AB0370 Development of patient preference phenotypes for rheumatoid arthritis

BackgroundMany important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, mandate a shared decision making approach (SDM). Furthermore, SDM is being increasingly recognized as an important...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAnnals of the rheumatic diseases Vol. 76; no. Suppl 2; p. 1177
Main Authors Nowell, WB, Wiedmeyer, C, Herath, G, Michel, G, Fraenkel, L
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Kidlington Elsevier Limited 01.06.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0003-4967
1468-2060
DOI10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-eular.5024

Cover

Loading…
Abstract BackgroundMany important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, mandate a shared decision making approach (SDM). Furthermore, SDM is being increasingly recognized as an important quality measure. One of the most common preference sensitive decisions in RA is how to escalate care when response to methotrexate monotherapy is inadequate. However, the number of RA medications currently approved makes it challenging for patients to weigh the pros and cons related to each of the treatment options in order to develop a preference.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to develop representative patient preference phenotypes to enable patient-physician dyads to effectively incorporate patient preferences at the point-of-care.MethodsPeople living with RA were invited to complete a Choice-Based Conjoint analysis survey including seven attributes (route of administration, time to onset of action, bothersome adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, extremely rare AEs, duration of time on the market and affordability) developed iteratively based on patient feedback. Each attribute was described across three or four levels using plain language. Preference phenotypes were identified by applying latent class analysis to the conjoint data. Class solutions were replicated five times from random starting seeds. A five-group solution was chosen based on Akaike's information criterion. We calculated the percentage of importance assigned to each attribute and performed simulations to estimate preferences for triple therapy, SC and IV biologics, or tofacitinib.Results1100 U.S. subjects recruited via the CreakyJoints online patient community completed the survey. Of these, 49 were eliminated because they completed the survey in less than 10 minutes and an additional 45 people were excluded because they did not respond correctly to a dominant choice task. The mean age was 51.7 (11.2). The majority were female; (92%) and Caucasian (93%). Preferences (assuming low cost across options), and the reasons underlying each respondent's preference, clustered into five groups (Figure 1). There were no differences in the distribution of demographic or clinical characteristics across the five groups. Phenotypes were created based on the stated preference data.ConclusionsRA patients' preferences vary and can be classified into distinct phenotypes. Ongoing research is evaluating whether enabling patients to identify with a preference phenotype facilitates SDM at the point-of-care.AcknowledgementsThis research was supported by a grant from the Rheumatology Research Foundation.Disclosure of InterestNone declared
AbstractList Background Many important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, mandate a shared decision making approach (SDM). Furthermore, SDM is being increasingly recognized as an important quality measure. One of the most common preference sensitive decisions in RA is how to escalate care when response to methotrexate monotherapy is inadequate. However, the number of RA medications currently approved makes it challenging for patients to weigh the pros and cons related to each of the treatment options in order to develop a preference. Objectives The objective of this study was to develop representative patient preference phenotypes to enable patient-physician dyads to effectively incorporate patient preferences at the point-of-care. Methods People living with RA were invited to complete a Choice-Based Conjoint analysis survey including seven attributes (route of administration, time to onset of action, bothersome adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, extremely rare AEs, duration of time on the market and affordability) developed iteratively based on patient feedback. Each attribute was described across three or four levels using plain language. Preference phenotypes were identified by applying latent class analysis to the conjoint data. Class solutions were replicated five times from random starting seeds. A five-group solution was chosen based on Akaike's information criterion. We calculated the percentage of importance assigned to each attribute and performed simulations to estimate preferences for triple therapy, SC and IV biologics, or tofacitinib. Results 1100 U.S. subjects recruited via the CreakyJoints online patient community completed the survey. Of these, 49 were