The value of knowing: preferences for genetic testing to diagnose rare muscle diseases.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing can offer early diagnosis and subsequent treatment of rare neuromuscular diseases. Options for these tests could be improved by understanding the preferences of patients for the features of different genetic tests, especially features that increase information available to patients. METHODS: We developed an online discrete-choice experiment using key attributes of currently available tests for Pompe disease with six test attributes: number of rare muscle diseases tested for with corresponding probability of diagnosis, treatment availability, time from testing to results, inclusion of secondary findings, necessity of a muscle biopsy, and average time until final diagnosis if the first test is negative. Respondents were presented a choice between two tests with different costs, with respondents randomly assigned to one of two costs. Data were analyzed using random-parameters logit. RESULTS: A total of 600 online respondents, aged 18 to 50 years, were recruited from the U.S. general population and included in the final analysis. Tests that targeted more diseases, required less time from testing to results, included information about unrelated health risks, and were linked to shorter time to the final diagnosis were preferred and associated with diseases with available treatment. Men placed relatively more importance than women on tests for diseases with available treatments. Most of the respondents would be more willing to get a genetic test that might return unrelated health information, with women exhibiting a statistically significant preference. While respondents were sensitive to cost, 30% of the sample assigned to the highest cost was willing to pay $500 for a test that could offer a diagnosis almost 2 years earlier. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the value people place on the information genetic tests can provide about their health, including faster diagnosis of rare, unexplained muscle weakness, but also the value of tests for multiple diseases, diseases without treatments, and incidental findings. An earlier time to diagnosis can provide faster access to treatment and an end to the diagnostic journey, which patients highly prefer.

Patient and caregiver preferences for haemophilia treatments: A discrete-choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: An evolving haemophilia treatment landscape provides new possibilities for previously unattainable lifestyles. AIM: We sought to understand how people with haemophilia (PwH) and their caregivers value the potential benefits of novel prophylactic treatments. We conducted a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) to quantify preferences for features of haemophilia treatments among adults and caregivers of children with haemophilia. A best-worst scaling (BWS) exercise measured the perceived burden of treatment administration features. METHODS: A cross-sectional, web-based survey was administered to male adults (≥18 years) and caregivers of male children (≤17 years) living with haemophilia in the United States. Respondents evaluated eight pairs of hypothetical haemophilia treatment profiles defined by six attributes in the DCE and 15 features in the BWS. RESULTS: In the DCE, both adults with haemophilia (n = 151) and caregivers (n = 151) prioritised avoiding the risk of developing inhibitor/ anti-drug antibodies and treatments that allowed for a more active life. They placed a lower priority on reducing the number of spontaneous bleeding episodes, route and frequency of administration, and avoiding the risk of hospitalisation due to adverse events. The BWS documented the burdensomeness of IV infusions and medications that require mixing and refrigeration. CONCLUSION: PwH and caregivers prefer treatments that enable a more active lifestyle with a lower risk of inhibitor development. Both groups valued the ability to lead an active life over reducing spontaneous bleeding, with caregivers placing the most weight on this attribute. As new treatments expand possibilities, healthcare professionals and PwH should continue to share decision-making, incorporating clinical judgment and individual preferences.

Eliciting Exploratory Patient Preference Data: A Case Study in a Rare Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative and quantitative methods provide different and complementary insights into patients' preferences for treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use a novel, mixed-methods approach employing qualitative and quantitative approaches to generate preliminary insights into patient preferences for the treatment of a rare disease-generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG). METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study to collect exploratory qualitative and quantitative patient preference information and generate informative results within a condensed timeline (about 4 months). Recruitment was facilitated by an international health research firm. Study participants first reviewed a brief document describing six treatment attributes (to facilitate more efficient review of the material during the focus groups) and were then provided a link to complete an online quantitative survey with a single risk threshold task. They then participated in online focus groups, during which they discussed qualitative questions about their experience with gMG treatment and completed up to three quantitative threshold tasks, the first of which repeated the threshold task from the online survey. RESULTS: The study elicited both quantitative data on 18 participants' risk tolerance and qualitative data on their treatment experience, additional treatment attributes of importance, the reasoning behind their preferences, and the trade-offs they were willing to make. Most participants (n = 15) chose the same hypothetical treatment in the first threshold task in the online survey and the focus groups. Focus group discussions provided insights into participants' choices in the threshold tasks, confirmed that all the attributes were relevant, and helped clarify what was important about the attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Patient preference information can be collected using a variety of approaches, both qualitative and quantitative, tailored to fit the research needs of a study. The novel mixed-methods approach employed in this study efficiently captured patient preference data that were informative for exploratory research, internal decision making, and future research.

