THU071 Key Device Attributes For Injectable SRL Therapy In Acromegaly And NETs To Aid Clinical Decision Making
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Disclosure: W.W. de Herder: Research Investigator; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Speaker; Self; Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Ipsen. S. Melmed: Consulting Fee; Self; Ionis Pharmaceuticals Inc., Ipsen, Novo Nordisk. Grant Recipient; Self; Pfizer Global R&D. C. Follin: None. W. Geilvoet: None. J.O. Jorgensen: Consulting Fee; Self; Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Global R&D. T. Kolarova: Grant Recipient; Self; Ipsen, ITM, AAA, Novartis Pharmaceuticals. M. Marks: None. W. Martin: Speaker; Self; Ipsen, AAA. K. Geerlings-Grootscholten: None. Background: Adherence, effectiveness and safety of SRL injections are similar for self- vs healthcare setting administration but patient preferences and device satisfaction vary. Device ease of use is associated with more favourable outcomes for other injectable hormones. Aim: To define key injectable SRL device attributes associated with optimal injection experience by people living with NETs/acromegaly and HCPs, identifying differences at 95% confidence. Methods: The survey (Jun-Nov ‘22) included active current users (≥6 months) of an SRL device for NETs/acromegaly, and for HCPs currently treating patients with NETs/acromegaly. There were 263 respondents from Australia, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Ireland, Mexico, Norway, Spain, UK, and USA: 201 patients (P), 10 caregivers (C) and 52 HCPs. In the P/C group (n=211), 157 people lived with NET and 54 with acromegaly; 74% were female. The HCP group (n=52) comprised 29 physicians, 20 nurses and 3 others (research nurse, clinical manager, patient leader) treating acromegaly (n=22), NET (n=15), or both (n=15). Results: P/C treatment duration ranged from 0.5->15y (≥3y in 61%); 49% had experience with >1 SRL device type. Most HCPs (62%) were prescribers, 48% administered SRL injections, 83% had experience with >1 SRL device type. In the P/C group, NET patients were significantly more likely to have injections administered by an HCP in a hospital setting (54% vs 26% with acromegaly, p=0.05). Home administration was more common among acromegaly P/C (57%; 26% self-injected, 22% by caregiver, 9% by HCP) vs NET P/C (30%; 10%, 9% and 11%, respectively). Top 3 key device attributes preferred by the P/C group were: 1) confidence that the correct amount of drug is delivered (76%); 2) quick administration with minimal pain/discomfort (68%); 3) device safety (needle-safety system, low risk of contamination; 53%).The top 3 in the HCP group was: 1) quick administration with minimal pain/discomfort (69%); 2) correct use is easy to learn, confidence in handling the device (63%); 3) confidence that the correct amount of drug is delivered (62%). Ease of learning and confidence on correct use was significantly more likely to be selected as important by HCPs than P/C (63% vs 44%, p=0.05); ‘shorter/finer needles’ was significantly more likely to be selected by P/C than HCPs (48% vs 25%; p=0.05). ‘Easy to store and transport’ was significantly more likely to be selected by people living with acromegaly vs NET (59% vs 35%, p=0.05). Conclusions: Patient opinions are important to define key device attributes impacting the injection experience. Home administration is more common in acromegaly vs NET, as reflected in P/C device attribute preferences. Identified differences in key device attributes preferred by patients and HCPs inform the decision on which SRL device best fits individual patient needs. Developed with COR2ED, supported by an independent educational grant from Ipsen. Presentation: Thursday, June 15, 2023
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,026 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».