Top

Archives of Osteoporosis

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Osteoporosis | Original Article

A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment

Authors: Charlotte Beaudart, Stuart Silverman, Deborah T. Gold, Setareh A. Williams, Rich Weiss, Mickael Hiligsmann

Published in: Archives of Osteoporosis | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Mini abstract

US patients with osteoporosis included in three focus groups identified efficacy, safety, cost, and convenience as important attributes of treatment when choosing between anabolic therapies with high stated preference for the solid Microstructured Transdermal System.

Objective

The current study evaluated patient perspective and relative importance of treatment attributes of in-home daily self-administration of abaloparatide-solid Microstructured Transdermal System (sMTS) compared with other anabolic agents (i.e. in-home daily subcutaneous self-injections, and monthly subcutaneous injections at doctor office) among a group of US patients with osteoporosis.

Methods

The current study included systematic literature reviews, experts’ consultation and three online patients focus groups (n=27), including patients ≥50 years of age at high risk for fracture. Nominal Group Technique was used by asking patients to (1) Individually identify characteristics that would be important for them when choosing between anabolic treatments, (2) Share ideas and discuss perspectives with other patients, (3) Review additional attributes generated from a systematic literature review, (4) Select and rank individually the 7 most important characteristics from the list and (5) Report their acceptability and stated preference ranking between the three treatment options.

Results

Twenty women and 7 men with a mean age of 65 (range 51-85 years) participated in the focus groups. Twenty-four treatment characteristics were identified through focus groups and literature review. Efficacy, safety, out-of-pocket costs, strength of evidence and the option to self-administer were ranked as the most important attributes. The majority of patients stated preference for a daily sMTS if prescribed by their doctor.

Conclusions

This study revealed that efficacy, safety, costs, and convenience are important attributes of osteoporosis treatment for US patients at high risk for fractures when choosing between anabolic therapies, with a high stated preference for sMTS.

Available only for authorised users

Leader D, Williams SA, Curtis JR, Weiss R (2018) Osteoporosis-Related Fracture Events in the US. J Clin Densitom 21(4):606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2018.05.027CrossRef

Al-Sari UA, Tobias J, Clark E (2016) Health-related quality of life in older people with osteoporotic vertebral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 27(10):2891–2900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3648-xCrossRefPubMed

Curtis JR, Daigle SG, Williams S, Weiss RJ, Wang Y, Arora T (2019) Worstening trends in osteoporosis management in the medicare population: 2010-2014. Pap Present. ACR/ARP Annu Meet Abstr Number 1872. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.04.1149

Hanssen D et al. (Commissioned by the National Osteoporosis Foundation). Medicare cost of osteoporotic fractures. The clinical and cost burden of an important consequence of osteoporosis. 2019; Available from (Accessed December 2021): https//static1.squarespace.com/static/5c0860aff793924efe2230f3/t/5d76b949deb7e9086ee3d7dd/1568061771769/Medicare+Cost+of+Osteoporotic+Fractures+20190827.pdf

Hiligsmann M, Cornelissen D, Vrijens B et al (2019) Determinants, consequences and potential solutions to poor adherence to anti-osteoporosis treatment: results of an expert group meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF). Osteoporos Int 30(11):2155–2165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-05104-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fatoye F, Smith P, Gebrye T, Yeowell G (2019) Real-world persistence and adherence with oral bisphosphonates for osteoporosis: A systematic review. BMJ Open 9(4):e027049. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027049CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hiligsmann M, Rabenda V, Gathon HJ, Ethgen O, Reginster JY (2010) Potential clinical and economic impact of nonadherence with osteoporosis medications. Calcif Tissue Int 86(3):202–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-009-9329-4CrossRefPubMed

Rashki Kemmak A, Rezapour A, Jahangiri R, Nikjoo S, Farabi H, Soleimanpour S (2020) Economic burden of osteoporosis in the world: A systematic review. Med J Islam Repub Iran 34:154. https://doi.org/10.34171/mjiri.34.154CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Paskins Z, Crawford-Manning F, Cottrell E et al (2020) Acceptability of bisphosphonates among patients, clinicians and managers: a systematic review and framework synthesis. BMJ Open 10(11):e040634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040634CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Patient perception of value in healthcare: osteoporosis and bone fragility 2019. A Patient-Oriented Value (POV™) Report. Available from (Accessed December 2021): https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c0860aff793924efe2230f3/t/5d3ee6edf9125d000190f46e/1564403439922/POV+in+Bone+Health+Report+NOF+7.29.pdf

11.

National Osteoporosis Foundation Report Finds Patient-Centered Care Is Key Element in Delivering High-Quality, High-Value Treatment. 2019. Available from (Accessed December 2021): https://www.nof.org/news/national-osteoporosis-foundation-report-finds-patient-centered-care-is-key-element-in-delivering-high-quality-high-value-treatment/

12.

Rohrbaugh J (1981) Improving the quality of group judgment: Social judgment analysis and the nominal group technique. Organ Behav Hum Perform 28:272–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(81)90025-8CrossRef

13.

