1
|
Babalola O, Gebben D, Tarver ME, Joyce Lee TH, Wang S, Siddiqui MM, Sonn GA, Viviano CJ. Patient Preferences for Benefit and Risk Associated With High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for the Ablation of Prostate Tissue in Men With Localized Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2024; 22:102113. [PMID: 38845330 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2024] [Revised: 04/25/2024] [Accepted: 05/02/2024] [Indexed: 06/19/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Food and Drug Administration must make decisions about emerging high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) devices that may lack relevant clinical oncologic data but present with known side effects. This study aims to capture patients' perspective by quantifying their preferences regarding the available benefit and important side effects associated with HIFU for localized prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Preferences for HIFU outcomes were examined using a discrete choice experiment survey. Participants were asked to choose a preferred treatment option in 9 choice questions. Each included a pair of hypothetical treatment profiles that have similar attributes/outcomes with varying levels. Outcomes included prostate biopsy outcome and treatment-related risks of erectile dysfunction (ED) and urinary incontinence (UI). We calculated the maximum risk of side effect patients were willing to tolerate in exchange for increased benefit. Preferences were further explored via clinical and demographic data. RESULTS About 223 subjects with a mean age of 64.8 years completed the survey. Respondents were willing to accept a 1.51%-point increase in new ED risk for a 1%-point increase in favorable biopsy outcome. They were also willing to accept a 0.93%-point increase in new UI risk for a 1%-point increase in biopsy outcome. Subjects who perceived their cancer to be more aggressive had higher risk tolerance for UI. Younger men were willing to tolerate less ED risk than older men. Respondents with greater than college level of education had a lower risk tolerance for ED or UI. CONCLUSIONS Results may inform development and regulatory evaluation for future HIFU ablation devices by providing supplemental information from the patient perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olufemi Babalola
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
| | - David Gebben
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
| | - Michelle E Tarver
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
| | - Ting-Hsuan Joyce Lee
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
| | - Shu Wang
- Department of Urology, University of Maryland Urology, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - M Minhaj Siddiqui
- Department of Urology, University of Maryland Urology, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Geoffrey A Sonn
- Department of Urology, Stanford School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | - Charles J Viviano
- Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gonzalez JM, Ganguli A, Morgans AK, Tombal BF, Hotte SJ, Suzuki H, Bhadauria H, Oh M, Scales CD, Wallace MJ, Yang JC, George DJ. Discrete-Choice Experiment to Understand the Preferences of Patients with Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer in the USA, Canada, and the UK. THE PATIENT 2023; 16:607-623. [PMID: 37566214 PMCID: PMC10570152 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00638-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/19/2023] [Indexed: 08/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment options for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) have broadened, and treatment decisions can have a long-lasting impact on patients' quality of life. Data on patient preferences can improve therapeutic decision-making by helping physicians suggest treatments that align with patients' values and needs. OBJECTIVE This study aims to quantify patient preferences for attributes of chemohormonal therapies among patients with mHSPC in the USA, Canada, and the UK. METHODS A discrete-choice experiment survey instrument was developed and administered to patients with high- and very-high-risk localized prostate cancer and mHSPC. Patients chose between baseline androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) alone and experimentally designed, hypothetical treatment alternatives representing chemohormonal therapies. Choices were analyzed using logit models to derive the relative importance of attributes for each country and to evaluate differences and similarities among patients across countries. RESULTS A total of 550 respondents completed the survey (USA, 200; Canada, 200; UK, 150); the mean age of respondents was 64.3 years. Treatment choices revealed that patients were most concerned with treatment efficacy. However, treatment-related convenience factors, such as route of drug administration and frequency of monitoring visits, were as important as some treatment-related side effects, such as skin rash, nausea, and fatigue. Patient preferences across countries were similar, although patients in Canada appeared to be more affected by concomitant steroid use. CONCLUSION Patients with mHSPC believe the use of ADT alone is insufficient when more effective treatments are available. Efficacy is the most significant driver of patient choices. Treatment-related convenience factors can be as important as safety concerns for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Marcos Gonzalez
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 300 W. Morgan Street, 27701, Durham, NC, USA.
- Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
| | - Arijit Ganguli
- Medical Affairs, Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, IL, USA
| | | | - Bertrand F Tombal
- Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Sebastien J Hotte
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University and Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Hiroyoshi Suzuki
- Department of Urology, Toho University Sakura Medical Center, Sakura City, Chiba, Japan
| | | | - Mok Oh
- Medical Affairs, Astellas Pharma Inc., Northbrook, IL, USA
| | - Charles D Scales
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 300 W. Morgan Street, 27701, Durham, NC, USA
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
- Department of Urology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Matthew J Wallace
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Jui-Chen Yang
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Daniel J George
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 300 W. Morgan Street, 27701, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Saad F, Clarke NW, Oya M, Shore N, Procopio G, Guedes JD, Arslan C, Mehra N, Parnis F, Brown E, Schlürmann F, Joung JY, Sugimoto M, Sartor O, Liu YZ, Poehlein C, Barker L, Del Rosario PM, Armstrong AJ. Olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PROpel): final prespecified overall survival results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:1094-1108. [PMID: 37714168 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00382-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2023] [Revised: 07/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/25/2023] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND PROpel met its primary endpoint showing statistically significant improvement in radiographic progression-free survival with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in patients with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) unselected by homologous recombination repair mutation (HRRm) status, with benefit observed in all prespecified subgroups. Here we report the final prespecified overall survival analysis. METHODS This was a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 126 centres in 17 countries worldwide. Patients with mCRPC aged at least 18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, a life expectancy of at least 6 months, with no previous systemic treatment for mCRPC and unselected by HRRm status were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by means of an interactive voice response system-interactive web response system to abiraterone acetate (orally, 1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone or prednisolone with either olaparib (orally, 300 mg twice daily) or placebo. The patients, the investigator, and study centre staff were masked to drug allocation. Stratification factors were site of metastases and previous docetaxel at metastatic hormone-sensitive cancer stage. Radiographic progression-free survival was the primary endpoint and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint with alpha-control (alpha-threshold at prespecified final analysis: 0·0377 [two-sided]), evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of a study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732820, and is completed and no longer recruiting. FINDINGS Between Oct 31, 2018 and March 11, 2020, 1103 patients were screened, of whom 399 were randomly assigned to olaparib plus abiraterone and 397 to placebo plus abiraterone. Median follow-up for overall survival in patients with censored data was 36·6 months (IQR 34·1-40·3) for olaparib plus abiraterone and 36·5 months (33·8-40·3) for placebo plus abiraterone. Median overall survival was 42·1 months (95% CI 38·4-not reached) with olaparib plus abiraterone and 34·7 months (31·0-39·3) with placebo plus abiraterone (hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·67-1·00; p=0·054). The most common grade 3-4 adverse event was anaemia reported in 64 (16%) of 398 patients in the olaparib plus abiraterone and 13 (3%) of 396 patients in the placebo plus abiraterone group. Serious adverse events were reported in 161 (40%) in the olaparib plus abiraterone group and 126 (32%) in the placebo plus abiraterone group. One death in the placebo plus abiraterone group, from interstitial lung disease, was considered treatment related. INTERPRETATION Overall survival was not significantly different between treatment groups at this final prespecified analysis. FUNDING Supported by AstraZeneca and Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fred Saad
- Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada.
