Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Administration options for pegfilgrastim prophylaxis: patient and physician preferences from a cross-sectional survey.
Brett Hauber, A; Mange, Brennan; Price, Mark A; Wolin, Daniel; Bensink, Mark; Kaye, James A; Chandler, David.
  • Brett Hauber A; RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Mange B; RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Price MA; RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. mprice@rti.org.
  • Wolin D; RTI Health Solutions, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
  • Bensink M; Amgen, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
  • Kaye JA; RTI Health Solutions, Waltham, MA, USA.
  • Chandler D; Amgen, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Support Care Cancer ; 26(1): 251-260, 2018 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28785862
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Although clinical guidelines recommend administration of pegfilgrastim 1-4 days after a myelosuppressive chemotherapy cycle to decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), some physicians administer pegfilgrastim on the same day as chemotherapy administration. A novel on-body injector (OBI) that automatically delivers pegfilgrastim the day after chemotherapy is also available. Our objective was to estimate patient and physician preferences among the pegfilgrastim administration options.

METHODS:

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of patients receiving pegfilgrastim and physicians prescribing pegfilgrastim. Respondents' preferences for pegfilgrastim administration options were elicited using direct elicitation; the relative importance of features associated with the options was estimated in a point-allocation exercise. Physicians considered two hypothetical patient profiles when completing the exercises.

RESULTS:

The samples included 200 patients and 200 physicians. Patients generally preferred the administration option with which they had experience. Among patients, 48.5% with previous in-clinic injections 24 hours after chemotherapy preferred this option; 56.8% with previous OBI administration preferred this option. For a clinically compromised patient, 37.5% of physicians preferred an in-clinic injection option; 49.5% preferred the OBI. For a less compromised patient, 55.5% preferred an in-clinic injection option; 28.0% preferred the OBI. Avoiding the need to return to the clinic was chosen most often as the most important treatment feature for patients and physicians.

CONCLUSIONS:

Patients and physicians identified that returning clinic visits for pegfilgrastim administration may be burdensome. A potential solution to mitigate this burden is the OBI, which allows adherence to the labeled use of pegfilgrastim without return visits to the clinic.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Relaciones Médico-Paciente / Polietilenglicoles / Filgrastim Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Relaciones Médico-Paciente / Polietilenglicoles / Filgrastim Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article