242
Views
17
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Factors Driving Patient Preferences for Growth Hormone Deficiency (GHD) Injection Regimen and Injection Device Features: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Pages 781-793 | Published online: 30 Apr 2020

References

  • Kluetz PG, O’connor DJ, Soltys K. Incorporating the patient experience into regulatory decision making in the USA, Europe, and Canada. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(5):e267–e274. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30097-4
  • US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry: Patient Preference Information – Voluntary Submission, Review in Premarket Approval Applications, Humanitarian Device Exemption Applications, and De Novo Requests, and Inclusion in Decision Summaries and Device Labeling; 2016.
  • Postmus D, Mavris M, Hillege HL, et al. Incorporating patient preferences into drug development and regulatory decision making: results from a quantitative pilot study with cancer patients, carers, and regulators. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;99(5):548–554. doi:10.1002/cpt.v99.5
  • healthcare Ifqaei. Background: what are patient preferences? Accessed 24 June, 2019.
  • UK R. NICE given grant to research patient preference; 2016. Accessed 24 June, 2019.
  • Louviere JJ, Flynn TN, Carson RT. Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis. J Choice Modell. 2010;3(3):57–72. doi:10.1016/S1755-5345(13)70014-9
  • Thurstone LL. A law of comparative judgment. Psychol Rev. 1927;34(4):273–286. doi:10.1037/h0070288
  • Mangham LJ, Hanson K, McPake B. How to do (or not to do) … Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. Health Policy Plan. 2009;24(2):151–158. doi:10.1093/heapol/czn047
  • Koledova E, Stoyanov G, Ovbude L, Davies PSW. Adherence and long-term growth outcomes: results from the easypod. Endocr Connect. 2018;7(8):914–923. doi:10.1530/EC-18-0172
  • Rosenfeld RG, Bakker B. Compliance and persistence in pediatric and adult patients receiving growth hormone therapy. Endocr Pract. 2008;14(2):143–154. doi:10.4158/EP.14.2.143
  • Cutfield WS, Derraik JG, Gunn AJ, et al. Non-compliance with growth hormone treatment in children is common and impairs linear growth. PLoS One. 2011;6(1):e16223. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016223
  • Boye KS, Matza LS, Walter KN, Van Brunt K, Palsgrove AC, Tynan A. Utilities and disutilities for attributes of injectable treatments for type 2 diabetes. Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12(3):219–230. doi:10.1007/s10198-010-0224-8
  • Quitmann J, Bloemeke J, Silva N, et al. Quality of life of short-statured children born small for gestational age or idiopathic growth hormone deficiency within 1 year of growth hormone treatment. Front Pediatr. 2019;7:164. doi:10.3389/fped.2019.00164
  • Reed Johnson F, Lancsar E, Marshall D, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design good research practices task force. Value Health. 2013;16(1):3–13. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223
  • Maniatis AK, Thornton P, Hofman P, et al. The pivotal phase 3 heiGHt Trial of Weekly TransCon™ hGH vs. Daily hGH in treatment-naïve subjects with pediatric growth hormone deficiency. Poster presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies/Pediatric Endocrine Society Annual Meeting(PAS/PES), April 27-30, 2019 (Baltimore MD).
  • Biospace. New Phase 2 data for somapacitan demonstrate its potential as an efficacious once-weekly treatment for childhood growth hormone deficiency. Published Sept 28 2018. Available from: https://www.biospace.com/article/new-phase-2-data-for-somapacitan-demonstrate-its-potential-as-an-efficacious-once-weekly-treatment-for-childhood-growth-hormone-deficiency/. Accessed March 27, 2020.
  • Hauffa BP, Touraine P, Urquhart--Kelly T, Koledova E. Managing transition in patients treated with growth hormone. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2017;8:346. doi:10.3389/fendo.2017.00346
  • Clayton PE, Cuneo RC, Juul A, Monson JP, Shalet SM, Tauber M. Consensus statement on the management of the GH-treated adolescent in the transition to adult care. Eur J Endocrinol. 2005;152(2):165–170. doi:10.1530/eje.1.01829
  • Cook DM, Yuen KC, Biller BM, Kemp SF, Vance ML. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for growth hormone use in growth hormone-deficient adults and transition patients – 2009 update. Endocr Pract. 2009;15(Suppl 2):1–29. doi:10.4158/EP.15.S2.1
  • Tritos NA, Hamrahian AH, King D, et al. A longer interval without GH replacement and female gender are associated with lower bone mineral density in adults with childhood-onset GH deficiency: a KIMS database analysis. Eur J Endocrinol. 2012;167(3):343–351. doi:10.1530/EJE-12-0070
  • Chrzan K, Orme B. An Overview and Comparison of Design Strategies for Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis. Sawtooth Software Inc; 2000.
  • Orme B. Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research. 2nd ed. Madison, Wis: Research Publishers LLC; 2010.
  • Software S. The Basics of Interpreting Conjoint Utilities; 2019.
  • Ammareller F, Schilback K, Schopohl J, Stormann S. Adherence, attitudes and beliefs of growth hormone deficient patients – a questionnaire-based cohort study. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2019.
  • Beusterien KM, Dziekan K, Flood E, Harding G, Jordan JC. Understanding patient preferences for HIV medications using adaptive conjoint analysis: feasibility assessment. Value Health. 2005;8(4):453–461. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00036.x