| | - Noel W Clarke
- The Christie and Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trusts and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| | | | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Giuseppe Procopio
- Programma Prostata Fondazione Istituto Nazionale Tumori Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - João Daniel Guedes
- Hospital de Base de São José do Rio Preto, São José do Rio Preto, Brazil
| | - Cagatay Arslan
- Izmir Economy University Medical Point Hospital, Karsiyaka, Izmir, Turkey
| | - Niven Mehra
- Radboud Universitair Medisch Centrum, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | | | - Emma Brown
- University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Yu-Zhen Liu
- Precision Medicine, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Laura Barker
- Global Medicines Development, Oncology R&D, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK
| | | | - Andrew J Armstrong
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancer, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Feng Z, Meng J, Sun Y, Xie T, Lu W, Wang G, Geng J. Assessment of patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs in China: a best-worst discrete choice experiment on three common cancer types. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e072469. [PMID: 37270199 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Despite the advancement in anticancer drug therapies, cancer treatment decisions are often complex and preference-sensitive, making them well suited for studying shared decision-making (SDM). Our study aimed to assess preferences for new anticancer drugs among three common types of patients with cancer to inform SDM. DESIGN We identified five attributes of new anticancer drugs and used a Bayesian-efficient design to generate choice sets for a best-worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE). The mixed logit regression model was applied to estimate patient-reported preferences for each attribute. The interaction model was used to investigate preference heterogeneity. SETTING The BWDCE was conducted in Jiangsu province and Hebei province in China. PARTICIPANTS Patients aged 18 years or older, who had a definite diagnosis of lung cancer, breast cancer or colorectal cancer were recruited. RESULTS Data from 468 patients were available for analysis. On average, the most valued attribute was the improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p<0.001). The low incidence of severe to life-threatening side effects, prolonged progression-free survival and the low incidence of mild to moderate side effects were also positive predictors of patients' preferences (p<0.001). Out-of-pocket cost was a negative predictor of their preferences (p<0.001). According to subgroup analysis by type of cancer, the improvement in HRQoL remained the most valuable attribute. However, the relative importance of other attributes varied by type of cancer. Whether patients were newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed cancer cases played a dominant role in the preference heterogeneity within each subgroup. CONCLUSIONS Our study can assist in the implementation of SDM by providing evidence on patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs. Patients should be informed of the multiattribute values of new drugs and encouraged to make decisions reflecting their values.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhe Feng
- Department of Medical Informatics, Nantong University Medical School, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Jingyi Meng
- Department of Medical Informatics, Nantong University Medical School, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Yanjun Sun
- Department of Radiotherapy, Tinghu District People's Hospital, Yancheng, Jiangsu, China
| | - Tongling Xie
- Department of Medical Informatics, Nantong University Medical School, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
- Department of Medical Informatics, The People's Hospital of Rugao, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Wenzhang Lu
- Department of Respiratory, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Guohua Wang
- Institute of Special Environmental Medicine, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| | - Jinsong Geng
- Department of Medical Informatics, Nantong University Medical School, Nantong, Jiangsu, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Higano CS, George DJ, Shore ND, Sartor O, Miller K, Conti PS, Sternberg CN, Saad F, Sade JP, Bellmunt J, Smith MR, Chandrawansa K, Sandström P, Verholen F, Tombal B. Clinical outcomes and treatment patterns in REASSURE: planned interim analysis of a real-world observational study of radium-223 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. EClinicalMedicine 2023; 60:101993. [PMID: 37251627 PMCID: PMC10209672 DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101993] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2022] [Revised: 04/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/18/2023] [Indexed: 05/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Radium-223, a targeted alpha therapy, is approved to treat bone-dominant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), based on significantly prolonged overall survival versus placebo and a favourable safety profile in the phase 3 ALSYMPCA study. ALSYMPCA was conducted when few other treatment options were available, and prospectively collected data are limited on the use of radium-223 in the current mCRPC treatment landscape. We sought to understand long-term safety and treatment patterns in men who received radium-223 in real-world clinical practice. Methods REASSURE (NCT02141438) is a global, prospective, observational study of radium-223 in men with mCRPC. Primary outcomes are adverse events (AEs), including treatment-emergent serious AEs (SAEs) and drug-related AEs during and ≤30 days after radium-223 completion, grade 3/4 haematological toxicities ≤6 months after last radium-223 dose, drug-related SAEs after radium-223 therapy completion, and second primary malignancies. Findings Data collection commenced on Aug 20, 2014, and the data cutoff date for this prespecified interim analysis was Mar 20, 2019 (median follow-up 11.5 months [interquartile range 6.0-18.6]), 1465 patients were evaluable. For second primary malignancies, 1470 patients were evaluable, 21 (1%) of whom had a total of 23 events. During radium-223 therapy, 311 (21%) of 1465 patients had treatment-emergent SAEs, and 510 (35%) had drug-related AEs. In the 6 months after completion of radium-223 therapy, 214 (15%) patients had grade 3/4 haematological toxicities. Eighty patients (5%) had post-treatment drug-related SAEs. Median overall survival was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval 14.6-16.5) from radium-223 initiation. Patient-reported pain scores declined or stabilised. Seventy (5%) patients had fractures. Interpretation REASSURE offers insight into radium-223 use in global real-world clinical practice with currently available therapies. At this interim analysis, with a median follow-up of almost 1 year, 1% of patients had second primary malignancies, and safety and overall survival findings were consistent with clinical trial experience. Final analysis of REASSURE is due in 2024. Funding Bayer HealthCare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celestia S. Higano
- Departments of Medicine and Urology, University of Washington, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Daniel J. George
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Neal D. Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| | - Oliver Sartor
- Departments of Medicine and Urology, Tulane Cancer Center, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Kurt Miller
- Department of Urology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - Peter S. Conti
- Molecular Imaging Center, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Cora N. Sternberg
- Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Department of Medicine, Meyer Cancer Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Fred Saad
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Juan Pablo Sade
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Alexander Fleming Institute, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Joaquim Bellmunt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Matthew R. Smith
- Genitourinary Oncology Program, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Bertrand Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lejeune C, Bourredjem A, Binquet C, Cussenot O, Boudrant G, Papillon F, Bruyère F, Haillot O, Koutlidis N, Bassard S, Fournier G, Valeri A, Moreau JL, Pierfitte B, Moulin M, Berchi C, Cormier L. Eliciting men's preferences for decision-making relative to treatments of localized prostate cancer with a good or moderate prognosis. World J Urol 2023:10.1007/s00345-023-04416-w. [PMID: 37173454 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04416-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 04/23/2023] [Indexed: 05/15/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In diseases where there is no real consensus regarding treatment modalities, promoting shared decision-making can contribute to improving safety and quality of care. This is the case in low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer (PC) treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences guiding men's decisions regarding the characteristics of the treatment strategies for PC to help physicians adopt a more patient-centered approach. METHODS This prospective multicenter study used a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The attributes and the modalities were identified from a qualitative study and a literature review. Relative preferences were estimated using a logistic regression model. Interaction terms (demographic, clinical and socio-economic characteristics) were added to the model to assess heterogeneity in preferences. RESULTS 652 men were enrolled in the study and completed a questionnaire with 12 pairs of hypothetical therapeutic alternatives between which they had to choose. Men's choices were significantly negatively influenced by the risk of impotence and urinary incontinence, death, and the length and frequency of care. They preferred treatments with a rescue possibility in case of deterioration or recurrence and the use of innovative technology. Surprisingly, the possibility of undergoing prostate ablation negatively influenced their choice. The results also highlighted differences in trade-offs according to socio-economic level. CONCLUSION This study confirmed the importance of considering patients' preferences in the decision-making process. It appears essential to better understand these preferences to allow physicians to improve communication and promote case-by-case decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Lejeune
- CHU Dijon Bourgogne, Inserm, Université de Bourgogne, CIC 1432, Module Épidémiologie Clinique, 7 bd Jeanne d'Arc, BP 87900, 21000, Dijon, France.
