IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v8y2024i6d10.1007_s41669-024-00510-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinicians’ Preferences for Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Receptor Modulators in Multiple Sclerosis Based on Clinical Management Considerations: A Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Keenan

    (Janssen Scientific Affairs)

  • Chiara Whichello

    (Evidera)

  • Hoa H. Le

    (Janssen Scientific Affairs)

  • David M. Kern

    (Janssen Research and Development)

  • Gabriela S. Fernandez

    (Evidera)

  • Vicky Turner

    (Evidera)

  • Anup Das

    (Evidera)

  • Matt Quaife

    (Evidera)

  • Amy Perrin Ross

    (Loyola University Chicago)

Abstract

Background Four sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulators are currently available in the USA for treating relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). These S1PR modulators have similar efficacy. Clinicians may therefore consider other factors, such as clinical management considerations, when distinguishing among treatments. This study estimated which S1PR modulator clinicians would choose on the basis of a treatment’s clinical management and quantified how individual aspects of clinical management might drive this choice. Methods A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was conducted on the basis of clinical management preferences elicited in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and real-world clinical management profiles of the S1PR modulators currently available to treat relapsing forms of MS (fingolimod, ozanimod, ponesimod, siponimod). The DCE was completed by neurologists in the USA experienced in treating MS and included eight clinical management attributes: first-dose observations, genotyping, liver function tests, eye exams, drug–drug interactions, interactions with antidepressants, interactions with foods high in tyramine, and immune system recovery time. Attribute levels were selected on the basis of S1PR modulator product labels. In the MCDA, partial MCDA scores were created for each attribute and summed to produce an overall MCDA score for each S1PR modulator. Results The DCE was completed by 200 neurologists. The overall MCDA score was highest for ponesimod (4.78 points), followed by siponimod (4.10 points), fingolimod (3.61 points), and ozanimod (2.38 points). Having fewer drug–drug interactions contributed most to the overall scores (up to 1.56 points), followed by having no first-dose observations (0.95 points), the shortest immune system recovery time (0.94 points), and not interacting with foods high in tyramine (0.86 points). Conclusion When considering clinical management convenience, the average US-based neurologist treating MS is likely to choose ponesimod over siponimod, fingolimod, or ozanimod. The strongest driver of preferences was the number of drug–drug interactions. This information can help inform recommendations for the treatment of MS and facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Keenan & Chiara Whichello & Hoa H. Le & David M. Kern & Gabriela S. Fernandez & Vicky Turner & Anup Das & Matt Quaife & Amy Perrin Ross, 2024. "Clinicians’ Preferences for Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Receptor Modulators in Multiple Sclerosis Based on Clinical Management Considerations: A Choice Experiment," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 8(6), pages 857-867, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s41669-024-00510-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-024-00510-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-024-00510-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-024-00510-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:8:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s41669-024-00510-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.