Integrating qualitative interviews in drug development and the use of qualitative evidence in product labelling and health technology assessments: a review.

Objective: Including qualitative research in clinical trial design is an innovative approach to understanding patients' perspective and incorporate the patient's voice in all stages of drug development and evaluation. This review aims to explore current practices, lessons learned from the literature, as well as how qualitative interviews are considered by health authorities for marketing authorization and reimbursement. Methods: A targeted literature review of Medline and Embase databases was conducted in February 2022 to identify publications on qualitative methods embedded in clinical trial of pharmaceutical products. An additional search of guidelines and labeling claims of approved products regarding qualitative research was performed in various sources of grey literature. Results: From the 24 publications and nine documents reviewed, we identified the research questions addressed with qualitative methods during clinical trials (e.g., change in quality of life, symptoms assessment, treatment benefit), preferred data collection methods (e.g., interviews), and data collection points (e.g., baseline and exit interviews). Moreover, the data from labels and HTAs demonstrate that qualitative data can play an important role in approval processes. Conclusion: The use of in-trial interviews is still emerging and is not yet common practice. Although the industry, scientific community, regulatory agencies and HTAs are showing an increasing interest in the use of evidence generated via in-trial interviews, guidance from regulators and HTAs would be helpful. Developing new methods and technologies to address the common challenges for such interviews is key to progress.

Analysis of patient-reported experiences up to 2 years after receiving idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, bb2121) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: Longitudinal findings from the phase 2 KarMMa trial.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the long-term experience of patients receiving ide-cel chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell therapy for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in the pivotal phase 2 KarMMa trial. METHODS: This qualitative study analyzed semi-structured patient interviews 6-24 months after ide-cel infusion. Thematic analysis with quantitative and longitudinal analyses explored patient perceptions of ide-cel treatment experience, advantages and disadvantages, and long-term health-related quality of life impact. Patient journeys were developed from narrative analysis of perceived treatment benefits with known remission length. RESULTS: Interviews with 45 patients 6-24 months postinfusion were analyzed; all reported ≥ 1 ide-cel treatment advantage, most often related to efficacy (n = 42/45, 93%), few or no side effects (n = 35/45, 78%), and avoidance of other treatments (n = 34/45, 76%). Patients generally reported 6-month improvements in physical health, functioning, emotional well-being, social life, and outlook on the future; these improvements mostly remained "stable" through 18 and 24 months. The most common patient journeys comprised physical, functioning, or emotional benefit with remission < 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal analysis of patient experiences showed sustained benefits and preference for ide-cel up to 24 months after treatment. Trial Registration Number and Date: NCT03361748. December 5, 2017.

Patient experience before and after treatment with idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, bb2121): qualitative analysis of patient interviews in the KarMMa trial.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the experience of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) receiving idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), a B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, in the pivotal, phase 2 KarMMa trial. METHODS: Optional semi-structured interviews before leukapheresis (pre-treatment) captured expectations and after ide-cel infusion (1, 2, and 3 months post-treatment), assessed treatment experience, ide-cel advantages/disadvantages, and health and well-being. In a mixed-method analysis, treatment experiences were categorized by clinical response status, health and well-being, and self-reported recovery after infusion. RESULTS: Pre-treatment interviews indicated unmet treatment needs. In post-treatment interviews, most patients reported the positives of ide-cel outweighed negatives (69%, n = 27/39). Most common advantages of ide-cel were efficacy (18-64%), favorable side-effect profile (46-68%), and recovery time (13-18%); most common disadvantages were related to side effects (13-20%). When analyzed by clinical response, patients most often had stringent complete or very good partial response and improved health and well-being with mild or severe recovery from the infusion (27/58, 47%). Most patients with minimal clinical response reported mild infusion recovery (5/6, 83%). CONCLUSIONS: Patient interviews before ide-cel treatment showed unmet needs in triple-class exposed RRMM. Post-treatment experiences generally favored ide-cel versus previously received treatments.

Drivers of and Barriers to Adherence to Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Diabetic Macular Edema Treatment Management Plans: A Multi-National Qualitative Study.

Purpose: Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) patients treated with intravitreally injected anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monotherapies achieve lower vision improvements compared with patients in clinical trials. This qualitative research study aimed to better understand the real-world anti-VEGF treatment experience from nAMD and DME patients', caregivers', and retina specialists' perspectives. Methods: One-time, semi-structured, individual interviews were conducted with adult patients with nAMD or DME treated with anti-VEGF injections for ≥12 months, their caregivers, and experienced retina specialists. Interview transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using a thematic analysis approach. Results: A total of 49 nAMD and 46 DME patients, 47 nAMD and 33 DME caregivers, and 62 retina specialists were interviewed in the USA, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Most (79%) patients and caregivers reported disruptions to their routine on the day before, the day of, or the day after anti-VEGF injection. Seven nAMD patients (14%) and 14 DME patients (30%) reported having missed an injection visit. The most frequently reported driver for adherence for patients was the doctor-patient relationship (n=66, 70%), whereas for caregivers, it was the ease of booking an appointment (n=25, 32%). Retina specialists reported patient education on the treatment (n=28, 45%) as the most important driver. Treatment barriers could be grouped into four categories: tolerability, clinical factors, logistical parameters and human factors. The most frequently reported barrier to adherence for patients and caregivers was related to side effects (pain/discomfort/irritation: n=63, 67% of patients; n=52, 66% of caregivers), whereas for retina specialists it was logistical parameters (travel logistics: n=44, 71%). Conclusion: This study highlights the importance of the doctor-patient relationship and patient education as key drivers, and treatment tolerability and logistics as key barriers to treatment adherence. Improved doctor-patient relationship/communication and patient education together with new therapies offering convenience, long-acting effectiveness, and better tolerability may improve treatment adherence.

Understanding disease symptoms and impacts and producing qualitatively-derived severity stages for MPS IIIA: a mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: MPS IIIA is a rare, degenerative pediatric genetic disease characterized by symptoms impacting cognition, mobility and behavior; the mean age of death is around 15 years of age. Currently, there are no approved therapies for MPS IIIA. METHODS: A two-year, multi-center, prospective, descriptive cohort study was conducted to document the natural history course of MPS IIIA. In the context of this study, semi-structured interviews were performed with parents of children at study entry and one year later. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis methods to identity concepts of interest to children and parents, identify what factors impacted parents' burden the most, and develop qualitatively-derived disease severity stages. Children were sorted into these stages according to the symptoms their parents described at the entry interview. This sorting was compared quantitatively to the sorting of children at baseline according to the child's calendar age and their BSID development quotient (DQ). RESULTS: 22 parents in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK were interviewed. Children ranged in age from 28 to 105 months (mean 61.4 months). The conceptual models for children's symptoms and impacts and parents' impacts provided a detailed and comprehensive picture of what it is like for children of various ages and their parents to live with MPS IIIA. Four factors were identified as mediating the burden perceived by parents: state support, family support, time since diagnosis, and parent coping strategy. Four disease stages were developed, accounting for both the presence and the severity of MPS IIIA symptoms. The comparison of children's sorting into these stages with the BSID DQ and the child's calendar age showed strong statistical associations. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this qualitative research embedded in a natural history study add to the current understanding of MPS IIIA as a complex disease that impacts every aspect of the lives of children and their families. This study demonstrates the unique potential of mixed methods research in rare diseases to address some of the current limitations of more traditional quantitative approaches by providing an individualized, detailed understanding of the patient experience.

Letting the patients speak: an in-depth, qualitative research-based investigation of factors relevant to health-related quality of life in real-world patients with hereditary angioedema using subcutaneous C1 inhibitor replacement therapy.

BACKGROUND: While many studies of effective hereditary angioedema (HAE) therapy have demonstrated improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using validated instruments, specific reasons behind the improved scores have never been investigated using qualitative methods. A non-interventional, qualitative research study was designed to investigate the reasons for improvements in HRQoL while using effective prophylaxis, in this case subcutaneous C1INH (C1INH[SC]) replacement therapy. METHODS: Adult patients with HAE-C1INH type 1 or 2 who had been using C1INH(SC) for ≥ 3 consecutive months were recruited through four HAE specialty practices in the US to participate in a 60-min phone interview performed by a trained qualitative research specialist (ICON plc) using a semi-structured interview guide with open-ended questions developed with the Angioedema Quality of Life (AE-QoL) items in mind. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis methods to identify concepts (specific symptoms/impacts) and themes (higher-level categories grouping related concepts). A cross-mapping exercise was performed between interview-identified concepts and items included in the AE-QoL. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were interviewed and included in the analysis (age range, 28-82 years [mean 47.5 years]; 64% female; 93% white). In 10 interviews, patients mentioned having no or nearly no HAE attacks, no longer feeling limited by HAE, less HAE-related anxiety/worry and depression, an improved ability to travel, fewer emergency room/hospital visits, and ease of administration of C1INH(SC), including not requiring assistance from others. Other commonly expressed concepts included: increased feelings of confidence, independence, optimism, and normalcy; less absence from work/school; better productivity; improved sleep and energy; healthier family relationships; and improved cognition. While all AE-QoL items emerged from patient interviews, a number of identified concepts were not addressed by the AE-QoL, including sensitivity to various potential attack-triggers (e.g., stress/anxiety, sports), attack frequency, not having to cancel social plans, improvements in ability to perform day-to-day tasks, and a lower burden from medical visits. CONCLUSIONS: From these interviews, a large number of common themes and concepts emerged: a greater sense of freedom and normalcy, increased productivity, and improved interpersonal relationships while using convenient and effective prophylaxis. These findings provide insights into real-world experiences and the many facets of HRQoL that are important to patients with HAE-C1INH.

