Parkinson’s Patients’ Tolerance for Risk and Willingness to Wait for Potential Benefits of Novel Neurostimulation Devices: A Patient-Centered Threshold Technique Study

Background. Parkinson’s disease (PD) is neurodegenerative, causing motor, cognitive, psychological, somatic, and autonomic symptoms. Understanding PD patients’ preferences for novel neurostimulation devices may help ensure that devices are delivered in a timely manner with the appropriate level of evidence. Our objective was to elicit preferences and willingness-to-wait for novel neurostimulation devices among PD patients to inform a model of optimal trial design. Methods. We developed and administered a survey to PD patients to quantify the maximum levels of risks that patients would accept to achieve potential benefits of a neurostimulation device. Threshold technique was used to quantify patients’ risk thresholds for new or worsening depression or anxiety, brain bleed, or death in exchange for improvements in “on-time,” motor symptoms, pain, cognition, and pill burden. The survey elicited patients’ willingness to wait to receive treatment benefit. Patients were recruited through Fox Insight, an online PD observational study. Results. A total of 2740 patients were included and a majority were White (94.6%) and had a 4-year college degree (69.8%). Risk thresholds increased as benefits increased. Threshold for depression or anxiety was substantially higher than threshold for brain bleed or death. Patient age, ambulation, and prior neurostimulation experience influenced risk tolerance. Patients were willing to wait an average of 4 to 13 years for devices that provide different levels of benefit. Conclusions. PD patients are willing to accept substantial risks to improve symptoms. Preferences are heterogeneous and depend on treatment benefit and patient characteristics. The results of this study may be useful in informing review of device applications and other regulatory decisions and will be input into a model of optimal trial design for neurostimulation devices.

[1]  B. Hauber,et al.  Using the Threshold Technique to Elicit Patient Preferences: An Introduction to the Method and an Overview of Existing Empirical Applications , 2019, Applied Health Economics and Health Policy.

[2]  Allison H. Oakes,et al.  Developing and piloting an instrument to prioritize the worries of patients with acute myeloid leukemia , 2018, Patient preference and adherence.

[3]  Shomesh E. Chaudhuri,et al.  Patient-centered clinical trials. , 2017, Drug discovery today.

[4]  M. Boeri,et al.  Patients' priorities in selecting chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatments. , 2017, Blood advances.

[5]  Shomesh E. Chaudhuri,et al.  Use of Bayesian Decision Analysis to Minimize Harm in Patient-Centered Randomized Clinical Trials in Oncology , 2017, JAMA Oncology.

[6]  J. Graff‐Radford,et al.  Survival and Causes of Death Among People With Clinically Diagnosed Synucleinopathies With Parkinsonism: A Population-Based Study , 2017, JAMA neurology.

[7]  A. Ascherio,et al.  The epidemiology of Parkinson's disease: risk factors and prevention , 2016, The Lancet Neurology.

[8]  Vahid Montazerhodjat,et al.  Is the Fda Too Conservative or Too Aggressive?: A Bayesian Decision Analysis of Clinical Trial Design , 2015, Journal of Econometrics.

[9]  Telba Irony,et al.  Incorporating patient-preference evidence into regulatory decision making , 2014, Surgical Endoscopy.

[10]  A. Brett Hauber,et al.  Quantifying Benefit–Risk Preferences for Medical Interventions: An Overview of a Growing Empirical Literature , 2013, Applied Health Economics and Health Policy.

[11]  H. Llewellyn-Thomas,et al.  Investigating patients' preferences for different treatment options. , 1997, The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres.

[12]  S. R. Watson,et al.  Decision Synthesis: The Principles and Practice of Decision Analysis@@@Strategic and Tactical Decisions , 1989 .