1
|
Hauber B, Hand MV, Hancock BC, Zarrella J, Harding L, Ogden-Barker M, Antipas AS, Watt SJ. Patient Acceptability and Preferences for Solid Oral Dosage Form Drug Product Attributes: A Scoping Review. Patient Prefer Adherence 2024; 18:1281-1297. [PMID: 38919378 PMCID: PMC11197953 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s443213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2023] [Accepted: 05/29/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Background There is no consistent framework for patient-centric drug product design, despite the common understanding that drug product acceptability and preferences influence adherence and, therefore, drug product effectiveness. The aim of this review was to assess current understanding of patient acceptability and preferences for solid oral dosage form (SODF) drug product attributes, and the potential impact of these attributes on patient behaviors and outcomes. Patients and Methods A scoping review was conducted. Embase, Ovid MEDLINE®, and PubMed® were searched for full-text articles published between January 2013 and May 2023. Following screening and assessment against predefined inclusion criteria, data were analyzed thematically. Results Nineteen studies were included. Four overarching domains of drug product attributes were identified and summarized in a framework: appearance, swallowability, palatability, and handling. Each domain was informed by specific drug product attributes: texture, form, size, shape, color, marking, taste, mouthfeel, and smell. The most frequently studied domains were swallowability and appearance, while the most studied attributes were size, shape, and texture. Smell, marking, and mouthfeel were the least studied attributes. Texture intersected all domains, while form, shape, and size intersected appearance, swallowability, and handling. Swallowability and size appeared to be the key domain and attribute, respectively, to consider when designing drug products. Few studies explored the impact of drug product attributes on behaviors and outcomes. Conclusion While existing studies of drug product attributes have focused on appearance and swallowability, this review highlighted the importance of two less well-understood domains-palatability and handling-in understanding patients' acceptability and preferences for SODF drug products. The framework provides a tool to facilitate patient-centric design of drug products, organizing and categorizing physical drug product attributes into four overarching domains (appearance, swallowability, palatability, and handling), encouraging researchers to comprehensively assess the impact of drug product attributes on patient acceptability, preferences, and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mark V Hand
- Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals, Ballintaggart, Cork, Ringaskiddy, Ireland
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jones B, Ryan M, Cook NS, Gutzwiller FS. Development of a disease-specific health utility score for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from a discrete choice experiment patient preference study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2024; 40:e30. [PMID: 38695141 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462324000242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES While patient input to health technology assessment (HTA) has traditionally been of a qualitative nature, there is increasing interest to integrate quantitative evidence from patient preference studies into HTA decision making. Preference data can be used to generate disease-specific health utility data. We generated a health utility score for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and consider its use within HTAs. METHODS Based on qualitative research, six symptoms were identified as important to COPD patients: shortness of breath, exacerbations, chronic cough, mucus secretion, sleep disturbance, and urinary incontinence. We employed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the random parameter logistic regression technique to estimate utility scores for all COPD health states. The relationship between patients' COPD health utility scores, self-perceived COPD severity, and EQ-5D-3L utility scores was analyzed, with data stratified according to disease severity and comorbidity subgroups. RESULTS The COPD health utility score had face validity, with utility scores negatively correlated with patients' self-perceived COPD severity. The correlation between the COPD health utility scores and EQ-5D-3L values was only moderate. While patient EQ-5D-3L scores were impacted by comorbidities, the COPD health utility score was less impacted by comorbid conditions. CONCLUSIONS Our COPD utility measure, derived from a DCE, provides a patient-centered health utility score and is more sensitive to the COPD health of the individual and less sensitive to other comorbidities. This disease-specific instrument should be considered alongside generic health-related quality of life instruments when valuing new COPD therapies in submissions to licensing and reimbursement agencies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Byron Jones
- Patient Engagement Science, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Mandy Ryan
- Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Nigel S Cook
- Global Patient Engagement, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Pandina GJ, Busner J, Kempf L, Fallon J, Alphs LD, Acosta MT, Berger AK, Day S, Dunn J, Villalta-Gil V, Grabb MC, Horrigan JP, Jacobson W, Kando JC, Macek TA, Singh MK, Stanford AD, Domingo SZ. Ensuring Stakeholder Feedback in the Design and Conduct of Clinical Trials for Rare Diseases: ISCTM Position Paper of the Orphan Disease Working Group. INNOVATIONS IN CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE 2024; 21:52-60. [PMID: 38495603 PMCID: PMC10941866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Abstract
The 1983 Orphan Drug Act in the United States (US) changed the landscape for development of therapeutics for rare or orphan diseases, which collectively affect approximately 300 million people worldwide, half of whom are children. The act has undoubtedly accelerated drug development for orphan diseases, with over 6,400 orphan drug applications submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1983 to 2023, including 350 drugs approved for over 420 indications. Drug development in this population is a global and collaborative endeavor. This position paper of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) describes some potential best practices for the involvement of key stakeholder feedback in the drug development process. Stakeholders include advocacy groups, patients and caregivers with lived experience, public and private research institutions (including academia and pharmaceutical companies), treating clinicians, and funders (including the government and independent foundations). The authors articulate the challenges of drug development in orphan diseases and propose methods to address them. Challenges range from the poor understanding of disease history to development of endpoints, targets, and clinical trials designs, to finding solutions to competing research priorities by involved parties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gahan J. Pandina
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Pandina is with Janssen Research & Development in Titusville, New Jersey
| | - Joan Busner
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Busner is with Signant Health in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania and Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine in Richmond, Virginia
| | - Lucas Kempf
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Kempf is with Parexel in Washington, DC
| | - Joan Fallon
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Fallon is with Curemark in Rye Brook, New York
| | - Larry D. Alphs
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Alphs is with Denovo Pharmaceuticals in Princeton, New Jersey
| | - Maria T. Acosta
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Acosta is with the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Anna-Karin Berger
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Berger is with H. Lundbeck A/S in Valby, Denmark
| | - Simon Day
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Day is with Clinical Trials Consulting & Training in Buckingham, United Kingdom
| | - Judith Dunn
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Dunn is with Evolution Research Group in Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Victoria Villalta-Gil
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Villalta-Gil is with WCG Clinical in Durham, North Carolina
| | - Margaret C. Grabb
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Grabb is with the National Institute of Mental Health in Rockville, Maryland
| | - Joseph P. Horrigan
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Horrigan is with AMO Pharma in Wonersh, United Kingdom and Duke University in Durham, North Carolina
| | - William Jacobson
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Jacobson is with Harmony Biosciences in Mundelein, Illinois
| | - Judith C. Kando
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Kando is with Karuna Therapeutics in Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Thomas A. Macek
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Macek is with Novartis Pharmaceuticals in Bannockburn, Illinois
| | - Manpreet K. Singh
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Singh is with Stanford University School of Medicine in Stanford, California
| | - Arielle D. Stanford
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Stanford is with Bristol Myers Squibb in Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Silvia Zaragoza Domingo
- All authors are members of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group for Rare Disease/Orphan Drug Development. Drs. Pandina and Busner are Co-Chairs
