Search

Objectives: We aimed to quantify patient preferences for efficacy, safety and convenience features of atopic dermatitis (AD) treatments., Design and Setting: Online discrete choice experiment survey., Participants: Adults in the UK, France and Spain who had used AD treatments during the past 2 years., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Preferences for attributes were analysed using a multinomial logit model. Willingness to make trade-offs was expressed as the maximum acceptable decrease (MAD) in the probability of achieving clear/almost clear skin at week 16., Results: The survey was completed by 404 patients (44.1±12.0 years; 65% women; 64% moderate/severe eczema). Most patients (68%) had no prior experience of using self-injectable treatments for AD or any other illness. Participants most valued increasing the chance of achieving a meaningful reduction in itch at week 16 from 20% to 50%, followed by reducing the risks of serious infections from 6% to 0% and of eye inflammation from 20% to 0%. Participants were willing to accept a decrease in the possibility of achieving clear/almost clear skin to obtain a treatment that can be paused (MAD=24.1%), requires occasional check-ups (MAD=16.1%) or no check-ups (MAD=20.9%) over frequent check-ups, is administered as a one time per day or two times per day oral pill versus a subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks (MAD=16.6%), has a 2-day over 2-week onset of action (MAD=11.3%), and can be used for flare management (MAD=5.8%)., Conclusions: Although patients with AD most valued treatment benefits and risks, they were willing to tolerate reduced efficacy to obtain a rapid onset, oral administration, less frequent monitoring and a treatment that can be paused. Understanding patients' preferences for AD therapies, including new targeted therapies, can aid shared decision-making between clinicians and patients and support health technology assessments., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CT, NK, HK and TT are employees of Evidera, which was paid by Eli Lilly & Co for work related to this study. AR and J-PC are employees of Eli Lilly & Co. AW received personal fees from Eli Lilly & Co for work related to this study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)