Patient and caregiver preferences for haemophilia treatments: A discrete-choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: An evolving haemophilia treatment landscape provides new possibilities for previously unattainable lifestyles. AIM: We sought to understand how people with haemophilia (PwH) and their caregivers value the potential benefits of novel prophylactic treatments. We conducted a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) to quantify preferences for features of haemophilia treatments among adults and caregivers of children with haemophilia. A best-worst scaling (BWS) exercise measured the perceived burden of treatment administration features. METHODS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was administered to male adults (≥18 years) and caregivers of male children (≤17 years) living with haemophilia in the United States. Respondents evaluated eight pairs of hypothetical haemophilia treatment profiles defined by six attributes in the DCE and 15 features in the BWS. RESULTS: In the DCE, both adults with haemophilia (n = 151) and caregivers (n = 151) prioritised avoiding the risk of developing inhibitor/ anti-drug antibodies and treatments that allowed for a more active life. They placed a lower priority on reducing the number of spontaneous bleeding episodes, route and frequency of administration, and avoiding the risk of hospitalisation due to adverse events. The BWS documented the burdensomeness of IV infusions and medications that require mixing and refrigeration. CONCLUSION: PwH and caregivers prefer treatments that enable a more active lifestyle with a lower risk of inhibitor development. Both groups valued the ability to lead an active life over reducing spontaneous bleeding, with caregivers placing the most weight on this attribute. As new treatments expand possibilities, healthcare professionals and PwH should continue to share decision-making, incorporating clinical judgment and individual preferences.

Patient preferences for chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatments: a discrete-choice experiment.

Aim: Patient preferences for the features of targeted chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) therapies may differ. Materials & methods: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey was administered to 229 respondents recruited through the CLL Society. Results: Respondents placed most importance on increasing the chance of progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years from 70 to 90% and confirming results with measurable residual disease (MRD) testing instead of routine testing. Respondents also preferred daily oral administration over intravenous infusion every 4 weeks, fixed-duration treatments over treat-to-progression treatments and treatments with lower side effect risks. Reducing risk of tumor lysis syndrome was least important relative to changes in other attributes. Conclusion: The combination of improving PFS combined with confirming results using MRD testing was more important than changes in all other study attributes included in the DCE. Results from this study can help inform shared decision-making when selecting therapies for CLL.

Several targeted treatments are available for people with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). These treatments target specific proteins present in CLL cancer cells. They differ in how long they keep cancer from progressing, how the results are measured and the side effects they cause. Some targeted CLL treatments are taken as a daily pill, and others are given by intravenous infusion. Some targeted treatments are given for a fixed amount of time, and others are given until CLL progresses. We surveyed 229 US patients with CLL to understand what features they most value in a targeted CLL treatment. Survey participants were recruited through the CLL Society, a nonprofit organization devoted to education, support, advocacy and research for the CLL community. Survey results indicated that participants placed the most importance on increasing the chance that the cancer would not progress after 2 years from 70 to 90% and confirming results with measurable residual disease testing (which can detect minute levels of leukemia cells) instead of routine testing. Participants also preferred taking a pill every day over receiving an intravenous infusion every 4 weeks and preferred treatments given for a fixed amount of time over treatments given until CLL progresses. Participants preferred treatments with lower chances of tumor lysis syndrome (a potentially organ-damaging condition that may result following treatment), irregular heartbeat and fatigue. It is important for doctors to understand the treatment features that matter to people living with CLL so that they can work with patients individually to choose the right treatment.

Risk tolerance in adjuvant and metastatic melanoma settings: a patient perspective study using the threshold technique.

Background: Adverse events (e.g., pyrexia) may affect treatment patterns and adherence. This study explored pyrexia risk tolerance among melanoma patients when treatment benefit is unknown versus known. Materials & methods: US respondents with stage III (n = 100) or stage III unresectable/stage IV melanoma (n = 125) chose between hypothetical melanoma treatments, defined by reoccurrence/progression-free survival and pyrexia risk, one resembling standard-of-care and one resembling dabrafenib + trametinib. Respondents chose first when efficacy was unknown and then when efficacy was known; pyrexia risk was varied systematically to define maximum acceptable risk. Results: Maximum acceptable risk of pyrexia was statistically significantly higher when efficacy was known versus unknown in stage III patients (85 vs 34%) and stage III unresectable/stage IV patients (66 vs 57%). Conclusion: Patients accepted higher levels of pyrexia risk when they understood treatment benefit.

Predictors of long-term cancer-related distress among female BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers without a cancer diagnosis: an international analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have high lifetime risks of developing breast and ovarian cancers. We sought to estimate the prevalence of cancer-related distress and to identify predictors of distress in an international sample of unaffected women with a BRCA mutation. METHODS: Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation and no previous cancer diagnosis were recruited from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and from a national advocacy group. Using an online survey, we asked about cancer risk reduction options and screening, and we measured cancer-related distress using the Impact of Event Scale. RESULTS: Among 576 respondents, mean age was 40.8 years (SD = 8.1). On average 4.9 years after a positive test result, 16.3% of women reported moderate-to-severe cancer-related distress. Women who had undergone risk-reducing breast and ovarian surgery were less likely to have (moderate or severe) cancer-related distress compared to other women (22.0% versus 11.4%, P value = 0.007). Women recruited from the advocacy group were more likely to have cancer-related distress than other women (21.6% versus 5.3%, P value = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 16% of women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation experience distress levels comparable to those of women after a cancer diagnosis. Distress was lower for women who had risk-reducing surgery.

Efficacy is Not Everything: Eliciting Women's Preferences for a Vaginal HIV Prevention Product Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment.

As new female-initiated HIV prevention products enter development, it is crucial to incorporate women's preferences to ensure products will be desired, accepted, and used. A discrete-choice experiment was designed to assess the relative importance of six attributes to stated choice of a vaginally delivered HIV prevention product. Sexually active women in South Africa and Zimbabwe aged 18-30 were recruited from two samples: product-experienced women from a randomized trial of four vaginal placebo forms and product-naïve community members. In a tablet-administered survey, 395 women chose between two hypothetical products over eight choice sets. Efficacy was the most important, but there were identifiable preferences among other attributes. Women preferred a product that also prevented pregnancy and caused some wetness (p < 0.001). They disliked a daily-use product (p = 0.002) and insertion by finger (p = 0.002). Although efficacy drove preference, wetness, pregnancy prevention, and dosing regimen were influential to stated choice of a product, and women were willing to trade some level of efficacy to have other more desired attributes.

Assessing the impact of excluded attributes on choice in a discrete choice experiment using a follow-up question.

Health researchers design discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to elicit preferences over attributes that define treatments. A DCE can accommodate a limited number of attributes selected by researchers based on numerous factors (e.g., respondent comprehension, cognitive burden, and sample size). For situations where researchers want information about the possible impact of an attribute excluded from the DCE, we propose a method to use a question after the DCE. This follow-up question includes the attributes in the DCE with fixed levels and an additional attribute originally excluded from the DCE. The DCE data can be used to predict the probability that respondents would select one treatment profile over another without the additional attribute. Comparing the prediction to the percentage of the sample who selected each profile when it includes the additional attribute provides information on the potential impact of the additional attribute. We provide an example using data from a DCE on treatments for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cost was excluded from the DCE, but the survey included a follow-up question with two fixed treatment profiles, similar to two treatments currently on the market, and a cost for each. Preferences were sensitive to modest changes in cost, highlighting the importance of gathering this information.

Preferences for breast cancer prevention among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have high lifetime risks of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The decision to embark on risk reduction strategies is a difficult and personal one. We surveyed an international group of women with BRCA mutations and measured choices and sequence of breast cancer risk reduction strategies. METHODS: Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation and no previous cancer diagnosis were recruited from the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, and from a national advocacy group. Using an online survey, we asked about cancer-risk reduction preferences including for one of two hypothetical medicines, randomly assigned, and women's recommendations for a hypothetical woman (Susan, either a 25- or 36-year-old). Sunburst diagrams were generated to illustrate hierarchy of choices. RESULTS: Among 598 respondents, mean age was 40.9 years (range 25-55 years). Timing of the survey was 4.8 years (mean) after learning their positive test result and 33% had risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) and bilateral mastectomy (RRBM), while 19% had RRBSO only and 16% had RRBM only. Although 30% said they would take a hypothetical medicine, 6% reported taking a medicine resembling tamoxifen. Respondents were 1.5 times more likely to select a hypothetical medicine for risk reduction when Susan was 25 than when Susan was 36. Women assigned to 36-year-old Susan were more likely to choose a medicine if they had a family member diagnosed with breast cancer and personal experience taking tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: Women revealed a willingness to undergo surgeries to achieve largest reduction in breast cancer risk, although this would not be recommended for a younger woman in her 20s. The goal of achieving the highest degree of cancer risk reduction is the primary driver for women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations in selecting an intervention and a sequence of interventions, regardless of whether it is non-surgical or surgical.

Patient Preferences for Preventive Migraine Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To understand treatment preferences of people with migraine and the relative importance of improvements in efficacy and avoiding adverse events (AEs), such as cognition problems or weight gain. BACKGROUND: Current preventive migraine medicines are associated with poor adherence and tolerability. There is an unmet need for effective migraine-specific preventive treatments with fewer AEs. METHODS: In a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey, respondents who self-reported having ≥6 migraine days/month were offered choices between pairs of hypothetical preventive migraine medicines. Six attributes, each with 3 levels, defined the medicines: reduction in headache days per month (10%, 25%, or 50%), frequency of limitations with physical activities (none, 1-category improvement, or 2-category improvement), cognition problems (no problems, thinking problems, or memory problems), weight gain (none, 5% body weight gain, or 10% body weight gain), how the medicine is taken (daily oral pill, once-monthly injection, or twice-monthly injection), and monthly out-of-pocket cost ($5, $60, or $175). The attributes and levels were informed by clinician input, the clinical literature, and 2 focus groups. An experimental design was used to create the pairs of hypothetical medicines for the discrete-choice experiment questions. Random-parameters logit was used to estimate the relative importance of the medicine attributes, and the results were used to predict the percentage of respondents who would select one medicine profile over another and to calculate willingness to pay for changes in attribute levels. RESULTS: The sample included 300 respondents; 72% indicated that migraines make physical activities difficult all or most of the time, and 81% had taken a prescription medicine to prevent migraine in the last 6 months. Respondents reported having, on average, approximately 16 headache days per month. Among noncost attributes, respondents valued a change from a 10% reduction in migraine days to a 50% reduction more highly than avoiding the worst levels of AEs, but were willing to trade off efficacy for less-severe AEs. Avoiding memory problems was more important than avoiding thinking problems. Avoiding a 10% weight gain was more important than avoiding thinking and memory problems. Respondents preferred a once-monthly injection or daily pill to twice-monthly injection. Respondents, on average, were willing to pay $84 (95% confidence interval [CI], $64-$103) per month to avoid a 10% weight gain, $59 (95% CI, $42-$76) per month to avoid memory problems, $35 (95% CI, $20-$51) per month to avoid a 5% weight gain, and $32 (95% CI, $18-$46) per month to avoid thinking problems. CONCLUSIONS: A preventive migraine medicine with improved efficacy and AE profile and a favorable mode of administration would be valuable to migraine sufferers. Patients may be willing to trade off efficacy for better AE profiles. Clinicians should work with patients to select treatments that meet each patient's needs.

Patient preferences for treatment of metastatic melanoma.

AIM: To investigate patient preferences for clinical attributes of first-line metastatic melanoma treatments. MATERIALS & METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment and best-worst scaling exercise were used to assess relative preferences for treatment attributes. RESULTS: The 200 survey respondents had distinct preferences. Avoiding a 30% risk of colitis or hormone gland problems and avoiding severe fever were more important to respondents than avoiding a 20% risk of extreme sun sensitivity (p < 0.05). Patients preferred taking pills to receiving intravenous infusions in a clinic. When attributes were combined, approximately 85% of respondents preferred a risk profile similar to targeted therapy over a profile similar to immunotherapy, holding efficacy constant. CONCLUSION: Taking patient preferences into account can help patients get the full benefit from metastatic melanoma therapies.

Parental preferences toward genomic sequencing for non-medically actionable conditions in children: a discrete-choice experiment.

PurposeApplication of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing is likely to increase in clinical practice, public health contexts, and research. We investigated how parental preference for acquiring information from genome-scale testing is influenced by the characteristics of non-medically actionable genetic disorders in children, as well as whether the preferences differed by gender and between African-American and white respondents.MethodsWe conducted a Web-based discrete-choice experiment with 1,289 parents of young children. Participants completed "choice tasks" based on pairs of profiles describing sequencing results for hypothetical genetic disorders, selected the profile in each pair that they believed represented the information that would be more important to know, and answered questions that measured their level of distress.ResultsKnowing the likelihood that the disorder would develop given a true-positive test result was most important to parents. Parents showed greater interest in learning sequencing results for disease profiles with more severe manifestations. This was associated with greater distress. Differences by gender and race reflected small differences in magnitude, but not direction.ConclusionParents preferred to learn results about genetic disorders with more severe manifestations, even when this knowledge was associated with increased distress. These results may help clinicians support parental decision making by revealing which types of sequencing results parents are interested in learning.