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Interception Therapy.

Importance: Interception therapy requires individuals to undergo treatment to prevent a future medical event, but little is known about preferences of individuals at high risk for lung cancer and whether they would be interested in this type of treatment. Objective: To explore preferences of individuals at high risk for lung cancer for potential interception therapies to reduce this risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used a discrete-choice experiment and included hypothetical lung cancer interception treatments with 4 attributes: reduction in lung cancer risk over 3 years, injection site reaction severity, nonfatal serious infection, and death from serious infection. Respondents were assigned to a baseline lung cancer risk of 6%, 10%, or 16% over 3 years. The discrete-choice experiment was administered online (July 13 to September 6, 2022) to US respondents eligible for lung cancer screening according to US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Participants included adults aged 50 to 80 years with at least a 20 pack-year smoking history. Statistical analysis was performed from September to December 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Attribute-level preference weights were estimated, and conditional relative attribute importance, maximum acceptable risks, and minimum acceptable benefits were calculated. Characteristics of respondents who always selected no treatment were also explored. Results: Of the 803 survey respondents, 495 (61.6%) were female, 138 (17.2%) were African American or Black, 55 (6.8%) were Alaska Native, American Indian, or Native American, 44 (5.5%) were Asian or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 104 (13.0%) were Hispanic, Latin American, or Latinx, and 462 (57.5%) were White, Middle Eastern or North African, or a race or ethnicity not listed; and mean (SD) age was 63.0 (7.5) years. Most respondents were willing to accept interception therapy and viewed reduction in lung cancer risk as the most important attribute. Respondents would accept a greater than or equal to a 12.0 percentage point increase in risk of nonfatal serious infection if lung cancer risk was reduced by at least 20.0 percentage points; and a greater than or equal to 1.2 percentage point increase in risk of fatal serious infection if lung cancer risk was reduced by at least 30.0 percentage points. Respondents would require at least a 15.4 (95% CI, 10.6-20.2) percentage point decrease in lung cancer risk to accept a 12.0 percentage point increase in risk of nonfatal serious infection; and at least a 23.1 (95% CI, 16.4-29.8) percentage point decrease in lung cancer risk to accept a 1.2 percentage point increase in risk of death from serious infection. Respondents who were unwilling to accept interception therapy in any question (129 [16.1%]) were more likely to be older and to currently smoke with no prior cessation attempt, and less likely to have been vaccinated against COVID-19 or examined for skin cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of individuals at high risk of lung cancer, most respondents were willing to consider interception therapy. These results suggest the importance of benefit-risk assessments for future lung cancer interception treatments.

Patients' Preferences for Adjunctive Parkinson's Disease Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

Background: Several adjunctive medications are available to reduce OFF time between levodopa/carbidopa (LD/CD) doses for people with Parkinson's disease (PD). Objective: To explore how individuals with PD balance benefits and burdens when considering adjunctive medications. Methods: US adults (30-83 years) with self-reported PD, currently treated with LD/CD, who experienced OFF episodes were recruited through the Fox Insight study to complete a discrete-choice experiment survey. Respondents selected among experimentally designed profiles for hypothetical adjunctive PD treatments that varied in efficacy (additional ON time), potential adverse effects (troublesome dyskinesia, risk of diarrhea, risk of change in bodily fluid color), and dosing frequency or the option "No additional medicine". Data were analyzed with random-parameters logit models. Results: Respondents (N=480) would require ≥60 additional minutes of daily ON time to accept either a 40% risk of change in bodily fluid color or 10 additional minutes with troublesome dyskinesia daily. Respondents would require 40 additional minutes of daily ON time to accept a 10% risk of diarrhea and 22 additional minutes of daily ON time to switch from 1 additional pill each day to 1 pill with each LD/CD dose. On average, respondents preferred adjunctive PD medication over no additional medication. Results predicted that 59.1% of respondents would select a hypothetical treatment profile similar to opicapone, followed by no additional medication (27.5%) and a hypothetical treatment profile similar to entacapone (13.4%). Limitations: The data collected were based on responses to hypothetical choice profiles in the survey questions. The attributes and levels selected for this study were intended to reflect the characteristics of opicapone and entacapone; attributes associated with other adjunctive therapies were not evaluated. Conclusion: Patients with PD expressed interest in adjunctive treatment to increase ON time and would accept reduced ON time to avoid adverse effects.

Patient preferences for atopic dermatitis treatments: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) experience skin lesions and intense itch that substantially affect quality of life. Patients have choices among systemic AD treatments that offer varied benefit-risk profiles. OBJECTIVE: Measure patients' willingness to trade off the risks and benefits of systemic treatments among individuals with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: Patients participated in a discrete choice experiment online survey with a series of choices between hypothetical AD treatments defined by six attributes reflecting benefits and risks of treatments (itch reduction, time until noticeable itch reduction, chance of clear or almost clear skin, risk of serious infection, risk of developing acne, and need for prescription topical steroids). Data were analyzed with a random parameters logit model to quantify preferences and the relative importance of attributes for treatment alternatives. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 200) placed the highest relative importance on itch reduction, speed of itch reduction, and skin clearance, and were generally willing to accept clinically relevant levels of risk of serious infection and acne in exchange for treatment benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate-to-severe AD were willing to trade clinically relevant treatment risks for greater or more rapid itch reduction and skin clearance offered by systemic therapies.

Adaptation of the WOMAC for Use in a Patient Preference Study.

OBJECTIVES: To adapt a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure, the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), into efficacy attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey designed to quantify the relative importance of endpoints commonly used in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) trials. METHODS: The adaptation comprised four steps: (1) selecting domains of interest; (2) determining presentation and framing of selected attributes; (3) determining attribute levels; and (4) developing choice tasks. This process involved input from multiple stakeholders, including regulators, health preference researchers, and patients. Pretesting was conducted to evaluate if patients comprehended the adapted survey attributes and could make trade-offs among them. RESULTS: The WOMAC pain and function domains were selected for adaption to two efficacy attributes. Two versions of the discrete choice experiment (DCE) instrument were created to compare efficacy using (1) total domain scores and (2) item scores for "walking on a flat surface." Both attributes were presented as improvement from baseline scores by levels of 0%, 30%, 50%, and 100%. Twenty-six participants were interviewed in a pretest of the instrument (average age 60 years; 58% female; 62% had KOA for ≥ 5 years). The participants found both versions of attributes meaningful and relevant for treatment decision-making. They demonstrated willingness and ability to tradeoff improvements in pain and function separately, though many perceived them as inter-related. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the growing literature regarding adapting PRO measures for patient preference studies. Such adaptation is important for designing a preference study that can incorporate a clinical trial's outcomes with PRO endpoints.

Impact of Potential Symptoms and Risks Associated with Acid Sphingomyelinase Deficiency on Patients and Caregivers: A Best-Worst Scaling Study.

Purpose: Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD) is a rare, progressive, and potentially fatal disease affecting major organs; its symptoms present heterogeneously. Data on the most bothersome symptoms for patients with ASMD types B or A/B and their caregivers or parents are limited. We conducted a survey to quantify the relative impact of potential ASMD symptoms and risks for patients and parents/caregivers. Patients and Methods: Twenty respondents, recruited via National Niemann-Pick Disease Foundation (United States) and Niemann-Pick United Kingdom, took a preference survey: 11 patients who had a self-reported diagnosis of ASMD types B or A/B and 9 parents who had a child with ASMD types B or A/B. Using object-case best-worst scaling, we explored the most and least bothersome among a set of 15 ASMD symptoms/risks selected based on clinical input and qualitative research with patients and caregivers. In 15 experimentally designed questions containing five items each, respondents ranked the symptoms/risks, irrespective of their experiences with them. Data were analyzed using a conditional multinomial logit model. Results: Patients reported constant abdominal pain, severe pain in bones and joints, and severe fatigue to be the most bothersome potential symptoms or risks, followed by a chance of bleeding in the spleen. The next most bothersome potential symptom was constant shortness of breath. Easy bruising and noticeable abdominal enlargement were among the least bothersome symptoms. The most bothersome symptom for parents was bleeding in the spleen. Conclusion: Patients and parents had similar perceptions of the most bothersome potential symptoms/risks. Despite the small sample size typical of rare disease studies, understanding patient preferences is important for such diseases and can inform shared decision-making.

