EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Patients' perceptions of subcutaneous delivery of darbepoetin alfa by autoinjector prefilled pen versus prefilled syringe: a randomized, crossover study



Patients' perceptions of subcutaneous delivery of darbepoetin alfa by autoinjector prefilled pen versus prefilled syringe: a randomized, crossover study



Clinical Therapeutics 34(9): 1948-1953



Subcutaneous injection of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for the correction of anemia associated with chronic kidney disease is well recognized. Different delivery devices are available, although their impact on patient-reported outcomes is limited. Subcutaneous delivery of darbepoetin alfa via an autoinjector prefilled pen (PFP) and prefilled syringe (PFS) were compared and assessed according to patient-rated preferences and perceptions. In this single-center, randomized, open-label, double-crossover study, patients continued using the PFS for 4 injections or were switched to the PFP for the same number of injections, after which they were switched to the alternative device. Following further 4 injections using the new device, patients were switched back to the initial device. Questionnaires were administered at the end of each series of injections for each device and at the start and end of the study. For overall device preference, the majority (62%) of patients responded with PFP, whereas 32% preferred the PFS mode of delivery. This preference for PFP was driven by a perception of increased convenience and ease of use compared with PFS. No significant differences in pain scores were noted between the 2 devices. Most patients rated both devices as being easy or extremely easy to use and were either satisfied or extremely satisfied. When given the choice, most patients preferred the PFP mode of administration compared with PFS due to convenience and ease of use. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ACTRN12611000839909.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 036541743

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 22902097

DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.07.012



Related references

Comparison of drug delivery with autoinjector versus manual prefilled syringe and between three different autoinjector devices administered in pig thigh. Medical Devices 9: 257-266, 2016

Phase 3, open-label, randomized study of the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of ixekizumab following subcutaneous administration using a prefilled syringe or an autoinjector in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (UNCOVER-A). Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2016

Absolute Bioavailability and Pharmacokinetic Comparability of Sirukumab Following Subcutaneous Administration by a Prefilled Syringe or an Autoinjector. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development 6(6): 570-576, 2017

Similar Pharmacokinetics of the Adalimumab (Humira®) Biosimilar BI 695501 Whether Administered via Subcutaneous Autoinjector or Prefilled Syringe (VOLTAIRE®-AI and VOLTAIRE®-TAI): Phase 1, Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group Trials. Rheumatology and Therapy 5(2): 403-421, 2018

Preference for a prefilled syringe or an auto-injection device for delivering golimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis: a randomized crossover study. Patient Preference and Adherence 12: 1193-1202, 2018

Use of a prefilled insulin syringe (Novolin Prefilled) by patients with diabetes. Clinical Therapeutics 15(2): 423-431, 1993

Usability and safety of SB5 (an adalimumab biosimilar) prefilled syringe and autoinjector in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2018: 1-1, 2018

Human factors study in untrained adolescents comparing an epinephrine prefilled syringe (symjepi™) with EpiPen® autoinjector. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, 2018

An open-label, multicenter study to evaluate the safe and effective use of the single-use autoinjector with an Avonex® prefilled syringe in multiple sclerosis subjects. Bmc Neurology 11: 126-126, 2012

Pharmacokinetic Profile of Subcutaneous Testosterone Enanthate Delivered via a Novel, Prefilled Single-Use Autoinjector: A Phase II Study. Sexual Medicine 3(4): 269-279, 2016

Healthcare professional and patient perceptions of a new prefilled insulin pen versus vial and syringe. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 9(10): 1181-1196, 2013

THU0403A Randomised, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Relative Bioavailability of a Single Dose of Belimumab Administered Subcutaneously by Prefilled Syringe or Autoinjector. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 74(Suppl 2): 342.2-343, 2015

Comparative pharmacokinetics of an adalimumab biosimilar SB5 administered via autoinjector or prefilled syringe in healthy subjects. Drug Design, Development and Therapy 12: 3799-3805, 2018

Comparison between prefilled syringe and autoinjector devices on patient-reported experiences and pharmacokinetics in galcanezumab studies. Patient Preference and Adherence 12: 1785-1795, 2018

Intuitiveness, instruction time, and patient acceptance of a prefilled insulin delivery device and a reusable insulin delivery device in a randomized, open-label, crossover handling study in patients with type 2 diabetes. Clinical Therapeutics 30(12): 2252-2262, 2009