Cargando…

Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of glatiramer acetate (GA) compared to other multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational cohort study carried out in MS patients treated with GA (GA cohort) or other MS therapies –switched from GA– (non-G...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Izquierdo, Guillermo, García-Agua Soler, Nuria, Rus, Macarena, García-Ruiz, Antonio José
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467772/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26085963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.337
_version_ 1782376411506409472
author Izquierdo, Guillermo
García-Agua Soler, Nuria
Rus, Macarena
García-Ruiz, Antonio José
author_facet Izquierdo, Guillermo
García-Agua Soler, Nuria
Rus, Macarena
García-Ruiz, Antonio José
author_sort Izquierdo, Guillermo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of glatiramer acetate (GA) compared to other multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational cohort study carried out in MS patients treated with GA (GA cohort) or other MS therapies –switched from GA– (non-GA cohort). Study data were obtained through review of our MS patient database. The primary endpoint was the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores reached at the end of treatment/last check-up. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients were included: GA cohort n = 120, non-GA cohort n = 60. Patients in the GA cohort showed better EDSS scores at the end of treatment/last check-up (mean ± SD, 2.8 ± 1.8 vs. 3.9 ± 2.2; P = 0.001) and were 1.65 times more likely to show better EDSS scores compared to the non-GA cohort (odds ratio, 0.606; 95%CI, 0.436–0.843; P = 0.003). Patients in the GA cohort showed longer mean time to reach EDSS scores of 6 (209.1 [95%CI, 187.6–230.6] vs. 164.3 [95%CI, 137.0–191.6] months; P = 0.004) and slower disability progression (hazard ratio, 0.415 [95%CI, 0.286–0.603]; P < 0.001). The annualized relapse rate was lower in the GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5; P = 0.001) and patients’ quality of life was improved in this study cohort compared to the non-GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: GA may slow down the progression of EDSS scores to a greater extent than other MS therapies, as well as achieving a greater reduction in relapses and a greater improvement in patients’ quality of life. Switching from GA to other MS therapies has not proved to entail a better response to treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4467772
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BlackWell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44677722015-06-17 Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies Izquierdo, Guillermo García-Agua Soler, Nuria Rus, Macarena García-Ruiz, Antonio José Brain Behav Original Research OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of glatiramer acetate (GA) compared to other multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational cohort study carried out in MS patients treated with GA (GA cohort) or other MS therapies –switched from GA– (non-GA cohort). Study data were obtained through review of our MS patient database. The primary endpoint was the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores reached at the end of treatment/last check-up. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients were included: GA cohort n = 120, non-GA cohort n = 60. Patients in the GA cohort showed better EDSS scores at the end of treatment/last check-up (mean ± SD, 2.8 ± 1.8 vs. 3.9 ± 2.2; P = 0.001) and were 1.65 times more likely to show better EDSS scores compared to the non-GA cohort (odds ratio, 0.606; 95%CI, 0.436–0.843; P = 0.003). Patients in the GA cohort showed longer mean time to reach EDSS scores of 6 (209.1 [95%CI, 187.6–230.6] vs. 164.3 [95%CI, 137.0–191.6] months; P = 0.004) and slower disability progression (hazard ratio, 0.415 [95%CI, 0.286–0.603]; P < 0.001). The annualized relapse rate was lower in the GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5; P = 0.001) and patients’ quality of life was improved in this study cohort compared to the non-GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: GA may slow down the progression of EDSS scores to a greater extent than other MS therapies, as well as achieving a greater reduction in relapses and a greater improvement in patients’ quality of life. Switching from GA to other MS therapies has not proved to entail a better response to treatment. BlackWell Publishing Ltd 2015-06 2015-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4467772/ /pubmed/26085963 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.337 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Izquierdo, Guillermo
García-Agua Soler, Nuria
Rus, Macarena
García-Ruiz, Antonio José
Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title_full Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title_fullStr Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title_short Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
title_sort effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467772/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26085963
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.337
work_keys_str_mv AT izquierdoguillermo effectivenessofglatirameracetatecomparedtoothermultiplesclerosistherapies
AT garciaaguasolernuria effectivenessofglatirameracetatecomparedtoothermultiplesclerosistherapies
AT rusmacarena effectivenessofglatirameracetatecomparedtoothermultiplesclerosistherapies
AT garciaruizantoniojose effectivenessofglatirameracetatecomparedtoothermultiplesclerosistherapies