Therapeutic preference for Alzheimer’s disease treatments: a discrete choice experiment with caregivers and neurologists

Table 4 Partial utilities of therapeutic attributes among caregivers and neurologists

Therapeutic attribute	Caregivers (N = 137)		Neurologists (N = 161)
Therapeutic attribute	^aMean (SE)	SD (SE)	^aMean (SE)	SD (SE)
Clinical effects (average): 1-year increment	0.47 (0.08)	0.65 (0.01)	0.82 (0.08)	0.70 (0.01)
Clinical effects (variation): wide vs. narrow	0.12 (0.08)	0.70 (0.01)	0.14 (0.07)	0.75 (0.01)
Biomarker response (amyloid clearance): 10% increment	0.20 (0.04)	0.28 (< 0.01)	0.26 (0.03)	0.24 (< 0.01)
Adverse events (symptomatic ARIA-E): 5% increment	− 0.26 (0.03)	0.25 (< 0.01)	− 0.52 (0.04)	0.41 (0.01)
Treatment duration: 1-year increment	− 0.02 (0.01)	0.13 (< 0.01)	− 0.13 (0.01)	0.15 (< 0.01)
Treatment titration (at initiation): yes vs. no	− 0.19 (0.04)	0.57 (< 0.01)	− 0.07 (0.02)	0.35 (< 0.01)
Treatment administration: IV every 4 vs. 2 weeks	0.20 (0.09)	0.83 (0.01)	1.00 (0.12)	1.16 (0.02)
Treatment administration: SC vs. IV every 2 weeks	0.07 (0.05)	0.72 (0.01)	0.42 (0.10)	1.10 (0.01)

ARIA-E Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema, IV Intravenous, SD Standard deviation, SE Standard error, SC Subcutaneous
^aA utility is a preference-based score, with higher scores indicating higher preferences for that attribute. For each attribute, a larger mean partial utility indicates a greater average preference in the sample, and a larger SD partial utility indicates greater heterogeneity in preference within the sample

ISSN: 1758-9193