Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 31, 2026

A Method of Trigonometric Modelling of Seasonal Variation Demonstrated with Multiple Sclerosis Relapse Data
Published on: December 9, 2015
Cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in patients with
Rainel Sánchez-de la Rosa1, Laura García-Bujalance2, José Meca-Lallana3
1Medical Department, TEVA Pharmaceutical, Calle de Anabel Segura, 11, 28108, Madrid, Spain. rainel.sanchez@tevaes.com.
Objective:
The Escala Study evidenced that the administration of glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis improved the spasticity of patients previously treated with interferon-β. However, whether such an improvement was translated into cost savings remained unclear. We therefore conducted a cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β in these patients with multiple sclerosis and spasticity.
Methods:
This cost analysis encompassed data from the observational Escala Study, which included patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and spasticity whose treatment had been switched from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate. Costs prior to starting glatiramer acetate (interferon-β period) were compared to the subsequent six months on glatiramer acetate (glatiramer acetate period). The analysis was carried out following the recommendations for conducting pharmacoeconomic studies and from the Spanish National Health System perspective. Costs associated with multiple sclerosis treatment, spasticity treatment and relapse management were expressed in 2014 euros (€); a 7.5 % discount was applied-when needed-as stipulated in Spanish law.
Results:
The management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, spasticity and relapses accounted for a 6-month cost per patient of 7,078.02€ when using interferon-β and 4,671.31€ when using glatiramer acetate. Switching from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate therefore represented a cost saving of 2,406.72€ per patient in favour of glatiramer acetate, which resulted from savings in treatment costs, relapse management and spasticity treatment of 1,890.02€, 430.48€ and 86.21€, respectively. The ratio of the costs during interferon-β was 1.5 times the costs during glatiramer acetate; thus, a fixed budget of 5,000,000€ would enable 1,070 patients to be treated with glatiramer acetate and only 706 patients with interferon-β.
Conclusions:
The treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with glatiramer acetate entailed cost savings when compared to interferon-β in patients with spasticity, which not only resulted from its lower costs of therapy and relapse management but also from its favourable effect on reducing spasticity. Thus, glatiramer acetate may be regarded as a more efficient alternative than interferon-β from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Classification of Skeletal Muscle Relaxants
Peripherally acting skeletal muscle relaxants interfere with the neurotransmission at the neuromuscular end plate to induce paralysis during...
Peripherally and Centrally Acting Muscle Relaxants: A Comparison
Centrally acting muscle relaxants can be further divided into spasmolytic and antispasmodic drugs. Spasmolytic...
Myasthenia Gravis: Overview and Treatment
These antibodies interfere with the function of the nicotinic receptors in three ways: by binding to the receptor and disrupting acetylcholine binding; by causing cross-linking of receptors which...
Spasmolytic Agents: Chemical Classification
A major class of centrally acting spasmolytics is the α2-agonist, such as tizanidine. These drugs bind to α2-adrenoceptors, inhibiting the release of the excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate. They also...