Preferences for breast cancer risk reduction among BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: a discrete-choice experiment.

PURPOSE: Unaffected women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations face difficult choices about reducing their breast cancer risk. Understanding their treatment preferences could help us improve patient counseling and inform drug trials. The objective was to explore preferences for various risk-reducing options among women with germline BRCA1/2 mutations using a discrete-choice experiment survey and to compare expressed preferences with actual behaviors. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment survey was designed wherein women choose between hypothetical treatments to reduce breast cancer risk. The hypothetical treatments were characterized by the extent of breast cancer risk reduction, treatment duration, impact on fertility, hormone levels, risk of uterine cancer, and ease and mode of administration. Data were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model. Women were also asked to express their preference between surgical and chemoprevention options and to report on their actual risk-reduction actions. Women aged 25-55 years with germline BRCA1/2 mutations who were unaffected with breast or ovarian cancer were recruited through research registries at five clinics and a patient advocacy group. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and March 2016, 622 women completed the survey. Breast cancer risk reduction was the most important consideration expressed, followed by maintaining fertility. Among the subset of women who wished to have children in future, the ability to maintain fertility was the most important factor, followed by the extent of risk reduction. Many more women said they would take a chemoprevention drug than had actually taken chemoprevention. CONCLUSIONS: Women with BRCA1/2 mutations indicated strong preferences for breast cancer risk reduction and maintaining fertility. The expressed desire to have a safe chemoprevention drug available to them was not met by current chemoprevention options.

Stated Preference for Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review of the Literature, 1990-2013.

INTRODUCTION: Stated-preference methods provide a systematic approach to quantitatively assess the relative preferences for features of cancer screening tests. We reviewed stated-preference studies for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening to identify the types of attributes included, the use of questions to assess uptake, and whether gaps exist in these areas. The goal of our review is to inform research on the design and promotion of public health programs to increase cancer screening. METHODS: Using the PubMed and EconLit databases, we identified studies published in English from January 1990 through July 2013 that measured preferences for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening test attributes using conjoint analysis or a discrete-choice experiment. We extracted data on study characteristics and results. We categorized studies by whether attributes evaluated included screening test, health care delivery characteristics, or both. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met the search criteria. Colorectal cancer was the most commonly studied cancer of the 3. Fifteen studies examined only screening test attributes (efficacy, process, test characteristics, and cost). Two studies included only health care delivery attributes (information provided, staff characteristics, waiting time, and distance to facility). Five studies examined both screening test and health care delivery attributes. Overall, cancer screening test attributes had a significant effect on a patient's selection of a cancer screening test, and health care delivery attributes had mixed effects on choice. CONCLUSION: A growing number of studies examine preferences for cancer screening tests. These studies consistently find that screening test attributes, such as efficacy, process, and cost, are significant determinants of choice. Fewer studies have examined the effect of health care delivery attributes on choice, and the results from these studies are mixed. There is a need for additional studies on the barriers to cancer screening uptake, including health care delivery attributes, and the effect of education materials on preferences.

Eliciting Exploratory Patient Preference Data: A Case Study in a Rare Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative and quantitative methods provide different and complementary insights into patients' preferences for treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use a novel, mixed-methods approach employing qualitative and quantitative approaches to generate preliminary insights into patient preferences for the treatment of a rare disease-generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG). METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to collect exploratory qualitative and quantitative patient preference information and generate informative results within a condensed timeline (about 4 months). Recruitment was facilitated by an international health research firm. Study participants first reviewed a brief document describing six treatment attributes (to facilitate more efficient review of the material during the focus groups) and were then provided a link to complete an online quantitative survey with a single risk threshold task. They then participated in online focus groups, during which they discussed qualitative questions about their experience with gMG treatment and completed up to three quantitative threshold tasks, the first of which repeated the threshold task from the online survey. RESULTS: The study elicited both quantitative data on 18 participants' risk tolerance and qualitative data on their treatment experience, additional treatment attributes of importance, the reasoning behind their preferences, and the trade-offs they were willing to make. Most participants (n = 15) chose the same hypothetical treatment in the first threshold task in the online survey and the focus groups. Focus group discussions provided insights into participants' choices in the threshold tasks, confirmed that all the attributes were relevant, and helped clarify what was important about the attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Patient preference information can be collected using a variety of approaches, both qualitative and quantitative, tailored to fit the research needs of a study. The novel mixed-methods approach employed in this study efficiently captured patient preference data that were informative for exploratory research, internal decision making, and future research.

