Avastin and Lucentis: what do patients know? A prospective questionnaire survey.

JRSM short reports Pub Date : 2013-07-30 eCollection Date: 2013-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2042533313484146
Avinash Manna, Oluwatoyin Oyede, Brigid Ning, Yit Yang, Niro Narendran
{"title":"Avastin and Lucentis: what do patients know? A prospective questionnaire survey.","authors":"Avinash Manna,&nbsp;Oluwatoyin Oyede,&nbsp;Brigid Ning,&nbsp;Yit Yang,&nbsp;Niro Narendran","doi":"10.1177/2042533313484146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess patients' knowledge of their drug therapy for neovascular macular degeneration and to identify which aspects of the drug they considered most important if given the option of switching to an alternative drug.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective questionnaire survey.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Wolverhampton, England.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 126 patients attending our hospital service for intravitreal ranibizumab therapy for neovascular macular degeneration.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Using a questionnaire, patients were asked questions pertaining to aspects of drug therapy in neovascular macular degeneration. Fields covered included drug names, knowledge of alternative drugs, cost of drugs and their views on switching to another drug.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty (63.5%) had heard of Lucentis (ranibizumab) and 31 (24.6%) were aware of Avastin (bevacizumab). Of the latter 31 patients, 20 did not have a preference between Avastin and Lucentis. These patients felt that the factors they would consider important for them to consider switching were effectiveness (10, 50%), specialist recommendation (8, 40%), safety (2, 10%) and cost (0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Introducing a cheaper, off-label alternative in the therapy of macular degeneration in the presence of a licensed option has been extensively debated. Many patients have no knowledge of this controversial issue but it is likely that efficacy and recommendation by clinicians are more important than cost to patients who may consider switching to the off-label Avastin.</p>","PeriodicalId":89182,"journal":{"name":"JRSM short reports","volume":"4 9","pages":"2042533313484146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2042533313484146","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JRSM short reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2042533313484146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To assess patients' knowledge of their drug therapy for neovascular macular degeneration and to identify which aspects of the drug they considered most important if given the option of switching to an alternative drug.

Design: Prospective questionnaire survey.

Setting: Wolverhampton, England.

Participants: A total of 126 patients attending our hospital service for intravitreal ranibizumab therapy for neovascular macular degeneration.

Main outcome measures: Using a questionnaire, patients were asked questions pertaining to aspects of drug therapy in neovascular macular degeneration. Fields covered included drug names, knowledge of alternative drugs, cost of drugs and their views on switching to another drug.

Results: Eighty (63.5%) had heard of Lucentis (ranibizumab) and 31 (24.6%) were aware of Avastin (bevacizumab). Of the latter 31 patients, 20 did not have a preference between Avastin and Lucentis. These patients felt that the factors they would consider important for them to consider switching were effectiveness (10, 50%), specialist recommendation (8, 40%), safety (2, 10%) and cost (0).

Conclusions: Introducing a cheaper, off-label alternative in the therapy of macular degeneration in the presence of a licensed option has been extensively debated. Many patients have no knowledge of this controversial issue but it is likely that efficacy and recommendation by clinicians are more important than cost to patients who may consider switching to the off-label Avastin.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿瓦斯汀和Lucentis:患者知道什么?前瞻性问卷调查。
目的:评估患者对新血管性黄斑变性药物治疗的认识,并确定如果选择改用替代药物,他们认为药物的哪些方面最重要。设计:前瞻性问卷调查。背景:英国伍尔弗汉普顿。参与者:共有126例患者在我院接受玻璃体内雷尼单抗治疗新血管性黄斑变性。主要结果测量:通过问卷调查,向患者询问有关新血管性黄斑变性药物治疗方面的问题。涉及的领域包括药物名称、替代药物的知识、药物的成本以及他们对改用另一种药物的看法。结果:80人(63.5%)听说过Lucentis(雷尼单抗),31人(24.6%)知道Avastin(贝伐单抗)。在后31名患者中,20名患者在阿瓦斯汀和Lucentis之间没有偏好。这些患者认为他们考虑转换的重要因素是有效性(10.50%),专家推荐(8.40%),安全性(2,10%)和成本(0%)。结论:在已有许可的黄斑变性治疗方案中引入更便宜的非说明书替代方案一直存在广泛的争议。许多患者不知道这一有争议的问题,但对于可能考虑改用非标签阿瓦斯汀的患者来说,临床医生的疗效和建议可能比成本更重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Knowledge, skills and attitude of evidence-based medicine among obstetrics and gynaecology trainees: a questionnaire survey. Severe inflammatory response and vasculitis leading to quadruple limb amputations. A rare case of submandibular abscess complicated by stroke. Are the pituitary gonadotrophins determinants of complete molar pregnancy? An investigation using the method of least squares. Lumbar puncture, chronic fatigue syndrome and idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1