Advertisement

Assessing Barriers to Adherence with the Use of Dimethyl Fumarate in Multiple Sclerosis

  • Angela AungstEmail author
  • Lise Casady
  • Crystal Dixon
  • Janice Maldonado
  • Natalie Moreo
  • Laurie Pearsall
  • Derrick Robertson
Short Communication
  • 89 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, inflammatory, central nervous system demyelinating disease that requires long-term use of disease-modifying therapies (DMT). Patient adherence to DMT is key in reducing the inflammation that leads to relapses and neurodegeneration. Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) poses unique challenges to adherence including being the only twice-daily dosing DMT. Previous research suggests there are direct roles that providers play on improving their patients’ adherence rates, such as focusing on the patient-provider relationship, helping put the patient at ease so that they feel understood and respected. Also, route of administration affects adherence in other chronic healthcare conditions. However, the issue of adherence to DMT in MS is more complex than just route of administration, with adverse effects being the main predictor of adherence.

Objectives

(1) To define various patient specific factors (e.g. fatigue and mood disorders) that affect adherence with DMF and (2) to understand how patients’ perceptions of treatment satisfaction (such as effectiveness, convenience, side effects and global satisfaction) and DMFs impact on quality of life (such as social support, activities of daily living, coping) influence adherence.

Methods

Our study was a prospective, observational measurement of adherence to treatment with DMF in MS patients over 52 weeks. Twenty-five out of thirty-five patients enrolled completed the study. Adverse event (AE) data was reviewed on all participants.

Results

Adherence rates correlated with patient’s perceived effectiveness (0.25, p < 0.023) and the level of bothersome symptoms the patient experienced (0.45, p < 0.0001). The majority of new AE onset was reported within 12 weeks of DMF initiation. This is consistent with previously published data with DMF use.

Conclusion

Adherence rates are an important factor to be considered when starting patients on DMT. DMF creates its own barriers to adherence with our study highlighting some, including twice-daily dosing and AEs experienced following treatment initiation. Healthcare providers should be aware of these barriers prior to treatment initiation and counsel patients appropriately.

Notes

Author Contributions

AA, DR, LC, and LP conceived and developed the protocol. LP performed the visits and data collection. AA performed the data analysis. DR, LC, JM, NM, AA, and CD contributed to the interpretation of the results. CD took the lead on writing the manuscript. DR completed final revisions and supervised the project. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This research was funded by a grant from Biogen. This research was approved by the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board.

Conflict of Interest

Derrick Robertson is a consultant for Alexion, Biogen, Celgene, EMD Serono, Genentech, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva Neuroscience; is on a speaker bureau for Acorda, Alexion, Biogen, Celgene, EMD Serono, Genentech, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva Neuroscience; and has received grant support from Actelion, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genentech, Medimmune, Mallinckrodt, MedDay, Novartis, PCORI, Sanofi-Genzyme, and TG Therapeutics. Lise Casady is on a speaker bureau and consults for Genentech, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Biogen. Janice Maldonado has received grant support from Genentech and Medimmune. Natalie Moreo, Crystal Dixon, Laurie Pearsall, and Angela Aungst have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.

Ethics Approval

All procedures in this study were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration including amendments and with the oversight of the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board that approved the study.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients who participated in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Wallin MT, Culpepper WJ, Campbell JD, et al. The prevalence of MS in the United States: a population-based estimate using health claims data. Neurology. 2019;92(10):e1029–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Menzin J, Caon C, Nichols C, et al. Narrative review of the literature on adherence to disease-modifying therapies among patients with multiple sclerosis. J Manag Care Pharm. 2013;19:24–40.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thach AV, Brown CM, Herrera V, et al. Association between treatment satisfaction, medication beliefs, and adherence to disease-modifying therapies in patients with multiple sclerosis. Int J Mult Scler Care. 2018;20:251–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sabate E. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Devonshire V, Lapierre Y, Macdonell R, et al. The global adherence project (GAP): a multicenter observational study on adherence to disease-modifying therapies in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol. 2011;18:69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Remington G, Rodriguez Y, Logan D, et al. Facilitating medication adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis. Int J Mult Scler Care. 2013;15:36–45.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patti F. Optimizing the benefit of multiple sclerosis therapy: the importance of treatment adherence. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2010;4:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holliday S, Robinson A. Dimethyl fumarate tolerability and treatment adherence amongst patients with multiple sclerosis enrolled in specialty pharmacy services. Neurology. 2014;82:230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Munsell M, Frean M, Menzin J, et al. An evaluation of adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis newly initiating treatment with a self-injectable or an oral disease-modifying drug. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;11:55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laliberté F, Bookhart BK, Nelson WW, et al. Impact of once-daily versus twice-daily dosing frequency on adherence to chronic medications among patients with venous thromboembolism. Patient. 2013;6(3):213–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Claxton A, Cramer J, Pierce C. A systematic review of the associations between dose regimens and medication compliance. Clin Ther. 2001;23(8):1296–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Medamigo® suite. Available from: https://www.aardexgroup.com/solution/medamigo_suite/22. Accessed 12 Mar 2019.
  13. 13.
    Baumstarck K, Butzkueven H, Fernández O, et al. Responsiveness of the multiple sclerosis international quality of life questionnaire to disability change: a longitudinal study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11(1):127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vermersch P, Hobart J, Dive-Pouletty C, et al. Measuring treatment satisfaction in MS: is the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication fit for purpose. Mult Scler. 2017;23(4):604–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Valko PO, Bassetti CL, Bloch KE, et al. Validation of the fatigue severity scale in a swiss cohort. Sleep. 2008;31(11):1601–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gebrie MH. An analysis of beck depression inventory 2nd edition (BDI-II). Glob J Endocrinol Metab. 2018;2(3):1–5.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fox RJ, Miller DH, Phillips JT, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 or glatiramer in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(12):1087–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gold R, Kappos L, Arnold DL, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(12):1098–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tan H, Cai Q, Agarwal S, et al. Impact of adherence to disease-modifying therapies on clinical and economic outcomes among patients with multiple sclerosis. Adv Ther. 2011;28:51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lizan L, Comellas M, Paz S, et al. Treatment adherence and other patient-reported outcome as cost determinants in multiple sclerosis: a review of the literature. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2014;8:1563–4.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mangoni AA, Jackson SHD. Age-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: basic principles and practical applications. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;57(1):6–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schlender JF, Meyer M, Thelen K, et al. Development of a whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic approach to assess the pharmacokinetics of drugs in elderly individuals. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2016;55:1573–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Neurology Morsani College of MedicineUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Miller School of MedicineUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations