Abstract
Background:
Comparisons between cladribine and other potent immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis (MS) are lacking.
Objectives:
To compare the effectiveness of cladribine against fingolimod, natalizumab, ocrelizumab and alemtuzumab in relapsing-remitting MS.
Methods:
Patients with relapsing-remitting MS treated with cladribine, fingolimod, natalizumab, ocrelizumab or alemtuzumab were identified in the global MSBase cohort and two additional UK centres. Patients were followed for ⩾6/12 and had ⩾3 in-person disability assessments. Patients were matched using propensity score. Four pairwise analyses compared annualised relapse rates (ARRs) and disability outcomes.
Results:
The eligible cohorts consisted of 853 (fingolimod), 464 (natalizumab), 1131 (ocrelizumab), 123 (alemtuzumab) or 493 (cladribine) patients. Cladribine was associated with a lower ARR than fingolimod (0.07 vs. 0.12, p = 0.006) and a higher ARR than natalizumab (0.10 vs. 0.06, p = 0.03), ocrelizumab (0.09 vs. 0.05, p = 0.008) and alemtuzumab (0.17 vs. 0.04, p < 0.001). Compared to cladribine, the risk of disability worsening did not differ in patients treated with fingolimod (hazard ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47–2.47) or alemtuzumab (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.26–2.07), but was lower for patients treated with natalizumab (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13–0.94) and ocrelizumab (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26–0.78). There was no evidence for a difference in disability improvement.
Conclusion:
Cladribine is an effective therapy that can be viewed as a step up in effectiveness from fingolimod, but is less effective than the most potent intravenous MS therapies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
