Patient Preferences for Endometriosis Pain Treatments in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify patient preferences for endometriosis-associated pain treatments and risk tolerance in exchange for pain reduction and to explore whether preferences vary on the basis of patient characteristics. METHODS: US women with a self-reported physician diagnosis of endometriosis and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea and nonmenstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) completed an online discrete choice experiment survey. Each choice question had a pair of hypothetical treatments characterized by attributes with varying levels: improvements in severe dysmenorrhea, severe NMPP, and severe dyspareunia; mode of administration; and treatment-related risks of pregnancy-related problems, bone fracture later in life, and moderate to severe hot flashes. A random-parameters logit model was used to quantify preferences and the attributes' conditional relative importance. RESULTS: A total of 250 women (mean age 34 years) completed the survey. The conditional relative importance of attributes was 3.66 for risk of moderate to severe hot flashes among respondents with and 3.58 among respondents without experience with moderate to severe hot flashes; 1.70, 1.49, and 1.48 for improvements in dyspareunia, NMPP, and dysmenorrhea, respectively; 0.60 for risk of pregnancy-related problems; 0.53 for mode of administration; and 0.49 for bone fracture risk. Preference weights for bone fracture risk levels were not statistically significantly different. In exchange for a greater improvement in dysmenorrhea from severe to mild (vs moderate), respondents without a history of hot flashes accepted a greater increase in the risk of moderate to severe hot flashes (38%) than did respondents with this history (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents placed the greatest weight on risk of hot flashes, followed by improvements in dyspareunia, NMPP, dysmenorrhea. Bone fracture risk did not drive preferences.

Patient preferences for elagolix and leuprolide for treating endometriosis-related pain in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated elagolix and leuprolide from the patient's perspective for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain. AREA COVERED: Preference weights from a published discrete choice experiment were used to evaluate preferences for treatment profiles simulating elagolix (150 mg/day and 200 mg/twice-daily dosages) and leuprolide for the treatment of moderate to severe endometriosis-related pain. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying the range of risk for pregnancy-related problems, moderate to severe hot flashes, and bone fracture across scenarios. EXPERT OPINION: The 200 mg twice daily dosage of elagolix is more likely to be preferred over leuprolide by patients with moderate to severe endometriosis-related pain in all scenarios explored in the evaluation and sensitivity analyses. The probability that an average respondent would select a treatment was sensitive to increases in risk of moderate to severe hot flashes for leuprolide and possible variations in the risk of pregnancy-related problems for both treatments but was not influenced by an increased risk of bone fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferences for treatment of endometriosis-related pain should be evaluated using the benefits and risks of each pharmacological option. Respondents were more likely to prefer the treatment profile similar to 200 mg twice daily elagolix over that of leuprolide in all scenarios.