Patient Evaluation of Satisfaction and Outcomes with an Autoinjector for Self-Administration of Subcutaneous Belimumab in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Clinical assessment of the potential use of a novel single-dose prefilled injection device for the administration of Acthar Gel in children: a narrative review

Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection; Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, NJ, USA) is indicated for the treatment of myriad inflammatory disorders and is currently administered manually via a vial and syringe. The administration of Acthar via a single-dose prefilled injector (SelfJect™) is intended to simplify its subcutaneous (SC) delivery. The purpose of this review was to determine whether SelfJect is suitable for use in pediatric patients through a literature assessment of various factors, including skin depth, needle length and gauge, dosage, force required for injection, and potential harms. Infants and young children, who commonly have skin-to-muscle distances less than the minimum depth of SelfJect administration, may have risk of unintentional intramuscular (IM) injection; however, an inadvertent IM injection poses no additional risk to children because of the bioequivalence between SC and IM administration of Acthar. The needle gauge of SelfJect is acceptable for pediatric patients and aligns with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for SC injections. The dosage delivered by SelfJect is only appropriate for children over 2 years of age. Although adolescents would likely be able to achieve the minimum force required to remove the protective cap and deliver a full dose of Acthar with SelfJect, an adult (18 years of age and older) should administer SelfJect to pediatric patients. In addition to the commonly reported postmarketing adverse events (AEs) from Acthar administration (e.g., asthenic conditions, fluid retention, insomnia, headache and increased blood glucose), injection site-related AEs common to injection devices may occur with SelfJect use. The risk of needlestick injury from SelfJect is mitigated by a needle guard. In summary, this review of injection device considerations demonstrates that SelfJect is appropriate for use in the pediatric population.

Investigation into the Acceptability of Moderate-to-Large Volume Subcutaneous Injections in Healthy Volunteers: Results from a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Study

Purpose

Therapeutic proteins are often delivered by subcutaneous (SC) autoinjector to enable self-administration. Autoinjectors typically deliver up to 1 mL injected volumes per dose. Delivery of larger volumes may be limited by injection site discomfort, including pain, swelling, and redness. Delivery at a slower rate may mitigate this discomfort. This single-center, randomized, crossover study evaluated the acceptability and tolerability of varying volumes and delivery rates of SC saline in healthy volunteers.

Patients and Methods

Eligible participants were adults (18-65 years) with a body mass index of 18.5-32.0 kg/m2. Participants (N = 24) were randomized to multiple sequences of infusions over five visits, with infusions ranging from 1 to 5 mL at rates of 1.50-6.00 mL/minute (min) and including a 1 mL SC infusion in 10 seconds (s) at a rate of 6.00 mL/min. The primary objective was to identify acceptable volume and delivery rates of SC saline, as assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, a tolerability and acceptability questionnaire, and infusion leakage.

Results

Infusions that met the acceptability criteria were 1 mL in 10s, 4 mL in 58s, and 3 mL in 2 mins. Higher delivery volumes and rates were associated with higher VAS pain scores but remained within the VAS acceptability criteria.

Conclusion

These findings may support the development of larger-volume injectors for self-administration of future medicines.

Physiology-based pharmacokinetic model with relative transcriptomics to evaluate tissue distribution and receptor occupancy of anifrolumab

Type I interferons contribute to the pathogenesis of several autoimmune disorders, including systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis, cutaneous lupus erythematosus, and myositis. Anifrolumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to subunit 1 of the type I interferon receptor (IFNAR1). Results of phase IIb and phase III trials led to the approval of intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) alongside standard therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe SLE. Here, we built a population physiology-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of anifrolumab by utilizing the physiochemical properties of anifrolumab, binding kinetics to the Fc gamma neonatal receptor, and target-mediated drug disposition properties. A novel relative transcriptomics approach was employed to determine IFNAR1 expression in tissues (blood, skin, gastrointestinal tract, lungs, and muscle) using mRNA abundances from bioinformatic databases. The IFNAR1 expression and PBPK model were validated by testing their ability to predict clinical pharmacokinetics over a large dose range from different clinical scenarios after subcutaneous and intravenous anifrolumab dosing. The validated PBPK model predicted high unbound local concentrations of anifrolumab in blood, skin, gastrointestinal tract, lungs, and muscle, which exceeded its IFNAR1 dissociation equilibrium constant values. The model also predicted high IFNAR1 occupancy with subcutaneous and intravenous anifrolumab dosing. The model predicted more sustained IFNAR1 occupancy ≥90% with subcutaneous anifrolumab 120 mg once-weekly dosing vs. intravenous 300 mg Q4W dosing. The results informed the dosing of phase III studies of anifrolumab in new indications and present a novel approach to PBPK modeling coupled with relative transcriptomics in simulating pharmacokinetics of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

Patient-reported preferences for subcutaneous or intravenous administration of parenteral drug treatments in adults with immune disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: Several studies have found subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) administration of similar drugs for long-lasting immunological and autoimmune diseases to have similar clinical effectiveness, meaning that what patients report they prefer is, or should be, a major factor in treatment choices. Therefore, it is important to systematically compile evidence regarding patient preferences, treatment satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQL) using SC or IV administration of the same drug. Materials & methods: PubMed database searches were run on 15 October 2021. Studies involving patients with experience of both home-based SC and hospital-based IV administration of immunoglobulins or biological therapies for the treatment of any autoimmune disease or primary immunodeficiencies (PIDs) were included. The outcomes assessed were patient preferences, treatment satisfaction and HRQL. Preference data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. Results: In total, 3504 citations were screened, and 46 publications describing 37 studies were included in the review. There was a strong overall preference for SC over IV administration, with similar results seen for PIDs and autoimmune diseases: PID, 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64-94%) preferred SC; autoimmune diseases, 83% (95% CI: 73-92%); overall, 82% (95% CI: 75-89%). The meta-analysis also found that 84% (95% CI: 75-92%) of patients preferred administration at home to treatment in hospital. Analysis of treatment satisfaction using the life quality index found consistently better treatment interference and treatment setting scores with SC administration than with IV administration. Conclusion: Compared with IV infusions in hospital, patients tend to prefer, to be more satisfied with and to report better HRQL with SC administration of the same drug at home, primarily due to the greater convenience. This study contributes to evidence-based care of patients with autoimmune diseases or PIDs.

Formative and validation human factors studies of a new disposable prefilled injection device for subcutaneous delivery of acthar gel (repository corticotropin injection)

BACKGROUND

The administration of repository corticotropin injection (Acthar Gel) via a single-dose prefilled injector (SelfJect) is intended to provide a simple, ergonomic alternative to traditional injection. Iterative human factors (HF) studies were conducted to identify potential use deviations and ensure appropriate device use.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This article presents seven formative studies, a validation study (with prior pilot validation studies), and a supplemental validation study with participants including lay users, patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. Participant interactions with SelfJect and the user interface were assessed. Use deviations, user preferences, and participants' ability to successfully complete tasks were evaluated to generate modifications to the device and user interface.

RESULTS

In the validation study, 91% of participants successfully administered their first injection. Use errors were rare with simulated-use (6.9%) and knowledge-based (1.6%) testing. Use deviations were commonly attributed to experimental artifact or information oversight, and device warming had the most use errors (49% of participants), even with extensive testing and adjustments to the user interface.

CONCLUSIONS

SelfJect was able to be used in a safe and effective manner by the intended users. Iterative HF studies informed the mitigation of use-related risks to reduce the occurrence of use deviations during simulated use.

Evaluating unmet needs in large-volume subcutaneous drug delivery: U.S. payer perspectives on a novel, large-volume on-body delivery system

OBJECTIVE

Existing healthcare systems face finite resource allocation and budgetary constraints, resulting in a substantial need for innovative solutions to enhance service delivery at reduced costs. A novel, user-friendly on-body delivery system (OBDS) was developed which enables administration of large-volume subcutaneous (SC) drugs in both clinical and home-based settings (at-home healthcare professional [HCP] administration or at-home self-administration).

METHODS

This research sought to evaluate the potential economic impact of at-home self- or HCP- administration with the OBDS through a comprehensive review of published literature and semi-structured interviews with 17 US payers representing approximately 227 million covered lives.

RESULTS

Published literature on OBDS remains limited, but available research highlights the cost-savings of SC administration due to reduced healthcare resource utilization, particularly with home-based care, and improved patient compliance. In interviews, payers identified several attributes that would help address unmet clinical and economic needs. Clinically, the hidden needle and ease-of-use compared to SC syringe pumps was deemed valuable to improve patient compliance and, as OBDS required minimal training, reduce the risk of administration errors. The flexibility to administer drugs at home (self-administration or HCP-administration) or in-clinic was identified as the most impactful attribute on coverage decision making as it has the greatest potential to reduce costs associated with HCP administration for several therapeutic areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the ability to help address critical unmet needs for the patient and healthcare system, a large proportion of the payers stated that the novel OBDS would warrant a price premium versus the cost of the standalone SC vial and certainly over the IV counterpart. Future research to quantify the value that OBDS efficiencies could bring to healthcare delivery are warranted.

Patients' Preferences for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Treatments-A Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND

Symptoms of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) vary between patients, but those of increased disease activity typically include musculoskeletal and mucocutaneous manifestations such as joint pain, swelling, and rashes. Several treatment options are available to patients with SLE with variable efficacy. Many treatments, especially corticosteroids, cause unwanted side effects, although little is currently known about patients' preferences for treatments of SLE.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify which attributes of SLE treatment are valued by patients and to quantify their relative importance.

METHODS

Adult participants with moderate-to-severe SLE were asked to make a series of choices between two hypothetical treatments in an online discrete choice experiment (DCE). A latent class model (LCL) was estimated to analyze choice data. Relative attribute importance (RAI) was calculated to determine the importance of each attribute to participants.

RESULTS

A total of 342 participants from the USA completed the survey. A three-class LCL model was found to have the best fit. Class 1 (non-attenders) had non-significant preferences across all attributes. To achieve a better fit, a constrained LCL (cLCL) model was run with the two remaining classes. The most important attributes for participants in class 2 (benefit-seekers) were joint pain (RAI = 32.0%), non-joint pain (RAI = 21.8%), fatigue (RAI = 20.1%), and skin rashes and itching (RAI = 19.1%). The most important attributes for participants in class 3 (risk-avoiders) were risk of non-severe side effects from corticosteroids (RAI = 28.4%), risk of severe side effects from corticosteroids (RAI = 21.4%), and the risk of infections (RAI = 19.2%). Risk-avoiders were more likely to have been diagnosed with SLE for a longer period (>1 year) and were more likely to have experience with oral corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS

SLE patients fall into two groups with distinct preferences: benefit-seekers, who prioritize reducing the impact of disease symptoms, and risk-avoiders, who prioritize avoiding treatment risks. The implication of this finding will depend on the reasons for these differences, which warrant further research. Our study suggests that these differences arise due to the impact of disease and treatment experience on preferences. If so, well-informed patients may not be willing to tolerate the risks associated with oral corticosteroids in exchange for their benefits.

Relevance of Adalimumab Product Attributes to Patient Experience in the Biosimilar Era: A Narrative Review

Adalimumab (ADL, Humira®, reference product), an anti-TNF-α biologic, has transformed the treatment of chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. However, the high cost of ADL therapy has driven the development of more affordable ADL biosimilars, agents with no clinically meaningful differences from the reference product. This review summarizes the product attributes of reference ADL and the nine ADL biosimilars approved and available in the USA in relation to patient experience of injection-site pain (ISP). Product formulation, delivery volume and device features (e.g., type and needle gauge size) influence patient experience of ISP with potential clinical consequences. Citrate-free formulations generally cause less ISP; injection volumes of > 1.5 ml may be associated with increased ISP. Reference ADL and all ADL biosimilars offer a citrate-free formulation, and reference ADL and four ADL biosimilars offer a high-concentration solution that allows a smaller injection volume. All available ADL products are injected subcutaneously using either a pre-filled pen (PFP) or pre-filled syringe (PFS). Patients prefer the PFP, but the PFS permits better control over the speed and duration of injection. Smaller (29-gauge) needle outer diameter is associated with less ISP; reference ADL and seven ADL biosimilars offer a device with a 29-gauge needle. In the USA, an approved biosimilar can be designated "interchangeable," allowing pharmacy-level substitution, where state law permits. In the USA, two ADL biosimilars have received interchangeability designation; others are seeking interchangeability designation from the Food and Drug Administration (n = 2), are being evaluated in clinical studies to support interchangeability (n = 2), or do not have/are not seeking interchangeability designation (n = 3). Product-related attributes influence patient experience of ISP caused by subcutaneous ADL injection. Reference ADL and ADL biosimilar products differ in their attributes, so discussion with patients about treatment options is essential to optimize adherence and outcomes.

Satisfaction and effectiveness of switching from intravenous to subcutaneous belimumab treatment in daily clinical practice

BACKGROUND

In 2017, belimumab (BEL) was approved in subcutaneous (SQ) administration. The effectiveness after switching from intravenous (IV) to SQ and patient satisfaction in daily clinical practice has not been studied. During the pandemic, patient follow-up and treatment were significantly affected, and some patients need a change from IV to SQ. Our aim was to evaluate daily clinical practice satisfaction to SQ BEL therapy in patients previously treated IV BEL. We hypothesized that SQ BEL in SLE patients previously treated with IV BEL was similar in effectiveness and conferred higher satisfaction.

METHODS

Observational, multicenter study, conducted in 7 reference centers in Catalonia. We included stable SLE patients (EULAR/ACR 2019) on treatment with SQ BEL and previous use of IV BEL (at least 3 months on IV BEL before switching). Since there are no well-validated tools for SQ BEL treatment satisfaction, we used RASQ-SQ, validated in patients with lymphoma who switched from IV Rituximab to SQ treatment, and modified for BEL treatment.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were included. The more prevalent clinical manifestations observed were related to the skin and joints and the patients had a mean baseline SLEDAI of 2.96 (SD 2.4) and SLICC score of 0.67 (SD 0.88). The median time from treatment with IV BEL before switching to SQ was 21 months (range). 84% of patients reported confidence in SQ BEL. 85.2% felt that treatment with SQ BEL was convenient or very convenient. 85% felt they had gained time with the change. 89% would recommend the SQ injection to other patients. Disease activity (mean SLEDAI) and remission rates remain stable after switching. No major new adverse effects were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall satisfaction, satisfaction with via of administration, and satisfaction with the time taken to receive BEL were higher for SQ BEL treatment. A switching SQ strategy is a reasonable alternative for BEL patients.

Implantable magnetically-actuated capsule for on-demand delivery

Many implantable drug delivery systems (IDDS) have been developed for long-term, pulsatile drug release. However, they are often limited by bulky size, complex electronic components, unpredictable drug delivery, as well as the need for battery replacement and consequent replacement surgery. Here, we develop an implantable magnetically-actuated capsule (IMAC) and its portable magnetic actuator (MA) for on-demand and robust drug delivery in a tether-free and battery-free manner. IMAC utilizes the bistable mechanism of two magnetic balls inside IMAC to trigger drug delivery under a strong magnetic field (|Ba| > 90 mT), ensuring precise and reproducible drug delivery (9.9 ± 0.17 μg per actuation, maximum actuation number: 180) and excellent anti-magnetic capability (critical trigger field intensity: ∼90 mT). IMAC as a tetherless robot can navigate to and anchor at the lesion sites driven by a gradient magnetic field (∇ Bg = 3 T/m, |Bg| < 60 mT), and on-demand release drug actuated by a uniform magnetic field (|Ba| = ∼100 mT) within the gastrointestinal tract. During a 15-day insulin administration in vivo, the diabetic rats treated with IMAC exhibited highly similar pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles to those administrated via subcutaneous injection, demonstrating its robust and on-demand drug release performance. Moreover, IMAC is biocompatible, batter-free, refillable, miniature (only Φ 6.3 × 12.3 mm3), and lightweight (just 0.8 g), making it an ideal alternative for precise implantable drug delivery and friendly patient-centered drug administration.

Design Development of the SMARTCLIC®/CLICWISE® Injection Device for Self-Administered Subcutaneous Therapies: Findings from Usability and Human Factor Studies

INTRODUCTION

An easy-to-use, multiuse, single-patient, electromechanical autoinjector, the SMARTCLIC®/CLICWISE® injection device, was recently developed to improve the self-administration options available to patients with chronic inflammatory disease treated with biologic agents. An extensive series of studies were conducted to guide the design and development of this device and to ensure its safety and effectiveness.

METHODS

Participants in two user preference studies and three formative human factor (HF) studies evaluated evolving iterations of the autoinjector device, dose dispenser cartridge, graphical user interface, and informational materials; participants in a summative HF test subsequently assessed the final proposed commercially representative product. In the user preference studies, rheumatologists and patients with chronic inflammatory disease, interviewed online and in-person, provided feedback on the design and functionality of four prototypes. In the HF studies, the safety, effectiveness, and usability of adapted prototypes were assessed under simulated-use conditions by patients with chronic inflammatory disease, caregivers, and healthcare professionals (HCPs). The safety and effectiveness of the final refined device and system were confirmed in a summative HF test by patients and HCPs in simulated-use scenarios.

RESULTS

Rheumatologists (n = 204) and patients (n = 39) interviewed in the two user preference studies provided feedback on the device size, feature ergonomics, and usability that guided prototype development in the subsequent formative HF studies. Observations from patients, caregivers, and HCPs (n = 55) participating in the latter studies yielded additional critical design revisions that culminated in development of the final device and system. Of 106 injection simulations conducted in the summative HF test, all resulted in successful medication delivery, and no potential harms were associated with injection-related use events.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this research facilitated development of the SmartClic/ClicWise autoinjector device and demonstrated that it could be used safely and effectively by participants representative of the intended-use population of patients, lay caregivers, and HCPs.

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of prefilled syringe and auto-injector presentations of MSB11456: results of a randomized, single-dose study in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab is a monoclonal immunoglobulin G interleukin-6 receptor antagonist. MSB11456 is a proposed tocilizumab biosimilar.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the pharmacokinetic equivalence of a single subcutaneous injection of MSB11456, when delivered via autoinjector (AI) and prefilled syringe (PFS), in healthy adult subjects.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, single fixed-dose, crossover study, 91 subjects received subcutaneous administration of tocilizumab 162 mg via AI and PFS presentations. The primary endpoint pharmacokinetic parameters were analyzed using analysis of variance. Safety data were summarized descriptively.

RESULTS

There were no differences in pharmacokinetic parameters between presentations, and safety parameters were comparable. The 90% confidence intervals for the geometric least squares mean ratios of all primary pharmacokinetic parameters were contained within the predefined 80.00% to 125.00% bioequivalence limits, indicating pharmacokinetic equivalence between the AI and PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

MSB11456 administration via AI was bioequivalent to administration via PFS. MSB11456 can be administered by AI or PFS, increasing the available range of self-injection devices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at EudraCT, number 2020-003419-86.

Impact of Belimumab on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Insights from Clinical Trials and Real-World Evidence

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic, autoimmune disease, characterised by a relapsing-remitting pattern of inflammatory activity, with each relapse contributing to irreversible end-organ damage with detrimental effects on patients' course, adding up to morbidity burden and shortening life-length. Along with several other demographic, socioeconomic, and life-style factors, high inflammatory activity and accrued organ damage have been coupled with adverse health-related quality of life (HRQoL) within physical, mental, and psychosocial aspects. The management of SLE has improved substantially during the last decades, owing to a technological explosion that has advanced drug development towards more targeted options. Being the first drug to be approved for SLE in more than half a century and the first in history biological agent for SLE, the introduction in 2011 of the monoclonal antibody belimumab that specifically binds to the soluble counterpart of B cell activating factor (BAFF) was a breakthrough in SLE drug development. The efficacy and favourable safety profile of belimumab has been demonstrated across several clinical trials and observational studies. Herein, we reviewed the literature and provide a summary on the effects of belimumab on SLE patients' HRQoL based on 23 studies. Belimumab has been shown to induce clinically important improvements in physical aspects of HRQoL and in fatigue, the latter being a common and major complaint within the SLE population. People with SLE overall benefit more from belimumab within physical compared with mental aspects of HRQoL. However, despite improvements of clinical and immunological features upon therapy with belimumab, HRQoL perception remains unsatisfactory for a substantial percentage of the patients. Finally, our review made apparent an urgent need for optimisation of the use of patient-reported outcome measures, both in research and clinical practice.

