Treatment Preferences of Adult Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder -A Discrete Choice Experiment

• Published in: Patient preference and adherence 2024-08, Vol.18, p.1651
• Main Authors: Schein, Jeff, Cloutier, Ma, Gauthier-Loiselle, Marjolaine, Catillon, Maryaline, Meng, Yan, Libchaber, Beatrice, Jiang, Fanny, Childress, Ann
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder; Care and treatment; Development and progression; Evaluation; Health attitudes; Medical care; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Quality management
• ISSN: 1177-889X; 1177-889X
• DOI: 10.2l47/PPA.S467724

Background: Understanding patient preferences for treatments may facilitate shared decision-making. This study assessed adult patient preferences for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatments in a sample of 600 patients in the United States (US). Methods: A web-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey was conducted among treated adults with ADHD. Participants were recruited from Dynata's US panel (06/22/2023-07/06/2023). Attributes and levels, identified based on clinical inputs and published data, included efficacy and safety. Participants' preferences were estimated using conditional logistic regression. Willingness to tradeoff and attributes' relative importance were calculated. Overall preferences for treatment profiles approximating centanafadine, lisdexamfetamine, atomoxetine, and viloxazine were estimated using adjusted total utilities. Results were stratified by current treatment status. Sensitivity analyses including participants who passed validity tests were conducted. Results: Among the 600 participants (mean age 37.9 years; 66.2% female; 50.8% treated), all attributes had a statistically significant impact on preferences for ADHD treatments (p < 0.001); the most important attribute was improvement in ADHD symptoms (36%), followed by risks of nausea (25%), insomnia (20%), anxiety (8%), dry mouth (6%), and feeling jittery (5%). Together, safety attributes accounted for >60% of relative importance in decision-making. Participants were willing to forgo 0.59, 0.57, 0.49, 0.32, and 0.17 percentage points of symptom improvement to achieve one-percentage-point reduced risk of insomnia, nausea, anxiety, feeling jittery, and dry mouth, respectively. Centanafadine profile had consistently higher adjusted total utilities than its comparators. Similar results were obtained in the subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Efficacy was the most important attribute for patients when making treatment decision, but taken together, AEs had greater relative importance than efficacy alone. Accordingly, a profile resembling that of centanafadine would be preferred by an average patient compared to key competitors due to its favorable safety profile. These findings may help improve treatment decision-making, enhance treatment satisfaction, and foster adherence. Keywords: ADHD, decision-making, discrete choice experiment, patient-centered care, patient satisfaction, patient preference, utility