Treatment satisfaction across injectable, infusion, and oral disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis

Abstract

BackgroundThe recent approval of oral disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) has provided patients with a new route of therapy administration. Little research has compared patients’ experiences with and perceptions of injectable, infusion and oral MS therapies. MethodsThree hundred fifty-seven treated MS patients enrolled in the CLIMB study completed the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). The TSQM provides information regarding perceived effectiveness, side effects, convenience and overall satisfaction. The patients were treated with either interferon beta-1a intramuscular (IFNβ−1a IM) (n = 40), interferon beta-1a subcutaneous (IFNβ−1a SC) (n = 45), glatiramer acetate (GA) (n = 118), natalizumab (NTZ) (n = 44), fingolimod (n = 66), or dimethyl fumarate (BG-12) (n = 44). Multivariable linear regression models were used to compare treatment satisfaction across all DMTs and between patients treated with injectable (n = 203), infusion (n = 44), and oral (n = 110) DMTs. All models were adjusted for sex, age, EDSS, and time on treatment. ResultsPatients taking oral DMTs reported significantly higher convenience scores compared to patients taking either injectable or infusion DMTs. The adjusted difference in the mean overall convenience score was 26.87 (95% CI: 21.4, 32.34) for the comparison of orals and injectables and 17.53 (95% CI: 11.15, 23.9) for the comparison of orals and infusion. In addition, the proportion of patients reporting a side effect was significantly lower for orals compared to injectables (adjusted OR= 0.35; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.68) and infusion compared to injectables (adjusted OR= 0.14; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.35). ConclusionPatients reported treatment with the oral medications as more convenient than the injectable and infusion DMTs.