Antipsychotic choice: understanding shared decision-making among doctors and patients

Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Medication in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma in China: A Discrete-Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the relative importance of attributes and the willingness to pay for pharmacological therapies among patients with renal cell carcinoma in China.

METHODS

Patients with renal cell carcinoma completed a D-efficient-designed, discrete-choice experiment online survey that presented a series of ten trade-off questions and one examining scenario. Based on the literature review and consultations with patients with renal cell carcinoma and clinicians, each question included a pair of hypothetical renal cell carcinoma medication profiles characterized by seven attributes including progression-free survival, objective response rate, medication regimen, fatigue, gastrointestinal reaction, hand-foot syndrome, and monthly out-of-pocket costs. Relative importance and willingness to pay were calculated using coefficients estimated by mixed logit regression in the main analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted considering the heterogeneity of the participants, based on sex, education level, and income level, using conditional logit regression.

RESULTS

The analysis incorporated responses from 182 Chinese respondents. Except for the medication regimen, all attributes were statistically significant. Progression-free survival was the most important attribute, followed by objective response rate, monthly out-of-pocket costs, fatigue, gastrointestinal reaction, and hand-foot syndrome. Patients were willing to pay ￥2010.51 ($298.30), ￥494.93 ($73.43) for 1 unit improvement of progression-free survival, and objective response rate, and￥7558.93 ($1121.50), ￥6927.24 ($1027.78) to avoid experiencing fatigue and gastrointestinal reaction, respectively. Differences in preferences and willingness to pay were found according to patients' gender, income, and education level.

CONCLUSIONS

In China, patients with renal cell carcinoma preferred medications with better efficacy (objective response rate and progression-free survival) and lower out-of-pocket costs. Heterogeneity can be found in preferences and willingness to pay based on patients' gender, income, and education levels.

Efficacy and Safety Profiles of Antipsychotic Drugs as Viewed by Psychiatrists: A Comparative Analysis of Cariprazine and Risperidone

BACKGROUND

Physicians hold the belief that the treatment outcomes and the treatment strategy they eventually adopt is largely determined by the differences in medications. Despite numerous studies focusing on the decision-making processes of psychiatrists, including the choice of antipsychotics when prescribing pharmacotherapy, the impact of therapeutic drug profiling on physicians' decision-making remains poorly comprehended.

AIM

The aim of this study is to assess the quantitative differences in perceptions of antipsychotics by psychiatrists using cariprazine and risperidone as examples.

METHODS

A total of 79 psychiatrists were interviewed anonymously in St. Petersburg, Russia. The physicians documented the clinical advantages they perceived drugs to possess relative to one another, following a predetermined principle: A B, A=B, A B (2-AC protocol). The comparison is based on eleven parameters that assess the effectiveness and safety of cariprazine or risperidone. It has been hypothesized that the pattern of responses (qualitative difference) and the degree of preference for each drug (quantitative difference) may not align with the data in the original meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The perception parameter exhibited a greater difference than anticipated (δ - 0.889), while the threshold for differentiating between the drugs was lower (τ - 1.001). The response pattern only aligned with theory by 44.37%. The dispersion of responses was associated with the length of work experience.

CONCLUSION

The perceived difference between the drugs significantly deviates from the theoretical data, both in terms of strength of perception and pattern (quantitative and qualitative differences).

Assessment of patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs in China: a best-worst discrete choice experiment on three common cancer types

OBJECTIVES

Despite the advancement in anticancer drug therapies, cancer treatment decisions are often complex and preference-sensitive, making them well suited for studying shared decision-making (SDM). Our study aimed to assess preferences for new anticancer drugs among three common types of patients with cancer to inform SDM.

DESIGN

We identified five attributes of new anticancer drugs and used a Bayesian-efficient design to generate choice sets for a best-worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE). The mixed logit regression model was applied to estimate patient-reported preferences for each attribute. The interaction model was used to investigate preference heterogeneity.

SETTING

The BWDCE was conducted in Jiangsu province and Hebei province in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 18 years or older, who had a definite diagnosis of lung cancer, breast cancer or colorectal cancer were recruited.

