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: 2370

Physician and Patient Preferences for Treating SLE: Insights into the Choice of Intravenous Infusion and Subcutaneous Injection

Matthew Lau1, Christopher F Bell1, Christine Poulos2 and Ameya Benegal3, 1GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, 3RTI Health Solutions, RTP, NC

Meeting: 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: patient preferences, Shared dicision making, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and treatment options

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Title: Patient Outcomes, Preferences, and Attitudes Poster II: Patient Perspectives

Session Type: ACR Poster Session C

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

Background/Purpose:

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic, multisystem autoimmune disease characterized by diverse clinical manifestations, chronic inflammation, and significant morbidity that can be fatal1. Treatment strategies for SLE focus on managing symptoms, reducing flares, preventing organ damage, and improving health-related quality of life2,3. Specific treatment goals should reflect shared decision making between the physician and patient. Currently, patients and physicians have a choice regarding mode of administration for SLE treatments, which range from oral medications, intravenous infusions (IV) and subcutaneous injections (SC). Given these choices, it is important to understand patient and physician characteristics that may drive the choice of selecting a mode of administration. The primary objective of the study was to examine patient and physician characteristics that are associated with the choice of IV or SC for an unspecified SLE treatment.

Methods:

An online exploratory stated preference study was conducted with patients and physicians recruited from a web panel in the U.S. among 200 SLE patients and 200 rheumatologists who treat SLE. The survey development was informed by the results of qualitative interviews with physicians who treat SLE and the final surveys were pretested with SLE patients and physicians who treat SLE. The direct elicitation questions described hypothetical SLE treatments with different modes of administration. Pairwise and multivariate analyses were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) for the likelihood of choosing SC over IV for a variety of respondent characteristics.

Results: Among the respondents, the mean (SD) age was 50.4 (14.0) in patients with SLE (86% female) and 51.4 (10.9) in rheumatologists who treat SLE (>50% in practice for >10 years). Analyses from the patient survey indicated that older respondents were more likely to select SC (OR=4.2); respondents with a fear of needles or self-injection (OR=0.1) and those who never need assistance with household activities (an indicator of higher quality of life) were less likely to choose SC (OR=0.1). Analyses from the physician survey suggested that 15 years or fewer years of training (OR=1.4) and a general preference for SC or IV (OR=2.1) are associated with physician’s choice of SC over IV. Treating 21-40 SLE patients each week rather than more (OR=0.6), having two-thirds of treated SLE patients with mild disease rather than more (OR=0.6), having more than 8 infusion chairs in clinic (OR=0.6), and spending more than 80% of the time (OR=0.7) in direct patient care are associated with physician’s choice of IV over SC.

Conclusion:

This exploratory study is among the first preference studies conducted with SLE patients and physicians who treat SLE. Patient’s age, severity of the disease, as well as a range of physician characteristics may play a role in choosing one route of administration over another. These insights may inform shared decision making, which may lead to better alignment between treatment choice and patient preferences, treatment satisfaction, adherence, and improved patient outcomes. The results of this study may inform the development of hypotheses for future studies. (Study funded by GSK HO-16-16706)


Disclosure: M. Lau, GlaxoSmithKline, 1, 3; C. F. Bell, GlaxoSmithKline, 1, 3; C. Poulos, GlaxoSmithKline, 5; A. Benegal, GlaxoSmithKline, 5.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Lau M, Bell CF, Poulos C, Benegal A. Physician and Patient Preferences for Treating SLE: Insights into the Choice of Intravenous Infusion and Subcutaneous Injection [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018; 70 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/physician-and-patient-preferences-for-treating-sle-insights-into-the-choice-of-intravenous-infusion-and-subcutaneous-injection/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/physician-and-patient-preferences-for-treating-sle-insights-into-the-choice-of-intravenous-infusion-and-subcutaneous-injection/

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