Do biological agents improve health-related quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus? Results from a systematic search of the literature

Despite an unprecedented rise in the number of biological therapies developed for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) during the last decades, most randomised clinical trials (RCTs) have failed to reach their primary efficacy endpoint. These endpoints mainly constitute composite outcomes that encompass disease activity indices derived from clinician-reported and laboratory data and do not necessarily reflect the patient perspective, as symptoms that represent major concerns to patients, such as fatigue, are seldom part of the evaluation. To overcome this limitation, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) constitute useful tools for evaluating the effect of an intervention on facets that are particularly relevant for the patients. In the present review, we performed a systematic literature search aiming to examine the effect of biological therapies on SLE patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and fatigue in RCT and real-life settings. We summarised results concerning 14 different biological agents, the majority of which targeting B cells or type I interferons, and discuss strategies that have been used to analyse HRQoL data, putting emphasis on minimal clinically important differences and the potential use of PROs as distinct targets in treat-to-target approaches. Lastly, we discuss differences between generic and disease-specific PRO measures and highlight the need of using a combination thereof aiming to capture the patient perspective in a comprehensive manner.

Payer Perspectives on Intravenous versus Subcutaneous Administration of Drugs

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought increased attention to vulnerable populations such as older or immunocompromised patients and heightened the focus on alternatives to intravenous (IV) formulations, particularly those that may be administered in a non-clinical setting. Among these alternative formulations are subcutaneous (SC) injections, which comprise an increasing share of commercialized and pipeline therapies. While much has been published about the benefits and limitations of IV versus SC administration to patients and health systems, less attention has been given to payer considerations regarding these routes of administration. Accordingly, this article provides payer perspectives on some of the key differences between IV and SC administration as they relate to management and billing, cost, treatment adherence and safety, and patient preference and quality of life. The benefits and limitations of these drug administration routes to key healthcare stakeholders—namely patients, physicians, and payers—are also discussed. Considerations of relevance are highlighted, including the potential for misalignment of stakeholder interests and countervailing factors that may impact decision-making about IV and SC formulations.

Evaluation of the Octreotide Acetate Pen Injector and its Instructions for Use in a Formative Human Factors Study

Introduction

Octreotide acetate subcutaneous injection is indicated to treat acromegaly and the symptoms of carcinoid tumors and vasoactive intestinal peptide tumors (VIPomas). This formative human factors study assessed the octreotide acetate pen injector and accompanying instructions for use (IFU) with self-trained participants.

Methods

The study enrolled patients with diagnoses of acromegaly, carcinoid tumors, or VIPomas and healthcare practitioners (HCPs) who treat patients with these diagnoses. The IFU provided a stepwise process with illustrations to train participants on using the pen injector. Participants familiarized themselves with the pen injector and the IFU before administering 2 unaided injections into skin-like pads; administering the full dose into the pad was considered a successful injection. The investigators evaluated each injection by performance measures—specific tasks necessary to safely and correctly administer the medication—and subjective measures, which included participant comments, feedback from questions, and suggestions for improvements.

Results

The study enrolled 11 participants—8 patients and 3 HCPs. Participants had a success rate of 100% for both injections. Errors included 1 participant priming the pen with the incorrect dose and 2 participants not holding the injector button for 10 s after the injection. Neither error led to a failed injection. To improve the IFU, participants suggested changing the order of wording on the priming step, clarifying illustrations of the plunger, and stronger indications to hold the injector button.

Conclusion

The octreotide pen injector and IFU were usable by self-trained participants. Participant errors and suggestions provided a foundation for recommendations to improve the IFU.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01739-1.

Patient Preferences for Subcutaneous versus Intravenous Administration of Treatment for Chronic Immune System Disorders: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

For many chronic immune system disorders, the available treatments provide several options for route of administration. The objective of this systematic literature review is to inform discussions about therapy choices for individual patients by summarizing the available evidence regarding the preferences of patients with chronic immune system disorders for intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) administration.

METHODS

Searches of the MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were conducted using terms designed to capture studies reporting patient preferences between IV and SC therapy published in English. Relevant studies were limited to those in which mode of administration, including treatment frequency and setting, was the main difference between comparators.

RESULTS

In total, 49 studies were included in the review. Among 18 studies that compared IV and SC immunoglobulin therapy, 16 found patients to prefer the SC administration route. The results of the 31 studies comparing IV infusion and SC injection of non-immunoglobulin therapies were mixed, with patients favoring SC administration in 20, IV infusion in seven, and having no overall preference in four. Patient experience had a strong effect on preferences, with treatment-experienced patients preferring their current administration route in most studies. Patients preferring SC administration tended also to prefer treatment at home, mainly due to the convenience and comfort of home treatment and the avoidance of having to attend hospital. By contrast, patients preferring IV infusion tended to cite the lower treatment frequency and a dislike of self-injecting, and preferred hospital treatment, mainly due to the presence of healthcare professionals and resulting feelings of safety.

CONCLUSION

In general patients with chronic immune system disorders tend to be more likely to choose SC administration than IV infusion, but preferences may vary according among individuals. These findings may assist discussions around appropriate treatment choices for each patient.

User-Centric Approach to Specifying Technical Attributes of Drug Delivery Devices: Empirical Study of Autoinjector-Cap Removal Forces

PURPOSE

The subcutaneous delivery of biologics using pre-filled autoinjector devices continues to attract broad scholarly interests. However, research still lacks a detailed understanding of user perceptions as the basis for specifying the clinically relevant technical attributes of a device, such as the cap-removal force. Therefore, this article studies the ability of users to remove the autoinjector cap, as well as the effects of the cap-removal force and user characteristics on the perceived ease of decapping.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-two participants among patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals removed the protective cap using non-functional devices with different target cap-removal forces between 25 N and 55 N. Data were collected on the ability of the users to effectively decap the device and their perceived ease of decapping. Linear regression was then applied to quantify the impact of the decapping force and patient characteristics on the perceived ease of decapping.

RESULTS

The participants of the study effectively decapped all autoinjector devices irrespective of age, sex, and dexterity impairments. Moreover, the study reveals that the perceived ease of decapping decreases significantly with increasing decapping force and participants' dexterity impairments.

CONCLUSION

The study provides initial empirical evidence on the ability of users to decap autoinjector devices and shows how increasing the cap-removal force and dexterity impairments reduce the perceived ease of decapping.

Insights into the choice between intravenous infusion and subcutaneous injection: physician and patient characteristics driving treatment in SLE

Introduction/objectives

Multiple modes of administration are available for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) treatments. This study examined patient and physician characteristics associated with the choice of weekly subcutaneous (SC) injection or monthly intravenous (IV) infusion for an unspecified SLE treatment.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, US web-based survey using a direct elicitation, stated-preference methodology (HO-16-16706). Two hundred patients and 200 physicians were asked to choose between IV or SC administration in a hypothetical scenario. Pairwise and multivariate analyses estimated the odds ratio (OR) for the likelihood of choosing SC over IV for respondent characteristics.

Results

Among patients, taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs increased the likelihood of choosing SC injection (OR 3.884), whilst having SLE-related skin problems, a fear of needles or self-injection, and never needing help around the house decreased the likelihood (OR 0.28, 0.13, 0.12, respectively; all p ≤ 0.05). Among physicians, > 95% recommended SC injection for patients who live or work far from an infusion center, prefer SC administration, and never or rarely miss medication doses. Physician characteristics including age and treatment practice also influenced choice.

Conclusions

Patient and physician characteristics influence choice of SC versus IV therapy for SLE. These findings might inform shared decision-making, which could lead to improved patient outcomes.

Key Points • Data regarding patient and physician preference for different modes of administration of SLE therapy are sparse. • This cross-sectional, US web-based study showed that patient and physician characteristics influence choice of SC versus IV therapy for SLE. • A degree of disconnect exists between how factors influence patients’ choice and how those characteristics influence physicians’ choice of SLE treatment mode of administration. • The findings from this study might inform shared decision-making, which could improve alignment between treatment choice and patient preferences, treatment satisfaction, adherence, and improved patient outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10067-020-05226-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient satisfaction and clinical effectiveness of switching from intravenous tocilizumab to subcutaneous tocilizumab in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: an observational study

INTRODUCTION

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a heterogeneous group of idiopathic inflammatory arthritis affecting children younger than 16 years of age. Tocilizumab (TCZ) is a humanized anti-interleukin 6 (IL-6) receptor antibody that was approved for systemic and polyarticular JIA patients. However, the studies regarding patients' satisfaction while receiving TCZ therapy is scarce. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the effect of subcutaneous (SC) TCZ administration on patient satisfaction and disease control of JIA patients.

METHODS

All JIA patients receiving TCZ were included in the study. Clinical features, laboratory findings and JADAS71 scores were recorded at baseline and every 3 months during follow-up. Nine of the patients on intravenous (IV) TCZ treatment were switched to SC form. All patients receiving TCZ-SC were questioned by a clinical nurse specialist (CNS) to assess patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients receiving TCZ were included in the study. Among them, treatment of nine patients (five female, four male) was switched to SC form with a median of 11.5 (8-69) months after initiation of TCZ. Patients were stable both clinically and in laboratory means at the 3rd month of TCZ-SC treatment. There was no deterioration in terms of active joint counts, physician's VAS, patient's VAS and JADAS71. According to patient satisfaction questionnaire, eight of the patients felt satisfied with SC administrations in terms of life quality, school success and reduced school absenteeism. However, one patient did not agree that the SC form is as effective as IV form and wanted to continue with IV form.

CONCLUSION

TCZ is an effective treatment option in JIA and switching from IV to SC route when necessary is found to be an effective and acceptable alternative by the patients as well.

