Search

Background: Current treatment regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include biologics such as epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, which have specific side-effect profiles. There is a lack of information on mCRC patient preference in Germany regarding biologics in combination with chemotherapy. This study aims to identify German mCRC patients' preference for these treatments PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter cross-sectional discrete choice experiment (DCE). Data were collected using electronic case report forms and structured phone interviews. DCE attributes were related to efficacy, side effects, frequency of administration, and distance to treating physicians' practice. Patients' characteristics and choices were analyzed descriptively. Choice data was modeled using a random utility maximization framework., Results: All attributes, except distance to treating physicians' practice, had a significant impact on patients' decision. The most important driver of patients' treatment decision was overall survival, followed by safety-related attributes and frequency of administration. Overall survival was the main driver in all subgroups analyzed. Risk of severe skin toxicities was more important to women, than men. In patients with prior experience of side effects, the risk of side effects accounted for 45% of a patient's decision, compared to 35% in those without prior experience., Conclusion: Overall survival remains the most important driver in mCRC patients' preferences for biologic treatment in combination with chemotherapy. Attributes related to safety were less important to patients when considering their treatment decision. These results indicate that understanding patient preferences may lead to increased treatment compliance., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real-world rates of treatment discontinuation and switching of biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)., Methods: A retrospective claims data analysis on all continuously insured adult IBD patients with initiation of a biologic therapy was conducted. Observation started with the date of the first prescription of index tumor necrosis factor α-inhibitors (anti-TNFα) or vedolizumab (VDZ) therapy and lasted 12 months. Non-persistence was assumed in case of a switch to another biologic or a treatment gap of >90 days., Results: We included 1,248 IBD biologic treatment starters (502 adalimumab, 77 golimumab, 441 infliximab, 228 VDZ); 837/411 were biologic-naïve (bio-naïve)/ biologic-experienced (bio-experienced). Mean age of bio-naïve/bio-experienced anti-TNFα patients was 39.2/38.1 years (54.9%/56.7% female) and 42.6/37.8 years for VDZ patients (56.3%/54.9% female). Seven hundred and seventy-two patients (61.9%) were persistent with their index biologic therapy after 12 months (61.9%/61.8% bio-naïve/bio-experienced). Percentage of persistent patients was 69.7% for VDZ (65.6%/71.3%) and 60.1% for anti-TNFα (61.4%/55.5%). VDZ was associated with later non-persistence in a multivariable Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio 0.675; p = 0.003) compared to anti-TNFα., Conclusions: Only 60-70% of IBD -patients are still persistent with their biologic therapy after 12 months. VDZ therapy is associated with a higher persistence than anti-TNFα therapy in this analysis., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background and Aims: While a minority of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients receives biologics in Germany, little is known about therapeutic needs of patients receiving non-biologic therapies. This study aimed to identify indicators of active disease/steroid dependency in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with conventional therapies and to describe health care resource use (HCRU)/cost., Methods: CD/UC patients treated with immunosuppressants (IS) and/or systemic or locally acting oral corticosteroids (CS) were identified in German claims data (2013-2017) and followed for 12 months post-therapy start. Indicators of active disease/steroid dependency during follow-up period were (i) ≥ 2 prescriptions of CS (sensitivity ≥ 4) or (ii) ≥ 1 IBD-related surgery or (iii) > 7 days IBD-related hospitalization(s)., Results: Of 9871 included IBD patients (5170 CD, 4701 UC), 25.7%/19.9% (CD/UC) received ≥ 2 prescriptions of CS (sensitivity, 17.4%/15.7%) (i), 3.2% experienced IBD-related surgeries (ii), and 2.5% > 7 days of hospitalizations (iii). Altogether, 44.4% had indicators of active disease/steroid dependency (sensitivity, 23.9%). Among patients with active disease/steroid dependency, 78.0% received CS monotherapy at baseline. Of these, 89.6% received a CS monotherapy in the follow-up period, too. Proportionally, fewer patients with CS monotherapy (57.4%) than IS therapy (91.0%) visited a specialist. HCRU/cost per patient year was significantly higher in patients with than without active disease/steroid dependency., Conclusions: A substantial percentage of biologic-naïve IBD patients suffers from active disease/steroid dependency. The majority receives a monotherapy with systemic CS. Referral to gastroenterologists for treatment optimization is recommended, also because active disease/steroid dependency is associated with increased HCRU/cost.