| | - Abderrahmane Bourredjem
- CHU Dijon Bourgogne, Inserm, Université de Bourgogne, CIC 1432, Module Épidémiologie Clinique, 7 bd Jeanne d'Arc, BP 87900, 21000, Dijon, France
| | - Christine Binquet
- CHU Dijon Bourgogne, Inserm, Université de Bourgogne, CIC 1432, Module Épidémiologie Clinique, 7 bd Jeanne d'Arc, BP 87900, 21000, Dijon, France
| | - Olivier Cussenot
- Academic Department of Urology, Tenon Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, UPMC Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Franck Bruyère
- Department of Urology, CHU-Tours University Hospital, Tours, France
- Université Francois Rabelais de Tours, PRES Centre Val de Loire, Tours, France
| | - Olivier Haillot
- Department of Urology, CHU-Tours University Hospital, Tours, France
- Université Francois Rabelais de Tours, PRES Centre Val de Loire, Tours, France
| | - Nicolas Koutlidis
- Department of Urology, William Morey Hospital, Chalon-sur-Saône, France
| | - Sébastien Bassard
- Department of Urology, William Morey Hospital, Chalon-sur-Saône, France
| | - Georges Fournier
- Department of Urology, CHU Brest University Hospital, Brest, France
| | - Antoine Valeri
- Department of Urology, CHU Brest University Hospital, Brest, France
| | | | | | - Morgan Moulin
- Department of Urology, CHU University Hospital François Mitterrand, Dijon, France
| | - Célia Berchi
- Normandie Univ, UniCaen, Inserm, Anticipe, 14000, Caen, France
| | - Luc Cormier
- Department of Urology, CHU University Hospital François Mitterrand, Dijon, France
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Menges D, Piatti MC, Omlin A, Cathomas R, Benamran D, Fischer S, Iselin C, Küng M, Lorch A, Prause L, Rothermundt C, O'Meara Stern A, Zihler D, Lippuner M, Braun J, Cerny T, Puhan MA. Patient and General Population Preferences Regarding the Benefits and Harms of Treatment for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment. EUR UROL SUPPL 2023; 51:26-38. [PMID: 37187724 PMCID: PMC10175729 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/03/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Patient preferences for treatment outcomes are important to guide decision-making in clinical practice, but little is known about the preferences of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Objective To evaluate patient preferences regarding the attributed benefits and harms of systemic treatments for mHSPC and preference heterogeneity between individuals and specific subgroups. Design setting and participants We conducted an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) preference survey among 77 patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) and 311 men from the general population in Switzerland between November 2021 and August 2022. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis We evaluated preferences and preference heterogeneity related to survival benefits and treatment-related adverse effects using mixed multinomial logit models and estimated the maximum survival time participants were willing to trade to avert specific adverse effects. We further assessed characteristics associated with different preference patterns via subgroup and latent class analyses. Results and limitations Patients with mPC showed an overall stronger preference for survival benefits in comparison to men from the general population (p = 0.004), with substantial preference heterogeneity between individuals within the two samples (both p < 0.001). There was no evidence of differences in preferences for men aged 45-65 yr versus ≥65 yr, patients with mPC in different disease stages or with different adverse effect experiences, or general population participants with and without experiences with cancer. Latent class analyses suggested the presence of two groups strongly preferring either survival or the absence of adverse effects, with no specific characteristic clearly associated with belonging to either group. Potential biases due to participant selection, cognitive burden, and hypothetical choice scenarios may limit the study results. Conclusions Given the relevant heterogeneity in participant preferences regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for mHSPC, patient preferences should be explicitly discussed during decision-making in clinical practice and reflected in clinical practice guidelines and regulatory assessment regarding treatment for mHSPC. Patient summary We examined the preferences (values and perceptions) of patients and men from the general population regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. There were large differences between men in how they balanced the expected survival benefits and potential adverse effects. While some men strongly valued survival, others more strongly valued the absence of adverse effects. Therefore, it is important to discuss patient preferences in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominik Menges
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Corresponding author. Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Hirschengraben 84, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland. Tel. +41 44 6344615.
| | - Michela C. Piatti
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Aurelius Omlin
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
- Onkozentrum Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Richard Cathomas
- Division of Oncology/Hematology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Daniel Benamran
- Department of Urology, Hôpitaux Universitaires Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Stefanie Fischer
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Christophe Iselin
- Department of Urology, Hôpitaux Universitaires Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Marc Küng
- Department of Oncology, Hôpital Cantonal Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland
| | - Anja Lorch
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Lukas Prause
- Department of Urology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Christian Rothermundt
- Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Alix O'Meara Stern
- Department of Oncology, Réseau Hospitalier Neuchâtelois, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
| | - Deborah Zihler
- Department of Oncology, Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Max Lippuner
- Europa Uomo Switzerland, Ehrendingen, Switzerland
| | - Julia Braun
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Cerny
- Foundation Board, Cancer Research Switzerland, Bern, Switzerland
- Human Medicines Expert Committee, Swissmedic, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Milo A. Puhan
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
de Wit R, Freedland SJ, Oudard S, Marinov G, Capart P, Combest AJ, Peterson R, Ozatilgan A, Morgans AK. Real-world evidence of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with cabazitaxel: comparison with the randomized clinical study CARD. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2023; 26:67-73. [PMID: 35039605 PMCID: PMC10023563 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-021-00487-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2021] [Revised: 11/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The CARD study demonstrated superiority of cabazitaxel over abiraterone/enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who received prior docetaxel and progressed ≤12 months on the alternative androgen-receptor-targeted agent (ARTA). The objective was to compare characteristics and treatment patterns of patients from a real-world dataset with the CARD population. METHODS Real-world data were collected from Medimix Live TrackerTM, a retrospective, global oncology database of healthcare professional-reported electronic patient medical forms (2001-2019), with data from patients from Europe, USA, Brazil and Japan. The database contained patient, tumor and treatment information for 12,140 patients who received ≥1 line of treatment for mCRPC. A CARD-like cohort included patients treated with docetaxel, prior abiraterone/enzalutamide and cabazitaxel. RESULTS A large proportion of patients received ≥2 lines of ARTA (35.1%) with 42% of patients who received a first-line ARTA receiving another ARTA in second line. Of the total patients, 452 were eligible for the CARD-like cohort. Median age of the CARD-like cohort was comparable to CARD (73 vs 70 years). The CARD-like cohort had unfavorable disease characteristics vs CARD: ECOG PS ≥ 2 (45% vs 4.7%); metastasis at diagnosis (46% vs 38%) and Gleason 8-10 (65% vs 57%). More patients in the CARD-like cohort received ARTA before docetaxel (48% vs 39%) and received the first ARTA for >12 months (30% vs 17%) compared with CARD. Despite more patients in the CARD-like cohort receiving the lower 20 mg/m2 dose of cabazitaxel (55% vs 21%), cabazitaxel treatment duration was similar (21.9 vs 22.0 weeks). CONCLUSIONS Sequential use of ARTA was frequent. Results indicate the CARD population is reflective of routine clinical practice and duration of response to cabazitaxel was similar in a real-world population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Stephen J Freedland
- Division of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Section of Urology, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Stephane Oudard
- George Pompidou European Hospital, University of Paris, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Austin J Combest
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
- PPD, Wilmington, NC, USA
| | - Ryan Peterson
- Sanofi, Global Medical Oncology, Cambridge, MA, USA
- Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Services, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Alicia K Morgans
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
