Preference and satisfaction with a 6-month subcutaneous injection versus a weekly tablet for treatment of low bone mass
- 547 Downloads
The Preference and Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) compares patient preference and satisfaction between a 6-month subcutaneous injection and weekly oral tablet for treatment of bone loss. Patients preferred and were more satisfied with a treatment that was administered less frequently, suggesting the acceptability of the 6-month injection for treatment of bone loss.
The PSQ compares patient preference and satisfaction between a 6-month subcutaneous injection and a weekly oral tablet for treatment of bone loss.
Postmenopausal women with low bone mass who enrolled in two separate randomized phase 3 double-blind, double-dummy studies received a 6-month subcutaneous denosumab injection (60 mg) plus a weekly oral placebo or a weekly alendronate tablet (70 mg) plus a 6-month subcutaneous placebo injection. After 12 months, patients completed the PSQ to rate their preference, satisfaction, and degree of bother with each regimen.
Most enrolled patients (1,583 out of 1,693; 93.5%) answered ≥1 item of the PSQ. Significantly more patients preferred and were more satisfied with the 6-month injection versus the weekly tablet (P < 0.001). More patients reported no bother with the 6-month injection (90%) than the weekly tablet (62%).
Patients preferred, were more satisfied, and less bothered with a 6-month injection regimen for osteoporosis.
KeywordsInjection Osteoporosis Preference Questionnaire Satisfaction Tablet
Funding for these studies was provided by Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA USA. Sacha Satram-Hoang, Ph.D. and Amy Foreman-Wykert, Ph.D. (Amgen, Inc.) provided editorial and writing assistance.
Conflicts of interest
The authors have the following disclosures:
David L. Kendler has served as an investigator for Merck, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Servier, Biosante, and Wyeth, and a speaker, consultant, or advisor for and/or received honoraria from Merck, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Servier, Nycomed, and Wyeth.
Louis Bessette has served as an investigator and advisory board member for Amgen.
Deborah Gold has served as a consultant for Amgen, Procter & Gamble, GlaxoSmithKline, F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., Sanofi-Aventis, Roche Diagnostics, Eli Lilly, and Merck. Additionally, she has received travel grants, speaking or writing fees, or other honoraria, and has served as a member of an advisory board for Amgen, Procter & Gamble, GlaxoSmithKline, F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd., Sanofi-Aventis, Roche Diagnostics, and Eli Lilly.
Rob Horne has received unrestricted grants to the University of London from Procter & Gamble, Gilead Life Sciences, and Hayward Medical Communications/Shire Pharmaceuticals. Professor Horne also has conducted occasional paid consultancy, medical education lectures, and advisory committees for Abbott, Adelphi, Amgen, Astellas, Astrazeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKlein, Hayward Medical Communications, Merck Outcomes Research, Novartis, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, and Shire Pharmaceuticals. Some consultancies included travel and accommodations paid by pharmaceutical companies.
Cheryl D. Hill is a paid consultant for Amgen Inc.
Sepideh Farivar-Varon is a former employee of Amgen and current employee of Allergan Inc. Dr. Varon owns stock and/or stock options in both Amgen and Allergan Inc.
Jeff Borenstein, Rachel Wagman, Suresh Siddhanti, David Macarios, Huei Wang, and Hoi-Shen Man are employees and shareholders of Amgen.
Henry G. Bone has served as an investigator for Amgen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Nordic Biosciences, and Zelos; as a consultant for Amgen, Merck, Nordic Bioscience, Osteologix, Pfizer, and Zelos; and has received speaker honoraria from Merck and Novartis.
- 2.Wahl C, Gregoire JP, Teo K et al (2005) Concordance, compliance and adherence in healthcare: closing gaps and improving outcomes. Healthc Qual 8:65–70Google Scholar
- 22.Cummings SR, McClung MR, Christiansen C et al (2008) The effects of denosumab on fracture risk in women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 20:167Google Scholar
- 29.Gold DT, Horne R, Hill C et al (2008) Development, reliability, and validity of a new preference satisfaction questionnaire. J Bone Miner Res 23:S210–S211Google Scholar
- 30.Kendler DL, Benhamou CL, Brown JP et al (2008) Effects of denosumab in postmenopausal women transitioning from alendronate therapy in comparison with continued alendronate. Osteoporos Int 9(Suppl 2):S385–S386Google Scholar
- 31.Brown JP, Prince RL, Deal C et al (2008) Comparison of the effect of denosumab and alendronate on bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: a randomized, blinded, phase 3 trial. J Bone Miner Res . doi: 10.1359/jbmr.080910 PubMedGoogle Scholar