The value of knowing: preferences for genetic testing to diagnose rare muscle diseases.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing can offer early diagnosis and subsequent treatment of rare neuromuscular diseases. Options for these tests could be improved by understanding the preferences of patients for the features of different genetic tests, especially features that increase information available to patients. METHODS: We developed an online discrete-choice experiment using key attributes of currently available tests for Pompe disease with six test attributes: number of rare muscle diseases tested for with corresponding probability of diagnosis, treatment availability, time from testing to results, inclusion of secondary findings, necessity of a muscle biopsy, and average time until final diagnosis if the first test is negative. Respondents were presented a choice between two tests with different costs, with respondents randomly assigned to one of two costs. Data were analyzed using random-parameters logit. RESULTS: A total of 600 online respondents, aged 18 to 50 years, were recruited from the U.S. general population and included in the final analysis. Tests that targeted more diseases, required less time from testing to results, included information about unrelated health risks, and were linked to shorter time to the final diagnosis were preferred and associated with diseases with available treatment. Men placed relatively more importance than women on tests for diseases with available treatments. Most of the respondents would be more willing to get a genetic test that might return unrelated health information, with women exhibiting a statistically significant preference. While respondents were sensitive to cost, 30% of the sample assigned to the highest cost was willing to pay $500 for a test that could offer a diagnosis almost 2 years earlier. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the value people place on the information genetic tests can provide about their health, including faster diagnosis of rare, unexplained muscle weakness, but also the value of tests for multiple diseases, diseases without treatments, and incidental findings. An earlier time to diagnosis can provide faster access to treatment and an end to the diagnostic journey, which patients highly prefer.

Patient Preferences for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

Treatments for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have varying benefit-risk profiles. We elicited 200 US patients' preferences for attributes associated with various first-line systemic treatments for unresectable HCC in a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey. Respondents answered nine DCE questions, each offering a choice between two hypothetical treatment profiles defined by six attributes with varying levels: overall survival (OS), months of maintained daily function, severity of palmar-plantar syndrome, severity of hypertension, risk of digestive-tract bleeding, and mode and frequency of administration. A random-parameters logit model was used to analyze the preference data. Patients regarded an additional 10 months of maintaining daily function without decline to be as important or more important than 10 additional months of OS, on average. Respondents valued avoiding moderate-to-severe palmar-plantar syndrome and hypertension more than extended OS. A respondent would require >10 additional months of OS (the greatest increase presented in the study) on average to offset the increased burden of adverse events. Patients with unresectable HCC prioritize avoiding adverse events that would severely impact their quality of life over mode and frequency of administration or digestive-tract bleeding risk. For some patients with unresectable HCC, maintaining daily functioning is as important or more important than the survival benefit of a treatment.

Impact of Potential Symptoms and Risks Associated with Acid Sphingomyelinase Deficiency on Patients and Caregivers: A Best-Worst Scaling Study.

Purpose: Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD) is a rare, progressive, and potentially fatal disease affecting major organs; its symptoms present heterogeneously. Data on the most bothersome symptoms for patients with ASMD types B or A/B and their caregivers or parents are limited. We conducted a survey to quantify the relative impact of potential ASMD symptoms and risks for patients and parents/caregivers. Patients and Methods: Twenty respondents, recruited via National Niemann-Pick Disease Foundation (United States) and Niemann-Pick United Kingdom, took a preference survey: 11 patients who had a self-reported diagnosis of ASMD types B or A/B and 9 parents who had a child with ASMD types B or A/B. Using object-case best-worst scaling, we explored the most and least bothersome among a set of 15 ASMD symptoms/risks selected based on clinical input and qualitative research with patients and caregivers. In 15 experimentally designed questions containing five items each, respondents ranked the symptoms/risks, irrespective of their experiences with them. Data were analyzed using a conditional multinomial logit model. Results: Patients reported constant abdominal pain, severe pain in bones and joints, and severe fatigue to be the most bothersome potential symptoms or risks, followed by a chance of bleeding in the spleen. The next most bothersome potential symptom was constant shortness of breath. Easy bruising and noticeable abdominal enlargement were among the least bothersome symptoms. The most bothersome symptom for parents was bleeding in the spleen. Conclusion: Patients and parents had similar perceptions of the most bothersome potential symptoms/risks. Despite the small sample size typical of rare disease studies, understanding patient preferences is important for such diseases and can inform shared decision-making.