eliminated because they completed the survey in less than 10 minutes and an additional 45 people were excluded because they did not respond correctly to a dominant choice task. The mean age was 51.7 (11.2). The majority were female; (92%) and Caucasian (93%). Preferences (assuming low cost across options), and the reasons underlying each respondent's preference, clustered into five groups ( Figure 1 ). There were no differences in the distribution of demographic or clinical characteristics across the five groups. Phenotypes were created based on the stated preference data. Conclusions RA patients' preferences vary and can be classified into distinct phenotypes. Ongoing research is evaluating whether enabling patients to identify with a preference phenotype facilitates SDM at the point-of-care. Acknowledgements This research was supported by a grant from the Rheumatology Research Foundation. Disclosure of Interest None declared
BackgroundMany important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, mandate a shared decision making approach (SDM). Furthermore, SDM is being increasingly recognized as an important quality measure. One of the most common preference sensitive decisions in RA is how to escalate care when response to methotrexate monotherapy is inadequate. However, the number of RA medications currently approved makes it challenging for patients to weigh the pros and cons related to each of the treatment options in order to develop a preference.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to develop representative patient preference phenotypes to enable patient-physician dyads to effectively incorporate patient preferences at the point-of-care.MethodsPeople living with RA were invited to complete a Choice-Based Conjoint analysis survey including seven attributes (route of administration, time to onset of action, bothersome adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, extremely rare AEs, duration of time on the market and affordability) developed iteratively based on patient feedback. Each attribute was described across three or four levels using plain language. Preference phenotypes were identified by applying latent class analysis to the conjoint data. Class solutions were replicated five times from random starting seeds. A five-group solution was chosen based on Akaike's information criterion. We calculated the percentage of importance assigned to each attribute and performed simulations to estimate preferences for triple therapy, SC and IV biologics, or tofacitinib.Results1100 U.S. subjects recruited via the CreakyJoints online patient community completed the survey. Of these, 49 were eliminated because they completed the survey in less than 10 minutes and an additional 45 people were excluded because they did not respond correctly to a dominant choice task. The mean age was 51.7 (11.2). The majority were female; (92%) and Caucasian (93%). Preferences (assuming low cost across options), and the reasons underlying each respondent's preference, clustered into five groups (Figure 1). There were no differences in the distribution of demographic or clinical characteristics across the five groups. Phenotypes were created based on the stated preference data.ConclusionsRA patients' preferences vary and can be classified into distinct phenotypes. Ongoing research is evaluating whether enabling patients to identify with a preference phenotype facilitates SDM at the point-of-care.AcknowledgementsThis research was supported by a grant from the Rheumatology Research Foundation.Disclosure of InterestNone declared
Author Nowell, WB
Michel, G
Fraenkel, L
Wiedmeyer, C
Herath, G
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: WB
  surname: Nowell
  fullname: Nowell, WB
  organization: Global Healthy Living Foundation, Upper Nyack
– sequence: 2
  givenname: C
  surname: Wiedmeyer
  fullname: Wiedmeyer, C
  organization: Global Healthy Living Foundation, Upper Nyack
– sequence: 3
  givenname: G
  surname: Herath
  fullname: Herath, G
  organization: Yale University School of Medicine
– sequence: 4
  givenname: G
  surname: Michel
  fullname: Michel, G
  organization: Yale University, New Haven, CT, United States
– sequence: 5
  givenname: L
  surname: Fraenkel
  fullname: Fraenkel, L
  organization: Yale University School of Medicine
BookMark eNqVkD1PwzAQhi0EEm3hP0TqnHK2E8cWUymfUgULzJaTXNRUjR3sBKkbC3-UX0LSMrAy3YfuvffumZJT6ywSMqewoJSLK2Ot32DflHWIGdAsxn5n_CIFlpyQCU2EHNoCTskEAHicKJGdk2kI26EESeWEPC9vgGfw_fl1ix-4c22DtotcFbWmq8e09VihR1tg1G7Qum7fYogq56ODs-lcXUbGdxtfd3W4IGeV2QW8_I0z8nZ_97p6jNcvD0-r5TrOqYQk5spIo3C4iaZVSQVAqWjB0oQVeZEmmaAqSyBnIi0FL1OjMlGAKAslc1lxZHxG5se9rXfvPYZOb13v7WCpGXAuGVNinLo-ThXehTA8oltfN8bvNQU9AtR_AOoRoD4A1CPAQS2O6rzZ_kv4AxU3fmM
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2017, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Copyright: 2017 © 2017, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Copyright_xml – notice: 2017, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
– notice: Copyright: 2017 © 2017, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
3V.
