Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative efficacy of diroximel fumarate, ozanimod and interferon beta-1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons.
Jiang, Tammy; Shanmugasundaram, Mathura; Bozin, Ivan; Freedman, Mark S; Lewin, James B; Shen, Changyu; Ziemssen, Tjalf; Arnold, Douglas L.
Affiliation
  • Jiang T; Formerly: Biogen, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
  • Shanmugasundaram M; Formerly: Biogen, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
  • Bozin I; Biogen, 6340, Baar, Switzerland.
  • Freedman MS; University of Ottawa, Department of Medicine & the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada.
  • Lewin JB; Biogen, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
  • Shen C; Biogen, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.
  • Ziemssen T; Center of Clinical Neuroscience, Carl Gustav Carus University Hospital, 01307, Dresden, Germany.
  • Arnold DL; Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 2B4, Canada.
J Comp Eff Res ; 13(10): e230161, 2024 Oct.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39158844
ABSTRACT

Aim:

Diroximel fumarate (DRF), ozanimod (OZA) and interferon beta-1a (IFN) are disease-modifying therapies approved for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis. No randomized trials have compared DRF versus OZA and IFN. We compared DRF versus OZA and DRF versus IFN using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons for efficacy outcomes, including annualized relapse rate (ARR), 12- and 24-week confirmed disability progression (CDP) and absence of gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) T1 lesions and new/newly enlarging T2 lesions. Patients &

methods:

We used individual patient data from EVOLVE-MS-1 (NCT02634307), a 2-year, open-label, single-arm, phase III study of DRF (n = 1057) and aggregate data from RADIANCE (NCT02047734), a 2-year, double-blind, phase III study that compared OZA 1 mg once daily (n = 433) and intramuscular IFN 30 µg once weekly (n = 441). To account for cross-trial differences, the EVOLVE-MS-1 population was restricted to those who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria for RADIANCE, then weighted to match the average baseline characteristics of RADIANCE.

Results:

After weighting, DRF and OZA had similar ARRs (0.18 and 0.17, respectively), with a rate difference (DRF vs OZA) of 0.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.04 to 0.06). DRF had a lower ARR than IFN (0.18 and 0.28, respectively), with a rate difference (DRF vs IFN) of -0.10 (95% CI -0.16 to -0.04) after weighting. Outcomes for 12- and 24-week CDP favored DRF versus OZA; 12-week CDP favored DRF versus IFN, but there was not strong evidence favoring DRF over IFN for 24-week CDP. Compared with OZA and IFN, DRF had higher proportions of patients without Gd+ T1 lesions and patients without new/newly enlarging T2 lesions.

Conclusion:

Disability progression and radiological outcomes were favorable for DRF versus OZA, although no differences were observed in ARR. Clinical and radiological outcomes generally favored DRF versus IFN. These findings may be informative for patients and clinicians considering different treatment options for MS.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Oxadiazoles / Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting / Interferon beta-1a Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Comp Eff Res Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Oxadiazoles / Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting / Interferon beta-1a Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Comp Eff Res Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido