ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1131

Patient Perspective of Helpfulness of Lupus Medications: A Qualitative Study of Medication Use Within the Type 1 and 2 SLE Model

Mithu Maheswaranathan1, Kevin McKenna2, Amy Corneli2, David Pisetsky3, Megan Clowse4 and Amanda Eudy1, 1Duke University, Durham, NC, 2Duke University, Durham, 3Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 4Duke University, Chapel Hill, NC

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2020

Keywords: health behaviors, Qualitative Research, quality of life, Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 8, 2020

Title: Patient Outcomes, Preferences, & Attitudes Poster II: Miscellaneous Rheumatic Diseases

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Medication management in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is particularly complex given the clinical heterogeneity of symptoms and a wide range of medications used.  We developed a conceptual model that characterizes symptoms and corresponding medications into two categories: Type 1 medications are used for Type 1 SLE symptoms or inflammatory manifestations (such as arthritis, nephritis, rashes) while Type 2 medications are used for Type 2 SLE symptoms of fatigue, myalgia, anxiety/depression and cognitive dysfunction.  Type 1 medications included antimalarials, oral immunosuppressants, biologics and steroids.  Type 2 medications included pain medications, muscle relaxants, sleep medications, and antidepressants.  We conducted a qualitative descriptive study to assess perceived helpfulness (benefits and drawbacks) of Type 1 and Type 2 medications and describe disease experiences in patients with SLE.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews among purposefully selected adult patients meeting SLICC criteria for SLE from an academic medical center.  We asked patients to describe the helpfulness of medications, including whether they believed their symptoms had improved.  All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and we used applied thematic analysis to analyze the data.

Results: We interviewed 37 patients (12 with Type 1 SLE, 12 with Type 2 SLE, and 13 with Mixed SLE); 73% were age ≤55 years, 84% had disease duration ≥5 years, 49% were black or African American, and 35% had a history of nephritis.

Medication Helpfulness: The majority of patients endorsed benefit from at least one Type 1 or Type 2 medication.  More patients reported at least one Type 2 medication as not helpful (n=24) compared to those reporting at least one Type 1 medication as not helpful (n=18).

Unable to Assess Helpfulness: More patients were unable to assess the helpfulness of Type 1 medications (~50%, n=19) compared to Type 2 medications (~20%, n=7).  Inability to determine helpfulness was often due to no change in symptoms or uncertainty of symptoms the medication was supposed to improve.

We categorized participant experiences with Type 1 and Type 2 medications by class of medication thematically (Table 1).  For example, patients viewed hydroxychloroquine as minimally beneficial compared to the dramatic improvements they noted on biologics and IV infusions.  Patients also had less certainty regarding the helpfulness and indication for antimalarials and oral immunosuppressants compared to biologics, steroids, and Type 2 medications.

Conclusion: For both Type 1 and 2 medications, the vast majority of patients reported at least some benefit in helping symptoms.  However, substantially more patients were unable to assess the helpfulness of Type 1 medications compared to Type 2, most often due to uncertainty regarding helpfulness or lack of awareness of indication.  These findings suggest physician/patient discussion about specific indications for which medications are prescribed and potential side effects may increase patient understanding and expectations regarding medication use.


Disclosure: M. Maheswaranathan, None; K. McKenna, None; A. Corneli, None; D. Pisetsky, None; M. Clowse, UCB, 5, GSK, 2, 5, Astra Zeneca, 5, Pfizer, 2; A. Eudy, NIH NCATS Award Number 1KL2TR002554, 2, Pfizer, 2.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Maheswaranathan M, McKenna K, Corneli A, Pisetsky D, Clowse M, Eudy A. Patient Perspective of Helpfulness of Lupus Medications: A Qualitative Study of Medication Use Within the Type 1 and 2 SLE Model [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020; 72 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/patient-perspective-of-helpfulness-of-lupus-medications-a-qualitative-study-of-medication-use-within-the-type-1-and-2-sle-model/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2020

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/patient-perspective-of-helpfulness-of-lupus-medications-a-qualitative-study-of-medication-use-within-the-type-1-and-2-sle-model/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology