Dataset Information

Patient Perceptions and Preferences of Two Etanercept Autoinjectors for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Findings from a Patient Survey in Europe.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Benepali^® was the first etanercept (Enbrel^®) biosimilar to be approved in the European Union. Both Benepali and Enbrel are available as autoinjector devices. In a recent survey, nurses from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (UK) reported that their patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) would prefer the Benepali autoinjector compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. To determine whether patients' perceptions were similar to those of the nurses, this survey evaluated patients' perceptions and preferences of the Benepali autoinjector versus the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector in the same five European countries.

Methods

Patients with RA using the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector participated in a 25-min, face-to-face questionnaire-interview. Patients were also shown an instructional video and device-handling leaflet, received a live demonstration on the Benepali autoinjector, and had access to both Benepali and Enbrel MYCLIC training autoinjectors. Patients rated the importance of ten autoinjector attributes on a seven-point scale (1 = not important at all; 7 = extremely important) and provided their autoinjector preferences based on specific attributes. Patients also gave their opinion on which autoinjector they would prefer to use for self-injection.

Results

Overall, 220 patients participated in the survey (France, n = 30; Germany, n = 65; Italy, n = 67; Spain, n = 12; UK, n = 46). 'Easy to operate the self-injection' was ranked as the most important attribute (mean score of 6.8), followed by 'easy to grip' (6.5), and 'intuitive/self-explaining usage' (6.3). Patients preferred the Benepali autoinjector, with the attribute of 'easier to operate' being a strong differentiator compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Most patients (74%) reported that they would prefer to use the Benepali autoinjector over the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. 'Easy to operate the self-injection' and 'button-free autoinjector' were key drivers when selecting an autoinjector.

Conclusions

Patients in Europe reported a preference for the Benepali autoinjector compared to the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. This finding is consistent with results from a recently reported nurse survey.

Funding

Biogen.

SUBMITTER: Thakur K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5127972 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEnbrel® (etanercept: manufactured by Immunex Corporation, Newbury Park, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320, USA) was the first biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Europe. More recently, an etanercept biosimilar (Benepali®: manufactured by Biogen Inc, Cambridge, MA 02124, USA) was approved in the European Union. The perceptions and preferences of the Benepali autoinjector versus Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector were evaluated by nurses from Europe.MethodsThe survey involved a 25-min face-to-face questionnaire-interview with nurses from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK, experienced in training patients on using the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Nurses viewed an instructional video and device-handling leaflet, received a live demonstration on the Benepali autoinjector and had access to both Benepali and Enbrel MYCLIC training autoinjectors. Nurses rated the importance of ten autoinjector attributes on a scale of 1-7 (1 = not important at all; 7 = extremely important) and provided their autoinjector preferences based on specific attributes. Nurses also gave their opinion on which autoinjector their patients with RA would prefer.ResultsA total of 149 nurses participated in this survey (France, n = 30; Germany, n = 40; Italy, n = 30; Spain, n = 19; UK, n = 30). 'Easy to operate the self-injection' was ranked as the most important attribute (mean score of 6.8), followed by 'easy to grip' (6.6) and 'intuitive/self-explaining usage' (6.6). Nurses preferred the Benepali autoinjector, with attributes of 'easier to operate' and 'more intuitive to use' being strong differentiators compared with the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. Most nurses (86%) reported that their patients would prefer the Benepali autoinjector over the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector. 'Easy to operate the self-injection' and 'button-free autoinjector' were key drivers when selecting an autoinjector.ConclusionBased on these survey results, nurses in Europe reported a preference for the Benepali autoinjector compared with the Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector for the majority of attributes assessed. In particular, attributes of 'easy to operate' and 'more intuitive/self-explaining to use' were highly rated for the Benepali autoinjector, which may allow easy handling of the autoinjector.FundingBiogen International GmBH.

