Out-of-pocket expenses of patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a comparison of patient-reported outcomes across 12 European countries.

BACKGROUND: There is a high variability of out-of-packet patient costs of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), but the issue is not widely recognised. Therefore, we compared patient costs of IBDs between 12 European countries. METHODS: A questionnaire-based study was conducted among adult patients with IBD. Data on patient characteristics and out-of-pocket expenses were anonymously collected. Ordered logit regression models were used to analyse the responses provided by patients. The results were adjusted for confounders and multiplicity. RESULTS: The questionnaires obtained from 3687 patients were analysed. Patients with comorbidities and active disease indicated higher out-of-pocket expenses than those without comorbidities and with disease in remission, respectively. Compared with other IBD, patients with ulcerative colitis indicated higher expenses on medications prescribed or recommended by physicians [odds ratio (OR) 1.99, 95% CI 1.48-2.67]. Expenses on dietary supplements, special diet or equipment, ostomy pouches, and transportation to a medical facility differed slightly between patients at different ages and were lower among men than among women (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54-0.93). The expenses differed significantly between countries. An adjusted mean patient cost per month varied from €77 (patient with Crohn disease in remission from Denmark) to €376 (patient with active ulcerative colitis from Romania). Compared with active disease, patients with IBD in remission had a lower out-of-pocket cost by 29-62% (€10-€22 monthly; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed a high relevance of the out-of-pocket cost of IBD in the context of economic evaluation and a high variability of the cost between countries.

What are the Unmet Needs and Most Relevant Treatment Outcomes According to Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Qualitative Patient Preference Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: As more therapeutic options with their own characteristics become available for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], drug development and individual treatment decision-making needs to be tailored towards patients' preferences and needs. This study aimed to understand patient preferences among IBD patients, and their most important treatment outcomes and unmet needs. METHODS: This qualitative study consisted of [1] a scoping literature review, [2] two focus group discussions [FGDs] with IBD patients [n = 11] using the nominal group technique, and [3] two expert panel discussions. RESULTS: IBD patients discussed a multitude of unmet needs regarding their symptoms, side-effects, and psychological and social issues for which they would welcome improved outcomes. In particular, IBD patients elaborated on the uncertainties and fears they experienced regarding the possible need for surgery or an ostomy, the effectiveness and onset of action of their medication, and the medication's long-term effects. Furthermore, participants extensively discussed the mental impact of IBD and their need for more psychological guidance, support, and improved information and communication with healthcare workers regarding their disease and emotional wellbeing. The following five characteristics were identified during the attribute grading as most important: prevent surgery, long-term clinical remission, improved quality of life [QoL], occurrence of urgency and improved labour rate. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that IBD drug development and treatment decision-making are needed to improve IBD symptoms and adverse events that significantly impact IBD patients' QoL. Furthermore, this study underlines patients' need for a shared decision-making process in which their desired treatment outcomes and uncertainties are explicitly discussed and considered.

Patients' perceptions of surgery for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: Surgery is indicated in selected patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, due to a negative perception, surgery may be delayed, leading to possible unfavourable outcomes. The aim of this work was to investigate patients' perceptions of surgery and the impact on reported outcomes. METHOD: An international multilingual online survey was used to query IBD patients' experiences of surgery, information sources, expectations and concerns, quality of life (QoL) and feelings. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 425 of 510 participants. Crohn's disease was more frequent (61%) than ulcerative colitis (36%). Most patients primarily learned about surgery from their gastroenterologist and were informed of the risks and benefits by the surgeon. In almost one-third of patients indication for surgery was not a shared decision between gastroenterologist and surgeon. Seventy per cent of patients naïve to surgery were not aware of any surgical options. The majority of patients (80%) perceived surgery as the last option after many medical treatments rather than an alternative therapeutic option (20%). Sixteen per cent of patients obtained their primary information from the Internet, while 82.4% used the Internet to obtain additional information. Fear of surgical complications was cited by 73% of patients, while relief from symptoms was indicated by 31%. Most patients coped with their stoma better than expected or as they expected. Negative feelings decreased after surgery, while a lasting improvement in positive feelings and QoL was reported. CONCLUSION: Despite the negative perception of surgery and the delayed involvement of surgeons as a source of information and in the decision-making process, the majority of respondents experienced positive outcomes from surgery, including improvement QoL and acceptance of the stoma.

Biosimilar knowledge and viewpoints among Brazilian inflammatory bowel disease patients.

BACKGROUND: In this analysis we aimed to describe Brazilian inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients' knowledge and perceptions regarding biosimilars and compare with viewpoints from non-Brazilian patients. METHODS: An online survey consisting of 19 questions was made available by the European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations between July 2018 and December 2018. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond to all of the questions. RESULTS: A total of 102 Brazilian IBD patients responded to the survey. The majority (78.4%) of patients had been exposed to anti-tumor-necrosis-factor drugs and 63.4% of them had heard of biosimilars. Brazilian respondents worried significantly more about biosimilars being less effective than the originator (62.5% versus 47.9%, p value 0.03) and molecular differences between biosimilars and originators (53.1% versus 31.8, p value 0.001) as compared with non-Brazilian IBD patients. The majority of Brazilian (75%) and non-Brazilian (64.1%) respondents thought that the lower cost of biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy (p value 0.09). In addition, 79.1% of Brazilian respondents believed that the arrival of biosimilars will have an impact on the management of IBD. CONCLUSIONS: Brazilian patients reported higher rates of misconceptions regarding biosimilars than non-Brazilian IBD patients. Although patients still worry about different aspects regarding biosimilars, they also tend to be confident that biosimilars will have an impact on the management of their disease. With the recent approval of many biosimilars in Brazil and the imminent widespread use of these drugs, our data raise awareness for the need of providing patient education to prevent negative expectations toward switching to biosimilars.

Patients' perspectives on smoking and inflammatory bowel disease: An online survey in collaboration with European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations.

BACKGROUND: Smoking has detrimental effects on Crohn's disease (CD) activity while data on ulcerative colitis (UC) are conflicting. Little is known about the use and impact of alternative smoking products in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). AIM: To understand the patients' perceptions of the impact of smoking on their IBD and to assess differences between CD and UC patients. METHODS: The questionnaire was developed by Philip Morris Products SA in cooperation with European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations. The final survey questionnaire consisted of 41 questions divided in 8 categories: (1) Subject screener; (2) Smoking history; (3) Background information; (4) IBD disease background; (5) Current disease status; (6) Current therapeutics and medications; and (7) Current nicotine/cigarettes use and awareness of the impacts of smoking on IBD. The questionnaire was submitted online from 4th November 2019 to 11th March 2020 through the European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations website to IBD patients who were current smokers or had a history of smoking. RESULTS: In total 1050 IBD patients speaking nine languages participated to the survey. Among them, 807 (76.9%) patients declared to have ever smoked or consumed an alternative smoking product, with a higher proportion of current cigarette smokers among CD patients (CD: 63.1% vs UC: 54.1%, P = 0.012). About two-thirds of the participants declared to have ever stopped cigarette smoking and restarted (67.0%), with a significantly higher proportion among UC patients compared to CD patients (73.1% vs 62.0%, P = 0.001). We also found significant differences between CD and UC patients in the awareness of the health consequences of smoking in their disease and in the perceived impact of smoking on disease activity, for both cigarettes and alternative smoking products. CONCLUSION: This survey found significant differences between CD and UC patients in both awareness and perception of the impact of smoking on their disease. Further efforts should be done to encourage smoking cessation for all IBD patients, including UC patients.

Preparing for the incoming wave of biosimilars in oncology.

With the imminent arrival of oncology biosimilars in the therapeutic paradigm, stakeholders including a clinician, specialist nurse, patient advocate, regulator and economist provide their perspective on optimising the uptake of these new agents in the treatment of cancer. A number of key messages emerge, based on the discussion that took place during a session of the European Society for Medical Oncology's Annual Congress, ESMO Madrid 2017. First, for successful integration of biosimilars into the global healthcare paradigm, informing and educating the full scope of stakeholders, including clinicians, nurses, pharmacists and patients, is primordial. Success is dependent on providing solid evidence and ensuring all voices are heard. Second, for oncology medicines, much can be learnt from the growing experience of approved biosimilars in other disease indications, with success stories for patients, their healthcare providers and healthcare budgets alike. Finally, effective sustainability of the impact on healthcare budgets and the redirection of these savings require education and transparency.

Patient Perspectives on Biosimilars: A Survey by the European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The aim of this survey was to find out the patients' perspectives concerning biosimilars. METHODS: An online survey consisting of 14 questions was made available between November 2014 and October 2015. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond the final twelve questions. RESULTS: A total of 1181 patients responded. Of these, 38% had heard of biosimilars. The respondents worried about biosimilars' safety profile [47.0%], efficacy [40.3%], and molecular basis [35.0%]. Only 25.2% of the respondents had no concerns about biosimilars. Just over half [55.9%] of the respondents thought that the lower cost of the biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy. Only 12.5% of respondents felt that extrapolation made sense. The survey showed that 39.9% felt that patients should be systematically informed, and 26.7% felt that patient associations should be informed and able to give their opinions. It also revealed that 20.9% of the respondents would be against the idea of interchangeability if the patient was not aware; 65.7% of the respondents would want to know whether they were receiving the reference drug or the biosimilar, and have all necessary information in writing before the drug was administered. Only 31.0% of the respondents would be fully confident about biosimilars, even if they were prescribed and explained by the treating physician. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were not familiar with biosimilars, and those who were had doubts and concerns about the biosimilars' safety and efficacy. The patients wished to be informed and involved in decision-making concerning biosimilars.