Cortnee Roman, Meghan Garabedian, Virginia R Schobel, Beth Schneider, Elizabeth Luce, Jason P Mendoza, James B Lewin, Sai L Shankar
{"title":"Patient and healthcare provider experience of diroximel fumarate: considerations for selecting disease-modifying therapy.","authors":"Cortnee Roman, Meghan Garabedian, Virginia R Schobel, Beth Schneider, Elizabeth Luce, Jason P Mendoza, James B Lewin, Sai L Shankar","doi":"10.1080/17582024.2025.2564589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate treatment perceptions of diroximel fumarate (DRF) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS), with contextual data from dimethyl fumarate (DMF) users, based on patient and healthcare provider (HCP) surveys.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective web-based survey was conducted among MyMSTeam users aged ≥ 21 years in the United States, who provided information about their MS disease and treatment history. The Spherix HCP survey collected retrospective chart data from HCPs for patients who switched disease-modifying therapies (DMTs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 535 MyMSTeam respondents, 77 (14%) received DMF and 46 (9%) received DRF. DRF users reported physical and emotional benefits such as slowed disease progression, decreased relapses, and new symptom prevention, with 70% noting at least one physical benefit and 46% reporting emotional/quality of life benefits. Additionally, 83% found DRF tolerable. HCPs reported prescribing DRF due to good tolerability (58%) and a preference for oral administration (50%). The most common reasons for switching to DRF were lack of efficacy (52%) or poor tolerability (49%) of previous DMTs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A real-world, patient-focused survey on MS treatment suggested DRF was well tolerated and associated with patient-reported physical benefits. HCP-reported reasons for selecting DRF included efficacy and tolerability issues with prior DMT.</p>","PeriodicalId":19114,"journal":{"name":"Neurodegenerative disease management","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurodegenerative disease management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17582024.2025.2564589","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate treatment perceptions of diroximel fumarate (DRF) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS), with contextual data from dimethyl fumarate (DMF) users, based on patient and healthcare provider (HCP) surveys.
Methods: A prospective web-based survey was conducted among MyMSTeam users aged ≥ 21 years in the United States, who provided information about their MS disease and treatment history. The Spherix HCP survey collected retrospective chart data from HCPs for patients who switched disease-modifying therapies (DMTs).
Results: Of 535 MyMSTeam respondents, 77 (14%) received DMF and 46 (9%) received DRF. DRF users reported physical and emotional benefits such as slowed disease progression, decreased relapses, and new symptom prevention, with 70% noting at least one physical benefit and 46% reporting emotional/quality of life benefits. Additionally, 83% found DRF tolerable. HCPs reported prescribing DRF due to good tolerability (58%) and a preference for oral administration (50%). The most common reasons for switching to DRF were lack of efficacy (52%) or poor tolerability (49%) of previous DMTs.
Conclusion: A real-world, patient-focused survey on MS treatment suggested DRF was well tolerated and associated with patient-reported physical benefits. HCP-reported reasons for selecting DRF included efficacy and tolerability issues with prior DMT.