Miller PD, Troy S, Weiss RJ et al (2021) Phase 1b Evaluation of Abaloparatide Solid Microstructured Transdermal System (Abaloparatide-sMTS) in Postmenopausal Women with Low Bone Mineral Density. Clin Drug Investig 41(3):277–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-021-01008-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. 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). Available from (Accessed December 2021):: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/patient-preference-information-voluntary-submission-review-premarket-approval-applications

15.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration (2019) Patient-Focused Drug Development: Methods to Identify What Is Important to Patients Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff, and Other Stakeholders

16.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Phys Ther 89(7):1006–1012. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535CrossRef

17.

Morrison A, Polisena J, Husereau D et al (2012) The effect of english-language restriction on systematic review-based meta-analyses: A systematic review of empirical studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 28:138–144. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462312000086CrossRefPubMed

18.

Somers C, Chimonas S, McIntosh E et al (2019) Using Nominal Group Technique to Identify Key Attributes of Oncology Treatments for a Discrete Choice Experiment. MDM Policy Pract 4:238146831983792. https://doi.org/10.1177/2381468319837925CrossRef

19.

Hiligsmann M, van Durme C, Geusens P et al (2013) Nominal group technique to select attributes for discrete choice experiments: An example for drug treatment choice in osteoporosis. Patient Prefer Adherence 7:133–139. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S38408CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

(2020) Nominal group technique is reliable for deciding research priorities. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7240.0/e

21.

Mishra P, Pandey CM, Singh U et al (2019) Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statistical data. Ann Card Anaesth 22:67–72. https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Arya J, Henry S, Kalluri H et al (2017) Tolerability, usability and acceptability of dissolving microneedle patch administration in human subjects. Biomaterials 128:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2017.02.040CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Dworkin RH, Jensen MP, Gould E et al (2011) Treatment satisfaction in osteoarthritis and chronic low back pain: The role of pain, physical and emotional functioning, sleep, and adverse events. J Pain 12:416–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2010.07.009CrossRefPubMed

24.

Norman JJ, Arya JM, McClain MA, Frew PM, Meltzer MI, Prausnitz MR (2014) Microneedle patches: Usability and acceptability for self-vaccination against influenza. Vaccine 32(16):1856–1862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.01.076CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Winblad B, Kawata AK, Beustrrieri KM et al (2007) Caregiver preference for rivastigmine patch relative to capsules for treatment of probable Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 22:485–491. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.1806CrossRefPubMed

26.

Adler G, Mueller B, Articus K (2014) The transdermal formulation of rivastigmine improves caregiver burden and treatment adherence of patients with Alzheimer’s disease under daily practice conditions. Int J Clin Pract 68:465–470. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12374CrossRefPubMed

27.

Pai MC, Aref H, Bassil N et al (2015) Real-world evaluation of compliance and preference in Alzheimer’s disease treatment. Clin Interv Aging 10:1779–1788. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S85319CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Lee KJ, Cho SJ, Kim BC et al (2017) Caregiver Preference and Treatment Compliance in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease in South Korea: RECAP Study Results. Adv Ther 34:481–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0465-8CrossRefPubMed

29.

Bridges JFP, Hauber AB, Marshall D et al (2011) Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health—a Checklist: A Report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Heal 14(4):403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013CrossRef

30.

Hollin IL, Craig BM, Coast J et al (2019) Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers. Patient 13(1 13):121–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40271-019-00401-XCrossRef

31.

Silverman S, Calderon A, Kaw K et al (2013) Patient weighting of osteoporosis medication attributes across racial and ethnic groups: a study of osteoporosis medication preferences using conjoint analysis. Osteoporosis Int 7:2067–2077. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00198-012-2241-1CrossRef

32.

U.S. (2009) Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:79. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-79CrossRef

33.

Losi S, Berra CCF, Fornengo R et al (2021) The role of patient preferences in adherence to treatment in chronic disease: a narrative review. Drug Target Insights 15:13–20. https://doi.org/10.33393/DTI.2021.2342CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment
Authors: Charlotte Beaudart
Stuart Silverman
Deborah T. Gold
Setareh A. Williams
Rich Weiss
Mickael Hiligsmann
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: Springer London
Keywords: Osteoporosis
Osteoporosis
Published in: Archives of Osteoporosis / Issue 1/2022
Print ISSN: 1862-3522
Electronic ISSN: 1862-3514
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-022-01075-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment

Abstract

Mini abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Mini abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Effect of denosumab treatment on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in osteoporotic patients: real-life experience 2-year follow-up

Self-reported physical functional health predicts future bone mineral density in EPIC-Norfolk cohort

Correction: UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis

Assessment of calcium and vitamin D medications adherence in patients with hypoparathyroidism after thyroidectomy

Lower socioeconomic status is associated with increased co-morbidity burden and independently associated with time to surgery, length of hospitalisation, and readmission rates of hip fracture patients

Alliance for the development of the Argentinian Hip Fracture Registry