First-Line Ocrelizumab Use for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United States: Trend and Comparison to Glatiramer Acetate and Dimethyl Fumarate

First-Line Ocrelizumab Use for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United States: Trend and Comparison to Glatiramer Acetate and Dimethyl Fumarate

First-Line Ocrelizumab Use for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United States: Trend and Comparison to Glatiramer Acetate and Dimethyl Fumarate Virginia R. Schobel, MSc; Jennifer Robinson Figure 1 Figure 2 Percent of Neurologists Who Agree with Figure 4 Table 1 Current Age Category Allocation: By DMT First-Line RRMS DMT Share: Trend Statement Agreement: Trend Gender and Current Age: By DMT Background 6% “I am comfortable using ocrelizumab as a first-line DMT 11% 10% 56+ Percent Age (mean In March 2017, ocrelizumab (OCR) was approved for the treatment of relapsing-remitting 2016 (n=777) 2017 (n=801) 2018 (n=758) 2019 (n=722) for patients with RMS” years Mean: 30% male years) and primary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS), irrespective of prior therapy exposure. The 31% 31% 2017 38% Glatiramer relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) indication was updated in July 2019 to encompass all 38% 3.09 40 to 55 (n=274) years acetate 29% 39.6 relapsing forms of MS (RMS), including clinically isolated syndrome, RRMS, and active (n=225) secondary progressive MS. 17% 39% 2018 37% 30 to 39 Dimethyl 57% 2017 3.582017 36% 8% (n=213) years fumarate 34% 36.9 Objective (n=125) Percent of audit of audit patients Percent Percent of audit of audit patients Percent 22% 25% 18 to 29 Ocrelizumab 2019 16% 29% 41.3 To trend OCR uptake among previously treatment-naïve RRMS patients and compare 58%2017 3.652017 years (n=58) Glatiramer acetate Dimethyl fumarate Ocrelizumab (n=199) characteristics of RRMS patients initiated on first-line OCR to those initiated on one of the Glatiramer Dimethyl Ocrelizumab more established platform disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), glatiramer acetate (GA) or *Note: tested, but no significant differences *Superscripts represent statistically significant differences acetate (n=225) fumarate (n=125) (n=58) *Note: tested, but no significant differences dimethyl fumarate (DMF). Figure 3 Figure 5 Unfavorable Long-Term Prognostic Profile Figure 6 Impact of Statement Agreement on First-Line RRMS Share Disability Progression Status: By DMT Methods “I am comfortable using ocrelizumab as a first-line DMT for patients with RMS” Based Upon Concerning Risk Factors: By DMT Glatiramer Glatiramer acetate (n=225) 12% 70% 17% Disagree [A] Neutral [B] Agree [C] acetate A retrospective, cross-sectional chart audit of MS patients who initiated their first DMT no n=22 physicians; n=5 physicians; n=111 physicians; 15% more than three months prior (i.e., new start patients) has been conducted with U.S. n=75 patients n=220 patients n=247 patients (n=225) 37% [A] neurologists (2016 n=242; 2017 n=274; 2018 n=213; 2019 n=204) each December. Data Dimethyl fumarate 33% (n=125) 10% 66% 23% were based on contributed RRMS patient chart reviews (2016 n=777; 2017 n=801; 2018 29% Dimethyl fumarate n=758; 2019 n=722). GA includes patients treated with either a branded or generic agent. 20% 16% 18% A (n=125) Ocrelizumab Poster abstract was updated with 2019 data. 15% [B] 21% 59% 21% 10% (n=58) 7% Ocrelizumab AB Results of audit patients Percent 1% (n=58) 35% Quickly progressing Slowly progressing Stable Improving [C] Glatiramer acetate Dimethyl fumarate Ocrelizumab Percent of audit patients In 2019, OCR was prescribed to 8%, GA to 31%, and DMF to 17% of new start RRMS Percent of audit patients *Superscripts represent statistically significant differences *Superscripts represent statistically significant differences *Note: tested, but no significant differences patients — stable with prior years (Figure 1). Comfort using Ocrevus