The potential health gain and cost savings of improving adherence in chronic myeloid leukemia

Patient Versus Physician Perspective in the Management of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia During Treatment with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a chronic disease with treatment-free remission (TFR) increasingly regarded as a feasible goal of treatment. However, various factors may influence adherence to international guidelines for CML management. This study aimed to compare the reporting of care between patients with CML and their treating doctors.

METHODS

Parallel patient and physician online surveys were conducted between September 22, 2021, and March 15, 2022, which focused on the perceptions of 1882 adult patients with CML and 305 physicians regarding tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment options, monitoring and toxicities, TFR, and challenges faced.

RESULTS

Among the enrolled patients, 69.9% received first-line imatinib treatment, 18.6% received nilotinib, and 4.7% received dasatinib. Among the patients treated with imatinib, 36.7% switched to other TKIs due to imatinib resistance/intolerance (71.1%), exploration of more potent TKIs to achieve TFR (8.9%), and treating physicians' recommendation (14.0%), with a median duration of initial treatment of 14 months [interquartile range (IQR) 6-36]. Most (91.8%) physicians agreed that the breakpoint cluster region-Abelson 1 (BCR::ABL1) transcript level should be assessed every 3 months, but only 42.7% of individuals committed to 3-monthly testing and only 17.8% strictly followed their treating physicians' recommendation. Half of the patients aimed for TFR; however, just 45.2% of physicians considered TFR as one of the top three goals for their patients. The major concern in obtaining TFR was patients' adherence. Fatigue was often distressing for patients with TKIs, while physicians were more concerned about platelet and neutrophil counts. A total of 12% and 20.8% of patients reported moderate/severe anxiety and depression, respectively, while only 53.7% of physicians had concerns about their patients' mental health. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, 69.2% of patients reported a reduction in their income. Among these patients, 61.8% maintained their current treatment, while 7.3% switched to cheaper alternatives or discontinued treatment, with over 80% of these patients belonging to the low-income group.

CONCLUSIONS

Overcoming challenges in patient-physician communication and treatment access is key to improving disease management and quality of life, especially for patients with low income.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05092048.

Evaluation of physician guideline adherence and areas for improvement in managing patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: a cross-sectional survey

The experience of a physician at a clinical center is among the critical factors in managing chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) during its treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The authors conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire to investigate barriers to physician use of published evidence-based guidelines in CML management in a real-world setting. Among the participating physicians (N = 407), 99.8% of physicians reported that CML guidelines were useful; however, only 62.9% of physicians reported that they follow guidelines in real-time. Although 90.7% of physicians prefer second-generation TKIs as the first-line treatment, imatinib (88.2%) remains the most widely administered TKI in the first-line setting. Only 50.6% of physicians switched the treatment when patients failed to achieve early molecular response (at 3 months), whereas 70.3% of physicians switched the treatment when patients' response to TKI was inadequate at 6 months and/or 12 months. Moreover, only 43.5% of physicians considered treatment-free remission (TFR) as one of the top 3 goals for their patients. The major concern to obtain TFR was patients' adherence. This study demonstrated that CML management was generally in line with the current guidelines, but some of the details at the point of care are needed to be improved in CML.

A clinician perspective on the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia in the chronic phase