Patient Preferences for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatments: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

Treatments for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have varying benefit-risk profiles. We elicited 200 US patients' preferences for attributes associated with various first-line systemic treatments for unresectable HCC in a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey. Respondents answered nine DCE questions, each offering a choice between two hypothetical treatment profiles defined by six attributes with varying levels: overall survival (OS), months of maintained daily function, severity of palmar-plantar syndrome, severity of hypertension, risk of digestive-tract bleeding, and mode and frequency of administration. A random-parameters logit model was used to analyze the preference data. Patients regarded an additional 10 months of maintaining daily function without decline to be as important or more important than 10 additional months of OS, on average. Respondents valued avoiding moderate-to-severe palmar-plantar syndrome and hypertension more than extended OS. A respondent would require >10 additional months of OS (the greatest increase presented in the study) on average to offset the increased burden of adverse events. Patients with unresectable HCC prioritize avoiding adverse events that would severely impact their quality of life over mode and frequency of administration or digestive-tract bleeding risk. For some patients with unresectable HCC, maintaining daily functioning is as important or more important than the survival benefit of a treatment.

Patient preferences for features of HER2-targeted treatment of advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a discrete-choice experiment study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to quantify patients' benefit-risk preferences for attributes associated with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted breast cancer treatments and estimate minimum acceptable benefits (MABs), denominated in additional months of progression-free survival (PFS), for given treatment-related adverse events (AEs). METHODS: We conducted an online discrete-choice experiment (DCE) among patients with self-reported advanced/metastatic breast cancer in the United States, United Kingdom, and Japan (N = 302). In a series of nine DCE questions, respondents chose between two hypothetical treatment profiles created by an experimental design. Profiles were defined by six attributes with varying levels: PFS, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, liver function problems, risk of heart failure, and risk of serious lung damage and infections. Data were analyzed using an error component random-parameters logit model. RESULTS: Among the attributes, patients placed the most importance on a change in PFS from 5 to 26 months; change from no diarrhea to severe diarrhea was the least important. Avoiding a 15% risk of heart failure had the largest MAB (5.8 additional months of PFS), followed by avoiding a 15% risk of serious lung damage and infections (4.6 months), possible severe liver function problems (4.2 months), severe nausea/vomiting (3.7 months), and severe diarrhea (2.3 months) compared with having none of the AEs. The relative importance of 21 additional months of PFS (increasing from 5 to 26 months) increased for women with HER2-negative disease and those with children. CONCLUSIONS: Patients valued PFS gain higher than the potential risk of AEs when deciding between hypothetical breast cancer treatments.

Development of a Patient Preference Survey for Wearable Kidney Replacement Therapy Devices.

Background: Recent innovations have the potential to disrupt the current paradigm for kidney failure treatment. The US Food and Drug Administration is committed to incorporating valid scientific evidence about how patients weigh the benefits and risks of new devices into their decision making, but to date, premarket submission of patient preference information (PPI) has been limited for kidney devices. With input from stakeholders, we developed a survey intended to yield valid PPI, capturing how patients trade off the potential benefits and risks of wearable dialysis devices and in-center hemodialysis. Methods: We conducted concept elicitation interviews with individuals receiving dialysis to inform instrument content. After instrument drafting, we conducted two rounds of pretest interviews to evaluate survey face validity, comprehensibility, and perceived relevance. We pilot tested the survey with in-center hemodialysis patients to assess comprehensibility and usability further. Throughout, we used participant input to guide survey refinements. Results: Thirty-six individuals receiving in-center or home dialysis participated in concept elicitation (N=20) and pretest (N=16) interviews. Participants identified reduced fatigue, lower treatment burden, and enhanced freedom as important benefits of a wearable device, and many expressed concerns about risks related to device disconnection-specifically bleeding and infection. We drafted a survey that included descriptions of the risks of serious bleeding and serious infection and an assessment of respondent willingness to wait for a safer device. Input from pretest interviewees led to various instrument modifications, including treatment descriptions, item wording, and risk-level explanations. Pilot testing of the updated survey among 24 in-center hemodialysis patients demonstrated acceptable survey comprehensibility and usability, although 50% of patients required some assistance. Conclusions: The final survey is a 54-item web-based instrument that will yield estimates of the maximal acceptable risk for the described wearable device and willingness to wait for wearable devices with lower risk.

The Patient Voice: Exploring Treatment Preferences in Participants with Mild Cognitive Concerns to Inform Regulatory Decision Making.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the feasibility of developing a discrete-choice experiment survey to elicit preferences for a treatment to delay cognitive decline among people with a clinical syndrome consistent with early Alzheimer's disease, including the development of self-reported screening criteria to recruit the sample. METHODS: Using input from qualitative interviews, we developed a discrete-choice experiment survey containing a multifaceted beneficial treatment attribute related to slowing cognitive decline for respondents with self-reported cognitive concerns. In two rounds of in-person pretest interviews, we tested and revised the survey text and discrete-choice experiment questions, including examples, language, and levels associated with the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, along with a set of de novo self-reported questions for identifying respondents who had neither too mild nor too advanced cognitive decline. Self-reported memory and thinking problems were compared with symptoms from studies of patients with early Alzheimer's disease (e.g., mild cognitive impairment, mild Alzheimer's disease) to determine whether those studies' recruited patients were similar to our anticipated target population. Round 1 pretest interviews resulted in significant simplifications in the survey instrument, revisions to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and revisions to the screening process. In round 2 of the pretest interviews, the ability of participants to provide consistent responses to the self-reported screening questions was further assessed. In addition, to evaluate participants' ability to understand and independently complete the discrete-choice experiment survey, two interviewers independently evaluated each participant's ability to make trade-offs in the discrete-choice experiment questions and to understand the content of the survey. RESULTS: Round 1 (15 pretest interviews) identified challenges with the survey instrument related to the complexity of the choice questions. The screening process did not screen out seven respondents with more advanced cognitive decline, as determined qualitatively by the interviewers and by these participants' inability to complete the survey. The survey instrument and screening criteria were revised, and an initial online screener was added to the screening process before round 2 pretests. In round 2 pretests, 12 participants reported cognitive problems similar to the target population for the survey but were judged able to understand and independently complete the discrete-choice experiment survey. CONCLUSIONS: We developed self-reported screening criteria that identified a sample of individuals with memory and thinking concerns who were similar to individuals with clinical symptoms of early Alzheimer's disease and who were able to independently complete a simplified discrete-choice experiment survey. Quantitative patient preference studies provide important information on patients' willingness to trade off treatment benefits/risks. Adapting the technique for patients with cognitive decline requires careful testing and adjustments to survey instruments. This work suggests it is the severity of cognitive impairment, rather than its presence, that determines the ability to complete a simplified discrete-choice experiment survey.

Preferences and Priorities for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma Treatments Among Patients and Caregivers in the United States.

Introduction/Background: This study aimed to describe patient and caregiver preferences for treatments of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Materials and Methods: A survey including discrete-choice experiment (DCE) and best-worst scaling (BWS) exercises was conducted among US patients with relapsed or refractory MM and their caregivers. The DCE included six attributes with varying levels including progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and mode and frequency of administration. In addition, the impact of treatment cost was assessed using a fixed-choice question. The BWS exercise included 18 items (modes and frequency of administration, additional treatment convenience, and toxicity items). The survey was administered online to patients recruited from the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation CoMMpass study (NCT01454297). Results: The final samples consisted of 94 patients and 32 caregivers. Avoiding severe nerve damage was most important to patients, followed by longer PFS. Caregivers considered PFS to be the most important attribute. We estimate that a third or more of patients were cost-sensitive, meaning their treatment preference was altered based on cost implications. Caregivers were not cost-sensitive. The three most bothersome treatment features in the BWS exercise were risk of kidney failure, lowering white blood cell counts, and weakening the immune system. Conclusion: Patients with relapsed or refractory MM and their caregivers consider many factors including efficacy, toxicity, mode/frequency of administration, and cost in their decisions regarding treatment options. The study provides a basis for future Research on patient and caregiver treatment preferences, which could be incorporated into shared decision-making with physicians.

Experiences and Treatment Preferences in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Cross-Sectional Study in the ArthritisPower Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Despite recent advances in treatment for psoriatic arthritis (PsA), many patients experience inadequate response or intolerance to therapy, indicating that unmet treatment-related needs remain. To further characterize these unmet needs, we evaluated patients' experiences regarding the burden of PsA symptoms and disease impacts, and patients' preferences for treatment. METHODS: Patients from ArthritisPower, a rheumatology research registry, completed a web-based survey. Object case best-worst scaling (BWS) was used to evaluate the relative burden of 11 PsA-related symptoms and the relative importance of improvement in nine PsA-related disease impacts. BWS data were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model. Patient demographics, preferences for mode and frequency of therapy, and preferences for methotrexate were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Among the 332 participants, most were White (94%), female (80%), with mean age of 54 years (SD 11.4). In the BWS, joint pain was the most bothersome symptom, followed by other musculoskeletal pain and fatigue. The BWS for disease impacts found that improvements in the ability to perform physical activities were most important, followed by improvements in the ability to function independently, sleep quality, and the ability to perform daily activities. The most burdensome symptoms and desired disease impact improvements were similar in patients regardless of their experience with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The most preferred mode and frequency of treatment administration was oral, once-daily medication (preferred by 38% of respondents), and 74% prioritized therapies that significantly improved joint-related symptoms versus psoriasis-related symptoms. The majority of respondents (65%) preferred PsA treatment regimens that did not include methotrexate. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PsA from a rheumatology registry found musculoskeletal pain symptoms to be the most bothersome and prioritized improvements to functional impacts of their disease. These findings can better inform development of new therapies and guide shared patient-provider treatment decision-making.

Exploring Decisional Conflict With Measures of Numeracy and Optimism in a Stated Preference Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Low optimism and low numeracy are associated with difficulty or lack of participation in making treatment-related health care decisions. We investigated whether low optimism and low self-reported numeracy scores could help uncover evidence of decisional conflict in a discrete-choice experiment (DCE). METHODS: Preferences for a treatment to delay type 1 diabetes were elicited using a DCE among 1501 parents in the United States. Respondents chose between two hypothetical treatments or they could choose no treatment (opt out) in a series of choice questions. The survey included a measure of optimism and a measure of subjective numeracy. We used latent class analyses where membership probability was predicted by optimism and numeracy scores. RESULTS: Respondents with lower optimism scores had a higher probability of membership in a class with disordered preferences (P value for optimism coefficient = 0.032). Those with lower self-reported numeracy scores were more likely to be in a class with a strong preference for opting out and disordered preferences (P = 0.000) or a class with a preference for opting out and avoiding serious treatment-related risks (P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: If respondents with lower optimism and numeracy scores are more likely to choose to opt out or have disordered preferences in a DCE, it may indicate that they have difficulty completing choice tasks.

Patient Preferences for Treating "OFF" Episodes in Parkinson's Disease: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Several on-demand treatments are available for management of "OFF" episodes in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). We evaluated patients' preferences for features of theoretical on-demand treatment options. METHODS: In a discrete choice experiment, US adults with self-reported PD of ≥5 years, or <5 years with "OFF" episodes, taking oral carbidopa/levodopa, selected between pairs of theoretical on-demand treatments that varied by mode of administration (with and without mode-specific adverse events [AEs]), time to FULL "ON," duration of "ON," and out-of-pocket cost for a 30-day supply. Data were analyzed with a random parameters logit model; results were used to calculate relative importance of treatment attributes, preference shares, and willingness to pay. RESULTS: Among 300 respondents, 98% had "OFF" episodes. Across the range of attribute levels included in the survey, avoiding $90 cost was most important to respondents, followed by a preferable mode of administration with associated AEs and decreasing time to FULL "ON." Duration of "ON" was relatively less important. On average, respondents preferred a theoretical dissolvable sublingual film versus other theoretical treatments with alternative modes of administration. Respondents were willing to pay $28-$52 US dollars to switch from least- to more-preferred mode of administration with associated AEs, $58 to reach FULL "ON" in 15 versus 60 min, and $9 to increase duration of FULL "ON" from 1 to 2 h. CONCLUSION: Respondents with PD valued lower out-of-pocket cost and a sublingual mode of administration with its associated AEs when choosing an on-demand treatment for "OFF" episodes.

