Shared Decision-Making in the Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: Results of a Cross-Sectional, Real-World Survey in Europe and the United States.

Introduction: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive deterioration of cognitive and physical functioning, reducing activities of daily living and quality of life (QoL). Several treatments are available that modify the course of the disease and reduce the frequency of relapses. Although effective, all treatment options are accompanied by adverse events, and this study aimed to assess the extent to which patients were involved in the choice of treatment. Methods: Data were drawn from the Adelphi Multiple Sclerosis Disease Specific Program (DSP)™, a cross-sectional survey of healthcare practitioners (HCP) and their patients with MS in real-world clinical settings in Europe and the United States (US) between December 2020 and July 2021. HCPs reported patient demographics, clinical characteristics, current and previous treatment, and treatment outcomes. Patients voluntarily completed questionnaires reporting the physical and psychological impact of their MS and its treatment. Regression analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to compare treatment outcomes in patients actively involved in their current treatment choice with those who were not. Results: Of a total of 692 patients, median age 40 years and 64% female, mostly diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS, those who were involved in shared decision-making tended to choose oral therapies such as dimethyl fumarate more often than HCPs. MS had greater impact on physical and psychological functioning in patients whose HCP made treatment decisions solely. Patients involved in decision-making reported greater satisfaction with their treatment and a better QoL. Discussion: Because no single optimal therapy exists for patients with MS, treatments should be individualized with consideration of patients' preferences. Our study shows that shared decision-making is under-utilized in the management of MS and supports the benefits of patient involvement. Conclusion: Patients who have an active role in treatment decision-making show improved wellbeing and QoL, and overall treatment satisfaction.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients with non­metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

This study used linked, routinely-collected datasets to explore incidence, clinical characteristics and outcomes of prostate cancer (PC) patients who experience a rise in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels despite androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), without evidence of metastases in their patient record, termed non-metastatic castration-resistant PC (nmCRPC). Routinely collected administrative data in Wales were used to identify patients diagnosed with PC and nmCRPC from 2000-2015. Logrank tests and Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare time-to-events across subgroups defined by PSA doubling time and age. Of 38,021 patients identified with PC, 1,465 met nmCRPC criteria. PC incidence increased over the study period, while nmCRPC categorizations reduced. Median time from PC diagnosis to nmCRPC categorization was 3.07 years (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.91-3.26) and from nmCRPC categorization to metastases/death was 2.86 years (95% CI 2.67-3.09). Shorter PSA doubling time (≤ 10 months, versus > 10 months) was associated with reduced time to metastases or death (2.11 years [95% CI 1.92-2.30] versus 5.22 years [95% CI 4.87-5.51]). Age was not significantly associated with time to metastases/death. Our findings highlight key clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients with nmCRPC prior to the introduction of recently approved treatments.

Current Treatment and Outcomes Benchmark for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer From a Large UK-Based Single Centre.

Objectives: To characterize treatment patterns and survival outcomes for patients with locally advanced or metastatic malignancy of the urothelial tract during a period immediately preceding the widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the UK. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively examined the electronic case notes of patients attending the Leeds Cancer Center, UK with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, receiving chemotherapy between January 2003 and March 2017. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes were collected. Summary and descriptive statistics were calculated for categorical and continuous variables as appropriate. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median survival and Cox regression proportional hazards model was used to explore relationships between clinical variables and outcome. Results: Two hundred and sixteen patients made up the study cohort, with a median age of 66 years (range: 35-83) and 72.7% being male. First-line treatment consisted of either a cisplatin- (44%) or carboplatin-based regimen (48%) in the majority of patients. Twenty seven percent of patients received a second-line of treatment (most commonly single-agent paclitaxel) following a first-line platinum containing regimen. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 19 and 27% of those treated with a first-line cisplatin- and carboplatin-based regimen, respectively. The median overall survival (mOS) of the study cohort was estimated to be 16.2 months (IQR: 10.6-28.3 months). Receipt by patients of cisplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with a longer mOS and this association persisted when survival analysis was adjusted for age, sex, performance status and presence of distant metastases. Conclusions: This study provides a useful benchmark for outcomes achieved in a real-world setting for patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC treated with chemotherapy in the immediate pre-immunotherapy era.

Cost-Effectiveness of Ranibizumab Versus Aflibercept for Macular Edema Secondary to Branch Retinal Vein Occlusion: A UK Healthcare Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Ranibizumab and aflibercept are anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents licensed for the treatment of visual impairment due to macular edema secondary to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). The aim of this study was to estimate, from a UK healthcare payer's perspective, the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab versus aflibercept in this indication. METHODS: A Markov model was used to simulate the outcomes and costs of treating BRVO. Patient baseline characteristics and efficacy data for ranibizumab were obtained from the BRAVO trial. The relative efficacy of aflibercept was derived from a published network meta-analysis. Injection frequencies were derived from ranibizumab and aflibercept studies included in the network meta-analysis. Health states were defined by increments of 10 letters in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Patients could gain or lose a maximum of two health states between cycles. The first cycle was 6 months, followed by monthly cycles. Different utility values were assigned to the better-seeing and worse-seeing eyes based on BCVA. A 2-year treatment time frame and a lifetime time horizon were used. Future costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The lifetime cost per patient treated was £15,273 with ranibizumab and £17,347 with aflibercept. Ranibizumab was dominant over aflibercept, producing incremental health gains of 0.0120 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost savings of £2074. Net monetary benefit for ranibizumab at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY was £2314. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were robust to variations in model parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Ranibizumab provides greater health gains at a lower overall cost than aflibercept in the treatment of visual impairment due to macular edema secondary to BRVO. Ranibizumab is therefore cost-effective from a UK healthcare payer's perspective. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.