7X5
7X7
7XB
88E
88I
8AF
8FE
8FH
8FI
8FJ
8FK
ABUWG
AFKRA
AZQEC
BBNVY
BENPR
BEZIV
BHPHI
BTHHO
CCPQU
DWQXO
FYUFA
GHDGH
GNUQQ
HCIFZ
K6~
K9-
K9.
LK8
M0R
M0S
M1P
M2P
M7P
PHGZM
PHGZT
PJZUB
PKEHL
PPXIY
PQEST
PQGLB
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
Q9U
DOI 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-eular.5024
DatabaseName CrossRef
ProQuest Central (Corporate)
Entrepreneurship Database
ProQuest Health & Medical Collection
ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
Science Database (Alumni Edition)
STEM Database
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
Hospital Premium Collection
Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
ProQuest Central Essentials
Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central
Business Premium Collection
Natural Science Collection
BMJ Journals
ProQuest One
ProQuest Central Korea
Proquest Health Research Premium Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Central Student
SciTech Premium Collection
ProQuest Business Collection
Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
Biological Sciences
Consumer Health Database
Health & Medical Collection (Alumni)
Medical Database
Science Database
Biological Science Database
ProQuest Central Premium
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Central Basic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
ProQuest Central Student
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Central Essentials
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest AP Science
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
SciTech Premium Collection
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Family Health (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Central
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
Health Research Premium Collection
Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition)
Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Central Korea
Health & Medical Research Collection
Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central (New)
ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni)
ProQuest Entrepreneurship
Business Premium Collection
ProQuest Science Journals (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central Basic
ProQuest Science Journals
ProQuest Family Health
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
ProQuest Hospital Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
Biological Science Database
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Business Collection
ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete
ProQuest Medical Library
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
BMJ Journals
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
DatabaseTitleList ProQuest Central Student

Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: BENPR
  name: ProQuest Central
  url: https://www.proquest.com/central
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1468-2060
ExternalDocumentID 10_1136_annrheumdis_2017_eular_5024
annrheumdis
GeographicLocations United States--US
GeographicLocations_xml – name: United States--US
GroupedDBID ---
.55
.GJ
.VT
169
23M
2WC
39C
3O-
4.4
40O
53G
5GY
5RE
5VS
6J9
7X7
7~S
88E
88I
8AF
8FE
8FH
8FI
8FJ
8R4
8R5
AAHLL
AAKAS
AAOJX
AAWJN
AAWTL
AAXUO
ABAAH
ABJNI
ABKDF
ABMQD
ABOCM
ABTFR
ABUWG
ABVAJ
ACGFO
ACGFS
ACGOD
ACGTL
ACHTP
ACMFJ
ACOAB
ACOFX
ACPRK
ACQSR
ACTZY
ADBBV
ADCEG
ADFRT
ADUGQ
ADZCM
AEKJL
AENEX
AFKRA
AFWFF
AGQPQ
AHMBA
AHNKE
AHQMW
AJYBZ
AKKEP
ALIPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ASPBG
AVWKF
AZFZN
AZQEC
BAWUL
BBNVY
BENPR
BHPHI
BKNYI
BLJBA
BOMFT
BPHCQ
BTFSW
BTHHO
BVXVI
C1A
C45
CAG
CCPQU
COF
CS3
CXRWF
DIK
DWQXO
E3Z
EBS
EJD
F5P
FDB
FYUFA
GNUQQ
H13
HAJ
HCIFZ
HMCUK
HYE
HZ~
IAO
IEA
IHR
INH
INR
IOF
ITC
J5H
K9-
KQ8
L7B
LK8
M0R
M1P
M2P
M7P
N9A
NTWIH
NXWIF
O9-
OK1
OVD
P2P
PHGZT
PQQKQ
PROAC
PSQYO
Q2X
R53
RHI
RMJ
RPM
RV8
RWL
RXW
TAE
TEORI
TR2
UAW
UKHRP
UYXKK
V24
VM9
VVN
W2D
W8F
WH7
WOQ
X6Y
X7M
YFH
YOC
YQY
ZGI
ZXP
AAFWJ
AALRI
AAYXX
CITATION
PHGZM
3V.
7X5
7XB
8FK
BEZIV
K6~
K9.
PJZUB
PKEHL
PPXIY
PQEST
PQGLB
PQUKI
PRINS
Q9U
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-b1804-39a8a9e00315fd1600d91c2542cbc547619740b265d63d5a976c06dc98b8f3e23
IEDL.DBID 7X7
ISSN 0003-4967
IngestDate Fri Jul 25 10:58:56 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 00:58:38 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:09:03 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess false
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue Suppl 2
Language English
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-b1804-39a8a9e00315fd1600d91c2542cbc547619740b265d63d5a976c06dc98b8f3e23
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
OpenAccessLink https://ard.bmj.com/content/annrheumdis/76/Suppl_2/1177.3.full.pdf
PQID 2033822962
PQPubID 2041045
ParticipantIDs proquest_journals_2033822962
crossref_primary_10_1136_annrheumdis_2017_eular_5024
bmj_primary_10_1136_annrheumdis_2017_eular_5024
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 20170600
2017-06-00
20170601
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2017-06-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 06
  year: 2017
  text: 20170600
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace Kidlington
PublicationPlace_xml – name: Kidlington
PublicationTitle Annals of the rheumatic diseases
PublicationYear 2017
Publisher Elsevier Limited
Publisher_xml – name: Elsevier Limited
SSID ssj0000818
Score 2.2156236
Snippet BackgroundMany important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S....
Background Many important treatment decisions for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are conditional on patient preferences and, according to the U.S....
SourceID proquest
crossref
bmj
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 1177
SubjectTerms Decision making
Methotrexate
Patients
Phenotypes
Preferences
Rheumatoid arthritis
Title AB0370 Development of patient preference phenotypes for rheumatoid arthritis
URI http://ard.bmj.com/content/76/Suppl_2/1177.3.full
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2033822962
Volume 76
