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.