Peter G M Mol1,2, Arna H Arnardottir1, Sabine M J Straus2,3, Pieter A de Graeff1,2, Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp1, Elise H Quik4, Paul F M Krabbe4, Petra Denig1. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG-MEB), Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the values regulators attach to different drug effects of oral antidiabetic drugs with those of doctors and patients. METHODS: We administered a 'discrete choice' survey to regulators, doctors and patients with type 2 diabetes in The Netherlands. Eighteen choice sets comparing two hypothetical oral antidiabetic drugs were constructed with varying drug effects on glycated haemoglobin, cardiovascular risk, bodyweight, duration of gastrointestinal complaints, frequency of hypoglycaemia and risk of bladder cancer. Responders were asked each time which drug they preferred. RESULTS: Fifty-two regulators, 175 doctors and 226 patients returned the survey. Multinomial conditional logit analyses showed that cardiovascular risk reduction was valued by regulators positively (odds ratio 1.98, 95% confidence interval 1.11-3.53), whereas drug choices were negatively affected by persistent gastrointestinal problems (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.41) and cardiovascular risk increase (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.87). Doctors and patients valued these effects in a similar manner to regulators. The values that doctors attached to large changes in glycated haemoglobin and that both doctors and patients attached to hypoglycaemia and weight gain also reached statistical significance. No group's drug choice was affected by a small absolute change in risk of bladder cancer when presented in the context of other drug effects. When comparing the groups, the value attached by regulators to less frequent hypoglycaemic episodes was significantly smaller than by patients (P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Regulators may value major benefits and risks of drugs for an individual diabetes patient mostly in the same way as doctors and patients, but differences may exist regarding the value of minor or short-term drug effects.
AIMS: To compare the values regulators attach to different drug effects of oral antidiabetic drugs with those of doctors and patients. METHODS: We administered a 'discrete choice' survey to regulators, doctors and patients with type 2 diabetes in The Netherlands. Eighteen choice sets comparing two hypothetical oral antidiabetic drugs were constructed with varying drug effects on glycated haemoglobin, cardiovascular risk, bodyweight, duration of gastrointestinal complaints, frequency of hypoglycaemia and risk of bladder cancer. Responders were asked each time which drug they preferred. RESULTS: Fifty-two regulators, 175 doctors and 226 patients returned the survey. Multinomial conditional logit analyses showed that cardiovascular risk reduction was valued by regulators positively (odds ratio 1.98, 95% confidence interval 1.11-3.53), whereas drug choices were negatively affected by persistent gastrointestinal problems (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.41) and cardiovascular risk increase (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.87). Doctors and patients valued these effects in a similar manner to regulators. The values that doctors attached to large changes in glycated haemoglobin and that both doctors and patients attached to hypoglycaemia and weight gain also reached statistical significance. No group's drug choice was affected by a small absolute change in risk of bladder cancer when presented in the context of other drug effects. When comparing the groups, the value attached by regulators to less frequent hypoglycaemic episodes was significantly smaller than by patients (P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Regulators may value major benefits and risks of drugs for an individual diabetespatient mostly in the same way as doctors and patients, but differences may exist regarding the value of minor or short-term drug effects.
Authors: Mette Bøgelund; Tina Vilsbøll; Jens Faber; Jan Erik Henriksen; Rasmus Prior Gjesing; Morten Lammert Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2011-10-10 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Janine Arnott; Hannah Hesselgreaves; Anthony J Nunn; Matthew Peak; Munir Pirmohamed; Rosalind L Smyth; Mark A Turner; Bridget Young Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: José Esteban Costa Gil; Juan Carlos Garnica Cuéllar; Paula Perez Terns; Aldo Ferreira-Hermosillo; José Antonio Cetina Canto; Ángel Alfonso Garduño Perez; Pedro Mendoza Martínez; Lucas Rista; Alejandro Sosa-Caballero; Estefanía Vázquez-Mendez; Luis Fernando Tejado Gallegos; Hungta Chen; Agustina Elizalde; Virginia B Tomatis Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 2.314
Authors: Marloes Dankers; Marjorie H J M G Nelissen-Vrancken; Bertien H Hart; Anke C Lambooij; Liset van Dijk; Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse Journal: Pharmacol Res Perspect Date: 2021-05
Authors: Monika Wagner; Dima Samaha; Hanane Khoury; William M O'Neil; Louis Lavoie; Liga Bennetts; Danielle Badgley; Sylvie Gabriel; Anthony Berthon; James Dolan; Matthew H Kulke; Mireille Goetghebeur Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Sonia Roldan Munoz; Douwe Postmus; Sieta T de Vries; Arna H Arnardottir; İlknur Dolu; Hans Hillege; Peter G M Mol Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2021-02-25 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Lylia Chachoua; Monique Dabbous; Clément François; Claude Dussart; Samuel Aballéa; Mondher Toumi Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2020-10-26