Exploring preferences of different modes of administration of hypomethylating agent treatments among patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Introduction: About half of patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) are not eligible for Standard Induction Chemotherapy (SIC). Hypomethylating Agents (HMAs) intravenously (IV) or subcutaneously (SC) in a clinical setting are typically offered as an alternative. However, injectable HMAs may be burdensome for patients given the frequent hospital visits and side effects. This study explored patient treatment preferences for different modes of administration (MOA) and the relative importance of treatment-related characteristics that influence treatment decisions. Methods: Semi-structured 1:1 interviews were conducted with 21 adult patients with AML in Germany, the United Kingdom, and Spain, who are not eligible for SIC, had experience with HMAs or were scheduled to be treated with HMAs. After discussing their experience of living with AML and its treatments, patients were presented with hypothetical treatment scenarios to explore their preferences, and a ranking exercise to assess the relative importance of treatment characteristics that influence their treatment-decisions for AML. Results: Most patients reported an overall preference for oral administration over parenteral routes (71%), mostly due to convenience. Those preferring IV or SC routes (24%) reasoned with faster speed of action and onsite monitoring. When presented with a hypothetical situation of a patient having to choose between two AML treatments that were identical except for their MOA, the majority preferred the oral route (76%). Regarding treatment characteristics that influence treatment decisions, patients most frequently reported efficacy (86%) and side effects (62%) as important, followed by mode of administration (29%), daily life impacts (24%) and location of treatment (hospital versus home) (14%). However, only efficacy and side effects were rated as number one deciding factors (67% and 19%, respectively). Patients most frequently rated dosing regimen (33%) as least important. Conclusion: The insights gained from this study may help support patients with AML who are receiving HMA treatment instead of SIC. A potential oral HMA with similar efficacy and tolerability profiles to injectable HMAs could influence treatment decisions. Furthermore, an oral HMA treatment might decrease the burden of parenteral therapies and improve patients' overall quality of life. However, the extent of influence MOA has on treatment decisions requires further investigation.

Patient Confidence and Information Preferences During the Treatment Decision-making Process: Results From a Large Multiple Myeloma Patient Survey Across 12 Countries in Europe and Israel.

BACKGROUND: The relapsing nature of multiple myeloma (MM) means that patients typically receive different and multiple lines of therapy, requiring many treatment decisions over the disease course. The aim of this study was to explore patient confidence and information preferences during the treatment decision-making process. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multinational, cross-sectional survey enrolled patients with MM. It was co-developed and distributed by Myeloma Patients Europe across 12 countries in Europe and Israel from May 2019 to March 2020. Eligibility criteria included a self-reported diagnosis of MM and being able to recall the decision-making process at the start of their latest treatment line. RESULTS: A total of 1559 patients were included, with complete responses received from 1081 (69%) patients. The median age range was 54 to 64 years; there was an equal gender split and 57% had their latest treatment decision made within the past year. Overall, 54% of patients felt "very confident" in the latest treatment decision. Patients deemed the most important information to be safety/tolerability and treatment effectiveness, but the latter was among the least frequently received. Most patients reported that their primary physician treating MM was their main source for all types of information (range, 62%-94%), with 87% of patients reporting a "very good" or "good" relationship with them. CONCLUSION: Over half of patients felt very confident in their latest treatment decision; however, patients reported not routinely receiving important treatment effectiveness information. Addressing the discrepancies between information that patients receive and consider important may enhance confidence in decision-making.

Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Quality of Life Scale in Patients with Onychomycosis.

(1) Background: Onychomycosis (OM) is a fungal nail infection, considered a risk factor for diabetic foot ulcers. It is associated with changes in quality of life, in terms of pain, self-confidence and self-esteem. The aim was to translate and adapt the OM quality of life questionnaire "OnyCOE-tTM-Quality Of Life Questionnaire Onychomycosis (Nail Fungal Condition)". (2) Methods: This study followed the guidelines proposed by Beaton et al. (2000), where two English to Portuguese translations were performed and, after an expert consensus, a common version was obtained. This was followed by two back-translations. The expert committee achieved semantic equivalence, idioms and concepts. The pre-test was applied to 49 people. The final version and processed data were sent to the authors. (3) Results: We adapted terms semantically, modified statements syntactically, altering items from interrogative to affirmative. (4) Conclusions: The translated version of the "Quality of life-Onychomycosis" questionnaire suggested that it can be used for further studies to test validity and reliability in this population.