Examining patient preferences in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis using a discrete-choice approach

被引:69
|
作者
Alten, Rieke [1 ]
Krueger, Klaus [2 ]
Rellecke, Julian [3 ]
Schiffner-Rohe, Julia [4 ]
Behmer, Olaf [5 ]
Schiffhorst, Guido [3 ]
Nolting, Hans-Dieter [3 ]
机构
[1] Charite, Schlosspk Klin, 2 Heubnerweg, D-14059 Berlin, Germany
[2] Praxiszentrum St Bonifatius, Munich, Germany
[3] IGES Inst GmbH, Berlin, Germany
[4] Pfizer Deutschland GmbH, Berlin, Germany
[5] Pfizer Pharma GmbH, Berlin, Germany
来源
关键词
rheumatoid arthritis; disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; patient preferences; discrete-choice experiment; best-worst scaling; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; BELIEFS; WORST; ADHERENCE; MEDICATION; THERAPIES; INJECTION; MEDICINES;
D O I
10.2147/PPA.S117774
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) used in second-line treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are administered parenterally. However, so-called targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) - developed more recently-offer alternative (ie, oral) administration forms in second-line treatment. Since bDMARDs and tsDMARDs can be regarded as equal in terms of efficacy, the present study examines whether such characteristics as route of administration drive RA patients' treatment choice. This may ultimately suggest superiority of some second-line DMARDs over equally effective options, at least according to RA-patient preferences. Objective: The current study assessed the importance of oral administration among other treatment characteristics differing between available second-line DMARDs for RA patients' preferences using a discrete-choice experiment (DCE). Materials and methods: The DCE involved scenarios of three hypothetical treatment options in a d-efficient design with varying levels of key attributes (route and frequency of administration, time till onset of drug effect, combination therapy, possible side effects), as defined by focus groups. Further patient characteristics were recorded by an accompanying questionnaire. In the DCE, patients were asked to choose best and worst options (best-worst scaling). Results were analyzed by count analysis and adjusted regression analysis. Results: A total of 1,588 subjects completed the DCE and were eligible for final analyses. Across all characteristics included in the DCE, "oral administration" was most desired and "intravenous infusion" was most strongly rejected. This was followed by "no combination with methotrexate" being strongly preferred and "intake every 1-2 weeks" being strongly rejected. On average, levels of route of administration showed strongest influences on patients' decisions in post hoc bootstrapping analysis. Conclusion: According to the results, an oral DMARD that does not have to be combined with methotrexate and is not administered (only) every 1-2 weeks appears a highly favorable treatment option for patients with RA. DMARDs meeting these preferences may increase compliance and adherence in RA treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:2217 / 2228
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Patient preferences for treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A US discrete-choice experiment survey
    Feldman, S.
    Poulos, C.
    Gilloteau, I.
    Mange, B.
    Guana, A.
    Boeri, M.
    Germino, B.
    Boehm, K.
    Gutknecht, M.
    Augustin, M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, 2019, 81 (04) : AB101 - AB101
  • [32] Patient Preferences for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment
    Li, Daneng
    Tan, Ruoding
    Hernandez, Sairy
    Reilly, Norelle
    Bussberg, Cooper
    Mansfield, Carol
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (05)
  • [33] Patient and physician preferences for adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma: A discrete-choice experiment.
    Calhoun, Shawna R.
    Vass, Caroline
    Myers, Kelley
    Imai, Kentaro
    Bussberg, Cooper
    Bhattacharya, Rituparna
    Pinto, Cathy Anne
    Poulos, Christine
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 41
  • [34] Patient preferences for chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatments: a discrete-choice experiment
    Ravelo, Arliene
    Myers, Kelley
    Brumble, Robyn
    Bussberg, Cooper
    Koffman, Brian
    Manzoor, Beenish S.
    Biondo, Juliana M.
    Mansfield, Carol
    FUTURE ONCOLOGY, 2024, 20 (28) : 2059 - 2070
  • [35] Influence of Medication Risks and Benefits on Patient and Clinician Preferences for Treatment in Multimorbidity: A Discrete-Choice Experiment
    Caughey, Gillian E.
    Huynh, Elisabeth
    Shakib, Sepehr
    Rose, John M.
    Swait, Joffre
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2017, 26 : 447 - 447
  • [36] Patient preferences for treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer in Japan: a discrete-choice experiment
    Hiroji Uemura
    Nobuaki Matsubara
    Go Kimura
    Akito Yamaguchi
    Dianne Athene Ledesma
    Marco DiBonaventura
    Ateesha F. Mohamed
    Enrique Basurto
    Ian McKinnon
    Ed Wang
    Kristen Concialdi
    Aya Narimatsu
    Yasuko Aitoku
    BMC Urology, 16
  • [37] Patient preferences for treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer in Japan: a discrete-choice experiment
    Uemura, Hiroji
    Matsubara, Nobuaki
    Kimura, Go
    Yamaguchi, Akito
    Ledesma, Dianne Athene
    DiBonaventura, Marco
    Mohamed, Ateesha F.
    Basurto, Enrique
    McKinnon, Ian
    Wang, Ed
    Concialdi, Kristen
    Narimatsu, Aya
    Aitoku, Yasuko
    BMC UROLOGY, 2016, 16 : 1 - 10
  • [38] Patient and physician preferences for anticancer drugs for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a discrete-choice experiment
    Gonzalez, Juan Marcos
    Ogale, Sarika
    Morlock, Robert
    Posner, Joshua
    Hauber, Brett
    Sommer, Nicolas
    Grothey, Axel
    CANCER MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH, 2017, 9 : 149 - 158
  • [39] Patient preferences for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
    Fraenkel, L
    Bogardus, ST
    Concato, J
    Felson, DT
    Wittink, DR
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2004, 63 (11) : 1372 - 1378
  • [40] Patient preferences for rheumatoid arthritis treatment
    Hsiao, Betty
    Fraenkel, Liana
    CURRENT OPINION IN RHEUMATOLOGY, 2019, 31 (03) : 256 - 263