RESULTS

Data from 468 patients were available for analysis. On average, the most valued attribute was the improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p<0.001). The low incidence of severe to life-threatening side effects, prolonged progression-free survival and the low incidence of mild to moderate side effects were also positive predictors of patients' preferences (p<0.001). Out-of-pocket cost was a negative predictor of their preferences (p<0.001). According to subgroup analysis by type of cancer, the improvement in HRQoL remained the most valuable attribute. However, the relative importance of other attributes varied by type of cancer. Whether patients were newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed cancer cases played a dominant role in the preference heterogeneity within each subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study can assist in the implementation of SDM by providing evidence on patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs. Patients should be informed of the multiattribute values of new drugs and encouraged to make decisions reflecting their values.

Antipsychotic utilization, healthcare resource use and costs, and quality of care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia in the United States

BACKGROUND

No research to date has examined antipsychotic (AP) use, healthcare resource use (HRU), costs, and quality of care among those with schizophrenia in the Medicare program despite it serving as the primary payer for half of individuals with schizophrenia in the US.

OBJECTIVES

To provide national estimates and assess regional variation in AP treatment utilization, HRU, costs, and quality measures among Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of 100% Medicare claims data from 2019. The sample included all adult Medicare beneficiaries with continuous fee-for-service coverage and ≥1 inpatient and/or ≥2 outpatient claims with a diagnosis for schizophrenia in 2019. Summary statistics on AP use; HRU and cost; and quality measures were reported at the national, state, and county levels. Regional variation was measured using the coefficient of variation (CoV).

RESULTS

We identified 314,888 beneficiaries with schizophrenia. About 91% used any AP; 20% used any long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI); and 14% used atypical LAIs. About 28% of beneficiaries had ≥1 hospitalization and 47% had ≥1 emergency room (ER) visits, the vast majority of which were related to mental health (MH). Total annual all-cause, MH, and schizophrenia-related costs were $23,662, $15,000 and $12,109, respectively. Among those with hospitalizations, 18.4% and 27.3% had readmission within 7 and 30 days and 56% and 67% had a physician visit and AP fill within 30 days post-discharge, respectively. Overall, 81% of beneficiaries were deemed adherent to their AP medications. Larger interstate variations were observed in LAI use than AP use (CoV: 0.21 vs 0.02). County-level variations were larger than state-level variations for all measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first study examining a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia, we found low utilization rates of LAIs and high levels of hospital admissions/readmissions and ER visits. State and county-level variations were also found in these measures.

Characteristics of people on long-acting injectable antipsychotics in Australia: Data from the 2010 National Survey of High Impact Psychosis

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates (1) the proportion of people with psychosis who are on long-acting injectable antipsychotics; (2) the difference in the demographic, clinical, substance use and adverse drug reaction profiles of people taking long-acting injectables compared to oral antipsychotics; and (3) the differences in the same profiles of those on first-generation antipsychotic versus second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables.

METHODS

Data were collected as part of the Survey of High Impact Psychosis. For this study, participants with diagnoses of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were on any antipsychotic medication were included (N = 1049).

RESULTS

Nearly a third (31.5%) of people with psychosis were on long-acting injectables, of whom 49.7% were on first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables and 47.9% were on second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables. This contrasts with oral antipsychotics where there was a higher utilisation of second-generation antipsychotics (86.3%). Of note, compared to those on the oral formulation, people on long-acting injectables were almost four times more likely to be under a community treatment order. Furthermore, people on long-acting injectables were more likely to have a longer duration of illness, reduced degree of insight, increased cognitive impairment as well as poor personal and social functioning. They also reported more adverse drug reactions. Compared to those on first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables, people on SGA long-acting injectables were younger and had had a shorter duration of illness. They were also more likely to experience dizziness and increased weight, but less likely to experience muscle stiffness or tenseness.

CONCLUSION

Long-acting injectable use in Australia is associated with higher rates of community treatment order use, as well as poorer insight, personal and social performance, and greater cognitive impairment. While long-acting injectables may have the potential to improve the prognosis of people with psychosis, a better understanding of the choices behind the utilisation of long-acting injectable treatment in Australia is urgently needed.