NEUROLOGIST PREFERENCES FOR NEW MS TREATMENTS: IMPLICATIONS FOR MARKET ACCESS PRIORITIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE
Author(s)
Sarah Mulnick, MPH1, Jennifer A. Whitty, PhD2, Gabriela S. Fernandez, MPH1, Sebastian Heidenreich, PhD, MSc2, Janneke Van Wingerden, PhD3, Nupur Greene, PhD, MPH, BPharm4;
1Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA, 2Thermo Fisher Scientific, London, United Kingdom, 3Sanofi, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 4Sanofi, Cambridge, MA, USA
1Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA, 2Thermo Fisher Scientific, London, United Kingdom, 3Sanofi, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 4Sanofi, Cambridge, MA, USA
OBJECTIVES: Currently available disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis (MS) have limited impact on disability progression and cognitive function. Investigational therapies with novel mechanisms of action potentially may improve these outcomes and address progression that manifests from the earliest stages of MS. This preference study elicited the relative importance neurologists place on treatment benefits and risks, providing insight into how they would prioritize new treatments for market access.
METHODS: Neurologists in the US, UK, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain treating MS for ≥1year completed an online survey, selecting their most-preferred and second-most preferred option for market access prioritization between three alternatives: two hypothetical treatments or a “no new treatment” option. Each treatment was described by 9 “attributes”. Data were analyzed using a mixed-logit-model to derive the maximum contribution of attribute improvements to participants’ prioritization decisions (i.e., relative attribute importance, RAI) conditional on the attribute levels shown.
RESULTS: Of 302 participants, 77% were male and 66% practiced in urban areas. Improving cognitive-functioning (RAI=19%) and increased time-to-worsening disability (RAI=19%) were the most important attributes for prioritizing access. Providing market access for treatments addressing progression from early MS stages over those for RRMS alone (RAI=14%) was the third-most important attribute. The fourth-attribute, reduction in relapse rate (RAI=11%), was relatively less important. Altogether, benefits contributed approximately half (∑RAI=49%) of prioritization decisions. Among risks, serious infection was most important to avoid (RAI=12%) followed by serious liver events (RAI=7%). Though relatively less important considerations, physicians prioritized treatments given orally, treatments with lower healthcare costs and treatments able to be given during pregnancy.
CONCLUSIONS: This was one of the first studies eliciting neurologists’ preferences for prioritizing new MS treatments for market access. The key attributes influencing neurologists’ treatment preferences included the potential to improve cognitive function, halt disability progression, and expand treatment options for MS phenotypes beyond RRMS.
METHODS: Neurologists in the US, UK, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain treating MS for ≥1year completed an online survey, selecting their most-preferred and second-most preferred option for market access prioritization between three alternatives: two hypothetical treatments or a “no new treatment” option. Each treatment was described by 9 “attributes”. Data were analyzed using a mixed-logit-model to derive the maximum contribution of attribute improvements to participants’ prioritization decisions (i.e., relative attribute importance, RAI) conditional on the attribute levels shown.
RESULTS: Of 302 participants, 77% were male and 66% practiced in urban areas. Improving cognitive-functioning (RAI=19%) and increased time-to-worsening disability (RAI=19%) were the most important attributes for prioritizing access. Providing market access for treatments addressing progression from early MS stages over those for RRMS alone (RAI=14%) was the third-most important attribute. The fourth-attribute, reduction in relapse rate (RAI=11%), was relatively less important. Altogether, benefits contributed approximately half (∑RAI=49%) of prioritization decisions. Among risks, serious infection was most important to avoid (RAI=12%) followed by serious liver events (RAI=7%). Though relatively less important considerations, physicians prioritized treatments given orally, treatments with lower healthcare costs and treatments able to be given during pregnancy.
CONCLUSIONS: This was one of the first studies eliciting neurologists’ preferences for prioritizing new MS treatments for market access. The key attributes influencing neurologists’ treatment preferences included the potential to improve cognitive function, halt disability progression, and expand treatment options for MS phenotypes beyond RRMS.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
MSR162
Topic
Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
Survey Methods
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, SDC: Neurological Disorders