Patient preferences for features of HER2-targeted treatment of advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a discrete-choice experiment study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to quantify patients' benefit-risk preferences for attributes associated with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted breast cancer treatments and estimate minimum acceptable benefits (MABs), denominated in additional months of progression-free survival (PFS), for given treatment-related adverse events (AEs). METHODS: We conducted an online discrete-choice experiment (DCE) among patients with self-reported advanced/metastatic breast cancer in the United States, United Kingdom, and Japan (N = 302). In a series of nine DCE questions, respondents chose between two hypothetical treatment profiles created by an experimental design. Profiles were defined by six attributes with varying levels: PFS, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, liver function problems, risk of heart failure, and risk of serious lung damage and infections. Data were analyzed using an error component random-parameters logit model. RESULTS: Among the attributes, patients placed the most importance on a change in PFS from 5 to 26 months; change from no diarrhea to severe diarrhea was the least important. Avoiding a 15% risk of heart failure had the largest MAB (5.8 additional months of PFS), followed by avoiding a 15% risk of serious lung damage and infections (4.6 months), possible severe liver function problems (4.2 months), severe nausea/vomiting (3.7 months), and severe diarrhea (2.3 months) compared with having none of the AEs. The relative importance of 21 additional months of PFS (increasing from 5 to 26 months) increased for women with HER2-negative disease and those with children. CONCLUSIONS: Patients valued PFS gain higher than the potential risk of AEs when deciding between hypothetical breast cancer treatments.

Patients' Preferences for Adjunctive Parkinson's Disease Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

Background: Several adjunctive medications are available to reduce OFF time between levodopa/carbidopa (LD/CD) doses for people with Parkinson's disease (PD). Objective: To explore how individuals with PD balance benefits and burdens when considering adjunctive medications. Methods: US adults (30-83 years) with self-reported PD, currently treated with LD/CD, who experienced OFF episodes were recruited through the Fox Insight study to complete a discrete-choice experiment survey. Respondents selected among experimentally designed profiles for hypothetical adjunctive PD treatments that varied in efficacy (additional ON time), potential adverse effects (troublesome dyskinesia, risk of diarrhea, risk of change in bodily fluid color), and dosing frequency or the option "No additional medicine". Data were analyzed with random-parameters logit models. Results: Respondents (N=480) would require ≥60 additional minutes of daily ON time to accept either a 40% risk of change in bodily fluid color or 10 additional minutes with troublesome dyskinesia daily. Respondents would require 40 additional minutes of daily ON time to accept a 10% risk of diarrhea and 22 additional minutes of daily ON time to switch from 1 additional pill each day to 1 pill with each LD/CD dose. On average, respondents preferred adjunctive PD medication over no additional medication. Results predicted that 59.1% of respondents would select a hypothetical treatment profile similar to opicapone, followed by no additional medication (27.5%) and a hypothetical treatment profile similar to entacapone (13.4%). Limitations: The data collected were based on responses to hypothetical choice profiles in the survey questions. The attributes and levels selected for this study were intended to reflect the characteristics of opicapone and entacapone; attributes associated with other adjunctive therapies were not evaluated. Conclusion: Patients with PD expressed interest in adjunctive treatment to increase ON time and would accept reduced ON time to avoid adverse effects.

Patient preferences for atopic dermatitis treatments: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) experience skin lesions and intense itch that substantially affect quality of life. Patients have choices among systemic AD treatments that offer varied benefit-risk profiles. OBJECTIVE: Measure patients' willingness to trade off the risks and benefits of systemic treatments among individuals with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: Patients participated in a discrete choice experiment online survey with a series of choices between hypothetical AD treatments defined by six attributes reflecting benefits and risks of treatments (itch reduction, time until noticeable itch reduction, chance of clear or almost clear skin, risk of serious infection, risk of developing acne, and need for prescription topical steroids). Data were analyzed with a random parameters logit model to quantify preferences and the relative importance of attributes for treatment alternatives. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 200) placed the highest relative importance on itch reduction, speed of itch reduction, and skin clearance, and were generally willing to accept clinically relevant levels of risk of serious infection and acne in exchange for treatment benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate-to-severe AD were willing to trade clinically relevant treatment risks for greater or more rapid itch reduction and skin clearance offered by systemic therapies.

Adaptation of the WOMAC for Use in a Patient Preference Study.

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.