Project description:IntroductionImraldi™ is a biosimilar of the anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) monoclonal antibody adalimumab and was recently approved in Europe for the treatment of various inflammatory conditions. Imraldi is administered via an autoinjector device that features distinct design attributes compared with other biologic TNF inhibitor autoinjectors, such as the Humira (adalimumab) Pen® and Enbrel® (etanercept) MyClic® Pen were developed by the relevant pharmaceutical companies. The aim of this study was to evaluate patients' and nurses' preferences for the Imraldi versus Humira or Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors in the UK and Germany.MethodsPatients with inflammatory joint or bowel disease and nurses with experience in educating patients with these conditions on self-injection participated in two survey studies, the first comparing the Imraldi and Humira autoinjectors and the second comparing the Imraldi and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors.ResultsOverall, 101 nurses (UK, n = 50; Germany, n = 51) and 151 patients (UK, n = 90; Germany, n = 61) participated in both studies. In the first study, 85% of nurses and 78% of patients preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira autoinjector (P < 0.001); in the second study, 86% of nurses and 79% of patients preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over the Enbrel MyClic autoinjector (P < 0.001). Top reasons for preferring the Imraldi autoinjector included ease of use, ease of grip, and its button-free initiation mechanism. Most nurses indicated they would recommend the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors, and most patients indicated they would choose the Imraldi autoinjector over the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors to continue treatment.ConclusionNurses and patients in the UK and Germany preferred the Imraldi autoinjector over both the Humira and Enbrel MyClic autoinjectors, which may be a consideration, along with other factors, for treatment decisions in the management of patients with inflammatory joint or bowel disease.FundingBiogen International GmbH.

Project description:BackgroundTofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), provides patients with an alternative to subcutaneously or intravenously administered biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Little is known about patient preference for novel RA treatments.ObjectiveTo investigate patient preferences for attributes associated with RA treatments.MethodsA choice-based conjoint survey was mailed to 1400 randomly selected commercially insured patients (aged 21-80 years) diagnosed with RA, who were continuously enrolled from May 1, 2012, through April 30, 2013, and had ≥2 medical claims for International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code 714.0 and no previous biologic DMARD use. Treatment attributes included route of administration; monthly out-of-pocket cost; frequency of administration; ability to reduce daily joint pain and swelling; likelihood of serious adverse events; improvement in the ability to perform daily tasks; and medication burden. Mean attribute importance scores were calculated after adjusting for patient demographics (eg, age, sex, years since diagnosis) using a hierarchical Bayes model. Patient preferences for each treatment attribute were ranked by the importance score. Part-worth utilities (ie, preference scores) were used to perform a conjoint market simulation.ResultsA total of 380 patients (response rate, 27.1%) returned the survey. Their mean age (± standard deviation) was 54.9 (± 9.3) years. Nonrespondents were 2 years younger (mean, 52.9 years; P = .002) but did not differ significantly from respondents in known clinical characteristics. After adjustment for demographic characteristics, mean patients' ranking of treatment attribute importance, in decreasing order, was route of administration, 34.1 (± 15.5); frequency of administration, 16.4 (± 6.8); serious adverse events, 12.0 (± 9.3); cost, 10.1 (± 6.2); medication burden, 9.8 (± 8.2); joint pain reduction, 8.9 (± 3.8); and daily tasks improvement, 8.8 (± 4.7). For the route of administration attribute, the part-worth utility was highest for the oral route. Conjoint simulation results showed that 56.4% of respondents would prefer an oral route of administration.ConclusionBased on this survey completed by 380 patients with RA, commercially insured patients with RA consider the route of administration to be the most important attribute of their RA treatment. In this study, the majority (56.4%) of patients preferred the oral route of administration over other routes. Understanding patient preferences may help to inform provider and payer decisions in treatment selection that may enhance patient adherence to therapy.

Project description:IntroductionMany rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients do not achieve their treatment goals and experience symptoms that affect psychosocial outcomes and daily activities. This study aimed to identify and quantify the unmet needs perceived by US patients with RA currently taking a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).MethodsA cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted with RA patients recruited through CreakyJoints, an online patient support community, and ArthritisPower®, an online patient research registry, from December 2017 to January 2018. Participant patients were aged ≥ 21 years, failed ≥ 1 DMARDs, and were receiving their current DMARD(s) for ≥ 6 months; they answered 50 questions about treatment history, RA symptoms, and flares and completed the Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) questionnaire and the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). Treatment satisfaction was defined by a TSQM global satisfaction score ≥ 80.ResultsOf 415 patients screened, 258 (62%) were eligible and completed the survey; 87% were women, and 87% white, with mean (SD) age of 54.5 (11.4) years. A total of 232 patients (90%) had current or past biologic DMARD (bDMARD) use, with 67% currently on a bDMARD, 65% on ≥ 1 conventional synthetic DMARD, and 40% on methotrexate. Forty-three percent of patients reported daily/almost daily use of prescription pain medications, and 44% reported a current flare. Mean (SD) TSQM scores were 59 [20] for effectiveness, 59 [26] for side effects, 72 [18] for convenience, and 65 [21] for global satisfaction. The mean (SD) RAID overall score was 5.1 (2.0) on a 0-10 scale. Only 26% (67 patients) were satisfied with their RA treatment. Patients not satisfied with treatment reported higher RAID scores overall and by domain, and approximately half reported a current flare.ConclusionsResults from this real-world survey suggest that three-fourths of RA patients are not satisfied with treatments, which include bDMARDs. Patients continued to experience bothersome symptoms that impacted their daily activities and life. There remains a need for improved disease management among currently treated RA patients.FundingEli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN, USA).

Project description:ObjectivePatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom remission is achieved following combination therapy with methotrexate plus etanercept face an ongoing medication burden. This study was undertaken to investigate whether sustained remission achieved on combination therapy can be maintained with either methotrexate or etanercept monotherapy, as assessed following discontinuation of one or the other medication from the combination.MethodsOf the 371 adult patients with RA who received combination therapy with methotrexate plus etanercept, remission (defined as a Simplified Disease Activity Index [SDAI] score of ≤3.3) was sustained in 253 patients through a 24-week open-label period. These 253 patients then entered a 48-week, double-blind period and were randomized to receive either 1) methotrexate monotherapy (n = 101), 2) etanercept monotherapy (n = 101), or 3) methotrexate plus etanercept combination therapy (n = 51). Patients who subsequently experienced disease-worsening received rescue therapy with the combination regimen at the same dosages as used in the initial run-in period. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in whom SDAI-defined remission was maintained without disease-worsening at week 48 in the etanercept monotherapy group as compared to the methotrexate monotherapy group. Secondary end points included time to disease-worsening, and the proportion of patients in whom SDAI-defined remission was recaptured after initiation of rescue therapy.ResultsBaseline demographic and clinical characteristics of the RA patients were similar across the treatment groups. At week 48, SDAI-defined remission was maintained in significantly more patients in the etanercept monotherapy group than in the methotrexate monotherapy group (49.5% versus 28.7%; P = 0.004). Moreover, as a secondary end point, sustained SDAI-defined remission was achieved in significantly more patients who received combination therapy than in those who received methotrexate monotherapy (52.9% versus 28.7%; P = 0.006). Time to disease-worsening was shorter in those who received methotrexate monotherapy than in those who received etanercept monotherapy or those who received combination therapy (each P < 0.001 versus methotrexate monotherapy). Among the patients who received rescue therapy, SDAI-defined remission was recaptured in 70-80% in each treatment group. No new safety signals were reported.ConclusionThe efficacy of etanercept monotherapy was superior to that of methotrexate monotherapy and similar to that of combination therapy in maintaining remission in patients with RA. SDAI-defined remission was recaptured in most of the patients who were given rescue therapy. These data could inform decision-making when withdrawal of therapy is being considered to reduce treatment burden in patients with well-controlled RA.