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have vastly improved long-term outcomes for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). After imatinib (a first-generation TKI), second- and third-generation TKIs were developed. With five TKIs (imatinib, dasatinib, bosutinib, nilotinib, and ponatinib) targeting BCR::ABL approved in most countries, and with the recent approval of asciminib in the USA, treatment decisions are complex and require assessment of patient-specific factors. Optimal treatment strategies for CML continue to evolve, with an increased focus on achieving deep molecular responses. Using clinically relevant case studies developed by the authors of this review, we discuss three major scenarios from the perspective of international experts. Firstly, this review explores patient-specific characteristics that affect decision-making between first- and second-generation TKIs upon initial diagnosis of CML, including patient comorbidities. Secondly, a thorough assessment of therapeutic options in the event of first-line treatment failure (as defined by National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European LeukemiaNet guidelines) is discussed along with real-world considerations for monitoring optimal responses to TKI therapy. Thirdly, this review illustrates the considerations and importance of achieving treatment-free remission as a treatment goal. Due to the timing of the writing, this review addresses global challenges commonly faced by hematologists treating patients with CML during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, as new treatment approaches continue to be explored in CML, this review also discusses the advent of newer therapies such as asciminib. This article may be a useful reference for physicians treating patients with CML with second-generation TKIs and, as it is focused on the physicians' international and personal experiences, may give insight into alternative approaches not previously considered.

The Development of a Web-Based, Patient-Centered Intervention for Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CMyLife): Design Thinking Development Approach

Background

With the global rise in chronic health conditions, health care is transforming, and patient empowerment is being emphasized to improve treatment outcomes and reduce health care costs. Patient-centered innovations are needed. We focused on patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), a chronic disease with a generally good long-term prognosis because of the advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. However, both medication adherence by patients and guideline adherence by physicians are suboptimal, unnecessarily jeopardizing treatment outcomes.

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop a patient-centered innovation for patients with CML using a design thinking methodology.

Methods

The 5 phases of design thinking (ie, empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test) were completed, and each phase started with the patient. Stakeholders and end users were identified and interviewed, and observations in the care system were made. Using tools in human-centered design, problems were defined and various prototypes of solutions were generated. These were evaluated by patients and stakeholders and then further refined.

Results

The patients desired (1) insights into their own disease; (2) insights into the symptoms experienced, both in terms of knowledge and comprehension; and (3) improvements in the organization of care delivery. A web-based platform, CMyLife, was developed and pilot-tested. It has multiple features, all targeting parts of the bigger solution, including a website with reliable information and a forum, a guideline app, personal medical records with logs of symptoms and laboratory results (including a molecular marker and linked to the guideline app), tailored feedback based on the patients’ symptoms and/or results, screen-to-screen consulting, delivery of medication, and the collection of blood samples at home.

Conclusions

The multifeatured innovation, CMyLife, was developed in a multidisciplinary way and with active patient participation. The aim of developing CMyLife was to give patients the tools to monitor their results, interpret these results, and act on them. With this tool, they are provided with the know-how to consider their results in relation to their personal care process. Whether CMyLife achieves its goal and the evaluation of the added value will be the focus of future studies. CML could become the first malignancy for which patients are able to monitor and manage their disease by themselves.

Problems and Promises of Health Technologies: The Role of Early Health Economic Modeling

BACKGROUND

To assess whether early health economic modeling helps to distinguish those healthcare innovations that are potentially cost-effective from those that are not potentially cost-effective. We will also study what information is retrieved from the health economic models to inform further development, research and implementation decisions.

METHODS

We performed secondary analyses on an existing database of 32 health economic modeling assessments of 30 innovations, performed by our group. First, we explored whether the assessments could distinguish innovations with potential cost-effectiveness from innovations without potential cost-effectiveness. Second, we explored which recommendations were made regarding development, implementation and further research of the innovation.

RESULTS

Of the 30 innovations, 1 (3%) was an idea that was not yet being developed and 14 (47%) were under development. Eight (27%) innovations had finished development, and another 7 (23%) innovations were on the market. Although all assessments showed that the innovation had the potential to become cost-effective, due to improved patient outcomes, cost savings or both, differences were found in the magnitude of the potential benefits, and the likelihood of reaching this potential. The assessments informed how the innovation could be further developed or positioned to maximize its cost-effectiveness, and informed further research.

CONCLUSION

The early health economic assessments provided insight in the potential cost-effectiveness of an innovation in its intended context, and the associated uncertainty. None of the assessments resulted in a firm 'no-go' recommendation, but recommendations could be provided on further research and development in order to maximize value for money.