Decision Making About Disease-Modifying Treatments for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Stated Preferences and Real-World Choices

Overview

Journal Patient

Specialty Health Services

Date 2023 Apr 18

PMID 37072663

Authors

Edward J D Webb

David Meads

Ieva Eskyte

Helen L Ford

Hilary L Bekker

Jeremy Chataway

George Pepper

Joachim Marti

Yasmina Okan

Sue H Pavitt

Klaus Schmierer

Ana Manzano

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: People with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis can benefit from disease-modifying treatments (DMTs). Several DMTs are available that vary in their efficacy, side-effect profile and mode of administration.

Objective: We aimed to measure the preferences of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis for DMTs using a discrete choice experiment and to assess which stated preference attributes correlate with the attributes of the DMTs they take in the real world.

Methods: Discrete choice experiment attributes were developed from literature reviews, interviews and focus groups. In a discrete choice experiment, participants were shown two hypothetical DMTs, then chose whether they preferred one of the DMTs or no treatment. A mixed logit model was estimated from responses and individual-level estimates of participants' preferences conditional on their discrete choice experiment choices calculated. Logit models were estimated with stated preferences predicting current real-world on-treatment status, DMT mode of administration and current DMT.

Results: A stated intrinsic preference for taking a DMT was correlated with currently taking a DMT, and stated preferences for mode of administration were correlated with the modes of administration of the DMTs participants were currently taking. Stated preferences for treatment effectiveness and adverse effects were not correlated with real-world behaviour.

Conclusions: There was variation in which discrete choice experiment attributes correlated with participants' real-world DMT choices. This may indicate patient preferences for treatment efficacy/risk are not adequately taken account of in prescribing. Treatment guidelines must ensure they take into consideration patients' preferences and improve communication around treatment efficacy/risk.

References

Bove R, Hauser S . Diagnosing multiple sclerosis: art and science. Lancet Neurol. 2017; 17(2):109-111. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30461-1. View

Reich D, Lucchinetti C, Calabresi P . Multiple Sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378(2):169-180. PMC: 6942519. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1401483. View

Thompson A, Banwell B, Barkhof F, Carroll W, Coetzee T, Comi G . Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2017; 17(2):162-173. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2. View

Comi G, Radaelli M, Soelberg Sorensen P . Evolving concepts in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Lancet. 2016; 389(10076):1347-1356. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32388-1. View

Lucchetta R, Tonin F, Borba H, Leonart L, Ferreira V, Bonetti A . Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Network Meta-Analysis. CNS Drugs. 2018; 32(9):813-826. DOI: 10.1007/s40263-018-0541-5. View

Rae-Grant A, Day G, Marrie R, Rabinstein A, Cree B, Gronseth G . Comprehensive systematic review summary: Disease-modifying therapies for adults with multiple sclerosis: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2018; 90(17):789-800. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005345. View

Alvarez-Cermeno J, Masjuan J, Villar L . Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, natalizumab, and multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353(16):1744-6. View

OConnor P, Wolinsky J, Confavreux C, Comi G, Kappos L, Olsson T . Randomized trial of oral teriflunomide for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(14):1293-303. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1014656. View

Jacobs L, Cookfair D, Rudick R, Herndon R, Richert J, Salazar A . Intramuscular interferon beta-1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis. The Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG). Ann Neurol. 1996; 39(3):285-94. DOI: 10.1002/ana.410390304. View

10.

Pohl D, Rostasy K, Gartner J, Hanefeld F . Treatment of early onset multiple sclerosis with subcutaneous interferon beta-1a. Neurology. 2005; 64(5):888-90. DOI: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000153570.33845.6A. View

11.

Miller D, Khan O, Sheremata W, Blumhardt L, Rice G, Libonati M . A controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348(1):15-23. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa020696. View

12.

Coles A, Twyman C, Arnold D, Cohen J, Confavreux C, Fox E . Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis after disease-modifying therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012; 380(9856):1829-39. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61768-1. View

13.

Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob E, Ellis A, Vass C . Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018; 37(2):201-226. PMC: 6386055. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2. View

14.

Clark M, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob E . Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014; 32(9):883-902. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x. View

15.

Ryan M . Discrete choice experiments in health care. BMJ. 2004; 328(7436):360-1. PMC: 341374. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.328.7436.360. View

16.

Lancsar E, Swait J . Reconceptualising the external validity of discrete choice experiments. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014; 32(10):951-65. DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0181-7. View

17.

Ryan M, Watson V . Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments. Health Econ. 2008; 18(4):389-401. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1364. View

18.

Quaife M, Terris-Prestholt F, Di Tanna G, Vickerman P . How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity. Eur J Health Econ. 2018; 19(8):1053-1066. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-018-0954-6. View

19.

Garcia-Dominguez J, Munoz D, Comellas M, Gonzalbo I, Lizan L, Polanco Sanchez C . Patient preferences for treatment of multiple sclerosis with disease-modifying therapies: a discrete choice experiment. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016; 10:1945-1956. PMC: 5045232. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S114619. View

20.

Reed Johnson F, Van Houtven G, Ozdemir S, Hass S, White J, Francis G . Multiple sclerosis patients' benefit-risk preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. J Neurol. 2009; 256(4):554-62. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-009-0084-2. View