Evaluating prescriber preferences for the treatment of indeterminate Chagas disease (EPPIC study): an international survey
In the authors' words
BackgroundBenznidazole (BNZ) and nifurtimox (NFX) remain the only approved treatments for Trypanosoma cruzi infection, but both are associated with frequent adverse drug reactions (ADRs), long treatment duration, and limited accessibility, resulting in poor treatment adherence and premature discontinuation. Recent clinical trials have evaluated shorter and lower-dose regimens; however, the minimum level of efficacy considered acceptable by healthcare providers -in the context of improved safety and greater accessibility -has not been systematically investigated. This study aimed to identify prescriber-defined efficacy thresholds and the factors influencing prescribing preferences for new antiparasitic regimens for Chagas disease. MethodsWe conducted an international, cross-sectional, web-based survey between June and August 2024 among healthcare providers, researchers, and public health practitioners with experience in Chagas disease from endemic and non-endemic countries. The survey assessed satisfaction with current antiparasitic drugs, perceived treatment disadvantages, and the willingness of practitioners to prescribe hypothetical new regimens with varying efficacy levels and additional clinical attributes. ResultsThirty of 50 invited participants completed the survey (60% response rate); most were physicians or nurses (57%), and 76% had more than six years of experience managing Chagas disease. An efficacy threshold of 70% or above was associated with substantially higher prescribing willingness: 46.7% of respondents reported being likely or very likely to prescribe a regimen with 70-79% efficacy, compared with 20.0% for 60-69% and 6.7% for 50-59%. Willingness to prescribe regimens with moderate efficacy (60-69%) was increased when regimens offered prevention of mother-to-child transmission, reduced ADR frequency and severity, or the possibility of second-line use. Improved accessibility was an additional determinant for regimen in the lowest efficacy range. Respondents identified ADRs, long treatment duration, and limited drug availability as the main disadvantages of current therapies. ConclusionsThis study provides preliminary, provider-level evidence that prescriber acceptance of new antiparasitic regimens for T. cruzi infection is shaped by the overall benefit-risk profile, not efficacy alone. A 70% efficacy threshold emerged as a critical inflection point for prescribing willingness, while prevention of mother-to-child transmission, improved tolerability, and greater accessibility were identified as key factors that could support the adoption of regimens with moderate efficacy. These findings may inform the design of future clinical trials and the development of treatment strategies aligned with real-world prescribing priorities. Author summaryChagas disease affects an estimated 9-11 million people worldwide, yet treatment options remain limited to two approved drugs -benznidazole and nifurtimox -both of which are associated with frequent adverse effects and lengthy treatment courses that are difficult to complete. As new, potentially shorter and better-tolerated regimens are being developed, understanding what level of efficacy healthcare providers consider acceptable is essential for guiding future trial design and treatment development. We surveyed healthcare providers, researchers, and public health practitioners with experience in Chagas disease from both endemic and non-endemic countries. Our findings suggest that a 70% efficacy threshold is critical for prescriber acceptance, and that willingness to prescribe regimens with moderate efficacy can be meaningfully increased when such regimens offer prevention of mother-to-child transmission, reduced adverse effects, or improved accessibility. These insights can inform researchers designing future clinical trials and help align therapeutic strategies with the real-world needs of providers and patients living with Trypanosoma cruzi infection.
Appeared: Tuesday, September 22. medRxiv. Preprint, not yet peer-reviewed.