4.3 Article

Fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis: An integrated analysis of safety findings

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND RELATED DISORDERS
Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 494-504

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2014.03.002

Keywords

Fingolimod; Multiple sclerosis; Safety; Adverse events; Cardiovascular events; Pooled analysis

Funding

  1. Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Fingolimod 0.5 mg once daily is the first approved oral therapy for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS). Objective: To report integrated long-term safety data from phase 2/3 fingolimod studies. Methods: Descriptive safety data are reported from the FTY720 Research Evaluating Effects of Daily Oral Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis (FREEDOMS) study, a 24-month, randomized, double-blind study comparing fingolimod 0.5 mg and 1.25 mg with placebo, and an All Studies group (patients who received fingolimod 0.5 mg (n=1640) or 1.25-0.5 mg (n=1776) in phase 2/3 studies and associated extensions). Relevant post-marketing experience, up to December 2011, is included. Results: The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) was similar with fingolimod and placebo in FREEDOMS. In the All Studies group, fingolimod U.S mg was associated with transient, rarely symptomatic (0.5%), bradycardia and second-degree atrioventricular block on treatment initiation, minor blood pressure increases, frequent (9%) but generally asymptomatic liver enzyme elevations, and macular oedema (0.4%). The incidences of infections (including serious and herpes infections), malignancies, SAEs and treatment discontinuations due to AEs were similar with fingolimod 0.5 mg and placebo. Conclusion: The safety profile of fingolimod has been well characterized in this large combined trial population. Although infrequent SAEs can occur, there is no increased risk of infections, malignancies or serious cardiovascular events versus placebo. (C) 2014 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available