Comparable Efficacy and Safety of Teriflunomide versus Dimethyl Fumarate for the Treatment of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

Publisher: Hindawi Pub. Corp Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101543314 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 2090-1852 (Print) Linking ISSN: 20901860 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Neurol Res Int Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE

Original Publication: New York, N.Y. : Hindawi Pub. Corp.

Background: The aim of this observational study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of two approved oral disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in patients with remitting-relapsing multiple sclerosis (RRMS): dimethyl fumarate (DMF) vs. teriflunomide (TRF).
Methods: A total of 159 RRMS patients (82 on TRF and 77 on DMF) were included. The expanded disability status scale (EDSS), confirmed disability improvement (CDI), confirmed disability progression (CDP), and annualized relapse rate (ARR) were evaluated for the two-year period prior to enrollment in our study. The drug-associated adverse effects (AEs) were recorded. We conducted propensity matching score to compare the efficacy between TRF and DMF.
Results: After matching for the confounders, TRF- and DMF-treated groups were not different in terms of EDSS ( P value = 0.54), CDI ( P value = 0.80), CDP ( P value = 0.39), and ARR ( P value >0.05). TRF discontinuation occurred in 2 patients (2.43%) due to mediastinitis and liver dysfunction, while a patient (1.29%) discontinued DMF due to depression. Incidence rate of AEs in the TRF-treated group was 81.4%: hair thinning (hair loss) (62.9%), nail loss (20.9%), and elevated aminotransferase (14.8%) were the most common AEs; in DMF-treated patients, AEs were 88.2% with predominance of flushing (73.2%), pruritus (16.9%), and abdominal pain (16.9%).
Conclusion: Based on our findings, DMF is as efficacious and safe as TRF for the treatment of RRMS in our Iranian study population. Multicentric studies need to corroborate these findings in other populations.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2021 Nasim Nehzat et al.)

CMAJ. 2009 May 12;180(10):998-1000. (PMID: 19372438)
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Feb;17(2):162-173. (PMID: 29275977)
Lancet Neurol. 2014 Mar;13(3):247-56. (PMID: 24461574)
Neurology. 2016 Mar 8;86(10):920-30. (PMID: 26865517)
Neurology. 1983 Nov;33(11):1444-52. (PMID: 6685237)
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Dec 12;4:96. (PMID: 17163989)
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 22;(4):CD011076. (PMID: 25900414)
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;90(4):458-468. (PMID: 30636699)
J Clin Med. 2020 May 02;9(5):. (PMID: 32370288)
N Engl J Med. 2011 Oct 6;365(14):1293-303. (PMID: 21991951)
Neurol Sci. 2003 Dec;24(5):361-4. (PMID: 14716534)
J Neurol. 2018 Dec;265(12):2980-2992. (PMID: 30327931)
N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 20;367(12):1098-107. (PMID: 22992073)
Neurology. 2019 Aug 13;93(7):e635-e646. (PMID: 31300547)
Mult Scler. 2017 Feb;23(2):253-265. (PMID: 27207449)
Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2018 Sep 10;11:1756286418796404. (PMID: 30210582)
Mult Scler. 2012 Sep;18(9):1278-89. (PMID: 22307384)
Mult Scler. 2005 Feb;11(1):46-50. (PMID: 15732266)
Neurology. 2018 Feb 13;90(7):e593-e600. (PMID: 29343473)
Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2012 Jul;5(4):205-20. (PMID: 22783370)
Stat Med. 2016 Mar 30;35(7):1103-16. (PMID: 26514380)
Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2017 Nov;18:170-172. (PMID: 29141803)
Curr Med Res Opin. 2014 Apr;30(4):613-27. (PMID: 24195574)
Eur J Neurol. 2015 Jun;22(6):981-9. (PMID: 25808578)
Neurol Ther. 2017 Jun;6(1):91-102. (PMID: 28211024)
Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019 Jan;27:101-111. (PMID: 30368221)
Curr Pharm Des. 2012;18(2):209-19. (PMID: 22229582)

Date Created: 20210802 Latest Revision: 20220425

20221213

PMC8298169

10.1155/2021/6679197

34336283