- Dr. Domingo is with Neuropsynchro in Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Janssens R, Barbier L, Muller M, Cleemput I, Stoeckert I, Whichello C, Levitan B, Hammad TA, Girvalaki C, Ventura JJ, Bywall KS, Pinto CA, Schoefs E, Katz EG, Kihlbom U, Huys I. How can patient preferences be used and communicated in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products? Findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER and call to action. Front Pharmacol 2023; 14:1192770. [PMID: 37663265 PMCID: PMC10468983 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1192770] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 09/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: Patients have unique insights and are (in-)directly affected by each decision taken throughout the life cycle of medicinal products. Patient preference studies (PPS) assess what matters most to patients, how much, and what trade-offs patients are willing to make. IMI PREFER was a six-year European public-private partnership under the Innovative Medicines Initiative that developed recommendations on how to assess and use PPS in medical product decision-making, including in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products. This paper aims to summarize findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER regarding i) PPS applications in regulatory evaluation, ii) when and how to consult with regulators on PPS, iii) how to reflect PPS in regulatory communication and iv) barriers and open questions for PPS in regulatory decision-making. Methods: PREFER performed six literature reviews, 143 interviews and eight focus group discussions with regulators, patient representatives, industry representatives, Health Technology Assessment bodies, payers, academics, and clincians between October 2016 and May 2022. Results: i) With respect to PPS applications, prior to the conduct of clinical trials of medicinal products, PPS could inform regulators' understanding of patients' unmet needs and relevant endpoints during horizon scanning activities and scientific advice. During the evaluation of a marketing authorization application, PPS could inform: a) the assessment of whether a product meets an unmet need, b) whether patient-relevant clinical trial endpoints and outcomes were studied, c) the understanding of patient-relevant effect sizes and acceptable trade-offs, and d) the identification of key (un-)favorable effects and uncertainties. ii) With respect to consulting with regulators on PPS, PPS researchers should ideally have early discussions with regulators (e.g., during scientific advice) on the PPS design and research questions. iii) Regarding external PPS communication, PPS could be reflected in the assessment report and product information (e.g., the European Public Assessment Report and the Summary of Product Characteristics). iv) Barriers relevant to the use of PPS in regulatory evaluation include a lack of PPS use cases and demonstrated impact on regulatory decision-making, and need for (financial) incentives, guidance and quality criteria for implementing PPS results in regulatory decision-making. Open questions concerning regulatory PPS use include: a) should a product independent broad approach to the design of PPS be taken and/or a product-specific one, b) who should optimally be financing, designing, conducting, and coordinating PPS, c) when (within and/or outside clinical trials) to perform PPS, and d) how can PPS use best be operationalized in regulatory decisions. Conclusion: PPS have high potential to inform regulators on key unmet needs, endpoints, benefits, and risks that matter most to patients and their acceptable trade-offs. Regulatory guidelines, templates and checklists, together with incentives are needed to foster structural and transparent PPS submission and evaluation in regulatory decision-making. More PPS case studies should be conducted and submitted for regulatory assessment to enable regulatory discussion and increase regulators' experience with PPS implementation and communication in regulatory evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosanne Janssens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Liese Barbier
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Irina Cleemput
- Belgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre (KCE), Brussels, Belgium
| | | | | | - Bennett Levitan
- Global Epidemiology, Janssen R&D, LLC, Pennsylvania, PA, United States
| | | | | | | | - Karin Schölin Bywall
- School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Division of Health and Welfare Technology, Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden
- Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | | | - Elise Schoefs
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Eva G. Katz
- Janssen Global Services, LLC, Raritan, NJ, United States
| | - Ulrik Kihlbom
- Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Stothers Rosenberg S, Ng X, Mansfield C, Poulos C, Peay H, Lee TH, Irony T, Ho M. Adaptation of the WOMAC for Use in a Patient Preference Study. Ther Innov Regul Sci 2023; 57:702-711. [PMID: 37061632 PMCID: PMC10105612 DOI: 10.1007/s43441-023-00510-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2023] [Indexed: 04/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To adapt a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure, the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), into efficacy attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey designed to quantify the relative importance of endpoints commonly used in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) trials. METHODS The adaptation comprised four steps: (1) selecting domains of interest; (2) determining presentation and framing of selected attributes; (3) determining attribute levels; and (4) developing choice tasks. This process involved input from multiple stakeholders, including regulators, health preference researchers, and patients. Pretesting was conducted to evaluate if patients comprehended the adapted survey attributes and could make trade-offs among them. RESULTS The WOMAC pain and function domains were selected for adaption to two efficacy attributes. Two versions of the discrete choice experiment (DCE) instrument were created to compare efficacy using (1) total domain scores and (2) item scores for "walking on a flat surface." Both attributes were presented as improvement from baseline scores by levels of 0%, 30%, 50%, and 100%. Twenty-six participants were interviewed in a pretest of the instrument (average age 60 years; 58% female; 62% had KOA for ≥ 5 years). The participants found both versions of attributes meaningful and relevant for treatment decision-making. They demonstrated willingness and ability to tradeoff improvements in pain and function separately, though many perceived them as inter-related. CONCLUSIONS This study adds to the growing literature regarding adapting PRO measures for patient preference studies. Such adaptation is important for designing a preference study that can incorporate a clinical trial's outcomes with PRO endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Stothers Rosenberg
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Xinyi Ng
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
| | | | | | - Holly Peay
- RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Ting-Hsuan Lee
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Telba Irony
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| | - Martin Ho
- Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Oliveira R, Almeida IF. Patient-Centric Design of Topical Dermatological Medicines. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 2023; 16:ph16040617. [PMID: 37111373 PMCID: PMC10144586 DOI: 10.3390/ph16040617] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2023] [Revised: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Topical treatments are essential approaches to skin diseases but are associated with poor adherence. Topical vehicles have the primary purpose of ensuring drug effectiveness (by modulating drug stability and delivery, as well as skin properties) but have a marked impact on treatment outcomes as they influence patient satisfaction and, consequently, adherence to topical treatments. There is also a wide variety of vehicles available for topical formulations, which can complicate the decisions of clinicians regarding the most appropriate treatments for specific skin disorders. One of the possible strategies to improve topical-treatment adherence is the implementation of patient-centric drug-product design. In this process, the patient's needs (e.g., those related to motor impairment), the needs associated with the disease (according to the skin lesions' characteristics), and the patient's preferences are taken into consideration and translated into a target product profile (TPP). Herein, an overview of topical vehicles and their properties is presented, along with a discussion of the patient-centric design of topical dermatological medicines and the proposal of TPPs for some of the most common skin diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rita Oliveira
- FP-BHS-Biomedical and Health Sciences Research Unit, FFP-I3ID-Instituto de Investigação, Inovação e Desenvolvimento, Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Rua Carlos da Maia 296, 4200-150 Porto, Portugal
- UCIBIO-Applied Molecular Biosciences Unit, MedTech, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Rua Jorge Viterbo de Ferreira 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal
- Associate Laboratory i4HB-Institute for Health and Bioeconomy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Rua Jorge Viterbo de Ferreira 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal
| | - Isabel F Almeida
- UCIBIO-Applied Molecular Biosciences Unit, MedTech, Laboratory of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Rua Jorge Viterbo de Ferreira 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal
- Associate Laboratory i4HB-Institute for Health and Bioeconomy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Rua Jorge Viterbo de Ferreira 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zvonareva O. Patient engagement in drug development: configuring a new resource for generating innovation. CRITICAL PUBLIC HEALTH 2023. [DOI: 10.1080/09581596.2023.2188140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/19/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Olga Zvonareva
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kiluk BD, Kleykamp BA, Comer SD, Griffiths RR, Huhn AS, Johnson MW, Kampman KM, Pravetoni M, Preston KL, Vandrey R, Bergeria CL, Bogenschutz MP, Brown RT, Dunn KE, Dworkin RH, Finan PH, Hendricks PS, Houtsmuller EJ, Kosten TR, Lee DC, Levin FR, McRae-Clark A, Raison CL, Rasmussen K, Turk DC, Weiss RD, Strain EC. Clinical Trial Design Challenges and Opportunities for Emerging Treatments for Opioid Use Disorder: A Review. JAMA Psychiatry 2023; 80:84-92. [PMID: 36449315 PMCID: PMC10297827 DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.4020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
