Improving Assessment of Adherence Behaviors and Drivers: Targeted Literature Review and Concept Elicitation Interviews in Multiple Countries and Disease Populations.

Purpose: Medication adherence is crucial for achieving clinical goals. Medication adherence drivers and behaviors were explored across multiple conditions, countries, and medication schedules/modalities to develop a conceptual model of medication adherence, which could later be used to support development of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of adherence. Patients and Methods: Targeted review of qualitative literature identified important medication adherence concepts. Fifty-seven qualitative concept elicitation interviews were conducted (USA n=21, Spain n=18, Germany n=18). Participants were prescribed medication for: hypertension (n=9), asthma (n=8), multiple myeloma (n=8), psoriasis (n=8), diabetes (n=7), depression (n=7), multiple sclerosis (n=7), and/or schizophrenia (n=6). Thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was performed. Expert clinicians (n=3) provided input throughout. Results: Nine qualitative articles were selected for review from 2168 screened abstracts. Forty-two medication adherence concepts were reported and grouped into 10 domains. Eight forms of medication adherence were reported during interviews, along with 27 drivers of non-adherence, all of which were incorporated into a conceptual model. Participants reported skipping medication doses (n=36/57; 63.2%) or taking medication later in the day than prescribed (n=29/57; 50.9%). Common drivers of non-adherence included forgetfulness (n=35/57; 61.4%), being out of the usual routine (n=31/57; 54.4%) and being busy (n=22/57; 38.6%). US participants were more likely to report non-adherence due to low perceived efficacy (n=6/21, 28.6%) and cost (n=5/21, 23.8%) than German (n=1/18, 5.6%; n=0/18, 0.0%) or Spanish (n=2/18, 11.1%; n=1/18, 5.6%) participants. Conclusion: Findings highlight the diverse forms and drivers of medication non-adherence, informing the development of a comprehensive conceptual model of medication adherence. The conceptual model builds on and advances previous models of medication adherence and can be used by healthcare professionals to understand and interpret barriers to medication adherence and how best to support patients in taking their medication as intended.

Medication adherence is the extent to which a patient takes their medication as prescribed. This paper describes a literature review and concept elicitation interviews to identify forms and drivers of medication adherence across a diverse sample of participants. Forms of non-adherence identified included: deviating from the prescription, skipping a dose, taking a different amount, and taking medication at a different time. Behaviours and drivers can vary by condition, treatment modality, and dosing schedule.This research highlights the variation in the prevalence of medication non-adherence, and the different forms and drivers of non-adherence, based on individuals' demographic and clinical characteristics. The conceptual model developed advances previous models of medication adherence and may support healthcare professionals in the management of patients and how they can be supported to take medication as intended. The research ultimately informed the development of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ^©), a novel generic patient-reported outcome measure.

The power of hope: Views of Ovarian Cancer patients on how maintenance therapy Affects their Lives (VOCAL).

Aim: To assess maintenance preference and trade-offs for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Methods: Patients completed a time trade-off exercise ranking five maintenance approaches. Patients' preferred approach was compared with alternatives to determine the progression-free time they would trade off to remain on their preferred approach. Results: Of 152 patients (median age 53 years, 68% White), 56% chose one of four maintenance medications, mostly to feel proactive and 44% chose active surveillance. Compared with their preferred approach, patients were willing to trade a mean progression-free time before switching of 2.3 months for once-daily oral medications, 3.2 months for twice-daily oral medications, 5.5 months for intravenous infusions every 3 weeks (iv. q3), 6.1 months for active surveillance and 7.5 months for iv. q3 and twice-daily oral. Conclusion: Findings highlight the importance of patients' awareness of all maintenance approaches and involving them in the decision-making process.

What is the article about? The VOCAL study looked at maintenance approach preferences of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Maintenance approach refers to the methods used after a patient has completed their initial chemotherapy to prevent disease progression for as long as possible. US patients completed an online survey, ranking five different maintenance approaches: No medication (active surveillance); Once-daily oral medication (e.g. pills); Twice-daily oral medication; Medication by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks; Medication by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks and oral twice-daily. Patients were asked to assume the same time to disease progression for all five approaches and the same side effects for the four approaches involving medications (2­5). Each patient then indicated how much time to disease progression they were willing to trade off to remain on their preferred approach before switching to an alternative. What were the results? Overall, 152 patients completed the survey (median age: 53 years, 68% White). Most patients preferred a medication approach (56%, n = 85) to active surveillance (44%, n = 67). Of the 85 patients who preferred medication, 66% (n = 56) reported this was to feel proactive in preventing their cancer returning. Once-daily oral medication was the most acceptable alternative to the patients' preferred maintenance approach, given they were willing to trade the least 'disease-free' time (2.3 months) before accepting a switch. What do the results mean? Individual patient preferences vary, and healthcare professionals should work with patients to determine which approach is most appropriate for them.

Alignment of Physician-Stated vs Clinically Derived Reference Fibrosis Score in Patients with Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis: A Real-World European Survey.

Objective: Stratifying disease severity in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is essential for appropriate treatment and long-term management. Liver biopsy is the reference standard for fibrosis severity in NASH, but less invasive methods are used, eg, Fibrosis-4 Index (FIB-4) and vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE), for which reference thresholds for no/early fibrosis and advanced fibrosis are available. We compared subjective physician assessment of NASH fibrosis versus reference thresholds to understand classification in a real-world setting. Methods: Data were drawn from Adelphi Real World NASH Disease Specific ProgrammeTM conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and UK in 2018. Physicians (diabetologists, gastroenterologists, hepatologists) completed questionnaires for five consecutive NASH patients presenting for routine care. Physician-stated fibrosis score (PSFS) based on available information was compared with clinically defined reference fibrosis stage (CRFS) determined retrospectively using VCTE and FIB-4 data and eight reference thresholds. Results: One thousand two hundred and eleven patients had VCTE (n = 1115) and/or FIB-4 (n = 524). Depending on thresholds, physicians underestimated severity in 16-33% (FIB-4) and 27-50% of patients (VCTE). Using VCTE ≥12.2, diabetologists, gastroenterologists and hepatologists underestimated disease severity in 35%, 32%, and 27% of patients, respectively, and overestimated fibrosis in 3%, 4%, and 9%, respectively (p = 0.0083 across specialties). Hepatologists and gastroenterologists had higher liver biopsy rates than diabetologists (52%, 56%, 47%, respectively). Conclusion: PSFS did not consistently align with CRFS in this NASH real-world setting. Underestimation was more common than overestimation, potentially leading to undertreatment of patients with advanced fibrosis. More guidance on interpreting test results when classifying fibrosis is needed, thereby improving management of NASH.

Physician- and patient-reported symptom concordance and association with quality of life in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Aim: To investigate the association of discordance in patient- and physician-reported symptoms on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients & methods: Data were drawn from a point-in-time survey of physicians and patients conducted in Germany, Italy and Spain (October 2018 - January 2019). Physicians and their consulting patients independently reported baseline characteristics, symptoms, treatment history and satisfaction, and HRQoL derived using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep) questionnaire. Results: Of 486 patients analysed, tiredness (73.3%, 73.7%), pain/aches (67.7%, 66.9%) and weight/appetite loss (54.3%, 53.7%) were the most common and concordant patient and physician-reported symptom domains, respectively. The symptom domains showing the largest discordance were reflux/indigestion (14.6%, 5.1%), neurological (11.9%, 5.6%), dermatological (9.3%, 6.2%) symptoms and jaundice (4.7%, 10.3%). Reduced HRQoL was observed with increasing symptom-reporting discordance. Conclusion: Further studies should investigate how symptom-reporting discordance influences patient satisfaction and HRQoL.

Qualitative Interviews to Support Development and Cognitive Debriefing of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©): A Patient-Reported Measure of Medication Adherence Developed for Use in a Range of Diseases, Treatment Modalities, and Countries.

Purpose: The Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©) is a newly developed generic patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment of medication adherence. The aim was to assess its content validity by conducting cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews with patients prescribed medication(s) of various treatment modalities in a range of therapy areas. Materials and Methods: Targeted literature/instrument review and concept elicitation interviews informed development of the ADAQ©. CD interviews were conducted with 57 adults from the United States of America (USA; n = 21), Spain (n = 18), and Germany (n = 18) who prescribed medication for hypertension, diabetes, depression, schizophrenia, asthma, multiple myeloma, psoriasis, and/or multiple sclerosis. Interviews were conducted in two rounds to explore the relevance and understanding of the item wording, instructions, recall period and response options. Verbatim transcripts were analysed in ATLAS.Ti using thematic analysis. Three expert clinicians provided guidance throughout the study. Results: ADAQ© items/instructions were well understood and relevant to participants. Key modifications following round 1 included revising instructions to refer to current medication(s) for one condition to reduce cognitive burden, removing two items with lower relevance (specifically those assessing running out of medication and social discouragement), and adding a response option for participants to indicate if they had stopped taking a medication. Minor wording modifications were made following round 2. Subgroup differences in item relevance were explored based on clinical characteristics. Cost of medication was more relevant amongst US participants. Conclusion: Content validity of the ADAQ© was confirmed in demographically and clinically diverse participants. Psychometric properties of the ADAQ© will be explored in future studies.

Effect of Fatigue on Health-Related Quality of Life and Work Productivity in Psoriatic Arthritis: Findings From a Real-World Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fatigue frequency and severity among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and assess the effect of fatigue severity on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assessing quality of life, function, and work productivity. METHODS: Data were derived from the Adelphi Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2018 in the United States and Europe. Patients had physician-confirmed PsA. Fatigue was collected as a binary variable and through its severity (0-10 scale, using the 12-item Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease fatigue question) from patients; physicians also reported patient fatigue (yes/no). Other PROMs included the 5-level EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) for health-related quality of life (HRQOL), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. Multivariate linear regression was used to evaluate the association between fatigue severity and other PROMs. RESULTS: Among the 831 included patients (mean age 47.5 yrs, mean disease duration 5.3 yrs, 46.9% female, 48.1% receiving a biologic), fatigue was reported by 78.3% of patients. Patients with greater fatigue severity had greater disease duration, PsA severity, pain levels, body surface area affected by psoriasis, and swollen and tender joint counts (all P < 0.05). In multivariate analyses, patients with greater fatigue severity experienced worse physical functioning, HRQOL, and work productivity (all P < 0.001). Presence of fatigue was underreported by physicians (reported in only 32% of patients who self-reported fatigue). CONCLUSION: Prevalence of patient-reported fatigue was high among patients with PsA and underrecognized by physicians. Fatigue severity was associated with altered physical functioning, work productivity, and HRQOL.

Health-Related Quality of Life Among Patients With HR+/HER2- Early Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to characterize health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among patients diagnosed with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer. METHODS: A multinational (United States, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and United Kingdom) study of patients diagnosed with stage I to III HR+/HER2- breast cancer, either receiving adjuvant treatment or under postadjuvant surveillance, was conducted between June and October 2019. Patients were identified by their consulting physician and invited to complete the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) and the EQ-5D-5L pen and paper questionnaires. EQ-5D-5L index scores were derived by using available country-specific health state value sets, where available, and numerically compared with general population scores derived from published normative and population data. Descriptive summary statistics were reported for FACT-B, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) (total and specific subscales), the EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ-VAS scores for each country. Results were stratified according to disease-free treatment status (active adjuvant treatment or postadjuvant surveillance), age (25-44, 45-54, 55-64, or ≥65 years), stage (I, II, or III), and menopausal status at the time of questionnaire completion (pre-/peri-menopausal or postmenopausal). FINDINGS: Overall, 1110 patients completed the HRQOL questionnaires (mean age, 59 years; 79% active adjuvant treatment, and 21% under surveillance postadjuvant treatment at time of questionnaire administration; 31% stage I, 48% stage II, and 20% stage III at diagnosis). Of these, 1102 completed the FACT-B and 1083 completed the EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. The mean (SD) FACT-B total score was 99.0 (21.9). The mean FACT-G total score was 72.5 (17.8), which was comparable to the published normative score. The mean EQ-5D index and EQ-VAS scores for each country were similar to corresponding population means; EQ-5D index scores ranged from 0.842 (0.098) in Japan to 0.916 (0.109) in France, and EQ-VAS scores from 68.0 (18.4) in Germany to 78.6 (16.4) in the United States. In addition, mean scores were comparable between the active adjuvant treatment and postadjuvant surveillance groups for the FACT-B total (99.4 [22.5] and 97.7 [19.7], respectively), FACT-G total (72.8 [18.3] and 71.3 [16.0]), EQ-5D index score (0.868 [0.135] and 0.869 [0.142]), and EQ-VAS (74.9 [17.2] and 74.4 [16.1]). IMPLICATIONS: Patient-reported HRQOL among patients with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer who were disease-free was high, with reported scores comparable to normative scores. These results improve our understanding of HRQOL among patients with early disease and may facilitate future studies examining the potential impact of adjuvant treatment and disease recurrence, including metastasis.

Real-World Impact of Physician and Patient Discordance on Health-Related Quality of Life in US Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited understanding concerning the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. Due to an overlap of symptoms, it can be difficult to separate disease versus treatment-related effects. Study objectives were to understand the impact of factors that might influence patients' HRQoL, assess the degree of concordance in symptom reporting by patients and physicians, and assess the impact of any discordance on HRQoL in AML patients. METHODS: Physicians in the USA captured demographics, current AML treatment and symptoms for 82 AML patients who completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu), 5-Dimension EuroQol Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and Cancer Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ). Effect size (ES) and clinically meaningful differences between AML subgroups were assessed, as was the impact of disagreement between patients and physicians regarding symptom recognition. RESULTS: Clinically meaningful lower overall FACT-Leu scores were observed for: relapsed/refractory versus non-relapsed/refractory AML patients (92.5 vs. 103.7; P = 0.09; ES = 0.439), hypomethylating agent (HMA) monotherapy versus other therapies in patients with low treatment intensity (89.9 vs. 112.9; P = 0.0021; ES = 0.971) and presence/absence of FLT3-ITD mutation (85.5 vs. 100; P = 0.148; ES = 0.816). Differences in health state were also clinically meaningful between patients with/without FLT3-ITD; EQ-5D-Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (47.6 vs. 63.7; P = 0.0428; ES = 0.816). Patients were more likely than physicians to report bruising (κ = 0.1292), fatigue (κ = 0.0836), bleeding (κ = 0.0177), weight loss (κ = 0.0821) and appetite loss (κ = - 0.0246). FACT-Leu was associated with patient-physician discordance on bleeding (difference - 14.12; P = 0.046), weight loss (- 21.22; P = 0.001) and appetite loss (- 12.58; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL is generally low for AML patients, especially for particular subgroups. Discordance in symptom reporting between patients and physicians was common and associated with further negative impacts on HRQoL. There may be many reasons for this but better communication between physicians and patients may lead to shared objectives and improvement in patients' HRQoL. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma, Inc.

Patient Characteristics and Real-World Treatment Patterns Among Early Users of PCSK9 Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and are approved for patients with familial hypercholesterolemia or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who require additional LDL-C lowering. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to characterize patients receiving PCSK9i medications in real-world practice and describe physician-reported treatment patterns among dyslipidemia patients using PCSK9i or other lipid-lowering therapy. METHODS: We analyzed data from a point-in-time Adelphi dyslipidemia disease-specific programme (DSP) survey conducted in the USA in 2016. Physicians provided treatment history, laboratory values, patient characteristics, and comorbidities for treated patients. To ensure sufficient numbers of PCSK9i-treated patients, we conducted systematic oversampling of patients being prescribed PCSK9i. Outcomes included patient characteristics and physician-reported treatment patterns. RESULTS: The DSP included 159 physicians, who provided information on 1522 patients (304 PCSK9i; 1218 non-PCSK9i). Mean ± standard deviation (SD) baseline LDL-C levels were 180.0 ± 39.7 mg/dl for PCSK9i patients and 159.2 ± 40.5 mg/dl for non-PCSK9i patients. Prior statin use was reported in 69.1% of PCSK9i patients and 19.5% of non-PCSK9i patients, and physician-reported statin intolerance was observed in 31.6% of PCSK9i and 5.3% of non-PCSK9i patients. Use of statins only was reported in 40.5% of PCSK9i and 88.8% of non-PCSK9i patients. The most common physician-reported reasons for change to PCSK9i were lack of efficacy (70.2%) and muscle-related symptoms (myalgia 28.6%; myopathy 11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians surveyed appeared to prescribe PCSK9i medications appropriately. PCSK9i-treated patients had higher rates of cardiovascular comorbidities and physician-determined statin intolerance, had higher LDL-C levels, and received more lines of therapy than non-PCSK9i patients.

Assessing gastroenterologist and patient acceptance of biosimilars in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease across Germany.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined gastroenterologists' motivation for prescribing biosimilars, assessed their treatment preferences in relation to prescribing behaviour, and explored patient attitudes to biosimilars. METHODS: Data were taken from the Adelphi Real World Biosimilars Programme, a real-world, cross-sectional study undertaken in 2015-2016 with German gastroenterologists and patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease. Gastroenterologists provided data on their prescribing behaviour and attitudes towards biosimilars, and invited the next eight eligible consecutive consulting patients to complete a detailed questionnaire. For analysis, gastroenterologists were split into 'Investigative', 'Conservative', and 'Other' groups. RESULTS: Overall, 25 gastroenterologists and 136 patients participated. Biosimilars accounted for <15% of all biologic therapies and >80% of gastroenterologists would prescribe a bio-originator rather than biosimilar as 1st line therapy if unrestricted. Patients showed some reluctance to accept biosimilars, although of those receiving biosimilars, 79% were satisfied with the current treatment of their condition, and 69% were satisfied with the control of symptoms. Although at least 35% of patients in each analysis group reported no concerns when starting treatment with a bio-originator or biosimilar, 41% of previously biologic-naïve patients prescribed a biosimilar indicated potential side effects and potential long-term problems, and 24% not knowing enough about the drug, as concerns. CONCLUSION: Results demonstrate that there is reluctance from patients to accept biosimilars and the need to further educate patients who are unsure to allow them to be involved in decision making, highlighting the importance of patient and physician communication. There remains a need for further research into non-clinical switching and the long term impact of prescribing biosimilars.