Efficacy and Safety Outcomes with Diroximel Fumarate After Switching from Prior Therapies or Continuing on DRF: Results from the Phase 3 EVOLVE-MS-1 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Diroximel fumarate (DRF) is an oral fumarate for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) with the same active metabolite as dimethyl fumarate (DMF). DRF has a safety/efficacy profile similar to DMF but with improved gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability and low (< 1%) treatment discontinuation due to GI adverse events (AEs). Efficacy and safety outcomes in patients who switched to DRF from other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have not been evaluated. METHODS: EVOLVE-MS-1 is an ongoing, 2-year, open-label, phase 3 study of DRF in adults with relapsing-remitting MS. Patients either entered as newly enrolled to DRF trials, or from the 5-week, randomized, head-to-head, phase 3 EVOLVE-MS-2 study of DRF and DMF. This analysis evaluated safety and GI tolerability in patients continuing on DRF (DRF-rollover) or switching from DMF (DMF-rollover) following EVOLVE-MS-2. Safety and efficacy were evaluated in a subset of newly enrolled patients who had received prior glatiramer acetate (GA; GA/DRF) or interferons (IFN; IFN/DRF) as their most recent DMT, prior to switching to DRF in EVOLVE-MS-1. RESULTS: As of September 1, 2020, 1057 patients were enrolled in EVOLVE-MS-1, including 166, 182, 239, and 225 patients in the GA/DRF, IFN/DRF, DRF-rollover, and DMF-rollover groups, respectively. Treatment discontinuation due to GI AEs was < 1% in all groups. GA/DRF and IFN/DRF patients experienced improvements from baseline in clinical and radiological efficacy outcomes, including significantly reduced annualized relapse rates. Rollover patients had low rates of new or recurrent GI AEs (DRF-rollover, 26.8%/4.2%; DMF-rollover, 27.1%/4.9%). CONCLUSION: After 2 years of DRF exposure, patients with prior GA, IFN, or fumarate treatment had safety outcomes consistent with previous fumarate studies. Efficacy in patients with prior GA or IFN treatment was consistent with previous fumarate studies. The data suggest that transition to DRF from GA, IFN, or DMF is a reasonable treatment strategy, with low rates of discontinuation due to GI AEs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02634307). INFOGRAPHIC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".