Clinical consensus on treatments for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: double-blinded Delphi panel.

Aim: Obtain clinical consensus on factors impacting first-line prescribing for transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Materials & methods: A double-blinded, modified Delphi panel was employed. USA-based hematologists/oncologists who treat TIE patients with NDMM were selected as expert panelists. Results: Consensus was reached that patient frailty, performance status, comorbidities, treatment efficacy, and adverse event profile affect first-line prescribing. All panelists agreed it is important to use the most efficacious treatment first; 88% of panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious. Panelists agreed treatment should be continued until progression while benefits outweigh risk. Conclusion: Findings reinforce the importance of using the most efficacious regimen upfront for TIE NDMM, and nearly all panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious treatment.

The purpose of this study was to determine the latest clinician preferences and opinions on factors affecting initial treatment selection for people recently diagnosed with multiple myeloma and unable to receive a bone marrow transplant, and to understand challenges with current treatments used in clinical practice. A panel of doctors with an average of two decades of experience treating blood disorders and cancers were recruited as expert panelists. Experts discussed treatment options by completing two rounds of surveys on treatment and one round of discussion. All experts agreed that the most effective treatment should be used first. Most experts considered treatment containing the drug daratumumab to be the most effective. Experts agreed that treatment should be continued until the cancer worsens if the treatment offers more benefits than side effects.

Understanding the unmet needs in insomnia treatment: a systematic literature review of real-world evidence.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to define and characterize the unmet needs in the pharmacological management of insomnia. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify relevant literature reporting real-world evidence in insomnia, published from January 2009 to April 2020. Pharmacological treatments - both prescription (benzodiazepines, 'Z-drugs' and suvorexant) and off-label (antidepressants, antipsychotics, and antihistamines) - were considered. RESULTS: Overall, 108 publications describing the humanistic (n = 59) and economic burden (n = 20) of insomnia, off-label treatment patterns (n = 28) and factors influencing treatment adherence or persistence (n = 8) were identified. A high prevalence of comorbid conditions was reported in patients with insomnia resulting in significantly lower health-related QoL compared to those with insomnia or a comorbidity alone. Current treatment options were associated with adverse events, including reduced sleep quality and next-day somnolence. An increased risk of accidents/injuries was also associated with insomnia and its treatment. Furthermore, safety concerns and perceived lack of efficacy for approved treatments have led to frequent off-label prescribing, despite a lack of clinical evidence of risk/benefit ratios. Safety concerns associated with benzodiazepines include risk of dependence, leading to prolonged treatment persistence and exacerbated adverse events, making them unsuitable for use in patients with chronic insomnia. Finally, the substantial economic burden of insomnia was evident, with reduced work productivity demonstrated in patients with insomnia compared to the general population. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights a clear unmet need for insomnia therapies that improve sleep quality without resulting in next-day impairment and/or dependence.

Disutility of Cognitive Processing Speed (CPS) Impairment in the Context of Multiple Sclerosis: A Time Trade-Off (TTO) Elicitation Study.

Introduction: Cognitive impairment, especially relating to cognitive processing speed, is a major cause of disability in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Utility values are quantitative estimates of the quality of life experienced in specific health states and are a key component of cost-effectiveness modelling. However, existing health state utility values in MS typically focus on physical ability and are generally derived using generic (not disease-specific) measures of quality of life. The objective of the current study was to generate health state utility values for levels of cognitive impairment. We used a direct utility elicitation approach called the time trade-off (TTO) methodology. Materials and Methods: Health state descriptions were created following interviews with healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers in the United States (n=35), and with healthcare professionals in the UK (n=5). Three health states (mild, moderate, and severe impairment) were defined based upon a well-established and validated test for cognitive dysfunction called the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and described using qualitative interview findings. Next, interviews with members of the general public in the UK were conducted to estimate utility values for each health state using the TTO methodology. The procedure was based on the established Measurement and Valuation of Health (MVH) protocol, which generates values on a scale from 0.0 to 1.0. Results: Mean health state utility values were 0.77 ± 0.24 in "mild impairment" (SDMT 43-40), 0.57 ± 0.26 in "moderate impairment" (SDMT 39-32), and 0.34 ± 0.28 in "severe impairment" (SDMT ≤ 31). Discussion: Results indicate that the public perceives that health states of cognitive slowing (as observed in MS) are associated with a substantial reduction in affected individuals' health-related quality of life, quantified using the TTO methodology. Future economic modeling should consider how utility impacts of both cognitive and physical disability can be appropriately incorporated.

Elicitation of Health State Utility Values in Retinitis Pigmentosa by Time Trade-off in the United Kingdom.

Introduction: Retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is an inherited retinal pathology associated with "night blindness" and progressive loss of peripheral vision, in some cases leading to complete blindness. Health state utility values are required for activities such as modelling disease burden or the cost-effectiveness of new interventions. The current study aimed to generate utility values for health states of varying levels of functional vision in RP, with members of the general public in the UK. Methods: Five health states were defined according to standard clinical measures of visual ability. Health state descriptions were developed following interviews with patients with RP in the UK (n=5). Further interviews were conducted for confirmation with healthcare professionals with specific experience of managing patients with RP in the UK (n=2). Interviews with members of the general public in the UK were conducted to value health states. A time trade-off (TTO) process based on the established Measurement and Valuation of Health (MVH) protocol was used. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, all interviews were web-enabled and conducted 1:1 by a trained moderator. Results: In total, n=110 TTO interviews were conducted with members of the UK general public. Mean TTO utility values followed the logical and expected order, with increasing visual impairment leading to decreased utility. Mean values varied between 0.78 ± 0.20 ("moderate impairment"), and 0.33 ± 0.26 ("hand motion" to "no light perception"). Supplementary visual analogue scale (VAS) scores also followed the logical and expected order: mean VAS values varied between 47.95 ± 15.38 ("moderate impairment") and 17.22 ± 12.49 in ("hand motion" to "no light perception"). Discussion: These data suggest that individuals living with RP have substantially impaired quality of life. Utility values for RP have been elicited here using a method and sample that is suitable for economic modelling and health technology assessment purposes.

Vaccine uptake and barriers to vaccination among at-risk adult populations in the US.

To reduce morbidity and mortality associated with vaccine-preventable diseases (VPD), it is imperative that vaccination programs are implemented and prioritized throughout all stages of life across all populations. This study aimed to determine vaccine uptake and barriers to vaccination against VPDs among at-risk adult populations in the United States. We conducted a systematic literature review for articles published between January 2010 and June 2020 and identified 153 publications. The review identified 17 at-risk populations. Vaccine uptake was suboptimal among many populations, with factors including age, gender, and disease severity, associated with uptake. This review identified several barriers that impact vaccine uptake among at-risk populations, with concerns over safety, vaccine costs, lack of insurance, and lack of provider recommendation commonly reported across populations. Embracing a national life-course immunization framework that integrates developing policies, guidelines, and education would be a step to addressing these barriers.

Burden of vaccine-preventable diseases among at-risk adult populations in the US.

Life-course immunization holds significant benefit for population health by reducing the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPD) through vaccinating individuals at different stages and circumstances in life. The study aimed to determine the epidemiologic, clinical, economic, and societal burden of VPDs among at-risk adult subpopulations in the United States. A systematic literature review was conducted for articles published between January 2010 and June 2020, which identified 72 publications. There was heterogeneity in available epidemiology data, with the prevalence of VPDs ranging from 1.1% to 68.7%. Where the disease burden was described, outcomes were typically worse among high-risk subpopulations than in the general population. Several VPDs, including herpes zoster, meningococcal, and pneumococcal infections were associated with increased costs. This review suggests that subpopulations may not frequently interact with the healthcare system, or their risk factors may not be recognized by healthcare providers, and therefore individuals may not be appropriately targeted for vaccination.

Evaluation of Patients with Insufficient Efficacy and/or Tolerability to Triptans for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: A Systematic Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: Use of triptans for acute treatment of migraine is associated with insufficient efficacy and/or tolerability in approximately 30-40% of people. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to synthesize definitions, terminology, subsequent treatment outcomes, and characteristics associated with this subpopulation. METHODS: A comprehensive SLR was conducted to identify studies, published from Jan 1995 to May 2019, which focused on insufficient efficacy and/or tolerability to triptans. RESULTS: Thirty-five publications were identified, of which 22 described randomized controlled trials and open-label studies, and 13 described observational studies. Across studies, multiple objectives and a high amount of variability in methodologies and outcomes were noted. The most commonly applied measures of efficacy were headache pain freedom and pain relief at 2 h. Ten studies assessed efficacy of switching or optimizing treatment in patients with historical insufficient efficacy or tolerability to previous triptan treatment and demonstrated varying levels of success. Factors associated with increased risk of triptan insufficient efficacy included severe baseline headache severity, photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, and depression. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of the methodology or definition used to identify people with insufficient efficacy and/or tolerability to triptans, study results support the assertion that a high unmet need remains for effective acute treatment of migraine.