Comparative analysis of fingolimod versus teriflunomide in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Abstract

Background: Fingolimod and teriflunomide are commonly used in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). These have not been compared in controlled trials, but only in observational studies, with inconclusive results. Comparison of their effect on relapse and disability in a real-world setting is therefore needed. Objectives: the objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of fingolimod and teriflunomide in reducing disease activity in RRMS. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective observational study was carried out with prospectively collected data from 15 centers. All consecutive RRMS patients treated with teriflunomide or fingolimod were included. Data for relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were collected. Patients were matched using propensity scores. Annualized relapse rates (ARR), disability accumulation, percentage of patients with active MRI and treatment discontinuation over a median 2.5-year follow-up period were compared. Results: Propensity score matching retained 349 out of 1388 patients in the fingolimod group and 349 out 678 in the teriflunomide group for final analyses. Mean ARR decreased markedly from baseline after 1 and 2 years of treatment in both the fingolimod (0.58-0.17 after 1 year and 0.11 after 2 years, p < 0.001) and teriflunomide (0.56-0.29 after 1 year and 0.31 after 2 years, p < 0.001) groups. Mean ARR was lower in fingolimod-treated patients than in those treated with teriflunomide at years 1 (p = 0.02) and 2 (p = 0.004). Compared to teriflunomide, the fingolimod group exhibited a higher percentage of relapse-free patients and a lower percentage of MRI-active patients after 2.5-year follow-up. Disability worsening was similar between the two groups. Patients were less likely to discontinue fingolimod than teriflunomide (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Fingolimod was associated with a better relapse control and lower discontinuation rate than teriflunomide. the two oral therapies exhibited similar effects on disability outcomes.