Qualitative Interviews Exploring Adverse Event Mitigation Strategies in Adults Receiving Amikacin Liposome Inhalation Suspension

• Published in: Pulmonary therapy Vol. 10; no. 3; pp. 315 - 330
• Main Authors: Ali, Juzar, Wu, Jasmanda, Hassan, Mariam, Tsai, Jui-Hua, Touba, Nancy, McCarrier, Kelly, Ballard, Mark, Chatterjee, Anjan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cheshire Springer Healthcare 01.09.2024; Adis, Springer Healthcare
• Subjects: Adverse events; Amikacin liposome inhalation suspension; Family Medicine; General Practice; Internal Medicine; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Mycobacterium avium complex; Nontuberculous mycobacteria; Original Research; Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes; Pharmacotherapy; Pneumology/Respiratory System; Quality of Life Research; Amikacin liposome inhalation suspension; Adverse events; complex; Nontuberculous mycobacteria; Mycobacterium avium complex
• ISSN: 2364-1754; 2364-1746; 2364-1746
• DOI: 10.1007/s41030-024-00263-1

Introduction This study aimed to gain insight from patients with refractory Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease (MAC-LD) into strategies used to manage adverse events (AEs) associated with amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS). Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with US patients with refractory MAC-LD prescribed ALIS in a real-world setting. Interview transcripts were analyzed and coded to identify patterns in participants’ descriptions of their ALIS treatment experiences, including AEs and their disruptiveness, and AE mitigation strategies, including participants’ ratings of strategies’ effectiveness. Concept saturation was also assessed. Results Twenty participants (mean age 48.7 years; 80% women; mean ALIS duration 5.45 months) were interviewed. At the time of the interview, 15 participants (75%) had received ALIS for > 1 month and 13 (65%) were currently receiving ALIS. Participants described 44 unique AE mitigation strategies, which can be categorized into three groups: prepare for treatment; prevent increased emergence of AEs; and persist on treatment by mitigating AEs. Common strategies (reported by ≥ 50% of participants) included use of educational materials from the patient support program, localized management of throat irritation, and symptom management to reduce fatigue. Evidence of concept saturation was observed: no new strategies were identified in the last five interviews, which suggests the sample was robust enough to identify all mitigation strategies likely to be used by the broader patient population. Conclusions This real-world study identified a diverse set of potential AE mitigation strategies intended to help individual patients prepare for ALIS treatment, prevent the increased emergence of certain AEs, and mitigate the impact of AEs on treatment persistence. Developing a comprehensive accounting of the types of mitigation strategies in use among patients in real-world settings can inform future investigation of the effectiveness of such strategies, and support evidence-based recommendations for treatment management.