How to prevent medication errors: a multidimensional scaling study to investigate the distinguishability between self-injection platform device variants

Background: The importance of subcutaneous drug delivery using self-injection devices based on common device platforms continues to grow. The resulting broad adoption of potentially look-alike or similar devices, however, raises concerns over limited device distinguishability and ensuing risk of medication errors. The objective of the study is thus to understand whether and how users effectively distinguish between self-injection device variants. Methods: Seventy-four patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals were asked to pairwise rate the similarity of eight platform autoinjector variants. Multidimensional scaling was then used to convert individual ratings into spatial configurations and thereby identify the attributes that influence device distinguishability. Results: Five different device attributes driving distinguishability were identified. Three of the attributes corresponded to single design features (the label color, device size and device shape). Two device attributes (the aspect ratio and chromaticity) combined distinct yet interrelated design features. Conclusions: The study provides initial empirical evidence that users are able to distinguish between device variants and as to what device attributes drive distinguishability. Furthermore, the results highlight patterns in how various user groups distinguish between device variants. These patterns relate with the user group characteristics (e.g. age, sight or dexterity) and the context of device usage (e.g. healthcare professionals).

Belimumab: A Review in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Belimumab (Benlysta^®) is a human immunoglobulin G1λ monoclonal antibody that inhibits the binding of soluble B lymphocyte stimulator to B cells. It is the only biological agent currently approved for the treatment of non-renal systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Belimumab is approved in the EU, the USA and other countries as add-on therapy in adult patients with active, autoantibody-positive SLE despite standard therapy. In phase III trials, treatment with IV or SC belimumab plus standard therapy was effective in terms of reducing overall disease activity and reducing the incidence and severity of flares, without worsening of patients' overall condition or the development of significant disease activity in new organ systems. Sustained disease control was maintained during longer-term (up to 10 years) treatment with IV belimumab. Belimumab also demonstrated steroid-sparing effects and was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life and fatigue. Belimumab was generally well tolerated in clinical trials, with low rates of immunogenicity. In view of the flexibility regarding the route of administration and the convenience of the once-weekly, self-administered, SC regimen, add-on therapy with belimumab is a useful treatment option for patients with active, autoantibody-positive SLE despite standard therapy.

Patient Satisfaction And Disease Control In Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Is Not Affected By Switching From Intravenous Belimumab To Subcutaneous Injections

PURPOSE

Since the launch of belimumab in 2011, the BLyS antibody has been increasingly used in the therapy of systemic Lupus erythematosus (SLE). Comparative studies showed that the intravenous (i.v.) and subcutaneous (s.c.) administration forms do not differ in their efficacy. Since the approval of the s.c. therapy, many patients have been switched from i.v. to s.c. administration. The clinical course of these patients and their satisfaction regarding the drug have not yet been investigated.

METHODS

A total of 9 patients with SLE were switched from i.v. to s.c. belimumab between 12/2017 and 03/2018. We assessed a self-developed questionnaire on drug satisfaction, disease activity (SLEDAI-2k), serological activity (leukocytes, DNA antibodies, complement), disease damage (SLICC/ACR damage index) and functional status (health-assessment questionnaire) at switching (T0) and after 6 months (T1). Association of the questionnaires with the form of administration (i.v. vs s.c.) was analyzed for each variable separately by linear regression analyses, adjusted for age, gender and disease duration.

RESULTS

At switching, disease activity of all patients was well controlled (median SLEDAI-2k = 2 [Interquartile range 0-4]) and the patients were mainly satisfied with their therapy. No evidence for any difference in disease activity, disease damage or patient satisfaction 6 months after switching was found. In tendency, patients were more satisfied with the s.c. administration.

CONCLUSION

The switch from i.v. to s.c. belimumab was successful in all cases and had no effect on disease activity or patient satisfaction. Despite the small sample size, s.c. belimumab seems to offer a good alternative to i.v. application.

Subcutaneous formulation of belimumab in treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: a critical review with focus on safety and satisfaction

Belimumab is a novel add-on therapy that has been approved for patients with active and antibody-mediated systemic lupus erythematosus. It is a monoclonal antibody that decreases the activation of B-cells and consequently decreases antibodies' production. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration approved subcutaneous belimumab for patients who have received training on using it. Subcutaneous belimumab can be administered using either a prefilled syringe or an auto-injector device. Weekly subcutaneous belimumab seems to be as effective as monthly intravenous belimumab with a similar safety margin. In this article, we reviewed the literature on subcutaneous belimumab focusing on safety and patients' experiences and satisfaction. Overall, subcutaneous belimumab appears to be preferred over intravenous belimumab for a number of reasons. However, more studies are still required to prove these findings.

Subcutaneous belimumab in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus

Systemic lupus erythematosus is a chronic autoimmune disease with various clinical manifestations, organ involvement and laboratory findings. The disease can involve any organ including skin, joints, kidneys, central and peripheral nervous system, cardiovascular system and more. Currently, the cornerstone of treatment includes antimalarial and immunosuppressive medications and glucocorticosteroids. Recently, great effort has been invested in finding more targeted drugs for achieving better control of the disease with less adverse events. Intravenous belimumab was the first and only biologic drug to be approved by the US FDA and Health Canada for lupus over the last 50 years, and recently was studied in subcutaneous form. This paper will review the major belimumab trials with a focus on the subcutaneous form.

Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Belimumab in Anti-Double-Stranded DNA-Positive, Hypocomplementemic Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of belimumab, a human immunoglobulin monoclonal antibody against B lymphocyte stimulator, in a subset of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who were hypocomplementemic (C3 <90 mg/dl and/or C4 <10 mg/dl) and anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) positive (≥30 IU/ml) at baseline.

