To assess the patterns of use of Disease Modifying Treatments (DMTs) between 2012 and 2016 among Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS) patients in Europe (EU). Data are from an ongoing multi-center retrospective chart-review study of RRMS patients in 5-EU (5EU: UK/Germany/France/Italy/Spain). Data on diagnosis, clinical status, and treatment patterns are collected from health care providers (HCPs) with practice duration (≥3yrs) and patient volume (≥15 MS patients/month). Each HCP collects de-identified data from next 10 consecutive MS patients within the respective study windows. RRMS patients taking injectable (INJ), ORAL, or infusible (INF) DMTs were analyzed across five time-periods since 2012: Q42012/Q42013/Q42014/Q42015/Q42016. In total, 1395(Q42012)/1465(Q42013)/1601(Q42014)/1586(Q4015)/1591(Q416) eligible RRMS patient charts were included in the analyses. Over the 2012-2016 time period, top-4 reasons for choosing DMTs were: efficacy factors (74.2%/55.6%), convenience factors (8.0%/13.6%), benefit vs risk profile (2.6%/10.5%) and patient decision (5.5%/5.9%). Overall % patients on INJ decreased from 73.5% (Q42012) to 38.8% (Q42016), and those on ORAL increased from 11.3% (Q42012) to 43.2% (Q42016). INF use showed only slight increase (14.6%/17.5% in Q42012/Q42016). Within 1st-line, changes in drug utilization from Q42012/Q42016 were: INJ:93.5%/53.5%, ORAL:2.0%/35.7%, INF:4.2%/10.3%; within 2nd-line, INJ:51.8%/23.7%, ORAL:18.9%/53.5%, INF:28.6%/22.7%; within 3rd and later lines, INJ:17.8%/9.4%, ORAL:44.1%/51.1%, INF:36.2%/37.8%. Among the overall cohort, mean EDSS scores at the time of study data collection remained stable from Q42012/Q42016 for INJ (2.08/1.99) & INF (3.63/3.26), while EDSS scores decreased for ORAL (3.18/2.16). In this study cohort, adoption of oral DMTs increased dramatically; displacing the use of injectables as preferred treatment and corresponding to a shift in prescription driver trends. Most recent EDSS scores indicated lower disease severity among users of oral DMTs, a likely consequence of their 1st line penetration. Impact of observed treatment patterns and treatment sequencing strategies on patient outcomes warrant further scrutiny.