Physician and patient benefit–risk preferences from two randomized long-acting injectable antipsychotic trials
Authors Katz EG, Hauber B, Gopal S, Fairchild A, Pugh A, Weinstein RB, Levitan BS
Received 2 June 2016
Accepted for publication 25 August 2016
Published 21 October 2016 Volume 2016:10 Pages 2127—2139
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen
Eva G Katz,1 Brett Hauber,2 Srihari Gopal,3 Angie Fairchild,2 Amy Pugh,4 Rachel B Weinstein,3 Bennett S Levitan3
1Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Raritan, NJ, 2RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, 3Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Titusville, NJ, 4The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), CA, USA
Purpose: To quantify clinical trial participants’ and investigators’ judgments with respect to the relative importance of efficacy and safety attributes of antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia, and to assess the impact of formulation and adherence.
Methods: Discrete-choice experiment surveys were completed by patients with schizophrenia and physician investigators participating in two phase-3 clinical trials of paliperidone palmitate 3-month long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic. Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical antipsychotic profiles defined by efficacy, safety, and mode of administration. Data were analyzed using random-parameters logit and probit models.
Results: Patients (N=214) and physicians (N=438) preferred complete improvement in positive symptoms (severe to none) as the most important attribute, compared with improvement in any other attribute studied. Both respondents preferred 3-month and 1-month injectables to oral formulation (P<0.05), irrespective of prior adherence to oral antipsychotic treatment, with physicians showing greater preference for a 3-month over a 1-month LAI for nonadherent patients. Physicians were willing to accept treatments with reduced efficacy for patients with prior poor adherence. The maximum decrease in efficacy (95% confidence interval [CI]) that physicians would accept for switching a patient from daily oral to 3-month injectable was as follows: adherent: 9.8% (95% CI: 7.2–12.4), 20% nonadherent: 25.4% (95% CI: 21.0–29.9), and 50% nonadherent: >30%. For patients, adherent: 10.1% (95% CI: 6.1–14.1), nonadherent: the change in efficacy studied was regarded as unimportant.
Conclusion: Improvement in positive symptoms was the most important attribute. Patients and physicians preferred LAIs over oral antipsychotics, with physicians showing a greater preference for 3-month over 1-month LAI. Physicians and patients were willing to accept reduced efficacy in exchange for switching a patient from an oral formulation to a LAI.
Keywords: benefit–risk assessment, long-acting injectable, patient preference, physician preference, schizophrenia, survey
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]