4.3 Article

Three-year clinical outcomes of relapsing multiple sclerosis patients treated with dimethyl fumarate in a United States community health center

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 7, Pages 942-950

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458517709956

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis; dimethyl fumarate; tolerance; disease progression; lymphopenia

Funding

  1. Providence Brain and Spine Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Following approval of dimethyl fumarate (DMF), we established a registry of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) patients taking DMF at our community MS center. Objective: To track DMF patients' tolerability, disease progression, and lymphopenia. Methods: Patients prescribed DMF for RMS from March 2013 to March 2016 were prospectively enrolled (N=412). Baseline data, clinical relapses, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity, discontinuation, and lymphocyte counts were captured through chart review. Results: The mean age of patients starting DMF was 49.412.0years and 70% transitioned from a previous disease-modifying therapy (DMT). Of the patients, 38% discontinued DMF, 76% of whom discontinued due to side effects. Clinical relapse and MRI activity were low. Comparing patients who transitioned from interferon- (IFN), glatiramer acetate (GA), or natalizumab (NTZ), patients previously on NTZ had higher rates of relapse than those previously on GA (annualized relapse rate p=0.039, percent relapse p=0.021). Grade III lymphopenia developed in 11% of patients. Lymphopenia was associated with older age (p<0.001) and longer disease duration (p<0.001). Conclusion: Given the high rates of lymphopenia and discontinuation, it has become our clinical practice to more closely scrutinize older patients and those with a longer disease duration who are potential candidates for initiating DMF therapy.

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