Quantifying Stated Preferences for Meningococcal Vaccines Among Adolescents/Young Adults and Parents of Adolescents in the United States: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is a severe and life-threatening disease. In the United States (US), vaccine coverage with MenACWY and MenB meningococcal vaccines is suboptimal among adolescents/young adults aged 16-23 years. A combined meningococcal vaccine (MenABCWY) could increase convenience (e.g., fewer injections) and improve coverage. The objective was to quantify preferences for hypothetical meningococcal vaccine profiles among adolescents/young adults and parents. METHODS: An online discrete choice experiment was conducted among 16- to 23-year-olds, and parents of 16- to 18-year-olds. Attributes (3 × 4) and levels (1 × 2) were based on the literature and focus groups. Participants made ten pair-wise forced trade-off choices, systematically varied using a D-optimal design. Random parameter logit quantified the relative importance of vaccination attributes and estimated the trade-offs. Differences in preferences by subgroups were assessed. RESULTS: Totals of 300 adolescents and young adults (median age 20 years) and 300 parents (median age 46 years) completed the survey. Overall, 89.6% of 16- to 23-year-olds and 69.1% of parents preferred a simplified hypothetical meningococcal vaccination profile, e.g., with fewer injections (3 vs. 4) and fewer healthcare provider (HCP) visits (2-3 vs. 4). Having HCP advice and clear Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations impacted vaccination choice, with both groups reporting high trust in HCP information (83.3% among 16- to 23-year-olds; 98.7% among parents). Barriers to vaccination included lack of HCP advice or awareness of meningococcal vaccines, and income level and out-of-pocket costs for parents. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents/young adults and parents demonstrated a significant preference for a meningococcal vaccine that is more convenient (such as combined MenABCWY). Parents' vaccination preferences differed by income level and out-of-pocket costs, suggesting financial barriers to vaccination may exist which could result in IMD prevention inequalities. Findings from this study provide important information to support patient-facing informed policy discussions. A simplified vaccination schedule and strong recommendation could help improve vaccine uptake, schedule compliance, disease prevention, and reduce inequalities in IMD risk and prevention. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

The respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein vaccine attenuates the severity of respiratory syncytial virus-associated disease in breakthrough infections in adults ≥60 years of age.

Background: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a contagious pathogen causing acute respiratory infections (ARIs). Symptoms range from mild upper respiratory tract infections to potentially life-threatening lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD). In adults ≥60 years old, vaccine efficacy of a candidate vaccine for older adults (RSVPreF3 OA) was 71.7% against RSV-ARI and 82.6% against RSV-LRTD (AReSVi-006/NCT04886596). We present the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the same trial at the end of the first RSV season in the northern hemisphere (April 2022). Methods: In this phase 3 trial, adults aged ≥60 years were randomized (1:1) to receive one dose of RSVPreF3 OA vaccine or placebo. PROs were assessed using InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO), Short Form-12 (SF-12), and EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Peak FLU-PRO Chest/Respiratory scores during the first 7 days from ARI episode onset were compared using a Wilcoxon test. Least squares mean (LSMean) of SF-12 physical functioning (PF) and EQ-5D health utility scores were estimated using mixed effects models. Results: In the RSVPreF3 OA group (N = 12,466), 27 first RSV-ARI episodes were observed versus 95 in the Placebo group (N = 12,494). Median peak FLU-PRO Chest/Respiratory scores were lower in RSVPreF3 OA (1.07) versus Placebo group (1.86); p = 0.0258. LSMean group differences for the PF and EQ-5D health utility score were 7.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.86, 23.85; p = 0.4125) and 0.0786 (95% CI: -0.0340, 0.1913; p = 0.1695). Conclusions: The RSVPreF3 OA vaccine, in addition to preventing infection, attenuated the severity of RSV-associated symptoms in breakthrough infections, with trends of reduced impact on PF and health utility.

Patient-reported outcomes in vaccines research: relevance for decision-making.

The development and demand for effective vaccines have witnessed an exponential growth over the last century. In the meantime, the vaccine market involves more knowledgeable stakeholders, with a shift in emphasis by regulatory agencies on understanding the patient perception and experience. The Food and Drug Administration's publication of the patient-reported outcomes (PRO) guidance has elevated the discipline of PROs and has resulted in a transition from clinician reports of patient outcomes to PROs. This review reports various research methods, which utilize PROs, including qualitative and quantitative research, clinical trials, and patient preference studies. With the advancement of electronic PRO data capture, additional advantages of PROs are being observed and utilized (e.g. as a trigger for clinical endpoints). We discuss uses and advantages of including PROs into the clinical trial program to improve efficiencies, clinical relevance and overall validity of the program in the vaccine field. (See Plain Language Summary).

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYWhat is the context?Potential vaccine recipients want to understand the benefits and risks of a vaccine directly from the patient perspective. Well-defined Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide this perspective.The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) bases their approvals for interventions on how the patients feel, function and survive, with PROs providing important quantitative estimates of how patients feel and function.What is new?The FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have developed frameworks that ensure that patients' experiences, perspectives, needs, and priorities are captured and meaningfully incorporated into drug/vaccine development and evaluation.This has led to an increased interest in PRO evaluations by other stakeholders including regulatory authorities, ministry of health, health technology assessment bodies, national immunization technical advisory groups (NITAGs), payer groups, key opinion leaders, healthcare providers and potential vaccine recipients.The availability of new technologies (e.g. smartphones) has increased the role of virtual observational and clinical studies, using mobile clinical trial platforms assessing PROs with no in-person site visits required.What is the impact?PROs may be incorporated into the research and development program of a vaccine using virtual technology, resulting in a more representative sample that is easier to recruit and retain. This introduces efficiencies and improves the clinical relevance and validity of the clinical trial program.The outputs of studies involving PROs are important to communicate the value of vaccination from a patient perspective.PRO data may also be included as inputs in public health and cost-effectiveness models, to further inform decision-makers on the value of vaccination.

Impact of respiratory syncytial virus disease on quality of life in adults aged ≥50 years: A qualitative patient experience cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Information about the impact of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) on quality of life in older adults is limited. This study characterized the patient experience of RSV illness in USA older adults and assessed the content validity of the InFLUenza Patient Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) in this population. METHODS: This qualitative, non-interventional, cross-sectional study included hybrid concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews with 30 individuals (age ≥50 years) with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed RSV diagnosed within 6 months of screening. Targeted literature review was first conducted to inform the development of interview materials. Webcam or telephone interviews were conducted by qualitative researchers using a semistructured interview guide. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using Excel and NVivo software. RESULTS: All participants reported impacts on daily activities, social activities, and relationships during RSV disease. Physical functioning was impaired in 25 (83%) participants, and 18 (60%) reported not engaging in leisure activities/hobbies. All nine participants who were working reported major impacts on work. Most (n = 28; 93%) described emotional impacts. A majority (n = 19; 63%) reported symptoms lasting beyond the acute disease stage from a week to >1 month. Symptom concepts reported generally matched FLU-PRO items and domains. Cognitive debriefing indicated that FLU-PRO was easy to understand and captured participants' experiences of RSV illness. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that RSV disease in adults aged ≥50 years in the USA has substantial impacts on daily life and that the concepts included in FLU-PRO are appropriate and fit for purpose as a measure of RSV symptoms in this population.