Importance Novel treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) are needed to address both the ongoing opioid epidemic and long-standing barriers to existing OUD treatments that target the endogenous μ-opioid receptor (MOR) system. The goal of this review is to highlight unique clinical trial design considerations for the study of emerging treatments for OUD that address targets beyond the MOR system. In November 2019, the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration sponsored a meeting to discuss the current evidence regarding potential treatments for OUD, including cannabinoids, psychedelics, sedative-hypnotics, and immunotherapeutics, such as vaccines. Observations Consensus recommendations are presented regarding the most critical elements of trial design for the evaluation of novel OUD treatments, such as: (1) stage of treatment that will be targeted (eg, seeking treatment, early abstinence/detoxification, long-term recovery); (2) role of treatment (adjunctive with or independent of existing OUD treatments); (3) primary outcomes informed by patient preferences that assess opioid use (including changes in patterns of use), treatment retention, and/or global functioning and quality of life; and (4) adverse events, including the potential for opioid-related relapse or overdose, especially if the patient is not simultaneously taking maintenance MOR agonist or antagonist medications. Conclusions and Relevance Applying the recommendations provided here as well as considering input from people with lived experience in the design phase will accelerate the development, translation, and uptake of effective and safe therapeutics for individuals struggling with OUD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian D Kiluk
- Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Bethea A Kleykamp
- University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York
| | - Sandra D Comer
- Division on Substance Use Disorders, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York
- Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Roland R Griffiths
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Andrew S Huhn
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Matthew W Johnson
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Kyle M Kampman
- Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
| | - Marco Pravetoni
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle
| | - Kenzie L Preston
- Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Research Branch, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ryan Vandrey
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Cecilia L Bergeria
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Michael P Bogenschutz
- Department of Psychiatry, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York
| | - Randall T Brown
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison
| | - Kelly E Dunn
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Robert H Dworkin
- University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York
| | - Patrick H Finan
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Peter S Hendricks
- Department of Health Behavior, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham
| | | | - Thomas R Kosten
- Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
- Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Dustin C Lee
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Frances R Levin
- Division on Substance Use Disorders, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York
- Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | - Aimee McRae-Clark
- Department of Psychiatry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston
| | - Charles L Raison
- Department of Human Development and Family Studies, School of Human Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
- Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison
| | | | - Dennis C Turk
- University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
| | - Roger D Weiss
- Division of Alcohol, Drugs, and Addiction, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts
- Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Eric C Strain
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lucía Schmidt A, Rodriguez-Esteban R, Gottowik J, Leddin M. Applications of quantitative social media listening to patient-centric drug development. Drug Discov Today 2022; 27:1523-1530. [PMID: 35114364 DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2022.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2021] [Revised: 08/13/2021] [Accepted: 01/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
Social media listening has been increasingly acknowledged as a tool with applications in many stages of the drug development process. These applications were created to meet the need for patient-centric therapies that are fit-for-purpose and meaningful to patients. Such applications, however, require the leverage of new quantitative approaches and analytical methods that draw from developments in artificial intelligence and real-world data (RWD) analysis. Here, we review the state-of-the-art in quantitative social media listening (QSML) methods applied to drug discovery from the perspective of the pharmaceutical industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Lucía Schmidt
- Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, 4070 Basel, Switzerland
| | - Raul Rodriguez-Esteban
- Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, 4070 Basel, Switzerland.
| | - Juergen Gottowik
- Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, 4070 Basel, Switzerland
| | - Mathias Leddin
- Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, 4070 Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Wale JL, Chandler D, Collyar D, Hamerlijnck D, Saldana R, Pemberton-Whitely Z. Can We Afford to Exclude Patients Throughout Health Technology Assessment? FRONTIERS IN MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY 2022; 3:796344. [PMID: 35146487 PMCID: PMC8821945 DOI: 10.3389/fmedt.2021.796344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Health technology assessment (HTA) is intended to determine the value of health technologies and, once a technology is recommended for funding, bridge clinical research and practice. Understanding the values and beliefs expressed by patients and health professionals can help guide this knowledge transfer and work toward managing the expectations of end users. We gathered patient and patient group leader experiences to gain insights into the roles that patients and patient advocacy groups are playing. We argue that through partnerships and co-creation between HTA professionals, researchers and patient advocates we can strengthen the HTA process and better align with service delivery where person-centered care and shared decision making are key elements. Patient experiences and knowledge are important to the democratization of evidence and the legitimacy of HTAs. Patient preference studies are used to balance benefits with potential harms of technologies, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can measure what matters to patients over time. A change in culture in HTA bodies is occurring and with further transformative thinking patients can be involved in every step of the HTA process. Patients have a right to be involved in HTAs, with patients' values central to HTA deliberations on a technology and where patients can provide valuable insights to inform HTA decision-making; and in ensuring that HTA methodologies evolve. By evaluating the implementation of HTA recommendations we can determine how HTA benefits patients and their communities. Our shared commitment can positively effect the common good and provide benefits to individual patients and their communities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janet L. Wale
- HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group (PCIG) Chair, Brunswick, VIC, Australia
- *Correspondence: Janet L. Wale
| | - David Chandler
- Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Alliance (PAPAA), St Albans, United Kingdom
| | - Deborah Collyar
- Patient Advocates in Research (PAIR), Danville, CA, United States
| | | | - Roberto Saldana
- Spanish Platform European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation (EUPATI), Madrid, Spain
| | - Zack Pemberton-Whitely
- Acute Leukemia Advocates Network and Leukaemia Patient Advocates Foundation, Bern, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Koss J, Rheinlaender A, Truebel H, Bohnet-Joschko S. Social media mining in drug development-Fundamentals and use cases. Drug Discov Today 2021; 26:2871-2880. [PMID: 34481080 DOI: 10.1016/j.drudis.2021.08.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2021] [Revised: 06/03/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
The incorporation of patients' perspectives into drug discovery and development has become critically important from the viewpoint of accounting for modern-day business dynamics. There is a trend among patients to narrate their disease experiences on social media. The insights gained by analyzing the data pertaining to such social-media posts could be leveraged to support patient-centered drug development. Manual analysis of these data is nearly impossible, but artificial intelligence enables automated and cost-effective processing, also referred as social media mining (SMM). This paper discusses the fundamental SMM methods along with several relevant drug-development use cases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Hubert Truebel
- Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany; AiCuris AG, Wuppertal, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jimenez-Moreno AC, van Overbeeke E, Pinto CA, Smith I, Sharpe J, Ormrod J, Whichello C, de Bekker-Grob EW, Bullok K, Levitan B, Huys I, de Wit GA, Gorman G. Patient Preferences in Rare Diseases: A Qualitative Study in Neuromuscular Disorders to Inform a Quantitative Preference Study. THE PATIENT 2021; 14:601-612. [PMID: 33660162 PMCID: PMC8357717 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00482-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION It has become increasingly important to include patient preference information in decision-making processes for drug development. As neuromuscular disorders represent multisystem, debilitating, and progressive rare diseases with few treatment options, this study aimed to explore unmet health care needs and patient treatment preferences for two neuromuscular disorders, myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) and mitochondrial myopathies (MM) to inform early stages of drug development. METHODS Fifteen semi-structured interviews and five focus group discussions (FGDs) were held with DM1 and MM adult patients and caregivers. Topics discussed included (1) reasons for study participation; (2) disease signs/symptoms and their impact on daily lives; (3) top desired benefits; and (4) acceptability of risks and tolerance levels for a hypothetical new treatment. Data were analyzed following a thematic 'code' approach. RESULTS A total of 52 participants representing a wide range of disease severities participated. 'Muscle strength' and 'energy and endurance' were the disease-related unmet needs most often mentioned. Additionally, improved 'balance', 'cognition' and 'gut function' were the top desired treatment benefits, while 'damage to the liver, kidneys or eyes' was the most concerning risk. Factors influencing their tolerance to risks related to previously having experienced the risk and differentiation between permanent and temporary risks. A few differences were elicited between patients and caregivers. CONCLUSIONS This qualitative study provided an open forum to elicit treatment-desired benefits and acceptable risks to be established by patients themselves. These findings can inform decisions for developing new treatments and the design of clinical trials for DM1 and MM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno
- Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK.
- Evidera, London, UK.
| | - Eline van Overbeeke
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Cathy Anne Pinto
- Pharmacoepidemiology Department, Center for Observational and Real-world Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA
| | - Ian Smith
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - James Ormrod
- School of Applied Social Science, University of Brighton, East Sussex, UK
| | - Chiara Whichello
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esther W de Bekker-Grob
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kristin Bullok
- Global Patient Safety Department, Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | | | - Isabelle Huys
- Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - G Ardine de Wit
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Grainne Gorman
- Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
How to integrate evidence from patient preference studies into health technology assessment: a critical review and recommendations. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2021; 37:e75. [PMID: 36744660 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462321000490] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies vary in their use of quantitative patient preference data (PP) and the extent to which they have formalized this use in their guidelines. Based on the authors' knowledge of the literature, we identified six different PP "use cases" that integrate PP into HTA in five different ways: through endpoint selection, clinical benefit rating, predicting uptake, input into economic evaluation, and a means to weight all HTA criteria. Five types of insight are distinguished across the use cases: understanding what matters to patients, predicting patient choices, estimating the utility generated by treatment benefits, estimating the willingness to pay for treatment benefits, and informing distributional considerations. Summarizing the literature on these use cases, we recommend circumstances in which PP can add value to HTA and the further research and guidance that is required to support the integration of PP in HTA. Where HTA places more emphasis on clinical outcomes, novel endpoints are available; or where there are already many treatment options, PP can add value by helping decision makers to understand what matters to patients. Where uptake is uncertain, PP can be used to estimate uptake probability. Where indication-specific utility functions are required or where existing utility measures fail to capture the value of treatments, PP can be used to generate or supplement existing utility estimates. Where patients are paying out of pocket, PP can be used to estimate willingness to pay.
Collapse
|
14
|
Janssens R, Lang T, Vallejo A, Galinsky J, Plate A, Morgan K, Cabezudo E, Silvennoinen R, Coriu D, Badelita S, Irimia R, Anttonen M, Manninen RL, Schoefs E, Vandebroek M, Vanhellemont A, Delforge M, Stevens H, Simoens S, Huys I. Patient Preferences for Multiple Myeloma Treatments: A Multinational Qualitative Study. Front Med (Lausanne) 2021; 8:686165. [PMID: 34295912 PMCID: PMC8289885 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.686165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 05/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Investigational and marketed drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) are associated with a range of characteristics and uncertainties regarding long term side-effects and efficacy. This raises questions about what matters most to patients living with this disease. This study aimed to understand which characteristics MM patients find most important, and hence should be included as attributes and levels in a subsequent quantitative preference survey among MM patients. Methods: This qualitative study involved: (i) a scoping literature review, (ii) discussions with MM patients (n = 24) in Belgium, Finland, Romania, and Spain using Nominal Group Technique, (iii) a qualitative thematic analysis including multi-stakeholder discussions. Results: MM patients voiced significant expectations and hopes that treatments would extend their lives and reduce their cancer signs and symptoms. Participants however raised concerns about life-threatening side-effects that could cause permanent organ damage. Bone fractures and debilitating neuropathic effects (such as chronic tingling sensations) were highlighted as major issues reducing patients' independence and mobility. Patients discussed the negative impact of the following symptoms and side-effects on their daily activities: thinking problems, increased susceptibility to infections, reduced energy, pain, emotional problems, and vision problems. MM patients were concerned with uncertainties regarding the durability of positive treatment outcomes, and the cause, severity, and duration of their symptoms and side-effects. Patients feared short-term positive treatment responses complicated by permanent, severe side-effects and symptoms. Conclusions: This study gained an in-depth understanding of the treatment and disease-related characteristics and types of attribute levels (severity, duration) that are most important to MM patients. Results from this study argue in favor of MM drug development and individual treatment decision-making that focuses not only on extending patients' lives but also on addressing those symptoms and side-effects that significantly impact MM patients' quality of life. This study underscores a need for transparent communication toward MM patients about MM treatment outcomes and uncertainties regarding their long-term efficacy and safety. Finally, this study may help drug developers and decision-makers understand which treatment outcomes and uncertainties are most important to MM patients and therefore should be incorporated in MM drug development, evaluation, and clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosanne Janssens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Elena Cabezudo
- Department of Haematology, H. Moises Broggi/ICO-Hospitalet, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Raija Silvennoinen
- Department of Hematology, Helsinki University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki, Finland.,University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Daniel Coriu
- Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.,Fundeni Clinical Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Ruxandra Irimia
- Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.,Fundeni Clinical Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Minna Anttonen
- Association of Cancer Patients in Finland, Helsinki, Finland
| | | | - Elise Schoefs
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | | | | | - Hilde Stevens
- Institute for Interdisciplinary Innovation in Healthcare (I3h), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Steven Simoens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Torbica A, Rognoni C, Tarricone R. Investigating Patients' Preferences to Inform Drug Development Decisions: Novel Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Migraine. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2021; 18:ijerph18094916. [PMID: 34063035 PMCID: PMC8124202 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18094916] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2021] [Revised: 04/29/2021] [Accepted: 05/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
There is limited evidence on the scope and overall benefit of patient-centred drug development decisions. The present study assessed patients’ preferences for the characteristics of an ideal migraine treatment through a discrete choice experiment in order to inform decision-making and drug development processes. We investigated the preferences according to five treatment attributes identified from a systematic literature review and two focus group elicitations. The heterogeneity of preferences was also investigated. Overall, the respondents considered the presence of adverse events, duration of treatment effect, reduction of symptom intensity, speed of effect and cost born by the patient as the most relevant treatment features. As expected, the patients preferred treatments with lower levels of adverse events and costs and treatments with greater speed, duration of treatment effect and effectiveness in reducing symptom intensity. There was significant preference heterogeneity only for the presence of adverse events. Compared to men, women had significantly higher preferences for quicker treatment effect and limited adverse events and reported higher preferences for costly treatments. The results of our survey help address research and development strategies in the pharmaceutical industry and public policy regarding treatments that are clinically effective and responsive to the needs expressed by patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aleksandra Torbica
- CERGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy; (A.T.); (R.T.)
- Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy
| | - Carla Rognoni
- CERGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy; (A.T.); (R.T.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Rosanna Tarricone
- CERGAS (Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy; (A.T.); (R.T.)
- Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University, 20136 Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Falahee M, Simons G, DiSantostefano RL, Valor Méndez L, Radawski C, Englbrecht M, Schölin Bywall K, Tcherny-Lessenot S, Kihlbom U, Hauber B, Veldwijk J, Raza K. Treatment preferences for preventive interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: protocol of a mixed methods case study for the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e045851. [PMID: 36916312 PMCID: PMC8039213 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2020] [Revised: 02/09/2021] [Accepted: 03/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Amidst growing consensus that stakeholder decision-making during drug development should be informed by an understanding of patient preferences, the Innovative Medicines Initiative project 'Patient Preferences in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle' (PREFER) is developing evidence-based recommendations about how and when patient preferences should be integrated into the drug life cycle. This protocol describes a PREFER clinical case study which compares two preference elicitation methodologies across several populations and provides information about benefit-risk trade-offs by those at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for preventive interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This mixed methods study will be conducted in three countries (UK, Germany, Romania) to assess preferences of (1) first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with RA and (2) members of the public. Focus groups using nominal group techniques (UK) and ranking surveys (Germany and Romania) will identify and rank key treatment attributes. Focus group transcripts will be analysed thematically using the framework method and average rank orders calculated. These results will inform the treatment attributes to be assessed in a survey including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a probabilistic threshold technique (PTT). The survey will also include measures of sociodemographic variables, health literacy, numeracy, illness perceptions and beliefs about medicines. The survey will be administered to (1) 400 FDRs of patients with RA (UK); (2) 100 FDRs of patients with RA (Germany); and (3) 1000 members of the public in each of UK, Germany and Romania. Logit-based approaches will be used to analyse the DCE and imputation and interval regression for the PTT. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study has been approved by the London-Hampstead Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/0407) and the Ethics Committee of the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (92_17 B). The protocol has been approved by the PREFER expert review board. The results will be disseminated widely and will inform the PREFER recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Falahee
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Gwenda Simons
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Larissa Valor Méndez
- Department of Internal Medicine and Institute for Clinical Immunology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universitat Erlangen-Nurnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Ulrik Kihlbom
- Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Brett Hauber
- Health Preference Assessment, RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
- Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Jorien Veldwijk
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- School of Health Policy & Management and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Karim Raza
- Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Department of Rheumatology, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
- MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research and Research into Inflammatory Arthritis Centre Versus Arthritis, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Use of Patient Preference Studies in HTA Decision Making: A NICE Perspective. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 13:145-149. [PMID: 31942698 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00408-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
Patient preference studies could provide valuable insights to a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence committee into the preferences patients have for different treatment options, especially if the study sample is representative of the broader patient population. We identify three main uses of patient preference studies along a technology's pathway from drug development to clinical use: in early clinical development to guide the selection of appropriate endpoints, to inform benefit-risk assessments carried out by regulators and to inform reimbursement decisions made by health technology assessment bodies. In the context of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's methods and processes, we do not see a role for quantitative patient preference data to be directly incorporated into health economic modelling. Rather, we see a role for patient preference studies to be submitted alongside other types of evidence. Examples where patient preference studies might have added value in health technology assessments include cases where two distinctly different treatment options are being compared, when patients have to decide between multiple treatment options, when technologies have important non-health benefits or when a treatment is indicated for a heterogenous population.
Collapse
|
18
|
Wartenweiler V, Chung G, Stewart A, Wenthur C. Pharmacy stakeholder reports on ethical and logistical considerations in anti-opioid vaccine development. BMC Med Ethics 2021; 22:30. [PMID: 33766021 PMCID: PMC7992836 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00599-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2020] [Accepted: 03/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As opioid use disorder (OUD) incidence and its associated deaths continue to persist at elevated rates, the development of novel treatment modalities is warranted. Recent strides in this therapeutic area include novel anti-opioid vaccine approaches. This work compares logistical and ethical considerations surrounding currently available interventions for opioid use disorder with an anti-opioid vaccine approach. METHODS The opinions of student pharmacists and practicing pharmacists assessing knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes toward current and future OUD management strategies were characterized using a staged, multi-modal research approach incorporating a focus group, pilot survey development and refinement, and final survey deployment. Survey responses were assessed using one- and two-way parametric and non-parametric analyses where appropriate, and multi-dimensional matrix profiles were compared using z-tests following an exhaustive combinatorial sum of differences calculation between items within each compared matrix. RESULTS Focus group content analysis revealed a high level of agreeableness among participants regarding anti-opioid vaccine technology and a sense of shared ownership regarding solutions to the opioid epidemic at large. Pilot survey results demonstrated subject ability to consider both pragmatic and ethical considerations related to current therapeutics and novel interventions in a single instrument, with high endurance amongst engaged subjects. Access inequality was the most concerning ethical consideration identified for anti-opioid vaccines. Support for anti-opioid vaccine implementation across various clinical scenarios was strongest for voluntary use amongst individuals in recovery, and lowest for mandatory use in at-risk individuals. CONCLUSIONS Ethical and logistical concerns surrounding anti-opioid vaccines were largely similar to those for current OUD therapeutics overall. Anti-opioid vaccines were endorsed as helpful potential additions to current OUD therapeutic approaches, particularly for voluntary use in the later stages of clinical progression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent Wartenweiler
- School of Pharmacy, University of WI - Madison, 777 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA
| | | | - Amy Stewart
- Department of Pharmacy, UW-Health, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, USA
| | - Cody Wenthur
- School of Pharmacy, University of WI - Madison, 777 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53705, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Petrocchi S, Janssens R, Oliveri S, Arnou R, Durosini I, Guiddi P, Louis E, Vandevelde M, Nackaerts K, Smith MY, Galli G, de Marinis F, Gianoncelli L, Pravettoni G, Huys I. What Matters Most to Lung Cancer Patients? A Qualitative Study in Italy and Belgium to Investigate Patient Preferences. Front Pharmacol 2021; 12:602112. [PMID: 33746750 PMCID: PMC7970036 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.602112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2020] [Accepted: 01/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The potential value of patient preference studies has been recognized in clinical individual treatment decision-making between clinicians and patients, as well as in upstream drug decision-making. Drug developers, regulators, reimbursement and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies are exploring how the use of patient preference studies could inform drug development, regulatory benefit risk-assessment and reimbursement decisions respectively. Understanding patient preferences may be especially valuable in decisions regarding Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) treatment options, where a variety of treatment options with different characteristics raise uncertainty about which features are most important to NSCLC patients. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, this qualitative study aimed to identify patient-relevant lung cancer treatment characteristics. Methods: This study consisted of a scoping literature review and four focus group discussions, 2 in Italy and 2 in Belgium, with a total of 24 NSCLC patients (Stages III-IV). The focus group discussions sought to identify which treatment characteristics patients find most relevant. The discussions were analyzed thematically using a thematic inductive analysis. Results: Patients highlighted themes reflecting: 1) positive effects or expected gains from treatment such as greater life expectancy and maintenance of daily functioning, 2) negative effects or adverse events related to therapy that negatively impact patients’ daily functioning such as fatigue and 3) uncertainty regarding the duration and type of treatment effects. These overarching themes were consistent among patients from Belgium and Italy, suggesting that treatment aspects related to efficacy and safety as well as the psychological impact of lung cancer treatment are common areas of concern for patients, regardless of cultural background or country. Discussion: Our findings illustrate the value of using qualitative methods with patients to identify preferred treatment characteristics for advanced lung cancer. These could inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding treatment options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Serena Petrocchi
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Rosanne Janssens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Serena Oliveri
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Reinhard Arnou
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Ilaria Durosini
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Guiddi
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Evelyne Louis
- Department of Pulmonology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marie Vandevelde
- Department of Pulmonology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristiaan Nackaerts
- Department of Pulmonology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Meredith Y Smith
- Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Boston, MA, United States, University of Southern California School of Pharmacy, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Giulia Galli
- Department of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Filippo de Marinis
- Thoracic Oncology Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Letizia Gianoncelli
- Thoracic Oncology Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gabriella Pravettoni
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Slejko JF, Hong YD, Sullivan JL, Reed RM, dosReis S. Prioritization and Refinement of Patient-Informed Value Elements as Attributes for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Treatment Preferences. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 14:569-579. [PMID: 33554310 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00495-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Formative research studies can inform stated-preference instrument development to quantify the importance of various attributes of healthcare treatments. The objective of this study was to elicit from patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease the prioritization of an established set of patient-informed value elements. METHODS Using an iterative mixed-methods study design, we engaged individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Phase 1 value element elicitation and Phase 2 language refinement. Study participants were recruited from March to July 2019. Four guided activities, administered in an online instrument, elicited individual preferences for 40 disease-agnostic value elements that were aligned with treatment, outcomes, or care process. Responses from the guided activities were summarized and then presented to a patient advocate and additional patient participants for further refinement of the value elements and the phrasing. RESULTS Twenty-three participants, 18 male and five female, mean age of 66 years (standard deviation = 7) were enrolled in Phase 1. Participant responses informed the selection of eight elements as the key candidates for the Phase 2 language refinement: Side Effects, New Therapeutic Option, Available Treatment, Appropriateness of Care, Predictable Healthcare Needs, Physical Activities: Endurance and Symptom Control, and Explanation of Treatment. With feedback from a patient advocate and additional patient participants, elements were refined, rephrased, or modified and this list was narrowed to six value elements (Side Effects, New Therapeutic Option, Willingness to Pay, Physical Activities, Explanation of Treatment, and Access to Care) to serve as attributes in a conceptual framework for a future quantitative stated-preference instrument. CONCLUSIONS This patient-engaged formative work identified patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease key attributes of value-based decision making that underpin benefit-risk trade-offs between physical endurance, treatment side effects, care access, and cost. This study illustrates an iterative process for eliciting and refining a comprehensive list of value elements, resulting in a subgroup of elements important to a specific patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia F Slejko
- Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 220 Arch Street, 12th Floor, Room 01-214, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.
| | - Yoon Duk Hong
- Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 220 Arch Street, 12th Floor, Room 01-214, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA
| | | | - Robert M Reed
- University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Susan dosReis
- Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, 220 Arch Street, 12th Floor, Room 01-214, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Durosini I, Janssens R, Arnou R, Veldwijk J, Smith MY, Monzani D, Smith I, Galli G, Garassino M, Katz EG, Bailo L, Louis E, Vandevelde M, Nackaerts K, de Wit GA, Pravettoni G, Huys I. Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Qualitative Study Protocol Among Advanced Lung Cancer Patients. Front Public Health 2021; 9:622154. [PMID: 33634069 PMCID: PMC7900128 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.622154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2020] [Accepted: 01/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilaria Durosini
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Rosanne Janssens
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Reinhard Arnou
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Jorien Veldwijk
- School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.,Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Meredith Y Smith
- Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., University of Southern California School of Pharmacy, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Dario Monzani
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Ian Smith
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Giulia Galli
- Unit of Thoracic Oncology, Medical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Marina Garassino
- Unit of Thoracic Oncology, Medical Oncology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Eva G Katz
- Janssen Research and Development, Raritan, NJ, United States
| | - Luca Bailo
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Evelyne Louis
- Department of Pneumology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Marie Vandevelde
- Department of Pneumology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kristiaan Nackaerts
- Department of Pneumology/Respiratory Oncology, University Hospital Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - G Ardine de Wit
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Gabriella Pravettoni
- Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Pilot approach to analyzing patient and citizen involvement in health technology assessment in four diverse low- and middle-income countries. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2021; 37:e1. [PMID: 33491616 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462320002263] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) striving to achieve universal health coverage, the involvement of different stakeholders in formal or informal ways in health technology assessment (HTA) must be culturally and socially relevant and acceptable. Challenges may be different from those seen in high-income countries. In this article, we aimed to pilot a questionnaire for uncovering the context-related aspects of patient and citizen involvement (PCI) in LMICs, collecting experiences encountered with PCI, and identifying opportunities for patients and citizens toward contributing to local decision- and policy-making processes related to health technologies. METHODS Through a collaborative, international multi-stakeholder initiative, a questionnaire was developed for describing each LMIC's healthcare system context and the emergence of opportunities for PCI relating to HTA. The questionnaire was piloted in the first set of countries (Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria, and South Africa). RESULTS The questionnaire was successfully applied across four diverse LMICs, which are at different stages of using HTA to inform decision making. Only in Brazil, formal ways of PCI have been defined. In the other countries, there is informal influence that is contingent upon the engagement level of patient and citizen advocacy groups (PCAGs), usually strongest in areas such as HIV/AIDS, TB, oncology, or rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS The questionnaire can be used to analyze the options for patients and citizens to participate in HTA or healthcare decision making. It will be rolled out to more LMICs to describe the requirements and opportunities for PCI in the context of LMICs and to identify possible routes and methodologies for devising a more systematic and formalized PCI in LMICs.
