Impact of clinical and demographic characteristics on patient preferences for psoriasis treatment features: Results from a discrete-choice experiment in a multicountry study

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to elicit preferences for psoriasis treatment features and to test for preference heterogeneity across groups of respondents.

Materials and methods

A discrete-choice experiment was employed to elicit preferences of patients with plaque psoriasis in multiple countries. The survey instrument included a series of choice questions between three hypothetical treatments, each characterized by varying levels of six attributes (namely, lesion reduction, risk of impairing side effects, time to reach results, mode and frequency of administration, itching reduction, and side effects). Random parameters logit was used to model the data. Results were compared across a total of 18 subgroup sets.

Results

The data analysis from 1,123 respondents showed that, on average, respondents receive more utility gain from higher levels of lesion reduction and lower risks of impairing side effects than changes in other attributes included in the study. Systematic differences were detected for 13 sets; the most pronounced differences were observed based on disease severity, nail psoriasis, biologic experience, and quality-of-life scores.

Conclusion

These many sources of preference heterogeneity identified by our analysis suggest that to improve patient satisfaction and, probably, adherence and persistence, clinicians should discuss options with patients when prescribing their treatment.

Keywords:

• Psoriasis treatment
• biologics
• topical
• patient preference heterogeneity
• discrete choice experiment
• subgroup analysis

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Kimberly Moon and Ginger Powell of RTI Health Solutions for overall project management for this study and Kate Lothman of RTI Health Solutions for her suggestions and revisions during the development of this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

Daniel Saure, Christopher Schuster, Julie Hill, and Mariana Guerreiro are employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly and Company and were involved in the study and in defining research questions. Marco Boeri, Brett Hauber, and Kathleen Klein are employees of RTI Health Solutions.

Notes

1 Note that the attribute ‘risk of impairing side effects’ refers to a risk of an adverse event that can impact daily life, while ‘appearance of side effects’ refers to how the adverse events appear (in phases, during the therapy but temporary, or permanently).

Additional information

Funding

The research for this study was funded by Eli Lilly and Company, who paid RTI Health Solutions to conduct the analyses that are the subject of this manuscript.