| Literature DB >> 22074056 |
Karsten Beer1, Martin Müller, Anna Marie Hew-Winzeler, Adriano Bont, Philippe Maire, Xiaojun You, Pamela Foulds, Jessica Mårlind, Daniela Curtius.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interferon beta (IFNβ) and glatiramer acetate (GA) are administered by subcutaneous (SC) or intramuscular (IM) injection. Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) often report injection-site reactions (ISRs) as a reason for noncompliance or switching therapies. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of patients on different formulations of IFNβ or GA who experienced ISRs and who switched or discontinued therapy because of ISRs.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22074056 PMCID: PMC3227610 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-11-144
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
Demographic and disease characteristics of patientsa at study entry
| IM IFNβ-1a | SC IFNβ-1b | SC IFNβ-1a | SC GA | Overall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age, years (SD) | 44.7 (10.35) | 45.9 (10.23) | 43.2 (9.72) | 43.1 (11.25) | 44.3 (10.12) |
| Gender, female (%) | 64 (78.0) | 84 (69.4) | 122 (66.7) | 15 (65.2) | 285 (69.7) |
| Mean duration of MS disease, years (SD) | 9.9 (7.37) | 10.0 (6.29) | 8.6 (5.74) | 9.5 (4.92) | 9.3 (6.22) |
| Mean duration of treatment, years (SD) | 5.5 (2.56) | 6.8 (3.06) | 5.5 (2.93) | 5.6 (3.24) | 5.9 (2.97) |
aThere were no statistically significant differences between the groups.
Figure 1Results of skin examination at the first evaluation. The number of patients experiencing ISRs at the first evaluation was recorded for each therapy. At the first evaluation examination, patients had been on their current DMT for at least 2 years. *P < 0.0001 vs IM IFNβ-1a; chi-square test. †P = 0.016 vs SC IFNβ-1b; P < 0.001 vs SC IFNβ-1a; P = NS vs IM IFNβ-1a; chi-square test.
Skin status at first evaluation examination
| IM IFNβ-1a | SC IFNβ-1b | SC IFNβ-1a | SC GA | Overall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any ISR, n (%) | 11 (13.4) | 71 (57.7) | 125 (67.9) | 7/23 (30.4) | 214 (51.9) |
| Necrosis, n (%) | 0 (0)a | 7 (5.7) | 11 (6.0) | 0 (0) | 18 (4.4) |
| Number of occurrences | |||||
| 1 | 0 | 1/7 (14.3) | 6/11 (54.5) | 0 | 7/18 (38.9) |
| 2 | 0 | 4/7 (57.1) | 3/11 (27.3) | 0 | 7/18 (38.9) |
| 3 | 0 | 1/7 (14.3) | 1/11 (9.1) | 0 | 2/18 (11.1) |
| 4 | 0 | 1/7 (14.3) | 0 | 0 | 1/18 (5.6) |
| Unknown | 0 | 0 | 1/11 (9.1) | 0 | 1/18 (5.6) |
| Severity | |||||
| Mild | 0 | 3/7 (42.9) | 6/11 (54.5) | 0 | 9/18 (50.0) |
| Moderate | 0 | 3/7 (42.9) | 3/11 (27.3) | 0 | 6/18 (33.3) |
| Severe | 0 | 1/7 (14.3) | 1/11 (9.1) | 0 | 2/18 (11.1) |
| Unknown | 0 | 0 | 1/11 (9.1) | 0 | 1/18 (5.6) |
| Lipoatrophy, n (%) | 1 (1.2)b | 11 (8.9) | 19 (10.3) | 3 (13.0) | 34 (8.3) |
| Number of occurrences | |||||
| 1 | 0 | 1/11 (9.1) | 5/19 (26.3) | 1/3 (33.3) | 7/34 (20.6) |
| 2 | 0 | 6/11 (54.5) | 6/19 (31.6) | 1/3 (33.3) | 13/34 (38.2) |
| 3 | 0 | 2/11 (18.2) | 2/19 (10.5) | 1/3 (33.3) | 5/34 (14.7) |
| 4 | 1/1 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1/34 (2.9) |
| ≥5 | 0 | 2/11 (18.2) | 6/19 (31.6) | 0 | 8/34 (23.5) |
| Severity | |||||
| Mild | 1/1 (100) | 6/11 (54.5) | 10/19 (52.6) | 2/3 (66.7) | 19.34 (55.9) |
| Moderate | 0 | 2/11 (18.2) | 9/19 (47.4) | 1/3 (33.3) | 12/34 (35.3) |
| Severe | 0 | 1/11 (9.1) | 0 | 0 | 1/34 (2.9) |
| Unknown | 0 | 2/11 (18.2) | 0 | 0 | 2/34 (5.9) |
| Injection omitted during last 4 weeks, n (%) | 0 (0)c | 7 (5.7) | 13 (7.1) | 1 (4.3) | 21 (5.1) |
At the first evaluation examination, patients had been on their current DMT for at least 2 years.
aP = 0.028 vs SC IFNβ-1b; P = 0.020 vs SC IFNβ-1a.
bP = 0.021 vs SC IFNβ-1b; P = 0.009 vs SC IFNβ-1a; P = 0.032 vs SC GA.
cP = 0.044 vs SC IFNβ-1b; P = NS vs SC GA; P = 0.011 vs SC IFNβ-1a.
Figure 2Patients wanting to switch or discontinue therapy at first evaluation (A) and 1 year (B). At the first evaluation examination, patients had been on their current DMT for at least 2 years.
Figure 3Reasons for switching or discontinuing therapy at the first evaluation (A) and 1 year (B). At the first evaluation examination, patients had been on their current DMT for at least 2 years.
Figure 4Patients remaining on original treatment at 1-year follow-up. *Overall P = 0.036 (chi-square test).
Skin status at one-year follow-up examination
| IM IFNβ-1a | SC IFNβ-1b | SC IFNβ-1a | SC GA | Overall | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Necrosis, n (%) | 0 (0) | 5 (4.8) | 5 (3.2) | 0 (0) | 10 (2.9) |
| Number of occurrences | |||||
| 1 | 0 | 3/5 (60.0) | 2/5 (40.0) | 0 | 5/10 (50.0) |
| 2 | 0 | 1/5 (20.0) | 2/5 (40.0) | 0 | 3/10 (30.0) |
| Unknown | 0 | 1/5 (20.0) | 1/5 (20.0) | 0 | 2/10 (20.0) |
| Severity | |||||
| Mild | 0 | 3/5 (60.0) | 1/5 (20.0) | 0 | 4/10 (40.0) |
| Moderate | 0 | 0 | 3/5 (60.0) | 0 | 3/10 (30.0) |
| Severe | 0 | 1/5 (20.0) | 0 | 0 | 1/10 (10.0) |
| Unknown | 0 | 1/5 (20.0) | 1/5 (20.0) | 0 | 2/10 (20.0) |
| Lipoatrophy, n (%) | 0 (0)a | 9 (8.7) | 23 (15.0)b | 1 (7.1) | 33 (9.6) |
| Number of occurrences | |||||
| 1 | 0 | 3/9 (33.3) | 4/23 (17.4) | 0 | 7/33 (21.2) |
| 2 | 0 | 2/9 (22.2) | 11/23 (47.8) | 1/1 (100) | 14/33 (42.4) |
| 3 | 0 | 3/9 (33.3) | 3/23 (13.0) | 0 | 6/33 (18.2) |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 1/23 (4.3) | 0 | 1/33 (3.0) |
| ≥5 | 0 | 1/9 (11.1) | 3/23 (13.0) | 0 | 4/33 (12.1) |
| Unknown | 0 | 0 | 1/23 (4.3) | 0 | 1/33 (3.0) |
| Severity | |||||
| Mild | 0 | 6/9 (66.7) | 11/23 (47.8) | 0 | 17/33 (51.5) |
| Moderate | 0 | 2/9 (22.2) | 6/23 (26.1) | 1/1 (100) | 9/33 (27.3) |
| Severe | 0 | 1/9 (11.1) | 1/23 (4.3) | 0 | 2/33 (6.1) |
| Unknown | 0 | 0 | 5/23 (21.7) | 0 | 5/33 (15.2) |
aP = 0.011 vs SC IFNβ-1b; P < 0.0001 vs SC IFNβ-1a.
bLipoatrophy status was not collected for 1 SC IFNβ-1a patient (n = 153).