Interferon beta for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in the Campania Region of Italy: Merging the real-life to routinely collected healthcare data.
<h4>Background</h4>We aim to overcome limitations of previous clinical and population-based studies by merging a clinical registry to routinely-collected healthcare data, and to specifically describe differences in clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization and costs between inte...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/f0d205e81aef4c27a2feb4776b5a6ac4 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | <h4>Background</h4>We aim to overcome limitations of previous clinical and population-based studies by merging a clinical registry to routinely-collected healthcare data, and to specifically describe differences in clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization and costs between interferon beta formulations for multiple sclerosis (MS).<h4>Methods</h4>We included 850 patients with MS treated with interferon beta formulations, from 2015 to 2019, seen at the MS Clinical Care and Research Centre (Federico II University of Naples, Italy) and with linkage to routinely-collected healthcare data (prescription data, hospital admissions, outpatient services). We extracted and computed clinical outcomes (relapses, 6-month EDSS progression using a roving EDSS as reference), persistence (time spent on a specific interferon beta formulation), adherence (medication possession ratio (MPR)), healthcare resource utilization and costs (annualized hospitalization rate (AHR), costs for hospital admissions and DMTs). To evaluate differences between interferon beta formulations, we used linear regression (adherence), Poisson regression (AHR), mixed-effect regression (costs), and Cox-regression models (time varying variables); covariates were age, sex, treatment duration, baseline EDSS and adherence.<h4>Results</h4>Looking at clinical outcomes, rates of relapses and EDSS progression were lower than studies run on previous cohorts; there was no differences in relapse risk between interferon beta formulations. Risk of discontinuation was higher for Betaferon®/Extavia® (HR = 3.28; 95%CI = 2.11, 5.12; p<0.01). Adherence was lower for Betaferon®/Extavia® (Coeff = -0.05; 95%CI = -0.10, -0.01; p = 0.02), and Avonex® (Coeff = -0.06; 95%CI = -0.11, -0.02; p<0.01), when compared with Rebif® and Plegridy® (Coeff = 0.08; 95%CI = 0.01, 0.16; p = 0.02). AHR and costs for MS hospital admissions were higher for Betaferon®/Extavia® (IRR = 2.38; 95%CI = 1.01, 5.55; p = 0.04; Coeff = 14.95; 95%CI = 1.39, 28.51; p = 0.03).<h4>Conclusions</h4>We have showed the feasibility of merging routinely-collected healthcare data to a clinical registry for future MS research, and have confirmed interferon beta formulations play an important role in the management of MS, with positive clinical outcomes. Differences between interferon beta formulations are mostly driven by adherence and healthcare resource utilization. |
|---|