TREATMENT SATISFACTION AND BURDEN OF ILLNESS WITH ORAL VS INJECTABLE MULTIPLE MYELOMA THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH NEWLY DIAGNOSED DISEASE (NDMM)
Author(s)
Romanus D1, DasMahapatra P2, Hoole M2, Lowe M2, Lawler E2, Curran C2, Campbell S1, Bell J3
1Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2PatientsLikeMe, Cambridge, MA, USA, 3Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Cambridge, MA, USA
OBJECTIVES: We compared patient-reported satisfaction, productivity, and burden of illness with oral vs injectable therapy in NDMM. METHODS: Patients were recruited from PatientsLikeMe, MyelomaCrowd, and Facebook. Eligible US patients were: ≥ 18 years, on current treatment without any prior change in therapy due to progression, without amyloidosis, and without other cancers. The cross-sectional electronic survey included: Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment - Specific Health Problem, and burden of illness questions. Outcomes of interest were compared between all-oral (oral users) or injectable therapy with or without oral medication (injectable users). Adjusted analyses were controlled for age, gender, race and frailty. RESULTS: Among 176 patients, mean age was 61 years, 38% were male, 86% were Caucasian, and 27% had ECOG-PS: 2+. Patients using oral vs injectable agents comprised 44% (78/176) and 56% (98/176), respectively. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. Adjusted means were comparable for treatment effectiveness (72 vs 71, p=0.72), and global satisfaction (54 vs 57, p=0.18) of the TSQM, but a trend toward greater convenience of treatment among patients using oral vs injectable agents was observed (81 vs. 76, p=0.06). Patient activity impairment was lower among patients using oral vs injectable agents (33% vs. 43%, p <0.05). Lower adjusted mean number of monthly clinic visits (1.2 vs 3.4, p<0.001), adjusted mean monthly travel and clinic visit time (minutes; patient: 185 vs 458, p<0.01; and caregiver: 58 vs 326, p<0.05) and estimated monthly per patient cost (sum of patient/caregiver travel and clinic visit value of time, and visit copay/parking) $150 vs $322 (p<0.01) were reported among patients using oral vs injectable agents. CONCLUSIONS: In NDMM, an all-oral regimen is associated with lower economic burden of illness and less activity impairment than an injectable regimen, and a trend towards greater treatment convenience.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2017-11, ISPOR Europe 2017, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Vol. 20, No. 9 (October 2017)
Code
PCN233
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes, Stated Preference & Patient Satisfaction, Work & Home Productivity - Indirect Costs
Disease
Oncology