A discrete choice experiment to quantify the influence of trial features on the decision to participate in cystic fibrosis trials

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred trial design optimises recruitment and retention, reduces trial failure rates and increases the diversity of trial cohorts. This allows safe and effective treatments to reach clinic more quickly. To achieve this, patients' views must be incorporated into trial design.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was used to quantify preferences of pwCF for trials features; medicine type, trial location, stipend, washout, drug access on trial completion and trial design. Respondents were presented pairs of hypothetical trial scenarios with different level combinations assigned through experimental design. Respondents were asked to pick their preferred option or decline both. The cross-sectional data were explored using a Random Parameters Logit model.

RESULTS

We received 207 eligible responses between Oct2020-Jan2021. The strongest influence on the decision to participate was trial location; pwCF favour participation at their usual clinical centre. Greater travel distances made respondents less willing to participate. Post-trial drug access ranked second. pwCF would rather participate in modulator trials than trials of other drugs. In general, pwCF did not favour a washout period, but were more prepared to washout non-modulators than modulators. Stipend provision was not ranked highly, but higher stipends increased intention to participate. Trial design (placebo vs open-label) had minimal influence on the decision to participate. There are complex interactions between placebos and washouts.

CONCLUSIONS

We used quantitative methods to systematically elicit preferences of pwCF for clinical trials' features. We explore the relevance of our findings to trial design and delivery in the current CF trials landscape.

Patient Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests in Light of Lowering the Screening Age to 45 Years

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force lowered the colorectal cancer (CRC) screening age to 45 years. We used conjoint analysis, a method that assesses complex decision making, to update our understanding on people's CRC screening test preferences in the context of new guidelines.

METHODS

We conducted a conjoint analysis survey among unscreened individuals ≥40 years at average risk for CRC to determine the relative importance of screening test attributes in their decision making (eg, modality, effectiveness at reducing CRC risk, bowel prep). We also performed simulations to estimate the proportion of people who would prefer each US Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on CRC-recommended test. The analyses were stratified among those aged 40-49 years (newly or soon-to-be eligible for screening) and ≥50 years (have been eligible).

RESULTS

Overall, 1000 participants completed the conjoint analysis (40-49 years, n = 456; ≥50 years, n = 544). When considering all 5 US MSTF-recommended tests, there were differences in test preferences between age groups (P = .019), and the most preferred test was a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-fecal DNA every 3 years: 40-49 years, 34.6%; ≥50 years, 37.3%. When considering only the US MSTF tier 1 tests, most 40- to 49- (68.9%) and ≥50-year-olds (77.4%; P = .004) preferred an annual FIT over a colonoscopy every 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that more than one-third of people may want to do a FIT-fecal DNA every 3 years for their CRC screening. When only considering US MSTF tier 1 tests, three-fourths of people may prefer an annual FIT over colonoscopy. Further research examining CRC screening test preferences among broader populations is warranted to inform and enhance screening programs.

"Asking Is Never Bad, I Would Venture on That": Patients' Perspectives on Routine Pain Screening in VA Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

Screening for pain in routine care is one of the efforts that the Veterans Health Administration has adopted in its national pain management strategy. We aimed to understand patients' perspectives and preferences about the experience of being screened for pain in primary care.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews captured patient perceptions and preferences of pain screening, assessment, and management.

SUBJECTS

We completed interviews with 36 patients: 29 males and seven females ranging in age from 28 to 94 years from three geographically distinct VA health care systems.

METHODS

We evaluated transcripts using constant comparison and identified emergent themes.

RESULTS

Theme 1: Pain screening can "determine the tone of the examination"; Theme 2: Screening can initiate communication about pain; Theme 3: Screening can facilitate patient recall and reflection; Theme 4: Screening for pain may help identify under-reported psychological pain, mental distress, and suicidality; Theme 5: Patient recommendations about how to improve screening for pain.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that patients perceive meaningful, positive impacts of routine pain screening that as yet have not been considered in the literature. Specifically, screening for pain may help capture mental health concerns that may otherwise not emerge.

What matters to people with memory problems, healthy volunteers and health and social care professionals in the context of developing treatment to prevent Alzheimer's dementia? A qualitative study

Background

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is recognized as one of the greatest global public health challenges. There is increasing consensus that optimal disease modification using pharmaceuticals may best be achieved earlier in the disease continuum before symptoms occur. However, more needs to be understood about what outcomes are meaningful to potential participants in clinical trials within this preventative paradigm and how people make trade‐offs between risks and benefits. The Electronic Person‐Specific Outcome Measure (ePSOM) programme is developing an app to capture person‐specific outcomes and preferences in clinical trials.

Objective

As one phase in the ePSOM programme, this study explored what matters when developing new treatments to prevent AD and how trade‐offs are made between risks and benefits, from three perspectives.

Design

Focus groups were conducted with people living with memory problems (n = 21) and healthy volunteers (n = 10), and telephone interviews with health and social care professionals (n = 10). Differences and overlap between the three groups were explored.

Results

Outcomes that matter lie in five key domains in relation to what matters in everyday life: Everyday Functioning; Relationships and Social Connections; Enjoying Life; Sense of Identity; and Alleviating  Symptoms. Insights were gained into the significance of reducing the risk of developing dementia with drugs and the processes of weighing up risks versus benefits.

Discussion and conclusions

The key domains identified are being used to inform the next stage of the ePSOM programme which is to develop a survey to be distributed nationally in the UK to explore these issues further.

Using Patient Perspectives to Inform the Development of a Behavioral Intervention for Chronic Pain in Patients with HIV: A Qualitative Study

Background

Chronic pain is a common and disabling comorbidity in individuals living with HIV. Behavioral interventions are among the most effective and safe nonpharmacologic treatments for chronic pain. However, the success of a behavioral intervention is influenced by how well it is tailored to the target population's biological, psychological, and social context. Given well-documented psychosocial vulnerabilities among persons with HIV, it is critical to develop a behavioral intervention for chronic pain tailored to this population.

Objective

To use qualitative methods to investigate patient preferences for the structure and delivery of a behavioral intervention for chronic pain in individuals with HIV.

Methods

Interviews and focus groups were used to elicit participant preferences. A thematic analysis approach, with an initial round of open coding, was used to develop the codebook and analyze the data.

Results

Qualitative data from 12 interviews and 3 focus groups with patients living with HIV and chronic pain (total N = 24) were analyzed. Emergent themes fell into four major categories: perceived value of group sessions, incorporating peer leadership, and two key elements of how the intervention should be delivered: the HIV status of group participants and views on phone-delivered intervention content.

Discussion

This study provides a framework for the structure and delivery of a behavioral intervention for chronic pain in individuals with HIV based on patient preferences. We will use these results to design our intervention, and hope that our approach informs the work of investigators in other disciplines who seek to incorporate patient preferences during intervention development.

Patients' with type 2 diabetes willingness to pay for insulin therapy and clinical outcomes

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed patient preferences, using willingness to pay as a method to measure different treatment characteristics or attributes associated with injectable insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adults with type 2 diabetes in 12 countries, diagnosed >6 months prior and receiving insulin for >3 months, were recruited through a representative online panel. Data were collected via online questionnaire and analyzed using a standard choice model for discrete choice experiment.

RESULTS

A total of 3758 patients from North America (n=646), South America (n=1537), and Europe (n=1575) completed the study. Mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in North America, South America, and Europe were 63 mmol/mol (7.9%), 75 mmol/mol (9.0%), and 64 mmol/mol (8.0%), respectively. In the three regions, monthly willingness to pay was US$116, US$74, and US$92, respectively, for a 1%-point decrease in HbA1c; US$99, US$80, and US$104 for one less major hypoglycemic event per year; and US$64, US$37 and US$60 for a 3 kg weight decrease. To avoid preinjection preparation of insulin, the respective values were US$47, US$18, and US$37, and US$25, US$25, and US$24 for one less injection per day. Among respondents on basal-only insulin who had previously tried a more intensive regimen, reasons for switching back included difficulty in handling multiple injections and risk of hypoglycemic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing HbA1c, frequency of major hypoglycemic events and weight decrease were the highest valued outcomes in each region. The administrative burden of injections was also considered important.

Patient satisfaction with testosterone replacement therapies: the reasons behind the choices

INTRODUCTION

Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) for male hypogonadism is rapidly gaining popularity and acceptance. Options include gels, injections, and implantable subcutaneous pellets.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine rates of patient satisfaction and reasons for patient preferences in hypogonadal men on TRT.

METHODS

An anonymous, prospective survey was distributed to men presenting for TRT at an academic urology clinic. The survey was organized into multiple domains including patient satisfaction and treatment motivation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient satisfaction responses obtained via anonymous survey.

RESULTS

Average patient age was 49 ± 0.7 years (n = 382). Injectable testosterone was chosen by 53%, gel-based regimens by 31%, and pellets by 17%. Overall, 70% of patients were satisfied with their TRT and 14% reported dissatisfaction. Satisfaction rates were similar between gels (68%), injections (73%), and implantable pellets (70%). Doctor recommendation was the sole significant reason for patients preferring gel-based TRT (66% vs. 37% injection users vs. 31% pellet users). Injectable TRT was favored because of lower cost (35% vs. 21% gel users vs. 19% pellet users). Pellets were favored for ease of use (64% vs. 44% injection users vs. 43% gel users) and convenience (58% vs. 26% injection users vs. 19% gel users). Pellets had increased rates of satisfaction within the first 12 months. Improvements in concentration and mood occurred at higher percentages in satisfied patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients are satisfied with TRT. Lower costs are important to patients on injections. Convenience and ease of use are central in choosing pellet therapy. Men on TRT should be questioned about mood and concentration because these factors exhibited the greatest improvements in satisfied patients.