The focus of this thesis is a new quantitative approach to consider patient preferences on benefits and risks in medical approvals. The overall aim of this thesis was to explore how patient preference information may be relevant to regulatory marketing authorisation decisions.

Study I provides an overview of the different decision-processes of industry, regulatory agencies and health technology assessment bodies/reimbursement agencies along the medical product lifecycle. In total, 15 decision points with the potential to include patient preference information were identified. 

Study II was an exploration of the patient perspective regarding the use of patient preference information in regulatory marketing authorisation decisions. Patients emphasised the need to have a say in decisions affecting their health and to be properly informed about potential risks and benefits of medical products. 

Study III assessed patient preferences on benefits and risks of Rheumatoid Arthritis treatments. Results revealed that patients’ preferences differed substantially. The three most important treatment attributes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis were: the probability of severe side effects, treatment effectiveness and route of administration. Those placing relatively more importance on treatment effectiveness were willing to acceptance higher risk levels of side effects. 

Study IV aimed to determine the influence of an educational tool, compared with traditional written information on patient preferences. It was found that those respondents receiving the educational tool focused more on the potential side effects than those receiving written information. 

Patient preference information has the potential to reveal patients’ preferences on benefits and risks with scientific rigour and can therefore be weighed against clinical data. This thesis supports the development of a structured approach to learn about patient preferences on benefits and risks in medical approvals