Literature DB >> 25371708

Patient preferences for disease-modifying drugs in multiple sclerosis therapy: a choice-based conjoint analysis.

Kathrin S Utz1, Jana Hoog2, Andreas Wentrup2, Sebastian Berg2, Alexandra Lämmer2, Britta Jainsch2, Anne Waschbisch2, De-Hyung Lee2, Ralf A Linker2, Thomas Schenk2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: With an increasing number of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS), patient preferences will gain importance in the decision-making process. We assessed patients' implicit preferences for oral versus parenteral DMTs and identified factors influencing patients' treatment preference.
METHODS: Patients with relapsing-remitting MS (n = 156) completed a questionnaire assessing treatment preferences, whereby they had to decide between pairs of hypothetical treatment scenarios. Based on this questionnaire a choice-based conjoint analysis was conducted.
RESULTS: Treatment frequency and route of administration showed a stronger influence on patient preference compared with frequency of mild side effects. The latter attribute was more important for treatment-naïve patients compared with DMT-experienced patients. The higher the Extended Disability Status Scale score, the more likely pills, and the less likely fewer side effects were preferred. Pills were preferred over injections by 93% of patients, when treatment frequency and frequency of side effects were held constant. However, preference switched to injections when pills had to be taken three times daily and injections only once per week. Injections were also preferred when pills were associated with frequent side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that route of administration and treatment frequency play an important role in the patients' preference for a given DMT.

Entities:  

Keywords:  choice-based conjoint analysis; multiple sclerosis; oral; parenteral; patient preference; treatment frequency

Year:  2014        PMID: 25371708      PMCID: PMC4218877          DOI: 10.1177/1756285614555335

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Adv Neurol Disord        ISSN: 1756-2856            Impact factor:   6.570


  14 in total

1.  Patient preferences for an oral anticoagulant after major orthopedic surgery: results of a german survey.

Authors:  Thomas Wilke
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 2.  Identification and development of new therapeutics for multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Ralf A Linker; Bernd C Kieseier; Ralf Gold
Journal:  Trends Pharmacol Sci       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 14.819

3.  Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care.

Authors:  M Ryan; E McIntosh; P Shackley
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.

Authors:  M Ryan; D A Scott; C Reeves; A Bate; E R van Teijlingen; E M Russell; M Napper; C M Robb
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 5.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; Carol L Bennett; Michael J Barry; Nananda F Col; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; France Légaré; Richard Thomson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-10-05

Review 6.  Partnership and consent in MS treatment choice.

Authors:  Jacqueline Palace
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 3.181

7.  Optimizing the benefit of multiple sclerosis therapy: the importance of treatment adherence.

Authors:  Francesco Patti
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Patient and community preferences for treatments and health states in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Lisa A Prosser; Karen M Kuntz; Amit Bar-Or; Milton C Weinstein
Journal:  Mult Scler       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.312

Review 9.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Mandy Ryan; Karen Gerard
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2010-12-19       Impact factor: 3.046

10.  Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria.

Authors:  Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 10.422

View more
  44 in total

1.  A Systematic Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analysis Studies in People with Multiple Sclerosis.

Authors:  Edward J D Webb; David Meads; Ieva Eskyte; Natalie King; Naila Dracup; Jeremy Chataway; Helen L Ford; Joachim Marti; Sue H Pavitt; Klaus Schmierer; Ana Manzano
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Improving Patient-Centered Care by Assessing Patient Preferences for Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Agents: A Stated-Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Caroline S Carlin; Lucas Higuera; Sarah Anderson
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2017

3.  [Do new oral therapies show advantages in the basal therapy of multiple sclerosis? Con].

Authors:  R A Linker
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 4.  The Value of Medicines: A Crucial but Vague Concept.

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; Robert Terkola; Maarten Postma
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Quantitative analysis of multiple sclerosis patients' preferences for drug treatment: a best-worst scaling study.

Authors:  Larry D Lynd; Anthony Traboulsee; Carlo A Marra; Nicole Mittmann; Charity Evans; Kathy H Li; Melanie Carter; Celestin Hategekimana
Journal:  Ther Adv Neurol Disord       Date:  2016-05-15       Impact factor: 6.570

6.  Preferences for Multiple Sclerosis Treatments: Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment to Examine Differences Across Subgroups of US Patients.

Authors:  Carol Mansfield; Nina Thomas; David Gebben; Maria Lucas; A Brett Hauber
Journal:  Int J MS Care       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug

7.  Patient-centered Treatment Decisions for Urethral Stricture: Conjoint Analysis Improves Surgical Decision-making.

Authors:  Lindsay A Hampson; Isabel E Allen; Thomas W Gaither; Tracy Lin; Jie Ting; E Charles Osterberg; Leslie Wilson; Benjamin N Breyer
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Assessing the Value of Treatment to Address Various Symptoms Associated with Multiple Sclerosis: Results from a Contingent Valuation Study.

Authors:  Pei-Jung Lin; Cayla J Saret; Peter J Neumann; Eileen A Sandberg; Joshua T Cohen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Disability may influence patient willingness to participate in decision making on first-line therapy in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Emanuele D'Amico; Carmela Leone; Francesco Patti
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar

10.  2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Criteria for Minimal, Moderate, and Major Clinical Response in Juvenile Dermatomyositis: An International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies Group/Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation Collaborative Initiative.

Authors:  Lisa G Rider; Rohit Aggarwal; Angela Pistorio; Nastaran Bayat; Brian Erman; Brian M Feldman; Adam M Huber; Rolando Cimaz; Rubén J Cuttica; Sheila Knupp de Oliveira; Carol B Lindsley; Clarissa A Pilkington; Marilynn Punaro; Angelo Ravelli; Ann M Reed; Kelly Rouster-Stevens; Annet van Royen-Kerkhof; Frank Dressler; Claudia Saad Magalhaes; Tamás Constantin; Joyce E Davidson; Bo Magnusson; Ricardo Russo; Luca Villa; Mariangela Rinaldi; Howard Rockette; Peter A Lachenbruch; Frederick W Miller; Jiri Vencovsky; Nicolino Ruperto
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 19.103

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.