Literature DB >> 17851994

Patient preferences among third agent HIV medications: a US and German perspective.

K M Beusterien1, K Dziekan, S Schrader, E Flood, R Flood, A Shearer, E A Davis.   

Abstract

The objective is to assess patient preferences for attributes associated with third agent HIV medications, including fosamprenavir/ritonavir (FPVr), fosamprenavir (FPV), lopinavir/ritonavir (LPVr), atazanavir (ATZ), and efavirenz (EFV). Subjects with HIV were recruited in the US and Germany to complete a computerized adaptive conjoint survey that assessed 13 attributes, including moderate to severe side effects, regimen convenience, drug resistance and efficacy. Literature on the target third-agent HIV drugs was used to identify percentage risk and severity level descriptions for each attribute. The derived preference (utility) weights for each attribute level informed the calculation of relative importance estimates for each attribute and the desirability of combinations of attributes matching the respective target third agents. The analysis included 288 HIV-positive participants (US: 132; Germany: 156), 205 of whom were treatment-experienced and 83 of whom were treatment-naïve. Of the 13 medication attributes evaluated, developing drug resistance, the risk of lipodystrophy, the risk of gastronitestinal side effects (diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting) and regimen convenience had the greatest impact on preferences. The profile based on FPVr was most preferred. Differences in the risk of developing drug resistance, risk of lipodystrophy, risk of gastrointestinal side effects and regimen convenience would likely be most influential in the perceived relative value of a third-agent medication. Physicians may wish to consider these features, especially when discussing HIV treatment options with their patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17851994     DOI: 10.1080/09540120701294278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AIDS Care        ISSN: 0954-0121


  10 in total

Review 1.  A descriptive review on methods to prioritize outcomes in a health care context.

Authors:  Inger M Janssen; Ansgar Gerhardus; Milly A Schröer-Günther; Fülöp Scheibler
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Methodologic evaluation of adaptive conjoint analysis to assess patient preferences: an application in oncology.

Authors:  Arwen H Pieterse; Anne M Stiggelbout; Corrie A M Marijnen
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis: a new patient-centered approach to the assessment of health service preferences.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Yvonne Chen
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Patient preferences for chemotherapies used in breast cancer.

Authors:  Kathleen Beusterien; Jessica Grinspan; Thomas Tencer; Adam Brufsky; Constance Visovsky
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2012-06-28

6.  What factors influence HIV testing? Modeling preference heterogeneity using latent classes and class-independent random effects.

Authors:  Jan Ostermann; Brian P Flaherty; Derek S Brown; Bernard Njau; Amy M Hobbie; Tara B Mtuy; Max Masnick; Axel C Mühlbacher; Nathan M Thielman
Journal:  J Choice Model       Date:  2021-07-11

Review 7.  Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Hiba El Masri; Treasure M McGuire; Mieke L van Driel; Helen Benham; Samantha A Hollingworth
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 2.314

8.  A Conjoint Analysis of the Acceptability of Targeted Long-Acting Injectable Antiretroviral Therapy Among Persons Living with HIV in the U.S.

Authors:  Jane M Simoni; Kenneth Tapia; Sung-Jae Lee; Susan M Graham; Kristin Beima-Sofie; Zahra H Mohamed; Joan Christodoulou; Rodney Ho; Ann C Collier
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2020-04

Review 9.  Stated-preference research in HIV: A scoping review.

Authors:  John M Humphrey; Violet Naanyu; Katherine R MacDonald; Kara Wools-Kaloustian; Gregory D Zimet
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 3.752

10.  Using discrete choice experiments to design interventions for heterogeneous preferences: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of a preference-informed, heterogeneity-focused, HIV testing offer for high-risk populations.

Authors:  Jan Ostermann; Bernard Njau; Amy Hobbie; Tara Mtuy; Martha L Masaki; Aisa Shayo; Marco van Zwetselaar; Max Masnick; Brian Flaherty; Derek S Brown; Axel C Mühlbacher; Nathan M Thielman
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 2.692

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.