Collapse
|
23
|
Winzenborg I, Soliman AM, Shebley M. A Personalized Medicine Approach Using Clinical Utility Index and Exposure-Response Modeling Informed by Patient Preferences Data. CPT-PHARMACOMETRICS & SYSTEMS PHARMACOLOGY 2020; 10:40-47. [PMID: 33200566 PMCID: PMC7825192 DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12570] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2020] [Accepted: 10/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Selection of a personalized dose for an individual patient can be informed by the patient's preferences, translated as weights on each of the clinically relevant safety and efficacy drug attributes, based on results from a brief patient preference elicitation questionnaire. In this analysis, the weighted attributes were simulated to represent various endometriosis patient profiles. Exposure-response simulations were performed for elagolix, a drug approved for management of moderate to severe pain associated with endometriosis, across a range of plasma exposures corresponding to a range of doses. The results were combined to calculate a personalized clinical utility index. An interactive user-friendly online application was developed and envisioned as a physician's desk tool to personalize the dose selection process based on individual patient preferences. This demonstration should serve as an example of how patient/physician conversation can be facilitated with quantitative tools for personalizing the dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Insa Winzenborg
- Clinical Pharmacology and PharmacometricsAbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KGLudwigshafen am RheinGermany
| | - Ahmed M. Soliman
- Health Economics & Outcomes ResearchAbbVieNorth ChicagoIllinoisUSA
| | - Mohamad Shebley
- Clinical Pharmacology and PharmacometricsAbbVieNorth ChicagoIllinoisUSA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Jimenez-Moreno AC, Pinto CA, Levitan B, Whichello C, Dyer C, Van Overbeeke E, de Bekker-Grob E, Smith I, Huys I, Viberg Johansson J, Adcock K, Bullock K, Soekhai V, Yuan Z, Lochmuller H, de Wit A, Gorman GS. A study protocol for quantifying patient preferences in neuromuscular disorders: a case study of the IMI PREFER Project. Wellcome Open Res 2020; 5:253. [PMID: 34395923 PMCID: PMC8356266 DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16116.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives: Patient preference studies are increasingly used to inform decision-making during the medical product lifecycle but are rarely used to inform early stages of drug development. The primary aim of this study is to quantify treatment preferences of patients with neuromuscular disorders, which represent serious and debilitating conditions with limited or no treatment options available. Methods: This quantitative patient preferences study was designed as an online survey, with a cross-over design. This study will target two different diseases from the neuromuscular disorders disease group, myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) and mitochondrial myopathies (MM). Despite having different physio-pathological pathways both DM1 and MM manifest in a clinically similar manner and may benefit from similar treatment options. The sample will be stratified into three subgroups: two patient groups differentiated by age of symptom onset and one caregivers group. Each subgroup will be randomly assigned to complete two of three different preference elicitation methods at two different time points: Q-methodology survey, discrete choice experiment, and best-worst scaling type 2, allowing cross-comparisons of the results across each study time within participants and within elicitation methods. Additional variables such as sociodemographic, clinical and health literacy will be collected to enable analysis of potential heterogeneity. Ethics and Dissemination: This study protocol has undergone ethical review and approval by the Newcastle University R&D Ethics Committee (Ref: 15169/2018). All participants will be invited to give electronic informed consent to take part in the study prior accessing the online survey. All electronic data will be anonymised prior analysis. This study is part of the Patient Preferences in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle (IMI-PREFER) project, a public-private collaborative research project aiming to develop expert and evidence-based recommendations on how and when patient preferences can be assessed and used to inform medical product decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aura Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno
- Wellcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK.,Patient Centered Research, Evidera, London, W6 8BJ, UK
| | - Cathy Anne Pinto
- Pharmacoepidemiology Department, Centre for Observational and Realworld Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA
| | - Bennett Levitan
- Department of Epidemiology, Janssen Research & Development, Titusville, NJ, USA
| | - Chiara Whichello
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christine Dyer
- Wellcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
| | - Eline Van Overbeeke
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Esther de Bekker-Grob
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ian Smith
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Isabelle Huys
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | | | - Kristin Bullock
- Global Patient Safety Department, Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, IN, 46205, USA
| | - Vikas Soekhai
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Zhong Yuan
- Department of Epidemiology, Janssen Research & Development, Titusville, NJ, USA
| | - Hanns Lochmuller
- Brain and Mind Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Ardine de Wit
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Grainne S Gorman
- Wellcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Cook NS, Landskroner K, Shah B, Walda S, Weiss O, Pallapotu V. Identification of Patient Needs and Preferences in Pigmented Villonodular Synovitis (PVNS) Using a Qualitative Online Bulletin Board Study. Adv Ther 2020; 37:2813-2828. [PMID: 32394210 PMCID: PMC7467432 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-020-01364-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2020] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
Introduction Pigmented villonodular synovitis (PVNS), also known as giant-cell tumour of the tendon sheath (GCTT), is a rare, benign proliferative tumour affecting the inner lining of synovial joints and tendon sheets. Information on treatment needs of PVNS patients to inform drug development is currently scarce. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with PVNS patients to generate insights into the objective and emotional aspects related to their medical journey and experiences of living with this disease. Methods A 4-day study using an online bulletin board (OBB), an asynchronous, online qualitative research platform, was conducted with patients recruited via physician referral who underwent screening questions to ensure eligibility for the study and willingness to participate. The discussion was moderated, was structured and allowed open answers in response to other participants’ posts. Results Eleven patients (4 from the USA, 4 from the UK and 3 from Canada; 45% female), aged 28–57 years, suffering from PVNS for 2–27 years participated in the study. Key patient insights from the study were: (1) pain was the topmost, spontaneous thought that the participants associated with PVNS, constituting a significant emotional and psychological burden; (2) surgery (arthroscopy) did not completely ameliorate symptoms associated with PVNS, as the relapse rate was high in these patients; (3) PVNS has a substantial negative financial impact on patients, their families and the healthcare system; (4) orthopaedic specialists/surgeons predominantly managed PVNS, as surgery is currently the only therapeutic option. Conclusion PVNS patients expressed an urgent need for a medical drug treatment, which can reduce pain, avoid relapses and provide an alternative to surgery, the current standard of care. Electronic Supplementary Material The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-020-01364-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Bhavik Shah
- Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad, India
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Faulkner E, Holtorf AP, Walton S, Liu CY, Lin H, Biltaj E, Brixner D, Barr C, Oberg J, Shandhu G, Siebert U, Snyder SR, Tiwana S, Watkins J, IJzerman MJ, Payne K. Being Precise About Precision Medicine: What Should Value Frameworks Incorporate to Address Precision Medicine? A Report of the Personalized Precision Medicine Special Interest Group. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 23:529-539. [PMID: 32389217 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2019] [Revised: 11/18/2019] [Accepted: 11/25/2019] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
Precision medicine is a dynamic area embracing a diverse and increasing type of approaches that allow the targeting of new medicines, screening programs or preventive healthcare strategies, which include the use of biologic markers or complex tests driven by algorithms also potentially taking account of patient preferences. The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcome Research expanded its current work around precision medicine to (1) describe the evolving paradigm of precision medicine with examples of current and evolving applications, (2) describe key stakeholders perspectives on the value of precision medicine in their respective domains, and (3) define the core factors that should be considered in a value assessment framework for precision medicine. With the ultimate goal of improving health of well-defined patient groups, precision medicine will affect all stakeholders in the healthcare system at multiple levels spanning the individual perspective to the societal perspective. For an efficient, timely and practical precision medicine value assessment framework, it will be important to address these multiple perspectives through building consensus among the stakeholders for robust procedures and measures of value aspects, including performance of precision mechanism; aligned reimbursement processes of precision mechanism and subsequent treatment; transparent expectations for evidence requirements and study designs adequately matched to the intended use of the precision mechanism and to the smaller target patient populations; recognizing the potential range of value-generation such as ruling-in and ruling-out decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric Faulkner
- Evidera, Bethesda, MD, USA; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; National Association of Managed Care Physicians, Glen Allen, VA, USA.