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV1LSwMxEA62heJFfGK1loBeV3c32TxO0kpLEVtELPS27CZZWqEP-_j_ZtKs2ovgeXdh-TKZfDOZmQ-hOxpaB8BVERgjSECp4oFkkQ7yzHIJzqNEMGhOHgxZf0Sfx8nYJ9zWvqyy9InOUeuFghy5DdJtMBXHksWPy88AVKPgdtVLaFRQDUaXQUkXH_MfTywiUSrmUcl4Hd16FRMQeVlNzHamp2trKNZTG6j6vE9CaH2v5LOP_XNq3027s6d3jI48acTt3SqfoAMzP0X1gb8WP0Mv7U5IeIh_VQDhRYH9zFS8_NYSwVDRtYC06xpbtordz9mwe6qxNaGJG3B0jka97vtTP_AyCUEeCbjXkJnIpIHtmRQ6sgxGy0jZwC9WuUoo5Ck4DfOYJZoRnWSWgKiQaSVFLgpiYnKBqvPF3FwiXEhBCBfGshBNFYuEjGGajD3BQpUlMmugBwtNutwNwkhdAEFcU3MJZgpgpg7MFMBsIFrC-L_PmiXkqd9U8E5pAld_P75Gh25NXbKkiaqb1dbcWO6wyVvOQFqo1ukOX9--AMCzwxc
linkProvider ProQuest
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LS8QwEB50BfUiPvFtQD1W-0jT5CDik1V3FxEFb7VNUlRwd91dEf-Uv9GZbOvjInjw3BbKly8z8yXzANjiPhqARBeetTLyONeJp0RgvDzDWCJJglgKKk5utkT9hp_fxrcj8F7VwlBaZWUTnaE2HU1n5CjSUUyFoRLhfvfZo6lRdLtajdAY0uLCvr2iZOvvnR3j-m6H4enJ9VHdK6cKeHkg6RpAZTJTltgcFyZAh29UoFEnhTrXMSdZn3A_D0VsRGTiDP219oXRSuayiCw1OkCTP8YjlDI1GDs8aV1efdl-GchqRh9XIhmHzXJuCo2V6d3blyfz0Edqom-wlGe6E_tUbD-aPz3-9Iw_HYPzdqfTMFWGqexgyKsZGLHtWRhvlhfxc9A4OPSjxGffco5Yp2Bll1bW_ZxewiiHrEMHvX2G8TFzP4dC_8EwJO29a6k0Dzf_AuEC1Nqdtl0EVigZRYm0GPcYrkUgVUj9a9Bn-jqLVbYEuwhN2h223kidZIlcGXUFZkpgpg7MlMBcAl7B-LfPVivI03Ib0zsV6ZZ_f7wBE_XrZiNtnLUuVmDSra87qlmF2qD3Ytcwchnk6yVdGNz9N0M_AGcn_Xw
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LT9tAEB5BKkVcKihFvFmp9GjwY5-HqgrQKJSHeihSbsbeXQuQSNIkCPHX-us6s7F5XJB6yNm2ZH377Xwzu_MA2OcxGgBlq8h7nUWcWxUZmbioLNCXUCoRWlJx8sWl7F3xn33RX4C_TS0MpVU2NjEYaje0dEaOQToGU2lqZHpY1WkRv06630d_IpogRTetzTiNGUXO_NMjhm-Tb6cnuNZf07T74_dxL6onDERloulKwBS6MJ6YLSqXoPg7k1iMmVJbWsEpxFc8LlMpnMycKFC7bSydNbrUVeap6QGa_w8qEwntMdVXLyqgE91M6-NGqjZ8qSeo0ICZ8Y1_uHe3EyQpqoSnjNMDEVPZ_WJ5f_dWI99KRNC97jJ8rB1W1pkxbAUW_OATtC_qK_lVOO8cxZmK2avsIzasWN2vlY2e55gwyiYb0pHvhKGnzMLPYch_6xjS9yY0V_oMV3MBcA1ag-HArwOrjM4ypT16QI5bmWiTUicbVM_YFsIUG3CI0OSjWROOPAQvWSiobsDMCcw8gJkTmBvAGxj_77PtBvK83tD0TkO_zfcf70EbeZmfn16ebcFSWN5wZrMNren4we-gCzMtdwNXGFzPm5z_AKtTAFs
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=AB0370%E2%80%85Development+of+patient+preference+phenotypes+for+rheumatoid+arthritis&rft.jtitle=Annals+of+the+rheumatic+diseases&rft.au=Nowell%2C+WB&rft.au=Wiedmeyer%2C+C&rft.au=Herath%2C+G&rft.au=Michel%2C+G&rft.date=2017-06-01&rft.issn=0003-4967&rft.eissn=1468-2060&rft.volume=76&rft.issue=Suppl+2&rft.spage=1177&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136%2Fannrheumdis-2017-eular.5024&rft.externalDBID=ard&rft.externalDocID=annrheumdis
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0003-4967&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0003-4967&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0003-4967&client=summon