To what degree are orphan drugs patient-centered? A review of the current state of clinical research in rare diseases.

BACKGROUND: Over the past 30 years, the healthcare industry has increasingly turned its attention to rare diseases. Regulators have emphasized the need for clinical research in this area to be patient-centered. However, there is a lack of evidence concerning whether this need is actually met. In this paper, we aim to address this gap. METHODS: First, we describe the state of patient-centricity in clinical research in rare diseases based on a targeted literature review. Second, we discuss recommendations from scientific bodies on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in rare diseases. Third, we analyze data collected from EMA's and FDA's websites concerning rare disease labeling claims and data from Clinicaltrials.gov concerning the use of PRO measures in rare disease pivotal trials. Fourth, we perform an exhaustive literature review on the use of PRO measures in the pharmaceutical industry, including all phases of clinical research, observational/registry studies, and instrument development and validation. RESULTS: There is limited information on rare disease patient engagement in study design, recruitment, and retention. None of the initiatives describing methods for developing PRO measures in rare diseases provide the clear guidance clinical researchers need. Only 17.4% of orphan drug labels contain a PRO measure. Less than half of pivotal trials in orphan drugs have a PRO measure as a primary or a secondary endpoint. Although the number of publications about PRO measures in rare diseases has risen in the past fifteen years, our results indicate that substantial improvements are needed to achieve patient-centricity. CONCLUSIONS: The nature and extent of patient engagement in rare disease research is under-documented. The current paradigm for developing and using PRO measures in clinical research is failing to meet the needs of rare disease patients. Not only are PROs rarely used as high-level endpoints in clinical trials or taken into account in labeling claims, they are also under-researched overall - there are too few measures for the multitude of rare diseases. We call for a clear guidance on patient engagement and suggest a realistic approach to the adaptation of PRO strategy to the specific context of clinical research in rare diseases.

When insulin degludec enhances quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: Anecdotal reports suggest that insulin degludec (IDeg) may offer unique health-related quality of life (HRQoL) benefits. As the nature of these benefits remain unclear, this study utilized qualitative research methods to investigate and elucidate the experience of "feeling better" after initiating IDeg. METHODS: Twenty adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who reported "feeling better" on IDeg for > 3 months participated in 90-min interviews. One focus group and nine telephone interviews were conducted at two sites in the United States (US) and one focus group was conducted in Switzerland. Patients were ≥ 18 years of age, did not take mealtime insulin, and had switched to IDeg from another basal insulin. Discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and translated (Swiss German). Utilizing grounded theory, transcripts were analyzed by sorting quotes into concepts using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants' mean age was 66 years and the average duration of T2D was 17.6 years. Mean duration of IDeg use was 1.45 years. Four major factors were identified as key contributors to patients' sense of "feeling better": 1) reduced sense of diabetes as burdensome and requiring excessive attention; 2) enhanced feelings of adaptability and freedom; 3) heightened sense of security, especially regarding concerns about hypoglycemia; and 4) greater sense of physical well-being (greater energy/less fatigue). Content saturation was achieved. Generally, patients from the US sites were more focused on medical results than Swiss patients, who were more likely to identify IDeg's effect on overall HRQoL. A limitation of the study was that the population was primarily white, > 60 and otherwise healthy (no comorbid physical or mental condition). CONCLUSIONS: A group of patients with T2D, who had switched to IDeg from another basal insulin, reported HRQoL benefits which were attributed to both diabetes-specific improvements (feeling less burdened by day-to-day diabetes demands) and non-specific gains (greater energy). The conclusions may have limited transferability due to the characteristics of the sample population and further research is needed.