METHODS

In this phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (BEL112341; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01484496), patients with moderate to severe SLE (Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index [SELENA-SLEDAI] score ≥8) were randomized (2:1) to receive weekly subcutaneous (SC) belimumab 200 mg or placebo, plus standard SLE therapy, for 52 weeks. The primary end point was SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) response rate at week 52. Secondary end points were time to severe flare and reduction in corticosteroid dose (weeks 40-52). Safety was assessed throughout.

RESULTS

Of the 836 patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, 356 were hypocomplementemic and anti-dsDNA positive at baseline (108 in the placebo group and 248 in the SC belimumab 200 mg group). Compared with placebo, the belimumab group contained more SRI-4 responders (47.2% versus 64.6%; P = 0.0014), had a lower incidence of severe flare according to the SELENA-SLEDAI flare index (31.5% versus 14.1%), and had a greater percentage of patients who reduced corticosteroid dosage by ≥25% to ≤7.5 mg/day during weeks 40-52 (11.4% versus 20.7%; P = 0.0844). Adverse events (AEs) were similar between treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that in hypocomplementemic, anti-dsDNA-positive SLE patients, weekly SC belimumab 200 mg significantly improves SRI-4 response, decreases severe flare incidence, and reduces corticosteroid use versus placebo; a trend toward greater benefit compared with the overall ITT population was observed. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of belimumab.

Preference for Subcutaneous Injection or Intravenous Infusion of Biological Therapy Among Italian Patients With SLE

This article focuses on the patients’ acceptance of a subcutaneous injection device for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, which in the upcoming years could be introduced beside the intravenous infusion of biological therapy. An online questionnaire was completed by 548 patients from different Italian regions. The preference for subcutaneous injection was 41.2%, for intravenous infusion was 36.9%, and 21.9% were uncertain. Patients with previous experience of biological therapies were less uncertain (P = .001). The reported motivations for the preference were analyzed through a lexicometric approach with the software T-LAB. Results revealed that respondents who preferred subcutaneous injections reported motivations that were more related to convenience, avoiding the discomfort of reaching the hospital. Patients who preferred intravenous infusion emphasized the importance of safety feelings related to the presence of qualified assistance during the therapy administration. In conclusion, patients appreciated the convenience that characterizes subcutaneous injections but also emphasized the importance of feeling safe during the administration. The study suggests that the choice of prescribing subcutaneous injections or intravenous infusions should be shared with patients, discussing possible resistances and avoiding preconceptions about patients’ preferences.

Patient- and Physician-reported Satisfaction With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Treatment in US Clinical Practice

PURPOSE

This two-part study comprised two descriptive, cross-sectional surveys to evaluate treatment satisfaction among patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and their physicians from US clinical practices. The Lupus Plus Project (LPP; part one) involved belimumab-containing regimens; the Disease Specific Program (DSP; part two) included all treatments and was designed to build on the body of evidence from part one.

METHODS

The LPP recruited patients receiving belimumab, and comprised 2 paper questionnaires: a patient self-completion questionnaire (PSC) and a patient record form (PRF) completed by the physician. The DSP enrolled patients with SLE receiving any treatment and comprised four parts: a PSC, a PRF completed by the physician after patient consultation, face-to-face physician interviews, and a workload form completed by the physicians to indicate their total SLE patient workload. The key objective of this study was to assess physician and patient satisfaction with current treatment.

FINDINGS

From the PSCs, data regarding patient-reported satisfaction with current treatment were available for 263 patients who were receiving belimumab combination therapy (LPP) and 250 patients who were receiving non-belimumab treatment (DSP). The majority of patients (belimumab, 86.3% [227/263]; non-belimumab, 78.4% [196/250]) responded positively (at least "somewhat satisfied") when asked about current treatment satisfaction, as did physicians (belimumab, 82.9% [311/375]; non-belimumab, 74.3% [326/439]). In multivariate analysis, factors most strongly associated with patient-reported satisfaction for patients receiving belimumab were patient-reported improvements in leisure activities since taking belimumab (odds ratio [OR] = 4.66), physician-reported improvements in fatigue (OR = 3.72), patient-reported improvements in general symptoms (OR = 3.02), and pain/achiness (OR = 2.71). Physician satisfaction was associated with clinical outcome such as improvements in pain/achiness (OR = 6.16), fatigue (OR = 3.76), and patient-reported satisfaction with treatment frequency (OR = 3.91). In patients receiving other SLE treatments, dosing frequency of current treatment (OR = 3.64) and a reduction in fatigue severity (OR = 3.61) were most strongly associated with patient-reported satisfaction; physician satisfaction was most strongly associated with a reduction in fatigue (OR = 6.22) and current remission status (OR = 6.05).

IMPLICATIONS

When considering SLE treatment satisfaction patients tend to consider impact on daily functioning, whereas physicians take into account a wider range of clinical outcomes; however, both strongly consider improvements in fatigue. These surveys provide insights into treatment satisfaction among prescribers and patients with SLE. GSK-ClinicalStudyRegister.com identifiers: GSK study 202146 [HO 15-15509] and 205086 [HO 15-16709].