Randi von Wrede1, Susanna Moskau-Hartmann2, Nicola Amarell3, Rainer Surges2, Christian Erich Elger4, Christoph Helmstaedter5. 1. Department of Epileptology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany. Electronic address: randi.von.wrede@ukbonn.de. 2. Department of Epileptology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany. 3. Department of Epileptology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Institute of General Practise and Family Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany. 4. Department of Epileptology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Beta Neurology- Competence Center for Epilepsy, Joseph-Schumpeter-Allee 15, 53227 Bonn, Germany. 5. Department of Epileptology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; St Mauritius Therapieklinik, Strümper Straße 111, 40670 Meerbusch, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A special component of cannabis, cannabidiol (CBD), is currently in the focus of epilepsy treatment and research. In this context, we investigated patients' expectations and preferences pertaining to plant-derived versus synthetic formulation of cannabidiol, as well as their willingness to get this treatment. METHODS: One hundred and four of 153 patients with different forms of epilepsy (54 % female, mean age 40 ± 16 yrs.) responded to the survey. The survey consisted of 8 questions addressing expectations of and concerns towards CBD treatment, preferences of plant-derived versus synthetic CBD, estimated monthly costs, and willingness to buy CBD at one's own expense. RESULTS: The majority (73 %) of the responding epilepsy patients wished to receive plant-derived CBD; 5 % preferred synthetic CBD. Reasons for this choice were botanic origin, lack of chemistry, and the assumption of fewer and less dangerous side effects. Eighty-two percent of the patients estimated the monthly costs of CBD treatment to be below €500. Using the willingness-to-pay approach to assess the commitment of patients, 68 % could imagine buying the drug themselves. Fifty-three percent of these would be willing to pay up to €100, 40 % €100 to €200, and another 7 % €200 to €500 per month. CONCLUSION: There is an overwhelming preference towards plant-derived cannabidiol in epilepsy patients, driven by the idea of organic substances being safer and better tolerated than synthetic. The willingness-to-pay approach reflects the high burden and pressure of uncontrolled epilepsy and the expectation of relief. Non-realistic ideas of pricing as well as what patients would be willing and able to pay confirm this perception.
PURPOSE: A special component of cannabis, cannabidiol (CBD), is currently in the focus of epilepsy treatment and research. In this context, we investigated patients' expectations and preferences pertaining to plant-derived versus synthetic formulation of cannabidiol, as well as their willingness to get this treatment. METHODS: One hundred and four of 153 patients with different forms of epilepsy (54 % female, mean age 40 ± 16 yrs.) responded to the survey. The survey consisted of 8 questions addressing expectations of and concerns towards CBD treatment, preferences of plant-derived versus synthetic CBD, estimated monthly costs, and willingness to buy CBD at one's own expense. RESULTS: The majority (73 %) of the responding epilepsypatients wished to receive plant-derived CBD; 5 % preferred synthetic CBD. Reasons for this choice were botanic origin, lack of chemistry, and the assumption of fewer and less dangerous side effects. Eighty-two percent of the patients estimated the monthly costs of CBD treatment to be below €500. Using the willingness-to-pay approach to assess the commitment of patients, 68 % could imagine buying the drug themselves. Fifty-three percent of these would be willing to pay up to €100, 40 % €100 to €200, and another 7 % €200 to €500 per month. CONCLUSION: There is an overwhelming preference towards plant-derived cannabidiol in epilepsypatients, driven by the idea of organic substances being safer and better tolerated than synthetic. The willingness-to-pay approach reflects the high burden and pressure of uncontrolled epilepsy and the expectation of relief. Non-realistic ideas of pricing as well as what patients would be willing and able to pay confirm this perception.