first line for RMS patients has increased over time (58% vs. 38% of neurologists in 2017; Figure 2). Figure 7 Figure 8 Level of Disability on Modified Rankin Scale: By DMT Reasons More Impactful in the Selection of Ocrelizumab as First-Line DMT Neurologists’ agreement with this statement correlated significantly with OCR share (Figure Glatiramer acetate (n=225) [A] Dimethyl fumarate (n=125) [B] Ocrelizumab (n=58) [C] Glatiramer acetate (n=211) [A] Dimethyl fumarate (n=124) [B] Ocrelizumab (n=58) [C] 3). Gender, mean age, and age category allocation did not differ between treatment AB AB 50% subgroups (Figure 4, Table 1). RRMS patients initiated on OCR were more likely to have a C 49% 55% AB 41% 53% perceived unfavorable long-term prognosis (OCR: 35%, GA: 15%, DMF: 16%; Figure 5) AB 27% 31% 38% 41% AB and to be experiencing disability progression (OCR: 21%, GA: 11%, DMF: 9%; NS; Figure 21% 21% 32% patients 19% 29% 6). In comparison, DMF patients were more likely to have no symptoms per the modified 14% 11% Percent of audit of audit Percent 6% 19% Rankin Scale (OCR: 14%, GA: 27%, DMF: 31%; Figure 7). OCR and DMF patients had a 4% 1% 1% 3% 14% 17% 14% 8% 12% greater mean T2 lesion burden at the most recent MRI scan (OCR: 5.8, GA: 3.8, DMF: 5.6) 0=No symptoms 1=No significant disability 2=Slight disability 3=Moderate disability 4=Moderately severe and, since first under the contributing neurologist’s care, OCR patients were more likely to disability My belief that this was Desire for a high Preference for the The specific MOA have had a relapse(s) (OCR: 48%, GA: 22%, DMF: 23%), decreased walking speed (OCR: Clinical Disease Activity Levels: By DMT Table 2 the best option efficacy agent dosing schedule 32%, GA: 10%, DMF: 9%), and/or confirmed disability progression over three months Glatiramer acetate [A] Dimethyl fumarate [B] Ocrelizumab [C] *Superscripts represent statistically significant differences (OCR: 26%, GA: 13%, DMF: 5%; Table 2). Best option belief, high efficacy desire, dosing Figure 9 Modified Rankin scales score (mean) AB schedule preference, and mechanism of action preference played significantly more of a 1.04 (n=225) 0.95 (n=125) 1.59 (n=58) Influence of Efficacy Need Versus Safety Risk Tolerance on Brand Selection: By DMT Kurtzke EDSS (mean) 1.80 (n=203) 1.79 (n=123) 2.50AB (n=54) role in the first-line selection of OCR compared to GA or DMF (Figures 8 and 9). Need for high efficacy Number of T2 lesions at most recent MRI 25% 3.76 (n=207) 5.64A (n=122) 5.76A (n=54) 42%A agent outweighs any (mean) 60%A safety risk (8-10) Conclusions Confirmed activity occurrences since Glatiramer acetate Dimethyl fumarate under contributing physician's care Ocrelizumab Regardless of neurologists’ perceived comfort with first-line OCR, use among new start (n=109) (n=65) (n=31) C Balance between efficacy (percent of audit patients; must have been 62% RRMS patients has remained flat during the first three years of availability. Compared to [A] [B] [C] need and safety risk under care for more than three months) 52% tolerance (4-7) platform DMTs, OCR is most likely to be selected when a high efficacy agent is required Relapse(s) 22% 23% 48%AB 36% due to risk factors suggesting a poor long-term prognosis at the time of DMT treatment Decreased walking speed 10% 9% 32%AB 13% Not at all comfortable initiation. 6% exposing patient to safety EDSS progression over three months 13% 5% 26%B risk (1-3) Disclosures: Glatiramer acetate Dimethyl fumarate Ocrelizumab A Virginia Schobel and Jennifer Robinson are employees of Spherix Global Insights, an independent market intelligence firm, and have received no industry EDSS progression over six months 6% 6% 19% (n=211) (n=124) (n=58) funding to conduct and report on this study. *Superscripts represent statistically significant differences [A] [B] [C].

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    1 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us