Patient preferences for rheumatoid arthritis treatments: results from the national cross-sectional LERACS study

Fayad, Fouad; Ziadé, Nelly; Merheb, Georges; Attoui, Said; Aiko, Alla; Mroue, Kamel; Masri, Abdel Fattah

doi:10.2147/ppa.s168738

Cited by 12 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with previous research, most patients in SENSE preferred oral monotherapy, 3 , 16 , 25 largely because of convenience and ease of use. Significant predictors for oral preference included older age, shorter disease duration, and a greater number of comorbidities.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Patient perspectives were assessed using PPI questionnaires developed by AbbVie ( Supplementary Text 1 ), based on the available literature 3 , 16 , 25 and patient research due to limited availability of appropriate validated tools. Preferences for pharmacologic treatment were assessed via a 6-item direct preference assessment questionnaire related to different treatment attributes.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

Taylor¹,

Ancuţa²,

Nagy³

et al. 2021

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients’ needs and perspectives are important determinants of treatment success in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Assessing patients’ perspectives can help identify unmet needs and enhance the understanding of treatment benefits. Objective The SENSE study assessed the impact of inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on treatment satisfaction, disease outcomes, and patient perspectives related to RA disease management. Methods SENSE was a noninterventional, cross-sectional study conducted in 18 countries across Europe, Asia, and South America. Adult patients with poorly controlled RA of moderate/high disease activity were eligible. Patient satisfaction was assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM v1.4). Treatment adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), quality of life (QoL), work ability, digital health literacy (DHL), patient preference information, and treatment strategy were also assessed. Results A total of 1624 patients were included in the study: most were female (84.2%) and middle-aged, and mean disease duration was 10.5 years. Mean TSQM global satisfaction subscore was 60.9, with only 13.5% of patients reporting good treatment satisfaction (TSQM global ≥80). The strongest predictor of good treatment satisfaction was treatment with advanced therapies. Most patients (87.4%) reported good treatment adherence. In general, patients had impaired QoL and work ability, high HRU, and 67.4% had poor DHL. Leading treatment expectations were “general improvement of arthritis” and “less joint pain”. Most patients preferred oral RA medications (60.7%) and rapid (≤1 week) onset of action (71.1%). “Increased risk for malignancies” and “increased risk for cardiovascular disease” were the least acceptable side effects. Despite suboptimal control, advanced therapies were only used in a minority of patients, and DMARD switches were planned for only half of the patients. Conclusion Suboptimal disease control negatively impacts treatment satisfaction, work ability, QoL, and HRU. Data collected on patient perspectives may inform shared decision-making and optimize treat-to-target strategies for improving patient outcomes in RA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

Taylor¹,

Ancuţa²,

Nagy³

et al. 2021

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…JAKi are orally administered small molecules. This route of administration is generally preferred by patients compared with receiving regular injections or infusions, which are required with biologics 8,9 . Further, it is postulated that oral administration is likely to decrease drug discontinuation compared with parenterally delivered agents 10 .…”

Section: Jak Inhibitorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of Janus kinase inhibitor safety in rheumatoid arthritis

Nash

Lim²,

Marabani

2021

Int J of Rheum Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last decade has seen considerable advancement in the treatment options available to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through the development of oral, small molecules that target and inhibit Janus kinases (JAKi). These drugs have a rapid onset of action, disrupting the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway and preventing the production of cytokines involved in inflammatory processes. They have the potential to provide immunomodulatory benefits across a broad range of diseases. This narrative review focuses on the safety profile of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib. Although JAKi have been shown to be effective in the treatment of RA, it is posited that they have different selectivities, which are likely to affect their safety profiles in RA patients. Currently, there are limited long‐term safety data available, with most data coming from randomized controlled trials. However, the data that are available show that upadacitinib and filgotinib may have improved safety profiles. This is particularly true in relation to herpes zoster, venous thromboembolism, and gastrointestinal perforation. Future research is needed to investigate the safety and efficacy of switching between JAKi when a previous JAKi has not been tolerated or has been ineffective.

show abstract

“…A total of 373 articles were screened to identify relevant treatment characteristics (attributes) for patients with rheumatoid arthritis through a scoping literature review. Of these articles, 23 articles were eligible for inclusion in attribute identification [1,6,8,9,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. Attribute selection was based on the relevance to the decision context (i.e.…”

Section: Attribute Identification: Stepmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional capacity vs side effects: treatment attributes to consider when individualising treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Bywall

Esbensen

Lason³

et al. 2021

Clin Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Individualisation of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment needs to take account of individual patients’ preferences to increase patient-centeredness in treatment decisions. The aim of this study was to identify patient-relevant treatment attributes to consider when individualising treatment for patients with RA. Method Patients with RA in Sweden were invited to rank the most important treatment attributes in an online survey (April to May 2020). Semi-structured interviews were conducted (October to November 2020) to further identify and frame potential attributes for shared decision-making. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic framework analysis. Patient research partners and rheumatologists supported the selection and framing of the treatment attributes across the assessment. Results The highest ranked attributes (N = 184) were improved functional capacity, reduced inflammation, reduced pain and fatigue and the risk of getting a severe side effect. The framework analysis revealed two overarching themes for further exploration: treatment goals and side effects. ‘Treatment goals’ emerged from functional capacity, revealing two dimensions: physical functional capacity and psychosocial functional capacity. ‘Side effects’ revealed that mild and severe side effects were the most important to discuss in shared decision-making. Conclusions Functional capacity (physical and psychosocial) and potential side effects (mild and severe) are important treatment attributes to consider when individualising RA treatment. Future research should assess how patients with RA weigh benefits and risks against each other, in order to increase patient-centeredness early on the treatment trajectory. Key Points• It is essential for the individualisation of treatment to identify what attributes patients with RA are willing to trade off in order to increase patient-centeredness in precision care.• Individualisation of rheumatoid arthritis treatment needs to account for patients’ preferences on functional capacity and side effects.• Future research is needed to assess how patients with rheumatoid arthritis weigh functional capacity against side effects, in order to increase patient-centeredness in treatment decisions.

show abstract

Patient preferences for rheumatoid arthritis treatments: results from the national cross-sectional LERACS study

Cited by 12 publications

References 10 publications

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

Treatment Satisfaction, Patient Preferences, and the Impact of Suboptimal Disease Control in a Large International Rheumatoid Arthritis Cohort: SENSE Study

A comparison of Janus kinase inhibitor safety in rheumatoid arthritis

Functional capacity vs side effects: treatment attributes to consider when individualising treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About