Patients' and caregivers' maximum acceptable risk of death for non-curative gene therapy to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

BACKGROUND: Gene therapy offers an etiologically targeted treatment for genetic disorders. Little is known about the acceptance of mortality risk among patients with progressive, fatal conditions. We assessed patients' and caregivers' maximum acceptable risk (MAR) of mortality for gene therapy when used to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). METHODS: The threshold technique was used to assess tolerance for mortality risks using a hypothetical vignette. Gene therapy was described as non-curative and resulting in a slowing of progression and with a 10-year benefit duration. MAR was analyzed using interval regression for gene therapy initiated "now"; in the last year of walking well; in the last year of being able to bring arms to mouth; and in newborns (for caregivers only). RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five caregivers and 35 patients reported the greatest MAR for gene therapy initiated in last year of being able to lift arms (mean MAR 6.3%), followed by last year of walking well (mean MAR 4.4%), when used "now" (mean MAR 3.5%), and when used in the newborn period (mean MAR 2.1%, caregivers only). About 35% would accept ≥200/2000 risk in the last year of being able to lift arms. Non-ambulatory status predicted accepting 1.8 additional points in MAR "now" compared with ambulatory status (p = 0.010). Respondent type (caregiver or patient) did not predict MAR. CONCLUSION: In this first quantitative study to assess MAR associated with first-generation DMD gene therapy, we find relatively high tolerance for mortality risk in response to a non-curative treatment scenario. Risk tolerance increased with disease progression. Patients and caregivers did not have significantly different MAR. These results have implications for protocol development and shared decision making.

Risk tolerance in adjuvant and metastatic melanoma settings: a patient perspective study using the threshold technique.

Background: Adverse events (e.g., pyrexia) may affect treatment patterns and adherence. This study explored pyrexia risk tolerance among melanoma patients when treatment benefit is unknown versus known. Materials & methods: US respondents with stage III (n = 100) or stage III unresectable/stage IV melanoma (n = 125) chose between hypothetical melanoma treatments, defined by reoccurrence/progression-free survival and pyrexia risk, one resembling standard-of-care and one resembling dabrafenib + trametinib. Respondents chose first when efficacy was unknown and then when efficacy was known; pyrexia risk was varied systematically to define maximum acceptable risk. Results: Maximum acceptable risk of pyrexia was statistically significantly higher when efficacy was known versus unknown in stage III patients (85 vs 34%) and stage III unresectable/stage IV patients (66 vs 57%). Conclusion: Patients accepted higher levels of pyrexia risk when they understood treatment benefit.

Long-Acting Injection and Implant Preferences and Trade-Offs for HIV Prevention Among South African Male Youth.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting pre-exposure prophylaxis (LA-PrEP) formulated as implants and injections are promising prevention method strategies offering simplicity, discretion, and long dose duration. Men are important end users of LA-PrEP, and early assessment of their preferences could enhance downstream male engagement in HIV prevention. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment survey was conducted with 406 men, aged 18-24, in Cape Town, South Africa, to assess preferences for 5 LA-PrEP attributes with 2-4 pictorially-depicted levels: delivery form, duration, insertion location, soreness, and delivery facility. Latent class analysis was used to explore heterogeneity of preferences and estimate preference shares. RESULTS: The median age was 21 (interquartile range 19-22), and 47% were men who have sex with men. Duration was the most important product attribute. Latent class analysis identified 3 classes: "duration-dominant decision makers" (46%) were the largest class, defined by significant preference for a longer duration product. "Comprehensive decision makers" (36%) had preferences shaped equally by multiple attributes and preferred implants. "Injection-dominant decision makers" (18%) had strong preference for injections (vs. implant) and were significantly more likely to be men who have sex with men. When estimating shares for a 2-month injection in the buttocks with mild soreness (HPTN regimen) vs. a 6-month implant (to arm) with moderate soreness (current target), 95% of "injection-dominant decision makers" would choose injections, whereas 79% and 63% of "duration-dominant decision makers" and "comprehensive decision makers" would choose implant. CONCLUSIONS: Young South African men indicated acceptability for LA-PrEP. Preferences were shaped mainly by duration, suggesting a sizeable market for implants, and underscoring the importance of product choice. Further research into men's acceptability of LA PrEP strategies to achieve engagement in these HIV prevention tools constitutes a priority.