Preferences for genetic interventions for SCA and Huntington's disease: results of a discrete choice experiment among patients.
Journal
Orphanet journal of rare diseases
ISSN: 1750-1172
Titre abrégé: Orphanet J Rare Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101266602
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Oct 2024
28 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
08
11
2023
accepted:
13
10
2024
medline:
29
10
2024
pubmed:
29
10
2024
entrez:
29
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although genetic interventions are on the horizon for some polyglutamine expansion diseases, such as subtypes of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) and Huntington's disease (HD), the patients' preferences regarding these new therapies are unclear. This study aims to get insight into what extent different characteristics of genetic interventions affect the preferences of patients with SCA and HD with regard to these interventions. Manifest and premanifest patients with SCA or HD were recruited online by platforms of patient associations. The respondents conducted a questionnaire that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The experimental design included 24 choice sets, but these were divided into three blocks of eight to reduce the number of tasks per respondent. Each choice set included two alternative treatments and consisted of four attributes (mode and frequency of administration, chance of a beneficial effect, risks, and follow-up), each with three or four different levels. The forced choice-elicitation format was used. Data were analyzed by using a multinominal logistic regression model. Responses of 216 participants were collected. The mode and frequency of administration of a genetic intervention, as well as the chance of a beneficial effect both influence the choice for a genetic intervention. Respondents less prefer repeated lumbar punctures compared to a single operation. As expected, a higher beneficial effect of treatment was preferred. Risks and follow-up did not influence the choice for a genetic intervention. The results can be used for the design and implementation of future genetic interventional trials as well as of patient-centered care pathways for rare movement disorders such as SCA and HD.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although genetic interventions are on the horizon for some polyglutamine expansion diseases, such as subtypes of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) and Huntington's disease (HD), the patients' preferences regarding these new therapies are unclear. This study aims to get insight into what extent different characteristics of genetic interventions affect the preferences of patients with SCA and HD with regard to these interventions.
METHODS
METHODS
Manifest and premanifest patients with SCA or HD were recruited online by platforms of patient associations. The respondents conducted a questionnaire that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The experimental design included 24 choice sets, but these were divided into three blocks of eight to reduce the number of tasks per respondent. Each choice set included two alternative treatments and consisted of four attributes (mode and frequency of administration, chance of a beneficial effect, risks, and follow-up), each with three or four different levels. The forced choice-elicitation format was used. Data were analyzed by using a multinominal logistic regression model.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Responses of 216 participants were collected. The mode and frequency of administration of a genetic intervention, as well as the chance of a beneficial effect both influence the choice for a genetic intervention. Respondents less prefer repeated lumbar punctures compared to a single operation. As expected, a higher beneficial effect of treatment was preferred. Risks and follow-up did not influence the choice for a genetic intervention.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The results can be used for the design and implementation of future genetic interventional trials as well as of patient-centered care pathways for rare movement disorders such as SCA and HD.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39468657
doi: 10.1186/s13023-024-03408-2
pii: 10.1186/s13023-024-03408-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
398Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
A novel gene. Containing a trinucleotide repeat that is expanded and unstable on Huntington’s disease chromosomes. The Huntington’s Disease Collaborative Research Group. Cell. 1993;72(6):971–83.
doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90585-E
Verbeek DS, van de Warrenburg BP. Genetics of the dominant ataxias. Semin Neurol. 2011;31(5):461–9.
doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1299785
pubmed: 22266884
Sullivan R, Yau WY, O’Connor E, Houlden H. Spinocerebellar ataxia: an update. J Neurol. 2019;266(2):533–44.
doi: 10.1007/s00415-018-9076-4
pubmed: 30284037
McColgan P, Tabrizi SJ. Huntington’s disease: a clinical review. Eur J Neurol. 2018;25(1):24–34.
doi: 10.1111/ene.13413
pubmed: 28817209
Tabrizi SJ, Estevez-Fraga C, van Roon-Mom WMC, Flower MD, Scahill RI, Wild EJ, et al. Potential disease-modifying therapies for Huntington’s disease: lessons learned and future opportunities. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(7):645–58.
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00121-1
pubmed: 35716694
pmcid: 7613206
Vázquez-Mojena Y, León-Arcia K, González-Zaldivar Y, Rodríguez-Labrada R, Velázquez-Pérez L. Gene Therapy for Polyglutamine Spinocerebellar ataxias: advances, challenges, and perspectives. Mov Disord. 2021;36(12):2731–44.
doi: 10.1002/mds.28819
pubmed: 34628681
Tabrizi SJ, Flower MD, Ross CA, Wild EJ. Huntington disease: new insights into molecular pathogenesis and therapeutic opportunities. Nat Rev Neurol. 2020;16(10):529–46.
doi: 10.1038/s41582-020-0389-4
pubmed: 32796930
Matos CA, Carmona V, Vijayakumar UG, Lopes S, Albuquerque P, Conceição M, et al. Gene therapies for Polyglutamine diseases. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2018;1049:395–438.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-71779-1_20
pubmed: 29427115
US FDA grants VICO Therapeutics Orphan-Drug Designation for VO. 659, an Investigational Therapy for Spinocerebellar Ataxia [updated 2021, June 29th. https://vicotx.com/us-fda-grants-vico-therapeutics-orphan-drug-designation-for-vo659-an-investigational-therapy-for-spinocerebellar-ataxia/
Pharmacokinetics A. and Safety Study of BIIB132 in Adults With Spinocerebellar Ataxia 3 (clinicaltrials.gov) [updated May 2nd, 2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05160558
McLoughlin HS, Moore LR, Chopra R, Komlo R, McKenzie M, Blumenstein KG, et al. Oligonucleotide therapy mitigates disease in spinocerebellar ataxia type 3 mice. Ann Neurol. 2018;84(1):64–77.
doi: 10.1002/ana.25264
pubmed: 29908063
pmcid: 6119475
Tabrizi SJ, Leavitt BR, Landwehrmeyer GB, Wild EJ, Saft C, Barker RA, et al. Targeting huntingtin expression in patients with Huntington’s Disease. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(24):2307–16.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1900907
pubmed: 31059641
Leavitt BR, Kordasiewicz HB, Schobel SA. Huntingtin-lowering therapies for Huntington Disease: a review of the evidence of potential benefits and risks. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(6):764–72.
doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.0299
pubmed: 32202594
Simpson JA, Lovecky D, Kogan J, Vetter LA, Yohrling GJ. Survey of the Huntington’s Disease patient and Caregiver Community reveals most impactful symptoms and treatment needs. J Huntingtons Dis. 2016;5(4):395–403.
doi: 10.3233/JHD-160228
pubmed: 27983566
Gornick MC, Ryan KA, Dayalu P, Carlozzi NE, Albin RL, Zahuranec DB. Huntington’s Disease Community Perspectives on Desired Characteristics of Disease Modifying Therapies. Tremor Other Hyperkinet Mov (N Y). 2021;11:3.
Rathert C, Wyrwich MD, Boren SA. Patient-centered care and outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev. 2013;70(4):351–79.
doi: 10.1177/1077558712465774
pubmed: 23169897
Marzban S, Najafi M, Agolli A, Ashrafi E. Impact of Patient Engagement on Healthcare Quality: a scoping review. J Patient Exp. 2022;9:23743735221125439.
doi: 10.1177/23743735221125439
pubmed: 36134145
pmcid: 9483965
Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M. Using Discrete Choice experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008.
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5753-3
Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, Vass CM. Discrete choice experiments in Health Economics: past, Present and Future. PharmacoEconomics. 2019;37(2):201–26.
doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2
pubmed: 30392040
Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health–a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14(4):403–13.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013
pubmed: 21669364
Bardakjian TM, Naczi KF, Gonzalez-Alegre P. Attitudes of potential participants towards molecular therapy trials in Huntington’s Disease. J Huntingtons Dis. 2019;8(1):79–85.
doi: 10.3233/JHD-180328
pubmed: 30689592
pmcid: 6398921
Thomas-Black G, Dumitrascu A, Garcia-Moreno H, Vallortigara J, Greenfield J, Hunt B, et al. The attitude of patients with progressive ataxias towards clinical trials. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022;17(1):1.
doi: 10.1186/s13023-021-02091-x
pubmed: 34983593
pmcid: 8729009
Landrum Peay H, Fischer R, Tzeng JP, Hesterlee SE, Morris C, Strong Martin A, et al. Gene therapy as a potential therapeutic option for Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a qualitative preference study of patients and parents. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(5):e0213649.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213649
pubmed: 31042754
pmcid: 6493713
Paquin RS, Fischer R, Mansfield C, Mange B, Beaverson K, Ganot A, et al. Priorities when deciding on participation in early-phase gene therapy trials for Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a best-worst scaling experiment in caregivers and adult patients. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):102.
doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1069-6
pubmed: 31072340
pmcid: 6509771
van Os NJH, Oosterloo M, Essers BAB, Grutters JPC, van de Warrenburg BPC. Genetic interventions for spinocerebellar ataxia and Huntington’s disease: a qualitative study of the patient perspective. J Huntingtons Dis. 2024;13(3):321–28. https://doi.org/10.3233/JHD-240026 .
Evans RW. Complications of lumbar puncture. Neurol Clin. 1998;16(1):83–105.
doi: 10.1016/S0733-8619(05)70368-6
pubmed: 9421542
Johnson FR, Yang JC, Reed SD. The Internal Validity of Discrete Choice Experiment Data: a Testing Tool for quantitative assessments. Value Health. 2019;22(2):157–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.07.876
pubmed: 30711059
Orme B. Getting started with Conjoint Analysis: strategies for product design and Pricing Research. Chapter 7: sample size issues for Conjoint Analysis. Madison, Wisconsin: Research Publishers LCC; 2019.
Witkop M, Morgan G, O’Hara J, Recht M, Buckner TW, Nugent D, et al. Patient preferences and priorities for haemophilia gene therapy in the US: a discrete choice experiment. Haemophilia. 2021;27(5):769–82.
doi: 10.1111/hae.14383
pubmed: 34310811
pmcid: 9290457
Monnette A, Chen E, Hong D, Bazzano A, Dixon S, Arnold WD, Shi L. Treatment preference among patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA): a discrete choice experiment. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16(1):36.
doi: 10.1186/s13023-020-01667-3
pubmed: 33472673
pmcid: 7819167
Tabrizi SJ, Scahill RI, Durr A, Roos RA, Leavitt BR, Jones R, et al. Biological and clinical changes in premanifest and early stage Huntington’s disease in the TRACK-HD study: the 12-month longitudinal analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10(1):31–42.
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70276-3
pubmed: 21130037
Byrne LM, Rodrigues FB, Johnson EB, Wijeratne PA, De Vita E, Alexander DC et al. Evaluation of mutant huntingtin and neurofilament proteins as potential markers in Huntington’s disease. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(458).
Statistics Netherlands: Highest achieved level of education by age and gender (Dutch only): Statistics Netherlands. 2022. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/maatwerk/2022/47/opleidingsniveau-16-naar-leeftijd-en-geslacht-2021
Watson V, Becker F, de Bekker-Grob E. Discrete Choice Experiment Response Rates: a Meta-analysis. Health Econ. 2017;26(6):810–7.
doi: 10.1002/hec.3354
pubmed: 27122445
Ryan M, Krucien N, Hermens F. The eyes have it: using eye tracking to inform information processing strategies in multi-attributes choices. Health Econ. 2018;27(4):709–21.
doi: 10.1002/hec.3626
pubmed: 29280222
Lancsar E, Louviere J. Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences? Health Econ. 2006;15(8):797–811.
doi: 10.1002/hec.1104
pubmed: 16615039
Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user’s guide. PharmacoEconomics. 2008;26(8):661–77.
doi: 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004
pubmed: 18620460
Klockgether T, Lüdtke R, Kramer B, Abele M, Bürk K, Schöls L, et al. The natural history of degenerative ataxia: a retrospective study in 466 patients. Brain. 1998;121(Pt 4):589–600.
doi: 10.1093/brain/121.4.589
pubmed: 9577387
Unified Huntington’s Disease Rating Scale. Reliability and consistency. Huntington Study Group. Mov Disord. 1996;11(2):136–42.
doi: 10.1002/mds.870110204