Contributions
Abstract: EP1555
Type: ePoster
Abstract Category: Therapy - disease modifying - Others
Introduction: Limited available data show the preferences of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) regarding devices for self-injecting disease-modifying drugs. For interferon beta-1a subcutaneously three times weekly (IFN β-1a SC tiw), options include manual injections; a preassembled, single-use autoinjector; and a reusable autoinjector with an adjustable injection-depth feature.
Methods: A Phase IV, randomised, prospective, US-based, multicentre study assigned patients with MS, using IFN β-1a 44 µg SC tiw for ≥5 weeks, in a crossover design: 4 weeks using a single-use autoinjector, then 4 weeks using a reusable autoinjector, or vice versa. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients rating each device as "easy" or "very easy", with or without regard to previous device experience, following the 4 weeks using each device. Additional endpoints included other ease-of-use questions.
Results: Of 96 randomised patients, 29 (30.2%) had most recent previous experience with manual injection, 23 (24.0%) with the single-use autoinjector, and 44 (45.8%) with the reusable autoinjector. Overall, 68.5% found the single-use autoinjector very easy or easy to use, vs 77.2% for the reusable device (difference −8.7%; p=0.256). 41.3% vs 27.2% found the respective devices very easy to use (difference 14.1%; p=0.079). Among those with most recent use of the reusable device, a greater proportion characterised that device (vs the single-use device) as very easy or easy after use during the study (85.7% vs 61.9%; p=0.013). Among those with previous use of the other injection methods, no significant differences were seen in the proportion identifying either device as very easy or easy to use. 82.6% agreed or strongly agreed that they were overall satisfied with the reusable autoinjector, vs 66.3% for the single-use autoinjector (p=0.020). For the single-use autoinjector vs the reusable device, 40.4% vs 33.0% strongly agreed they were overall satisfied with the device, 47.9% vs 36.2% strongly agreed they were satisfied with the amount of time to complete an injection, 50.0% vs 29.8% strongly agreed they were satisfied with the number of steps needed, and 55.3% vs 28.7% found the respective devices extremely convenient.
Conclusions: Responses indicate differences in satisfaction between devices, including differences by previous device use; however, both were found easy or very easy to use by most patients. Having two viable options may offer benefit for patients.
Disclosure: Sibyl Wray has received research funding from Alkermes, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genzyme, Novartis, Receptos, and Roche/Genentech; and has received consulting fees from Biogen, Genzyme, and Teva. Choon Cha and Brooke Hayward are employees of EMD Serono, Inc., Rockland, MA, USA (a business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Fernando Dangond is an employee of EMD Serono, Inc., Billerica, MA, USA (a business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Barry Singer has received consulting/speaking fees from Acorda, Bayer, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genentech, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva; and has received grant/research support from Acorda, Biogen, MedImmune, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Roche.
Abstract: EP1555
Type: ePoster
Abstract Category: Therapy - disease modifying - Others
Introduction: Limited available data show the preferences of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) regarding devices for self-injecting disease-modifying drugs. For interferon beta-1a subcutaneously three times weekly (IFN β-1a SC tiw), options include manual injections; a preassembled, single-use autoinjector; and a reusable autoinjector with an adjustable injection-depth feature.
Methods: A Phase IV, randomised, prospective, US-based, multicentre study assigned patients with MS, using IFN β-1a 44 µg SC tiw for ≥5 weeks, in a crossover design: 4 weeks using a single-use autoinjector, then 4 weeks using a reusable autoinjector, or vice versa. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients rating each device as "easy" or "very easy", with or without regard to previous device experience, following the 4 weeks using each device. Additional endpoints included other ease-of-use questions.
Results: Of 96 randomised patients, 29 (30.2%) had most recent previous experience with manual injection, 23 (24.0%) with the single-use autoinjector, and 44 (45.8%) with the reusable autoinjector. Overall, 68.5% found the single-use autoinjector very easy or easy to use, vs 77.2% for the reusable device (difference −8.7%; p=0.256). 41.3% vs 27.2% found the respective devices very easy to use (difference 14.1%; p=0.079). Among those with most recent use of the reusable device, a greater proportion characterised that device (vs the single-use device) as very easy or easy after use during the study (85.7% vs 61.9%; p=0.013). Among those with previous use of the other injection methods, no significant differences were seen in the proportion identifying either device as very easy or easy to use. 82.6% agreed or strongly agreed that they were overall satisfied with the reusable autoinjector, vs 66.3% for the single-use autoinjector (p=0.020). For the single-use autoinjector vs the reusable device, 40.4% vs 33.0% strongly agreed they were overall satisfied with the device, 47.9% vs 36.2% strongly agreed they were satisfied with the amount of time to complete an injection, 50.0% vs 29.8% strongly agreed they were satisfied with the number of steps needed, and 55.3% vs 28.7% found the respective devices extremely convenient.
Conclusions: Responses indicate differences in satisfaction between devices, including differences by previous device use; however, both were found easy or very easy to use by most patients. Having two viable options may offer benefit for patients.
Disclosure: Sibyl Wray has received research funding from Alkermes, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genzyme, Novartis, Receptos, and Roche/Genentech; and has received consulting fees from Biogen, Genzyme, and Teva. Choon Cha and Brooke Hayward are employees of EMD Serono, Inc., Rockland, MA, USA (a business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Fernando Dangond is an employee of EMD Serono, Inc., Billerica, MA, USA (a business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Barry Singer has received consulting/speaking fees from Acorda, Bayer, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genentech, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Teva; and has received grant/research support from Acorda, Biogen, MedImmune, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Roche.