Population-level judgements on the value of therapies to treat multiple sclerosis don’t adequately depict the differences between how providers and payers view value compared with patients and how patients view value different from one another.
Population-level judgements on the value of therapies to treat multiple sclerosis (MS) don’t adequately depict the differences between how providers and payers view value compared with patients and how patients view value different from one another.
A survey from Real Endpoints, LLC, found variability in MS treatment preferences at the payer, provider, and patient levels that need to be taken into account in healthcare decision making.
“Furthermore, any tool, such as a value framework, used to quantify the value of an MS treatment should transparently define the differences in preferences and treatment goals,” according to the summary.
Some of the differences include that patients tended to be more concerned about a drug’s safety characteristics than payers or physicians. Patients were also more concerned with the out-of-pocket costs of a drug than payers.
Patients with MS also reported that a drug’s effect on symptoms, such as fatigue and walking difficulty, had the highest value to them. Meanwhile, payers and physicians ascribed high value to a drug’s impact on disease progression, effect on relapse rate, and effect on severity of relapse.
Overall, though, patient preferences were diverse and patient opinions tended to be more varied than payer responses.
A total of 90 people were surveyed—30 payers, 30 neurologists treating MS, and 30 patients with MS—to determine stakeholder preferences in MS treatment. In addition, a team reviewed more than 300 research articles. Additional findings from the project, which was funded by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, will be released at a later date.
Could On-Body Delivery of Isatuximab Bring More Competition to Anti-CD38 Myeloma Treatment?
June 6th 2025Results for IRAKLIA show noninferiority for Sanofi's on-body delivery system for isatuximab, compared with IV administration. Patients overwhelmingly preferred the hands-free delivery option.
Read More
ICS Use Tied to Fewer Exacerbations in Patients With Bronchiectasis and Elevated Blood Eosinophils
June 6th 2025Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use was common among patients with bronchiectasis and was associated with reduced exacerbations and hospitalizations in those with elevated blood eosinophil counts.
Read More
Real-World Data Support Luspatercept vs ESAs for Anemia in Lower-Risk MDS
June 5th 2025Patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) who received luspatercept showed greater hemoglobin gains and transfusion independence compared with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in a real-world analysis.
Read More
At EHA 2025, Hematology Discussions Will Stretch Across Lifespans and Locations
June 5th 2025The 2025 European Hematology Association (EHA) Congress, convening virtually and in Milan, Italy, from June 12 to June 15, 2025, will feature a revamped program structure for the meeting’s 30th anniversary while maintaining ample opportunities to network, debate, and absorb practice-changing findings in hematology and oncology.
Read More