George DJ, Mohamed AF, Tsai JH, Karimi M, Ning N, Jayade S, Botteman M. Understanding what matters to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients when considering treatment options: A US patient preference survey. Cancer Med 2023; 12:6040-6055. [PMID: 36226867 PMCID: PMC10028042 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Revised: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding how patients perceive the efficacy, safety, and administrative burden of treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can facilitate shared-decision making for optimal management. This study sought to elicit patient preferences for mCRPC treatments in the US. METHODS We conducted a cross-sectional survey using the discrete-choice experiment method. Participants were asked to state their choices over successive sets of treatment alternatives, defined by varying levels of treatment attributes: overall survival (OS), months until patients develop a fracture or bone metastasis, likelihood of requiring radiation to control bone pain, fatigue, nausea, and administration (i.e., oral/IV injection/IV infusion). Using mixed logit models, we determined the value (i.e., preference weights) that respondents placed on each attribute. Relative attribute importance (RAI) and marginal rates of substitution (MRS) were calculated to understand patients' willingness to make tradeoffs among different attributes. RESULTS The final data set numbered 160 participants, with a mean age of 71.6 years old and a mean of 8.96 years since prostate cancer diagnosis. Participants' treatment preferences were as follows: OS (RAI: 31%), bone pain control (23%), nausea (16%), delaying fracture or bone metastasis (15%), fatigue (11%), and administration (3%). The MRS demonstrated that respondents were willing to trade 1.9 months of OS to eliminate moderate nausea and 3.3 months of OS for a reduction in fatigue from severe to mild. CONCLUSIONS Improving OS is the highest priority for patients with mCRPC, but they are willing to trade some survival to reduce the risk of requiring radiation to control bone pain, delay a fracture or bone metastasis, and experience less severe nausea and fatigue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J George
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | | | - Jui-Hua Tsai
- Evidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA
| | - Milad Karimi
- Evidence and Access, OPEN Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ning Ning
- Evidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA
| | - Sayeli Jayade
- Evidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA
| | - Marc Botteman
- Evidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Jiang S, Ren R, Gu Y, Jeet V, Liu P, Li S. Patient Preferences in Targeted Pharmacotherapy for Cancers: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2023; 41:43-57. [PMID: 36372823 PMCID: PMC9813042 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01198-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/18/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Targeted pharmacotherapy has been increasingly applied in cancer treatment due to its breakthroughs. However, the unmet needs of cancer patients are still significant, highlighting the urgency to investigate patient preferences. It is unclear how patients deliberate their choices between different aspects of targeted therapy, including cost, efficacy, and adverse events. Since discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have been widely applied to patient preference elicitation, we reviewed DCEs on targeted therapy for different cancers. We also synthesized evidence on the factors influencing patients' choices and their willingness-to-pay (WTP) for survival when treated by targeted therapy. METHODS We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE and MEDLINE, up to August 16, 2022, supplemented by a reference screening. The attributes from the selected studies were categorized into three groups: outcomes, costs, and process. We also calculated the relative importance of attributes and WTP for survival whenever possible. The purpose, respondents, explanation, findings, significance (PREFS) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included DCE studies. RESULTS The review identified 34 eligible studies from 13 countries covering 14 cancers, such as breast, ovarian, kidney, prostate, and skin cancers. It also reveals a rising trend of DCEs on this topic, as most studies were published after 2018. We found that patients placed higher weights on the outcome (e.g., overall survival) and cost attributes than on process attributes. On average, patients were willing to pay $561 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $415-$758) and $716 (95% CI $524-$958) out-of-pocket for a 1-month increase in progression-free survival and overall survival, respectively. PREFS scores of the 34 studies ranged from 2 to 4, with a mean of 3.38 (SD: 0.65), suggesting a reasonable quality based on the checklist. However, most studies (n = 32, 94%) did not assess the impact of non-responses on the results. CONCLUSIONS This is the first systematic review focusing on patient preferences for targeted cancer therapy. We showcased novel approaches for evidence synthesis of DCE results, especially the attribute relative importance and WTP. The results may inform stakeholders about patient preferences toward targeted therapy and their WTP estimates. More studies with improved study design and quality are warranted to generate more robust evidence to assist decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shan Jiang
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ru Ren
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
- NHC Key Lab of Health Economics and Policy Research (Shandong University), Jinan, 250012, China
- Center for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
- Institute of Medical Sciences, The Second Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, 247# Beiyuan Street, Jinan, 250033, China
| | - Yuanyuan Gu
- Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School & Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
| | - Varinder Jeet
- Macquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School & Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia
| | - Ping Liu
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
- NHC Key Lab of Health Economics and Policy Research (Shandong University), Jinan, 250012, China
- Center for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
| | - Shunping Li
- Centre for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
- NHC Key Lab of Health Economics and Policy Research (Shandong University), Jinan, 250012, China
- Center for Health Preference Research, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Viswanath D, Won YY. Combining Radiotherapy (RT) and Photodynamic Therapy (PDT): Clinical Studies on Conventional RT-PDT Approaches and Novel Nanoparticle-Based RT-PDT Approaches under Preclinical Evaluation. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2022; 8:3644-3658. [PMID: 36000986 DOI: 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.2c00287] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Radiotherapy (RT) is the primary standard of care for many locally advanced cancers. Often times, however, the efficacy of RT is limited due to radio-resistance that cancer cells develop. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has gained importance as an alternative local therapy. Because its mechanism involves minimal acquired resistance, PDT is a useful adjunct to RT. This review discusses recent advances in combining RT with PDT for cancer treatment. In the first part of this review, we will discuss clinical trials on RT + PDT combination therapies. All these approaches suffer from the same inherent limitations as any current PDT methods; (i) visible light has a short penetration depth in human tissue (<∼10 mm), and (ii) it is difficult to illuminate the entire tumor homogeneously by external/interstitial laser irradiation. To address these limitations, scintillating nanoparticle-mediated RT-PDT approaches have been explored in which nanoparticles convert X-rays (RT) into visible light (PDT); high-energy X-rays can reach deep into the body to irradiate cancers uniformly and precisely. The second part of this review will discuss recent efforts in developing and applying nanoparticles for RT-PDT applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dhushyanth Viswanath
- Davidson School of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, United States
| | - You-Yeon Won
- Davidson School of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, United States.,Purdue University Center for Cancer Research, West Lafayette, Indiana 47906, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
George DJ, Agarwal N, Sartor O, Sternberg CN, Tombal B, Saad F, Miller K, Constantinovici N, Guo H, Reeves J, Jiao X, Sandström P, Verholen F, Higano CS, Shore N. Real-world patient characteristics associated with survival of 2 years or more after radium-223 treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (EPIX study). Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2022; 25:306-313. [PMID: 35190653 PMCID: PMC9184267 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-021-00488-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2021] [Revised: 12/14/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Background The real-world EPIX study was conducted to gather information about the characteristics of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who survived ≥2 years after treatment with the alpha-emitter radium-223. Methods This retrospective study of electronic health records in the US Flatiron database (NCT04516161) included patients with mCRPC treated with radium-223 between January 2013 and June 2019. Median overall survival (OS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50% reduction) from start of radium-223 treatment were the primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. Patient characteristics were compared between those who survived ≥2 years versus <2 years, including a subgroup who survived <6 months. Results In the 1180 patients identified, median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI: 12.1–13.7), and 13% of patients with data at 6 months had a PSA response. The survival groups included 775 patients (65.7%) who survived <2 years (including 264 (22.4%) who survived <6 months) and 185 patients (15.7%) who survived ≥2 years; 220 patients (18.6%) had incomplete follow-up data and were censored. On multivariate analysis, age >75 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 2–4, visceral metastases, prior symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs), and prior chemotherapy were independently prognostic of reduced OS. For patients with survival ≥2 years versus <2 years, median age was 71 versus 75 years, 4% versus 14% had ECOG PS 2–4, 4% versus 10% had visceral metastases, 38% versus 44% had prior SSEs, and 16% versus 32% had prior chemotherapy. Conclusions In this study of men with mCRPC treated in real-world clinical practice, median OS was consistent with that seen in the phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial. Patients who survived ≥2 years after the start of radium-223 were younger and had better ECOG PS, lower disease burden, and less use of prior chemotherapy than those who survived <2 years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J George