| | | | - Surrey Walton
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; Second City Outcomes Research, LLC, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | - Hwee Lin
- National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Uwe Siebert
- University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics, and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria; Harvard School of Public Health and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; ONCOTYROL Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Innsbruck, Austria
| | | | | | | | - Maarten J IJzerman
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Parkville, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Assessing physician preferences on future therapeutic options and diagnostic practices in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. JHEP Rep 2020; 2:100081. [PMID: 32190823 PMCID: PMC7068123 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2020.100081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2019] [Revised: 12/13/2019] [Accepted: 01/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background & Aims There is currently no data on physician preferences regarding future therapies for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH); this study explores these preferences and characteristics that are relevant to physician decision-making when choosing a potential therapy for a patient with NASH. The results were compared with those from a similar patient preference survey which was conducted in parallel. Method Initial exploratory 30-minute telephone interviews were conducted to inform the design of a 15-minute quantitative online specialist physicians survey, containing direct questions and a preference survey. This was based on a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment to assess the relative importance of different treatment characteristics (attributes), followed by several paired comparison questions to understand the preference for 5 hypothetical product profiles. Results The answers come from 121 physicians from Canada (n = 31), Germany (n = 30), the UK (n = 30) and the USA (n = 30). The primary driving element in NASH treatment decision-making was efficacy (49.23%), defined as "[hypothetical product] impact on liver status" and "[slowing of] progression to cirrhosis". Physicians reported the common use of non-invasive NASH diagnostic tests and 81% reported performing liver biopsy. In 57% of cases, physicians reported that "concerns related to the available diagnostic methods" limit the number of patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH. Conclusions This first physician preference study reveals that efficacy will be the main driver for physicians in selecting future NASH drugs. The findings also confirm the widespread use of non-invasive diagnostic tests and the reluctance to perform confirmatory liver biopsy despite guideline recommendations, mainly due to limited therapeutic options and patient refusal. Lay summary This study explores physician preferences in relation to future therapies for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and characteristics that are relevant to physician decision-making when choosing a potential therapy for a patient with NASH. The results of a short online survey completed by 121 specialist physicians determined that the primary factor that influences treatment decision-making is efficacy, and that a wide range of non-invasive techniques are used to diagnose NASH, while confirmatory liver biopsy is not performed by all physicians despite guideline recommendations.
Collapse
|
28
|
Patalano F, Gutzwiller FS, Shah B, Kumari C, Cook NS. Gathering Structured Patient Insight to Drive the PRO Strategy in COPD: Patient-Centric Drug Development from Theory to Practice. Adv Ther 2020; 37:17-26. [PMID: 31707715 PMCID: PMC6979452 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-01134-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
We illustrate our experience of gathering patient insights on the most patient-relevant symptoms in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) via a structured and systematic approach towards ‘patient-centric’ drug development, leveraging recent advances in digital technologies using online platforms. The four-step approach comprised the following: literature search, social media listening (SML) study, online bulletin board (OBB) exercise, and design of an online patient preference study (PPS). The initial online studies (SML and OBB) revealed that, besides dyspnoea and exacerbations, patients perceive cough and mucus production as equally important aspects of disease management for COPD. To further build and quantify patients’ understanding of the importance of these symptoms, an online patient preference survey is underway. Based on these findings, we have elected to include the Cough and Sputum Assessment Questionnaire or CASA-Q, a validated instrument to collect patient-reported outcomes (PRO), besides the use of the COPD assessment test or CAT to assess the severity and impact of COPD in drug development studies for COPD. Additionally, to capture movement and sleep disturbance, we consider the inclusion of actigraphy as a digital evidence-capture end point. Lastly, in a phase II trial, a survey questionnaire on incontinence will be administered to evaluate the importance of this issue among patients. We believe that integrating insights derived from “online” studies (SML, OBB, and PPS) into drug development offers an opportunity to truly listen to patients’ voices in early product design ensuring relevance of end points selected for the clinical trial program. This approach also has the potential to complement conventional qualitative and quantitative data collection requirements for PRO instrument development. While awaiting final guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, the recently released draft documents on collecting representative patients’ input reference social media as a tool to collect qualitative patient preference data and these developments suggest that patient preference data can influence future clinical trial design, end point selection, and regulatory reviews. Funding: Novartis Pharma AG, Basel.
Collapse
|
29
|
Messmer E, Chan C, Asbell P, Johnson G, Sloesen B, Cook N. Comparing the needs and preferences of patients with moderate and severe dry eye symptoms across four countries. BMJ Open Ophthalmol 2019; 4:e000360. [PMID: 31909193 PMCID: PMC6936582 DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2019-000360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Revised: 10/02/2019] [Accepted: 10/31/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS Understanding patients' perspectives of their disease can inform drug development and treatment decisions. In this study, we compared the preferences and needs of patients with moderate and severe dry eye symptoms from four different countries. METHODS A quantitative questionnaire was developed based on the self-explicated conjoint methodology and was administered to 160 patients with moderate or severe dry eye disease (DED) from Australia, Germany, UK and the USA. RESULTS Patients with moderate dry eye symptoms ranked 'treatment satisfaction' as the most important aspect, whereas 'symptom bother' was more relevant for those in the severe group. Both the moderate and severe groups classified treatment effectiveness as the most important treatment attribute. This result was consistent across the four countries, although US patients gave significantly higher scores than patients from other countries (p<0.001). Furthermore, patients from Australia ranked 'treatment experience' as significantly more important than the concern of side effects, whereas respondents from Germany exhibited the opposite trend (p<0.05 for both). The health burden of DED is reflected in the average European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions 5-level (EQ-5D) scores of 0.764 and 0.658 for patients with moderate and severe disease, respectively. CONCLUSION Our results confirm that across the countries in the study, moderate and severe DED has a major impact on patients' quality of life and daily activities. By providing insight into the patient perspective of DED, our study helps identify outcomes that are important to patients and may guide future drug development and clinical decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth Messmer
- Department of Ophthalmology, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
| | - Colin Chan
- Central Clinical School, University of Sydney Sydney Medical School, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Penny Asbell
- Ophthalmology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York, USA
| | | | | | - Nigel Cook
- Global Patient Access, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Patient Preferences in the Medical Product Lifecycle. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 13:7-10. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00400-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
|