Physician and patient benefit–risk preferences from two randomized long-acting injectable antipsychotic trials

References

• CoppolaDMelkoteRLannieCEfficacy and safety of paliperidone extended release 1.5 mg/day-a double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, study in the treatment of patients with schizophreniaPsychopharmacol Bull2011442119
   Google Scholar
• KaneJMAgugliaEAltamuraACGuidelines for depot antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia. European Neuropsychopharmacology Consensus Conference in Siena, ItalyEur Neuropsychopharmacol19988155669452941
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VolavkaJCitromeLOral antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia: heterogeneity in efficacy and tolerability should drive decision-makingExpert Opin Pharmacother200910121917192819558339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KienleGSKieneHClinical judgement and the medical professionJ Eval Clin Pract201117462162720973873
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BridgesJFMohamedAFFinnernHWWoehlAHauberABPatients’ preferences for treatment outcomes for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a conjoint analysisLung Cancer201277122423122369719
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brett HauberAMohamedAFBeamCMedjedovicJMauskopfJPatient preferences and assessment of likely adherence to hepatitis C virus treatmentJ Viral Hepat201118961962720579276
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MohamedAFHauberABNearyMPPatient benefit–risk preferences for targeted agents in the treatment of renal cell carcinomaPharmacoeconomics2011291197798821854079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration (FDA)The voice of the patient: a series of reports from FDA’s Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative2015 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/ucm368342.htmAccessed February 25, 2016
   Google Scholar
• European Medicines AgencyThe patient’s voice in the evaluation of medicinesHow patients can contribute to assessment of benefit and risk2013 Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Report/2013/10/WC500153276.pdfAccessed September 8, 2015
   Google Scholar
• European Medicines AgencyPatients to discuss benefit – risk evaluation of medicines with the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use2014 Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Press_release/2014/09/WC500173511.pdfAccessed 4 Jan 2016
   Google Scholar
• Health Canada, Government of CanadaArchived – Minister Ambrose announces patient involvement pilot for orphan drugs2014 Available from: http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=7&nid=873619&crtr.tp1D=1Accessed February 26, 2016
   Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration (FDA)Enhancing benefit-risk assessment in regulatory decision-making2014 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/UserFees/PrescriptionDrugUserFee/ucm326192.htmAccessed September 7, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)Patient preference information – submission, review in PMAs, HDE applications, and De Novo requests, and inclusion in device labeling Draft Guidance for industry, food and Drug Administration Staff, and other stakeholders2015 Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ucm/groups/fdagov-public/@fdagov-meddev-gen/documents/document/ucm446680.pdfAccessed September 8, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC)Patient Centered Benefit-Risk Project Report2015 Available from: http://mdic.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/MDIC_PCBR_Framework_Proof5_Web.pdfAccessed September 8, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)Europe 2 Programme: 5th Call for proposals2015 Available from: http://www.imi.europa.eu/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/IMI2Call5/IMI2_C5_PUBLICATION.pdfAccessed 5 Jan 2016
   Google Scholar
• RevickiDAShakespeareAKindPPreferences for schizophrenia-related health states: a comparison of patients, caregivers and psychiatristsInt Clin Psychopharmacol1996112101108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BridgesJFKinterETSchmedingARudolphIMuhlbacherACan patients diagnosed with schizophrenia complete choice-based conjoint analysis tasks?Patient20114426727521995832
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• LevitanBMarkowitzMMohamedAFPatients’ preferences related to benefits, risks, and formulations of schizophrenia treatmentPsychiatr Serv201566771972625772762
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MarkowitzMALevitanBSMohamedAFPsychiatrists’ judgments about antipsychotic benefit and risk outcomes and formulation in schizophrenia treatmentPsychiatr Serv20146591133113924828964
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CitromeLNew second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophreniaExpert Rev Neurother201313776778323898849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ShulerKMApproaches to improve adherence to pharmacotherapy in patients with schizophreniaPatient Prefer Adherence2014870171424868149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KaplanGCasoyJZummoJImpact of long-acting injectable antipsychotics on medication adherence and clinical, functional, and economic outcomes of schizophreniaPatient Prefer Adherence201371171118024265549
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BerwaertsJLiuYGopalSEfficacy and safety of the 3-month formulation of paliperidone palmitate vs placebo for relapse prevention of schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trialJAMA Psychiatry201572883083925820612
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SavitzAJXuHGopalSEfficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 3-month formulation for patients with schizophrenia: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, noninferiority studyInt J Neuropsychopharmacol2016197 pii:pyw018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BridgesJFHauberABMarshallDConjoint analysis applications in health – a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task ForceValue Health201114440341321669364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HanemannMLoomisJKanninenBStatistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuationAm J Agric Econ199173412551263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JohnsonFRLancsarEMarshallDConstructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task ForceValue Health201316131323337210
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HauberABMohamedAFJohnsonFRFalveyHTreatment preferences and medication adherence of people with Type 2 diabetes using oral glucose-lowering agentsDiabet Med200926441642419388973
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MullardAPatient-focused drug development programme takes first stepsNat Rev Drug Discov201312965165223989777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ShumwayMSentellTChouljianTTellierJRozewiczFOkunMAssessing preferences for schizophrenia outcomes: comprehension and decision strategies in three assessment methodsMent Health Serv Res20035312113515224446
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ShumwayMSaundersTShernDPreferences for schizophrenia treatment outcomes among public policy makers, consumers, families, and providersPsychiatr Serv20035481124112812883140
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MarkowitzMLevitanBMohammedAPsychiatrists’ preferences for benefit and risk outcomes and formulation in schizophrenia treatments: a conjoint analysis studyPoster Presentation (PS5-05) at the Institute on Psychiatric ServicesOctober 4–7; 2012New York, NY
   Google Scholar
• Marta-PedrosoCFreitasHDomingosTTesting for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: a case study of web based versus in-person interviewsEcol Econ2007623–4388398
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NielsenJSUse of the Internet for willingness-to-pay surveys: a comparison of face-to-face and web-based interviewsResour Energy Econ2011331119129
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar