Dataset Information

Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for geographic atrophy: A mixed-methods study.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objectives

The acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for patients with Geographic Atrophy (GA) is currently unknown. This study therefore aimed to investigate the extent to which regular intravitreal injections may be acceptable to GA patients.

Subjects/methods

Thirty UK-based individuals with GA secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), recruited from two London-based hospitals, were interviewed in April-October 2021 regarding acceptability of new GA treatments. Participants responded to a structured questionnaire, as well as open-ended questions in a semi-structured interview. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) informed framework analysis of the qualitative data.

Results

Twenty participants (67%) were female, and median (interquartile range (IQR)) age was 83 (78, 87) years. 37% of participants had foveal centre-involving GA, and better eye median (IQR) logMAR visual acuity was 0.30 (0.17, 0.58). Data suggested that 18 participants (60% (95% CI: 41-79%)) would accept the treatment, despite awareness of potential drawbacks. Eight participants (27% (95% CI: 10-43%) were ambivalent or undecided about treatment, and four (13%) (95% CI: 0-26%) would be unlikely to accept treatment. Reducing the frequency of injections from monthly to every other month increased the proportion of participants who considered the treatments acceptable. Conversely, factors limiting acceptability clustered around: the limited magnitude of treatment efficacy; concerns about side effects or the increased risk of neovascular AMD; and the logistical burden of regular clinic visits for intravitreal injections. Misunderstandings of potential benefits indicate the need for appropriately-designed patient education tools to support decision-making.

Conclusions

Our study suggests a majority of participants would be positive about intravitreal treatment for GA, in spite of potential burdens.

SUBMITTER: Enoch J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10174603 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for geographic atrophy: A mixed-methods study.

Enoch Jamie J Ghulakhszian Arevik A Sekhon Mandeep M Crabb David P DP Taylor Deanna J DJ Dinah Christiana C

Eye (London, England) 20230511 17

<h4>Background/objectives</h4>The acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for patients with Geographic Atrophy (GA) is currently unknown. This study therefore aimed to investigate the extent to which regular intravitreal injections may be acceptable to GA patients.<h4>Subjects/methods</h4>Thirty UK-based individuals with GA secondary to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), recruited from two London-based hospitals, were interviewed in April-October 2021 regarding acceptability of new ...[more]

PMID: 37170013

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a common cause of visual impairment, affecting central vision. Geographic atrophy (GA) is an advanced form of the non-neovascular (dry) type of AMD. Late-stage clinical trials suggest that intravitreal injections of novel therapeutics may slow down the rate of GA progression by up to 30% in 1 year, thus allowing people with GA to preserve central vision for a longer period. While intravitreal injections have become an established treatment modality for neovascular (wet) AMD, it is unknown whether patients with (more gradually progressing) GA would accept regular injections that slow down, but do not stop or reverse, vision loss. Therefore, this mixed-methods pilot study will aim to explore whether regular intravitreal injections will be acceptable as treatment for patients with GA, and the factors that may affect treatment acceptability.Methods and analysisA mixed-methods survey has been designed in collaboration with a GA patient advisory group. The survey comprises of structured questionnaires, semi-structured interview questions regarding patients' perceptions of intravitreal injections and the burden of treatment, and a task eliciting preferences between different potential treatments. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, this study will be conducted remotely by telephone. Thirty individuals will be recruited from NHS Medical Retina clinics at Central Middlesex Hospital, London. Half of the participants will be naïve to intravitreal injections, while half will have previous experience of intravitreal injections for neovascular (wet) AMD. Qualitative data analysis will be conducted using the Framework Method of analysis to identify key themes from participants' accounts.Ethics and disseminationThe study received Health Research Authority approval on 23 March 2021 (IRAS Project ID: 287824). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations to the medical retina community, as well as through dialogue with patients and macular disease charities.

Project description:IntroductionGeographic atrophy (GA) is the advanced form of the non-neovascular ('dry') type of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Previously untreatable, complement inhibitors delivered by regular intravitreal injections have recently been demonstrated to slow down the progression of GA lesions in phase 3 trials. One such treatment, Syfovre (pegcetacoplan), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in February 2023. These therapies slow down, but do not stop or reverse, the progression of GA; they may also increase the risk of developing the neovascular ('wet') type of AMD. In light of these developments, this study aims to quantify the acceptability of these new intravitreal injection treatments to patients with GA in the UK and explore factors that may influence the acceptability of these treatments.Methods and analysisIn this cross-sectional, non-interventional study, the primary objective is to determine the proportion of patients with GA that find regular intravitreal therapy acceptable for slowing the progression of GA. We will use a validated acceptability questionnaire in order to quantify the acceptability of new treatments among patients with GA. The correlation between acceptability and functional and structural biomarkers of GA will be established. We will also explore demographic, general health and ocular factors that may influence acceptability. 180 individuals with a diagnosis of GA will be recruited from 7 to 8 participating National Health Service trusts across the UK. Multiple regression analysis will be conducted to determine the simultaneous effects of multiple factors on patient acceptability.Ethics and disseminationThe study received ethical approval from the Health Research Authority on 14 March 2023 (IRAS Project ID: 324854). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations to the medical retina community, as well as through dialogue with patients and macular disease charities.

Project description:ObjectivesThe Covid-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid global transition towards telemedicine; yet much remains unknown about telemedicine's acceptability and safety in rheumatology. To help address this gap and inform practice, this study investigated rheumatology patient and clinician experiences and views of telemedicine.MethodsSequential mixed methodology combined analysis of surveys and in-depth interviews. Between and within-group differences in views of telemedicine were examined for patients and clinicians using t-tests.ResultsSurveys (patients n = 1340, clinicians n = 111) and interviews (patients n = 31, clinicians n = 29) were completed between April 2021 and July 2021. The majority of patients were from the UK (96%) and had inflammatory arthritis (32%) or lupus (32%). Patients and clinicians rated telemedicine as worse than face-to-face consultations in almost all categories, although >60% found it more convenient. Building trusting medical relationships and assessment accuracy were great concerns (93% of clinicians and 86% of patients rated telemedicine as worse than face-to-face for assessment accuracy). Telemedicine was perceived to have increased misdiagnoses, inequalities and barriers to accessing care. Participants reported highly disparate telemedicine delivery and responsiveness from primary and secondary care. Although rheumatology clinicians highlighted the importance of a quick response to flaring patients, only 55% of patients were confident that their rheumatology department would respond within 48 hours.ConclusionFindings indicate a preference for face-to-face consultations. Some negative experiences may be due to the pandemic rather than telemedicine specifically, although the risk of greater diagnostic inaccuracies using telemedicine is unlikely to be fully resolved. Training, choice, careful patient selection, and further consultation with clinicians and patients is required to increase telemedicine's acceptability and safety.Trial registrationThis telemedicine study is part of a pre-registered longitudinal multi-stage trial, the LISTEN study (ISRCTN-14966097), with later Covid-related additions registered in March 2021, including a pre-registered statistical analysis plan.

Project description:Objective/purposeTo evaluate efficacy and safety of monthly intravitreal injections of sirolimus, an immunosuppressive drug, for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration associated geographic atrophy (GA).DesignRandomized, controlled, single-masked multi-center phase 2 clinical trial of intravitreal sirolimus vs. sham therapy in AREDS2 clinical centers.SubjectsParticipants with GA.MethodsParticipants eligible in one eye were randomly assigned to a monthly intravitreal injection of sirolimus (20 µL [440 µg]) or sham treatment while participants with two study eyes were assigned to a monthly intravitreal injection in a randomly-selected eye. Best-corrected visual acuities (BVCA), spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT), fundus color photography and fundus autofluorescence (FAF) images were obtained at baseline and every 6 months until visit month 24.Main outcome measuresRate of progression of GA (mm2/year) measured on color fundus photograph from baseline to 24 months. Secondary outcome measures include change in BVCA, worsening of vision by ≥3 lines, and changes in area of GA measured on FAF and OCT.Results52 participants (mean age 79 years) were enrolled with 27 study eyes assigned to sirolimus from May 2012 to March 2014. The baseline median area of GA was 4.73 DA (12.01 mm2). The mean (standard deviation) growth rates of GA detected on color fundus photographs were 2.27 (2.17) mm2 and 1.91 (2.27) mm2 at month 12, and 4.94 (2.96) mm2 and 5.72 (3.97) mm2 at month 24, for the sirolimus and sham groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the GA growth rates between the two treatment groups (P=0.33). Median visual acuity changes and incidence of 15-letter loss from baseline were not different between the 2 treatment groups (p=0.19). The intervention was stopped early because of sterile endophthalmitis that occurred in 3 participants in the sirolimus group. Participants were followed for safety until the study was closed in May 2015 due to lack of efficacy.ConclusionSirolimus did not result in different rates of GA growth in this phase 2 study. Immunosuppression may be important for some stages of the AMD process but may not necessarily be the main pathway for the development of GA.

Dataset Information

Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for geographic atrophy: A mixed-methods study.

Background/objectives

Subjects/methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Exploring patient acceptability of emerging intravitreal therapies for geographic atrophy: A mixed-methods study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets