Background : In September 2014, 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) was universally recommended for all US adults aged ≥65 years. Adult PCV13 coverage, including whether disparities in uptake exist, however, is not well-described. Methods : We used a monthly series of cross-sectional analyses of administrative medical and prescription claims data collected by IQVIA and linked to sociodemographic data collected by Experian to estimate overall and subpopulation-level uptake of PCV13 among US adults aged ≥65 years. Results : Among adults aged ≥65 years, 43.3% received PCV13 by the end of November 2017. Race/ethnicity, annual household income, education status, and neighborhood urbanicity were strongly related to PCV13 uptake among adults aged ≥65 years. Lower uptake of PCV13 was observed for non-Hispanic black (36.3%) and Hispanic (30.0%) adults ( vs 45.6% for non-Hispanic whites, P < .01), the poor (30.7% vs 54.2% among lowest vs highest income deciles, P < .01), adults with low educational status (33.0% vs 49.0% among those without high school education vs college educated, P < .01), and those living in rural communities (22.9%) or urban/inner-city (33.8%) areas ( vs 45.8% in suburban areas, P < .01). Conclusions : PCV13 uptake among adults aged ≥65 occurred rapidly in the three years after universal recommendation in September 2014. Yet, poor and minority communities, rural and urban/inner-city areas, and communities with low educational attainment had substantially lower PCV13 coverage. These same populations are at increased risk of pneumococcal disease. In order to maximize the benefits of pneumococcal vaccination, further targeted and tailored interventions to increase PCV13 uptake in these underserved populations are still necessary.

No abstract

Background: In Japan, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) dosing regimens for wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD) include pro re nata, every 2 months, and treat-and-extend, resulting in different outcomes and patient burden. Although reflecting patient preferences in treatment decision-making is desirable, few studies have examined this in Japan. This study assessed the patients willingness to trade-off between different dosing regimens. Patients and Methods: Patients with wAMD were recruited from four Japanese university hospitals to complete a face-to-face cross-sectional survey. In a discrete choice experiment, patients were asked to choose their preferred option from two anti-VEGF treatment profiles shown side-by-side across a series of choice tasks. The profiles varied on four attributes: number of injections in 12 months, number of physician consultations in 12 months, chance of 1-year visual acuity (VA) improvement, and chance of 2-year VA maintenance. Preference weights were estimated using hierarchical Bayes' models. Results: Overall, 120 patients (30 treatment naïve and 90 anti-VEGF experienced) completed the survey. Patients were willing to accept an increase from three to approximately eight injections in 12 months to increase the chance of 1-year VA improvement from 25% to 40%. They would be willing to accept 11 injections in 12 months if the chance of 2-year VA maintenance increased from 80% to 96%. The most valued attributes were increasing the chance of 2-year VA maintenance and reducing the number of injections in 12 months, which were each about twice as important as decreasing physician consultations in 12 months and increasing the chance of 1-year VA improvement (p<0.001). Among the dosing regimens, patients most preferred treat-and-extend because of its higher chance of 2-year VA maintenance. Conclusion: Informing patients with wAMD about the likelihood of long-term VA maintenance when selecting treatment may increase the acceptance of an optimal treatment regimen and number of injections.

Purpose To understand and compare preferences for dosing- and toxicity-related attributes associated with selective cyclin-dependent 4/6 kinase inhibitors regimens among US oncologists and patients. Materials and Methods Oncologists and patients with mBC participated in an internet-based survey that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a best–worst scaling (BWS) exercise. For the DCE, participants chose between two hypothetical treatment profiles, each with seven attributes: risk of dose reduction due to adverse events (AEs), risk of diarrhea, risk of abdominal pain, need for electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring to assess heart function, risk of Grade 3/4 neutropenia, dosing regimen, and dosing schedule. The BWS exercise assessed the relative prioritization of a larger set of 16 attributes. Hierarchical Bayesian models were used to estimate preference weights for each attribute level. Results Oncologists (N=209) and patients (N=304) rated risks of diarrhea (25% each) and Grade 3/4 neutropenia (20% and 24%, respectively) as the most important attributes for treatment choice. The risks of diarrhea and Grade 3/4 neutropenia were 1.8 to 2.3 times (oncologists: 25% and 20%, respectively vs 11%) and 2.4 to 2.5 times (patients: 25% and 24%, respectively vs 10%) higher in relative importance than the risk of dose reduction due to AEs. Oncologists placed greater importance on the risk of dose reduction due to AEs and the need for ECG monitoring, whereas patients placed greater importance on the risk of Grade 3/4 neutropenia (all, p<0.05). The BWS exercise results were largely consistent with those from the DCE. Conclusion The risks of diarrhea and Grade 3/4 neutropenia were key drivers of both oncologist and patient preferences. Overall, the palbociclib + aromatase inhibitor (AI) profile was most preferred, due to its association with a lower risk of diarrhea and no ECG monitoring, compared with abemaciclib + AI and ribociclib + AI profiles, respectively.

Background and Objective Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with central nervous system dysfunction and accelerated brain volume loss (BVL). There exists a paucity of research examining the importance of BVL to patients and neurologists and exploring whether such preferences may differ between these two groups. This study sought to evaluate the preferences of patients and neurologists for RRMS treatments by considering benefits and risks associated with novel and common disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). Patients and Methods US patients diagnosed with non-highly active RRMS and US-based neurologists completed an online cross-sectional survey. A discrete choice experiment was used to assess patient and neurologist treatment preferences, with neurologists considering preferences for patients with non-highly active RRMS. Respondents chose between two treatment profiles with seven attributes identified in qualitative research: 2-year disability progression; 1-year relapse rate; rate of BVL; and risks of gastrointestinal symptoms, flu-like symptoms, infection, and life-threatening events. Attribute-level weighted preferences were estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian model. Results Analyses included 150 patients with non-highly active RRMS (mean age: 54 years) and 150 neurologists (65% in private practice). Among patients, the most important treatment attribute was reducing the rate of BVL, followed by reducing the risk of infection and risk of flu-like symptoms. In contrast, the most important treatment attribute among neurologists was reducing the risk of a life-threatening event, followed by slowing the rate of 2-year disability progression and risk of infection. Conclusion The findings highlight differences in treatment preferences between US patients and neurologists for non-highly active RRMS. The importance placed by patients on slowing the rate of BVL makes this a key topic that should be covered in the shared decision-making process.