Table 5.
Comparison between patients who received tacrolimus and those who received azathioprine.
| Characteristics | Tacrolimus | Azathioprine | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients, No. | 25 | 29 | |
| Age at onset, median, y | 31 | 38 | 0.142a |
| Treatment duration, median, month | 11 | 16 | 0.220a |
| Pre-ARR vs Post-ARR | 2.9 vs 0.4 | 2.7 vs 0.6 | |
| Change from pretreatment to posttreatment, % | 86.2 | 77.8 | |
| Pre-EDSS or Post-EDSS | 4.5 vs 2.3 | 4.3 vs 3.9 | |
| Change from pretreatment to posttreatment, % | 48.9 | 9.3 | |
| Relapse free, % | 72 | 48 | 0.100b |
| Improved or stabilized EDSS score, % | 96 | 62 | 0.003 b |
| Total adverse events, No. | 4 | 9 | 0.223b |
| Severe adverse eventsc, No. | 1 | 7 | 0.056b |
ARR: annualized relapse rate; EDSS: Expanded Disability Severity Scale.
aMann-Whitney U test.
bFisher’s exact test.
csevere adverse events included agranulocytosis, liver damage, and death etc.
Azathioprine could reduce the ARR and EDSS score by 77.8% and 9.3%, respectively. However, in comparison with tacrolimus treatment, azathioprine therapy provided a relatively lower relapse-free rate and a significantly lower rate of improved or stabilized EDSS score (relapse-free rate, 48% vs 72%, P = 0.1; rate of improved or stabilized EDSS score, 62% vs 96%, P = 0.003). Azathioprine group exhibited considerably higher adverse events occurrence of total adverse events (31%) and severe adverse events (24%) than observed in tacrolimus group (16% and 4%, respectively).