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: 1680

What Trade-offs Are Acceptable to Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients During Treatment Selection?

Rieke Alten1, Juan carlos Nieto-Gonzalez2, Peggy Jacques3, Carlomaurizio Montecucco4, Robert Moots5, Helga Radner6, Sebastian Heidenreich7, Chiara Whichello7, Nicolas Krucien7, Monia Zignani8, Harald Vonkeman9 and Katrien Van Beneden10, 1Department of Internal Medicine and Rheumatology, Schlosspark Klinik, University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2Servicio de Reumatología, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain, 3Department of Rheumatology and VIB Inflammation Research Center, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium, 4Division of Rheumatology, University of Pavia and Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy, 5Department of Rheumatology, Aintree University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom, 6Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Rheumatology, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 7Patient-centred Research, Evidera Inc., London, United Kingdom, 8Medical Affairs, Galapagos GmbH, Basel, Switzerland, 9Department of Rheumatology, Medisch Spectrum Twente and University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands, 10Medical Safety, Galapagos NV, Mechelen, Belgium

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2023

Keywords: Decision analysis, health behaviors, rheumatoid arthritis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 13, 2023

Title: Abstracts: RA – Treatments II: RA Treatment Safety

Session Type: Abstract Session

Session Time: 4:00PM-5:30PM

Background/Purpose: Multiple RA therapies are available that differ in attributes such as mode of administration and benefit-risk profile. Challenging trade-offs are made during treatment selection to accommodate patients’ circumstances and ensure comprehensive disease management. EULAR recommendations for RA management emphasize the need to recognize patient preferences in shared decision-making (SDM). This study elicited trade-offs that RA patients were willing to make during treatment selection, accounting for preference heterogeneity.

Methods: An online discrete choice experiment was conducted from Sep–Oct 2021; RA patients were required to elicit their preferences for RA treatment attributes (Figure) and make trade-offs between them. Attributes were chosen based on literature review and qualitative patient interviews; these were tested in a quantitative pilot. Main data collection was via an online survey which asked participants to choose between hypothetical treatments. Patients were ≥18 years old, diagnosed with RA, currently received systemic DMARD therapy for RA, and resident in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, or United States. Male patients were oversampled to support subgroup analysis of preferences for effects on sperm parameters. Data were analyzed using a correlated mixed logit model; differences in preferences by sex and age were explored. Relative attribute importance (RAI) scores and maximum acceptable risk (MAR) measures were derived.

Results: In total, 2,090 patients participated; 42% were female with predefined oversampling of males; mean age was 45.2 years (range 18–83). Estimated effects were significant for all attributes (p< 0.001), implying that they all influenced treatment choice and that preferences differed between participants. RAI scores revealed different priorities between males and females (Figure). Reducing pain and negative effect on semen parameters was most important to males; females were most concerned by risk of blood clots and serious infections. Remaining attributes were of lower importance. No single attribute explained treatment preferences by more than 30%. Patients aged 18-44 years placed less importance on frequency and mode of treatment administration than older patients. Patients accepted extra risks of blood clots, serious infections, or negative effects on sperm for an oral pill every day vs injection once a week, and for reducing amount of pain from 30% to 10% (Table). Similar observations were made for improved performance of daily activities. Acceptable trade-offs varied between patients.

Conclusion: Preferences of RA patients were driven by benefits and risks of RA treatments, with no single attribute dominating the decision making. Patients were willing to accept higher risk of serious infections and blood clots in exchange for improvements in pain, daily activities, or administration convenience. These findings emphasize the importance of considering the entire treatment profile, including benefits, risks, and administration to support SDM between providers and patients.

Supporting image 1

Figure. RAI overall and by sex

Supporting image 2

Table. Benefit-risk trade-offs: willingness to accept extra risk


Disclosures: R. Alten: AbbVie, 2, 6, Amgen, 2, 6, Biogen, 2, 6, BMS, 2, 6, Celltrion, 2, 6, Gilead, 2, 6, Janssen, 2, 6, Lilly, 2, 6, Medac, 2, 6, MSD, 2, 6, Mylan, 2, 6, Novartis, 2, 6, Pfizer, 2, 6, Roche, 2, 6, Sandoz, 2, 6, Sanofi-Genzyme, 2, 6, UCB, 2, 6, Viatris, 2, 6; J. Nieto-Gonzalez: AbbVie, 2, 6, Amgen, 2, 6, Biogen, 6, Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS), 6, FAES Farma, 6, Galapagos, 2, GSK, 2, Janssen, 2, 6, Lilly, 6, MSD, 2, 6, Novartis, 6, Pfizer, 6, Roche, 6, Sanofi, 6, UCB, 6; P. Jacques: AbbVie, 12, Support for meeting attendance, Eli Lilly, 6, Galapagos, 12, Support for meeting attendance, Pfizer, 5, Roche, 5, UCB, 12, Support for meeting attendance; C. Montecucco: AbbVie, 2, 6, BMS, 2, 6, Boehringer Ingelheim, 6, Eli Lilly, 6, Galapagos, 6, Gilead, 2, Pfizer, 6, Roche, 6, Sanofi, 6; R. Moots: Amgen, 6, Ferring, 2, Galapagos, 6, Novartis, 5; H. Radner: Gilead, 6, Janssen, 6, MSD, 6, Pfizer Cooperation Austria, 6; S. Heidenreich: Evidera Inc., 3, 11; C. Whichello: Evidera Inc., 3; N. Krucien: Evidera Inc., 3, 11; M. Zignani: Galapagos, 3, 11; H. Vonkeman: AbbVie, 5, 6, Boehringer Ingelheim, 5, 6, Galapagos, 5, 6, Janssen, 5, 6, Novartis, 5, 6, Pfizer, 5, 6, UCB, 5, 6; K. Van Beneden: Galapagos, 3, 11.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Alten R, Nieto-Gonzalez J, Jacques P, Montecucco C, Moots R, Radner H, Heidenreich S, Whichello C, Krucien N, Zignani M, Vonkeman H, Van Beneden K. What Trade-offs Are Acceptable to Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients During Treatment Selection? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2023; 75 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/what-trade-offs-are-acceptable-to-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-during-treatment-selection/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2023

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/what-trade-offs-are-acceptable-to-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-during-treatment-selection/

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