Patient and community preferences for treatments and health states in multiple sclerosis

Objective: To examine preferences for treatments and health states for patients with relapsing-remitting MS and members of the community. Methods: A survey was developed to evaluate health-related quality-of-life measures (utilities) for three treatments and six MS health states using a utility-elicitatio n software package, U-Titer II. Sixty-two MS patients at two large teaching hospitals in Boston, MA, and 67 members of the general community in San Diego, C A, completed the health-related quality-of-life survey using a computer. Results: A ssessment of quality of life decreased as disability level of MS health states increased for both respondent groups. Respondents rated less-disabled health states relatively highly (>0.94 for patients and >0.89 for community respondents). Q uality-of-life measures for treatments in mean utilities ranged from 0.80 to 0.96. Patients assigned higher utilities for both MS health states and treatment states than community respondents; the ratings became more disparate as health states worsened. Conclusions: O n average, respondents assigned utilities to currently available treatments for MS that are comparable to those of mild to moderate stages of the disease itself. These results underscore the importance of including preferences for health states and treatment alternatives in the decision to initiate treatment for individual patients or in the evaluation of effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of these treatments in patients with MS.

[1]  S. Steinmetz,et al.  Notes from the insurance underground: how the chronically ill cope. , 1994, Journal of health politics, policy and law.

[2]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Preference-based measures in economic evaluation in health care. , 2000, Annual review of public health.

[3]  Carolyn E. Schwartz,et al.  Reliability and validity of two self-report measures of impairment and disability for MS , 1999, Neurology.

[4]  G W Torrance,et al.  Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health Utilities Index. , 1995, PharmacoEconomics.

[5]  G. Torrance,et al.  Cost and health related quality of life consequences of multiple sclerosis , 2000, Multiple sclerosis.

[6]  D. Goodin,et al.  Side-effect profile of interferon beta 1-B , 1995, Journal of Neuroimmunology.

[7]  G. W. Ellison,et al.  A health-related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis , 1995, Quality of Life Research.

[8]  M. Weinstein,et al.  The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1996, JAMA.

[9]  W. O'Fallon,et al.  A reappraisal of the epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in Olmsted County, Minnesota , 1990, Neurology.

[10]  G. Karabatsos,et al.  Validation of the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis quality of life instrument , 1996, Neurology.

[11]  J. W. Rose,et al.  Copolymer 1 reduces relapse rate and improves disability in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis , 1995, Neurology.

[12]  D. Goodin Survey of multiple sclerosis in Northern California , 1999 .

[13]  J. Law,et al.  Screening for speech and language delay: a systematic review of the literature. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[14]  S. Neilson,et al.  Static and dynamic models of interdisease competition: Past and projected mortality from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and multiple sclerosis , 1993, Mechanisms of Ageing and Development.

[15]  C. Granger,et al.  Intramuscular interferon beta‐1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis , 1996, Annals of neurology.

[16]  X. Montalban,et al.  Interferon-β1b in the treatment of multiple sclerosis , 2005, Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy.

[17]  G. Torrance Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. , 1986, Journal of health economics.

[18]  A. Jacoby,et al.  A cost-utility analysis of interferon beta for multiple sclerosis. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[19]  B. McNeil,et al.  Fallacy of the five-year survival in lung cancer. , 1978, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  B. O'brien,et al.  Are health states "timeless"? The case of the standard gamble method. , 1999, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[21]  R. Farmer,et al.  Quality of life in multiple sclerosis. Comparison with inflammatory bowel disease and rheumatoid arthritis. , 1992, Archives of neurology.

[22]  D. Paty,et al.  Life expectancy in patients attending multiple sclerosis clinics , 1992, Neurology.

[23]  J. Kurtzke Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1983, Neurology.

[24]  R. Knobler,et al.  Systemic recombinant human interferon-beta treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: pilot study analysis and six-year follow-up. , 1993, Journal of interferon research.

[25]  J H Simon,et al.  Intramuscular interferon beta-1a therapy initiated during a first demyelinating event in multiple sclerosis. CHAMPS Study Group. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  G. Omenn Public health genetics: an emerging interdisciplinary field for the post-genomic era. , 2000, Annual review of public health.

[27]  D. Mohr,et al.  Therapeutic expectations of patients with multiple sclerosis upon initiating interferon beta-lb: Relationship to adherence to treatment , 1996, Multiple sclerosis.

[28]  P. Dolan,et al.  The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. , 1996, Health economics.

[29]  L. Jacobs,et al.  A profile of multiple sclerosis: The New York State Multiple Sclerosis Consortium , 1999, Multiple sclerosis.