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Oliver Sartor
- Tulane Cancer Center, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Cora N Sternberg
- Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Department of Medicine, Meyer Cancer Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, UC Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Fred Saad
- University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Kurt Miller
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Urologische Klinik und Hochschulambulanz, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Helen Guo
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, NJ, USA
| | - John Reeves
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, NJ, USA
| | | | | | | | - Celestia S Higano
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Sigurdson S, Harrison M, Pearce A, Richardson H, Zaza K, Brundage M. One Fraction Size Does Not Fit All: Patient Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy From a Discrete Choice Experiment. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:e24-e33. [PMID: 34991857 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.08.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a standard of care option for localized prostate cancer. To inform clinical practice we quantified patients' preferences for convenience, efficacy, and toxicity risks, of conventional, moderate hypofractionation, and stereotactic radiation therapy regimens. METHODS AND MATERIALS We used a discrete choice experiment with a voluntary sample consisting of patients treated with EBRT for localized prostate cancer at our academic cancer center. In 2019, 58 participants, mean (SD) age of 72.9 (7.1) years, agreed to complete an in-person 1:1 discrete choice experiment. Each participant made 12 choices between 2 unique EBRT scenarios, each described by 5 attributes: (1) treatment time; (2) fiducial markers; and risk of (3) prostate specific antigen recurrence; (4) acute and (5) late GI or GU toxicity. Patient preferences were estimated using mixed multinomial logistic regression, and prespecified subgroups with conditional logistic regression. RESULTS All attributes were statistically significant, thus influenced participants' choices. Risks of prostate specific antigen recurrence (β = -2.581), late (β = -1.854), and acute (β = -1.005) toxicity were most important to participants (P < .001 for each), followed by EBRT length (β = -0.728; P = .017) and fiducial marker implantation (β = -0.563; P = .004). Older (β = -0.063; 95% confidence interval, -0.12, -0.01) and rural (β = -0.083; 95% CI -0.14, -0.02) participants significantly preferred shorter EBRT and were less willing-to-extend treatment to reduce toxicity risk. CONCLUSIONS Patients with prostate cancer place importance on EBRT attributes, and some are willing to trade-off increased risk of toxicity for improved convenience. Our findings promote shared clinical decision-making because patients are interested in learning about the trade-offs involved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samantha Sigurdson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Mark Harrison
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Alison Pearce
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Harriet Richardson
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Khaled Zaza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michael Brundage
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Menges D, Piatti MC, Cerny T, Puhan MA. Patient Preference Studies for Advanced Prostate Cancer Treatment Along the Medical Product Life Cycle: Systematic Literature Review. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16:1539-1557. [PMID: 35789822 PMCID: PMC9250329 DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s362802] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2022] [Accepted: 06/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient preference studies can inform decision-making across all stages of the medical product life cycle (MPLC). The treatment landscape for advanced prostate cancer (APC) treatment has substantially changed in recent years. However, the most patient-relevant aspects of APC treatment remain unclear. This systematic review of patient preference studies in APC aimed to summarize the evidence on patient preferences and patient-relevant aspects of APC treatments, and to evaluate the potential contribution of existing studies to decision-making within the respective stages of the MPLC. METHODS We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies evaluating patient preferences related to APC treatment up to October 2020. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction and quality assessment in duplicate. We descriptively summarized the findings and analyzed the studies regarding their contribution within the MPLC using an analytical framework. RESULTS Seven quantitative preference studies were included. One study each was conducted in the marketing approval and the health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement stage, and five were conducted in the post-marketing stage of the MPLC. While almost all stated to inform clinical practice, the specific contributions to clinical decision-making remained unclear for almost all studies. Evaluated attributes related to benefits, harms, and other treatment-related aspects and their relative importance varied relevantly between studies. All studies were judged of high quality overall, but some methodological issues regarding sample selection and the definition of patient-relevant treatment attributes were identified. CONCLUSION The most patient-relevant aspects regarding the benefits and harms of APC treatment are not yet established, and it remains unclear which APC treatments are preferred by patients. Findings from this study highlight the importance of transparent reporting and discussion of study findings according to their aims and with respect to their stage within the MPLC. Future research may benefit from using the MPLC framework for analyzing or determining the aims and design of patient preference studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominik Menges
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of Zurich (UZH), Zurich, Switzerland
- Correspondence: Dominik Menges, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of Zurich (UZH), Hirschengraben 84, Zurich, CH-8001, Switzerland, Tel +41 44 634 46 15, Email
| | - Michela C Piatti
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of Zurich (UZH), Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Thomas Cerny
- Foundation Board, Cancer Research Switzerland (Krebsforschung Schweiz KFS), Bern, Switzerland
- Human Medicines Expert Committee (HMEC), Swissmedic, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Milo A Puhan
- Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of Zurich (UZH), Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Connor MJ, Genie MG, Burns D, Bass EJ, Gonzalez M, Sarwar N, Falconer A, Mangar S, Dudderidge T, Khoo V, Winkler M, Ahmed HU, Watson V. A Systematic Review of Patients' Values, Preferences, and Expectations for the Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer. EUR UROL SUPPL 2021; 36:9-18. [PMID: 34977691 PMCID: PMC8703228 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
CONTEXT Advances in systemic agents have increased overall survival for men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. Additional cytoreductive prostate treatments and metastasis-directed therapies are under evaluation. These confer toxicity but may offer incremental survival benefits. Thus, an understanding of patients' values and treatment preferences is important for counselling, decision-making, and guideline development. OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review of patients' values, preferences, and expectations regarding treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for qualitative and preference elucidation studies reporting on patients' preferences for treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) or GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual). The protocol was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020201420. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 1491 participants from 15 studies met the prespecified eligibility for inclusion. The study designs included were discrete choice experiments (n = 5), mixed methods (n = 3), and qualitative methods (n = 7). Disease states reported per study were: metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in nine studies (60.0%), metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in two studies (13.3%), and a mixed cohort in four studies (26.6%). In quantitative preference elicitation studies, patients consistently valued treatment effectiveness and delay in time to symptoms as the two top-ranked treatment attributes (low or very low certainty). Patients were willing to trade off treatment-related toxicity for potential oncological benefits (low certainty). In qualitative studies, thematic analysis revealed cancer progression and/or survival, pain, and fatigue as key components in treatment decisions (low or very low certainty). Patients continue to value oncological benefits in making decisions on treatments under qualitative assessment. CONCLUSIONS There is limited understanding of how patients make treatment and trade-off decisions following a diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer. For appropriate investment in emerging cytoreductive local tumour and metastasis-directed therapies, we should seek to better understand how this cohort weighs the oncological benefits against the risks. PATIENT SUMMARY We looked at how men with advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer make treatment decisions. We found that little is known about patients' preferences for current and proposed new treatments. Further studies are required to understand how patients make decisions to help guide the integration of new treatments into the standard of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin J. Connor
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK,Corresponding author at: Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Campus, Fulham Palace Road, London W6 8RF, UK.
| | - Mesfin G. Genie
- Health Economic Research Unit (HERU), Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - David Burns
- Health Economic Research Unit (HERU), Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Edward J. Bass
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Michael Gonzalez
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Naveed Sarwar
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Alison Falconer
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Stephen Mangar
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Tim Dudderidge
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Vincent Khoo
- Department of Clinical Oncology, The Royal Marsden Hospital & Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Hashim U. Ahmed
- Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK,Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Verity Watson
- Health Economic Research Unit (HERU), Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Connor MJ, Genie MG, Gonzalez M, Sarwar N, Thippu Jayaprakash K, Horan G, Hosking-Jervis F, Klimowska-Nassar N, Sukumar J, Pokrovska T, Basak D, Robinson A, Beresford M, Rai B, Mangar S, Khoo V, Dudderidge T, Falconer A, Winkler M, Watson V, Ahmed HU. Metastatic prostate cancer men's attitudes towards treatment of the local tumour and metastasis evaluative research (IP5-MATTER): protocol for a prospective, multicentre discrete choice experiment study. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e048996. [PMID: 34794989 PMCID: PMC8603288 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048996] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and intensification with agents such as docetaxel, abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide has resulted in improved overall survival in men with de novo synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Novel local cytoreductive treatments and metastasis-directed therapy are now being evaluated. Such interventions may provide added survival benefit or delay the requirement for further systemic agents and associated toxicity but can confer additional harm. Understanding men's preferences for treatment options in this disease state is crucial for patients, clinicians, carers and future healthcare service providers. METHODS Using a prospective, multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE), we aim to determine the attributes associated with treatment that are most important to men with mHSPC. Furthermore, we plan to determine men's preferences for, and trade-offs between, the attributes (survival and side effects) of different treatment options including systemic therapy, local cytoreductive approaches (external beam radiotherapy, cytoreductive radical prostatectomy or minimally invasive ablative therapy) and metastases-directed therapies (metastasectomy or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy). All men with newly diagnosed mHSPC within 4 months of commencing ADT and WHO performance status 0-2 are eligible. Men who have previously consented to a cytoreductive treatment or have developed castrate-resistant disease will be excluded. This study includes a qualitative analysis component, with patients (n=15) and healthcare professionals (n=5), to identify and define the key attributes associated with treatment options that would warrant trade-off evaluation in a DCE. The main phase component planned recruitment is 300 patients over 1 year, commencing in January 2021, with planned study completion in March 2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority East of England, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 20/EE/0194). Project information will be reported on the publicly available Imperial College London website and the Heath Economics Research Unit (HERU website including the HERU Blog). We will use the social media accounts of IP5-MATTER, Imperial Prostate London, HERU and the individual researchers to disseminate key findings following publication. Findings from the study will be presented at national/international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. Authorship policy will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT04590976.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin John Connor
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Mesfin G Genie
- Health Economics Research Unit (HERU), Faculty of Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
- Economics, Ca' Foscari University of Venice, Venezia, Italy
| | - Michael Gonzalez
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Naveed Sarwar
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Kamalram Thippu Jayaprakash
- Department of Oncology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
- Department of Oncology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital King's Lynn NHS Foundation Trust, King's Lynn, UK
| | - Gail Horan
- Department of Oncology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Feargus Hosking-Jervis
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Natalia Klimowska-Nassar
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial College Clinical Trials Unit (ICTU), Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Johanna Sukumar
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial College Clinical Trials Unit (ICTU), Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Tzveta Pokrovska
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Dolan Basak
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Angus Robinson
- Department of Oncology, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK
| | - Mark Beresford
- Department of Oncology, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK
| | - Bhavan Rai
- Department of Urology, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Stephen Mangar
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Vincent Khoo
- Department of Oncology, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Tim Dudderidge
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Alison Falconer
- Department of Oncology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Mathias Winkler
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Verity Watson
- Health Economics Research Unit (HERU), Faculty of Medicine, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Hashim Uddin Ahmed
- Imperial Prostate, Divison of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Reiss AB, Saeedullah U, Grossfeld DJ, Glass AD, Pinkhasov A, Katz AE. Prostate cancer treatment and the relationship of androgen deprivation therapy to cognitive function. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 24:733-741. [PMID: 34743290 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-021-02727-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 10/23/2021] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the second most common form of cancer in men. For advanced, high risk prostate cancer, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the preferred treatment and can induce remission, but resistance to ADT brings biochemical recurrence and progression of cancer. ADT brings adverse effects such as erectile dysfunction, decreased libido, and diminished physical strength. It is estimated that between 25 and 50% of men on ADT manifest some form of cognitive dysfunction that may be self-reported or reported by a family member. There is concern that impaired cognitive function with ADT is due to loss of testosterone support. Testosterone and its metabolites are known to possess neuroprotective properties. While a direct causal relationship between ADT and cognitive decline in prostate cancer patients has not been established, this review describes the controversy surrounding the possible connection between ADT and neurocognitive deterioration. The cellular and molecular mechanisms believed to underlie the protection of neuronal integrity by androgens are discussed. Results from animal models and human clinical studies are presented. Finally, we call attention to lifestyle modifications that may minimize cognitive issues in prostate cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A B Reiss
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA.
| | - U Saeedullah
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA
| | - D J Grossfeld
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA
| | - A D Glass
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA
| | - A Pinkhasov
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA
| | - A E Katz
- Biomedical Research Institute, NYU Long Island School of Medicine, 101 Mineola Boulevard, Suite 4-004, Mineola, NY, 11501, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Collacott H, Soekhai V, Thomas C, Brooks A, Brookes E, Lo R, Mulnick S, Heidenreich S. A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments. THE PATIENT 2021; 14:775-790. [PMID: 33950476 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00520-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/17/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As the number and type of cancer treatments available rises and patients live with the consequences of their disease and treatments for longer, understanding preferences for cancer care can help inform decisions about optimal treatment development, access, and care provision. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are commonly used as a tool to elicit stakeholder preferences; however, their implementation in oncology may be challenging if burdensome trade-offs (e.g. length of life versus quality of life) are involved and/or target populations are small. OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to characterise DCEs relating to cancer treatments that were conducted between 1990 and March 2020. DATA SOURCES EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for relevant studies. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Studies were included if they implemented a DCE and reported outcomes of interest (i.e. quantitative outputs on participants' preferences for cancer treatments), but were excluded if they were not focused on pharmacological, radiological or surgical treatments (e.g. cancer screening or counselling services), were non-English, or were a secondary analysis of an included study. ANALYSIS METHODS Analysis followed a narrative synthesis, and quantitative data were summarised using descriptive statistics, including rankings of attribute importance. RESULT Seventy-nine studies were included in the review. The number of published DCEs relating to oncology grew over the review period. Studies were conducted in a range of indications (n = 19), most commonly breast (n =10, 13%) and prostate (n = 9, 11%) cancer, and most studies elicited preferences of patients (n = 59, 75%). Across reviewed studies, survival attributes were commonly ranked as most important, with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) ranked most important in 58% and 28% of models, respectively. Preferences varied between stakeholder groups, with patients and clinicians placing greater importance on survival outcomes, and general population samples valuing health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Despite the emphasis of guidelines on the importance of using qualitative research to inform attribute selection and DCE designs, reporting on instrument development was mixed. LIMITATIONS No formal assessment of bias was conducted, with the scope of the paper instead providing a descriptive characterisation. The review only included DCEs relating to cancer treatments, and no insight is provided into other health technologies such as cancer screening. Only DCEs were included. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Although there was variation in attribute importance between responder types, survival attributes were consistently ranked as important by both patients and clinicians. Observed challenges included the risk of attribute dominance for survival outcomes, limited sample sizes in some indications, and a lack of reporting about instrument development processes. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020184232.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah Collacott
- Evidera, The Ark, 2nd Floor, 201 Talgarth Road, London, W6 8BJ, UK.
| | - Vikas Soekhai
- Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Caitlin Thomas
- Evidera, The Ark, 2nd Floor, 201 Talgarth Road, London, W6 8BJ, UK
| | - Anne Brooks
- Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA
| | - Ella Brookes
- Evidera, The Ark, 2nd Floor, 201 Talgarth Road, London, W6 8BJ, UK
| | - Rachel Lo
- Evidera, The Ark, 2nd Floor, 201 Talgarth Road, London, W6 8BJ, UK
| | - Sarah Mulnick
- Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Sartor O, George D, Tombal B, Agarwal N, Higano CS, Sternberg CN, Miller K, Jiao X, Guo H, Sandström P, Bruno A, Verholen F, Saad F, Shore N. Real-world outcomes of second novel hormonal therapy or radium-223 following first novel hormonal therapy for mCRPC. Future Oncol 2021; 18:35-45. [PMID: 34636627 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2021-0886] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate real-world clinical outcomes of radium-223 or alternative novel hormonal therapy (NHT) following first-line NHT for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Patients & methods: Retrospective analysis of the US Flatiron database (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03896984). Results: In the radium-223 cohort (n = 120) versus the alternative NHT cohort (n = 226), proportionally more patients had prior symptomatic skeletal events and bone-only metastases, and first-line NHT duration was shorter. Following second-line therapy, 49 versus 39% of patients received subsequent life-prolonging therapy; of these, 47 versus 76% received taxane. Median overall survival was 10.8 versus 11.2 months. Conclusion: Real-world patients with mCRPC had similar median overall survival following second-line radium-223 or alternative NHT after first-line NHT. Many patients received subsequent therapy, with less taxane use after radium-223.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oliver Sartor
- Tulane Cancer Center, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | - Daniel George
- Departments of Medicine & Surgery, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Bertrand Tombal
- Division of Urology, IREC, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Celestia S Higano
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington & Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Cora N Sternberg
- Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell Department of Medicine, Meyer Cancer Center, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kurt Miller
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Urologische Klinik und Hochschulambulanz, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Helen Guo
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, NJ, USA
| | | | - Amanda Bruno
- Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, NJ, USA
| | | | - Fred Saad
- University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, SC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Uemura H, Matsushima H, Yokomizo A, Kobayashi K, Arai G, Satoh T, Grillo V, Chen Y, Singh S, Ledesma DA. Unmet needs in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer from the Japanese patient perspective: a discrete choice experiment. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e052471. [PMID: 34400460 PMCID: PMC8370498 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES With novel antiandrogen treatments of varying clinical benefits and risks becoming available, this study investigates how patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) value differences in treatment characteristics. DESIGN Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING A discrete choice experiment was conducted. Patients chose between two hypothetical non-metastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) treatments defined by six attributes: risk of fatigue, falls or fracture, cognitive impairment, hypertension, rashes as side effects to treatment and extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs. PARTICIPANTS A total of 137 adult male patients with CRPC with no prior experience with chemotherapy and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0-1 were recruited. Patients were excluded if they participated in an investigational programme outside of routine clinical practice, had a clinically relevant medical or psychiatric condition, or diagnosis of visceral/other metastases not related to the prostate, or were otherwise deemed ineligible by the referring physician. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES Relative preference weights and relative importance of the attributes was estimated by hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. RESULTS Among the treatment attributes, 'risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment' was the most important attribute (relative importance (RI) (95% CI): 27.47% (24.80% to 30.14%)), followed by 'extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs' (RI (95% CI): 17.87% (15.49% to 20.25%)) and the 'risk of falls or fracture' (RI (95% CI): 15.99% (14.73% to 17.25%)). The 'risk of hypertension as a side effect of treatment' (RI (95% CI): 13.77% (12.73% to 14.81%)) had similar RI as 'risk of rashes as a side effect of treatment' (RI (95% CI): 13.17% (12.15% to 14.19%)), followed by the 'risk of fatigue as a side effect of treatment' (RI (95% CI): 11.74% (10.75% to 12.73%)). CONCLUSIONS Patients consider the risk of cognitive impairment as a side effect of treatment as the most important attribute in nmCRPC, followed by the extension of time until cancer-related pain occurs, and the risk of falls and fracture. These features should be considered in treatment decision making for nmCRPC in Japan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiroji Uemura
- Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan
| | | | - Akira Yokomizo
- Department of Urology, Harasanshin Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Kazuki Kobayashi
- Department of Urology, Yokosuka Kyosai Hospital, Yokosuka, Japan
| | - Gaku Arai
- Department of Urology, Dokkyo Medical University Saitama Medical Center, Koshigaya, Japan
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Patients' preferences for delaying metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Combining health state and treatment valuation. Urol Oncol 2021; 39:367.e7-367.e17. [PMID: 33736976 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.12.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2020] [Revised: 11/13/2020] [Accepted: 12/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) experience disease progression at different rates. The purpose of this study was to quantify the strength of patient preferences for delaying prostate cancer progression utilizing a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and valuing 3 health states in the continuum of CRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Men with CRPC, recruited from US patient panels, completed a cross-sectional web-based survey. The survey consisted of vignette-based time trade-off and a DCE designed to quantify patients' willingness to pay to delay metastatic CRPC. Three health states were presented: (1) living with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) (2) living with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) before chemotherapy, and (3) living with mCRPC either on or after chemotherapy. The DCE consisted of 15 hypothetical choices with attributes characterizing CRPC (pain, fatigue, out of pocket cost, dosing, and time until cancer metastasizes). Patients' willingness to pay for changes in each attribute were derived. RESULTS A total of 176 patients with CRPC were surveyed (mean age: 64.2 years; 74% nmCRPC). Patients valued the nmCRPC health state (0.865) significantly higher than mCRPC before chemotherapy (0.743) or mCRPC on or after chemotherapy (0.476), both P < 0.001. In the DCE, patient treatment valuation was most affected by increasing the number of months until cancer metastasized; patients were willing to pay an additional $682 per month to delay time to metastases from 6 to 24 months (95% Confidence Interval: $387-$977) and additional $1,041 per month to delay time to metastasis to 48 months (95% Confidence Interval: $591-$1,490). CONCLUSIONS The results of this study demonstrated men with CRPC place significant value on delaying metastases. This study represents the first time 2 stated preference methods, time trade-off and DCE, were used together to understand patients' preferences and valuation of health states in CRPC.
Collapse
|
22
|
Facing life-prolonging treatment: The perspectives of men with advanced metastatic prostate cancer - An interview study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2020; 49:101859. [PMID: 33126157 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2020.101859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2020] [Revised: 09/07/2020] [Accepted: 10/16/2020] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Several life-prolonging treatment options have recently become available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, research regarding patient experiences while undergoing these treatments is scarce. The aim was to explore the perspectives of men when facing life-prolonging treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHOD Qualitative interviews were conducted with 16 men as they were starting, undergoing or had completed their first life-prolonging treatment. Interpretive description was used for analysis. RESULTS The results illuminate the complexity of facing life-prolonging treatment, with interlaced dimensions beyond just the outcome, and where the men described other dimensions of their lives in relation to the treatment. The results are presented as 4 themes; Considering treatment when the remainder of life is at stake, Preparing for the life-prolonging treatment after deciding to go through with it, Considering the prospect of the life-prolonging treatment not being successful and Reflecting on death and dying in the light of a life-limiting illness. CONCLUSIONS The quality and content of the remainder of life are central for men when facing life-prolonging treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This is important when weighing desired treatment outcomes against side effects, and when reflecting upon whether going through with treatment would be worth it or not. The results illuminate the importance of encouraging men at this stage to express expectations, hopes and fears regarding the treatment and the future when considering life-prolonging treatments. Nurses working with these patients are important in the decision-making process and in evaluating treatments, to detect needs for interventions.
Collapse
|
23
|
Chachoua L, Dabbous M, François C, Dussart C, Aballéa S, Toumi M. Use of Patient Preference Information in Benefit-Risk Assessment, Health Technology Assessment, and Pricing and Reimbursement Decisions: A Systematic Literature Review of Attempts and Initiatives. Front Med (Lausanne) 2020; 7:543046. [PMID: 33195294 PMCID: PMC7649266 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2020.543046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2020] [Accepted: 09/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives: Inclusion of patient preference (PP) data in decision making has been largely discussed in recent years. Healthcare decision makers—regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA)—are more and more conscious of the need for a patient-centered approach to decide on optimal allocation of scarce money, time, and technological resources. This literature review aims to examine the use of and recommendations for the integration of PP in decision making. Methods: A literature search was conducted through PubMed/Medline in May 2019 to identify publications on PP studies used to inform benefit–risk assessments (BRAs) and HTAs and patient-centered projects and guidelines related to the inclusion of PPs in health policy decision making. After title and abstract screening and full-text review, selected publications were analyzed to retrieve data related to the collection, use, and/or submission of PPs informing BRA or HTA as well as attempts and initiatives in recommendations for PPs integration in decision-making processes. Results: Forty-nine articles were included: 24 attempts and pilot project discussions and 25 PP elicitation studies. Quantitative approaches, particularly discrete choice experiments, were the most used (24 quantitative elicitation studies and 1 qualitative study). The objective of assessing PPs was to prioritize outcome-specific information, to value important treatment characteristics, to provide patient-focused benefit–risk trade-offs, and to appraise the patients' willingness to pay for new technologies. Moreover, attempts and pilot projects to integrate PPs in BRAs and HTAs were identified at the European level and across countries, but no clear recommendations have been issued yet. No less than seven public and/or private initiatives have been undertaken by governmental agencies and independent organizations to set guidance targeting improvement of patients' involvement in decision making. Conclusion: Despite the initiatives undertaken, the pace of progress remains slow. The use of PPs remains poorly implemented, and evidence of proper use of these data in decision making is lacking. Guidelines and recommendations formalizing the purpose of collecting PPs, what methodology should be adopted and how, and who should be responsible for generating these data throughout the decision-making processes are needed to improve and empower integration of PPs in BRA and HTA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lylia Chachoua
- Laboratory EA 3279 - CEReSS, Aix-Marseille University, Life Sciences and Health Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Marseille, France
| | - Monique Dabbous
- Laboratory EA 3279 - CEReSS, Aix-Marseille University, Life Sciences and Health Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Marseille, France
| | - Clément François
- Laboratory EA 3279 - CEReSS, Aix-Marseille University, Life Sciences and Health Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Marseille, France.,Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France
| | | | - Samuel Aballéa
- Laboratory EA 3279 - CEReSS, Aix-Marseille University, Life Sciences and Health Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Marseille, France.,Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France
| | - Mondher Toumi
- Laboratory EA 3279 - CEReSS, Aix-Marseille University, Life Sciences and Health Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Marseille, France.,Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Srinivas S, Mohamed AF, Appukkuttan S, Botteman M, Ng X, Joshi N, Tsai JH, Fang J, Waldeck AR, Simmons SJ. Patient and caregiver benefit-risk preferences for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment. Cancer Med 2020; 9:6586-6596. [PMID: 32725755 PMCID: PMC7520320 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2019] [Revised: 06/25/2020] [Accepted: 06/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Recently approved second‐generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) for non‐metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine how nmCRPC patients and caregivers perceive the benefits versus risks of these new treatments. Methods An online DCE survey with 14 treatment choice questions was administered to nmCRPC patients and caregivers. Each choice question compared two hypothetical medication profiles varying in terms of 5 safety attributes (risk or severity of adverse events [AEs]: fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, serious fall, and serious fracture) and two efficacy attributes (duration of overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression). Random parameters logit models were used to estimate each attribute's relative importance. We also estimated the amounts of OS that respondents were willing to forego for a reduction in AEs. Results In total, 143 nmCRPC patients and 149 caregivers viewed the AEs in following order of importance (most to least): serious fracture, serious fall, cognitive problems, fatigue, and skin rash. On average, patients were willing to trade 5.8 and 4.0 months of OS to reduce the risk of serious fracture and fall, respectively, from 3% to 0%; caregivers were willing to trade 6.6 and 5.4 months of OS. Conclusions nmCRPC patients and caregivers preferred treatments with lower AE burdens and were willing to forego OS to reduce the risk and severity of AEs. Our results highlight the importance of carefully balancing risks and benefits when selecting treatments in this relatively asymptomatic population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Xinyi Ng
- Pharmerit International, LP, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Srinivas S, Mohamed AF, Appukkuttan S, Botteman M, Ng X, Joshi N, Horodniceanu E, Waldeck AR, Simmons SJ. Physician preferences for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment. BMC Urol 2020; 20:73. [PMID: 32571276 PMCID: PMC7310549 DOI: 10.1186/s12894-020-00631-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent approvals of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) have changed the treatment landscape for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These SGARIs have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment to explore how United States physicians make treatment decisions between adverse events (AEs) and survival gains in nmCRPC, a largely asymptomatic disease. METHODS Treating physicians (n = 149) participated in an online survey that included 14 treatment choice questions, each comparing 2 hypothetical treatment profiles, which varied in terms of 5 safety and 2 efficacy attributes. We described safety attributes (fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, falls, and fractures) in terms of severity and frequency, and efficacy attributes (overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression) in terms of duration of effect. We used a random parameters logit model to estimate preference weights and importance scores for each attribute. We also estimated the amount of survival gain physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in specific AEs between treatment options. RESULTS Physicians placed more importance on survival than on time to pain progression, and viewed a reduction in cognitive problems from severe to none, a reduction in risk of a serious fracture from 8% to none, and a reduction in fatigue from severe to none as the most important safety attributes. Physicians were willing to forego 9.1 and 6.6 months of OS, respectively, to reduce cognitive problems and fatigue from severe to mild-to-moderate. To reduce the risk of a serious fracture from 8 to 5% and 5% to none, physicians were willing to trade 3.9 and 5.3 months of OS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Physicians were willing to trade substantial amounts of survival to avoid AEs between hypothetical treatments. These results emphasize the importance of carefully balancing therapies' benefits and risks to ultimately optimize the overall quality of nmCRPC patients' survival. Nonetheless, it is noted that the results from the study sample of 149 physicans may not be representative of the viewpoints of all nmCRPC-treating physicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandy Srinivas
- Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California USA
| | | | | | | | - Xinyi Ng
- Pharmerit International, Bethesda, MD USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
The impact of patient characteristics on enzalutamide pharmacokinetics and how this relates to treatment toxicity and efficacy in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2020; 85:753-760. [PMID: 32076807 PMCID: PMC7125069 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-020-04039-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2019] [Accepted: 01/31/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Purpose The aim of the study is to investigate the influence of patient characteristics, age and body mass index (BMI), on pharmacokinetics of enzalutamide, and to study the relationships between drug exposure and enzalutamide efficacy and toxicity, in mCRPC patients. Methods Data were collected in a longitudinal cohort study (ANDROPS) and a prospective observational study (ILUMINATE), both in mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide. To investigate the influence of age and BMI on exposure, enzalutamide and N-desmethylenzalutamide levels were compared by ANOVA. To investigate the relation of exposure versus time to progression (TTP), the sum plasma levels were divided into quartiles and compared by Kaplan–Meier analysis. To assess the relation of exposure with fatigue, plasma levels in patients experiencing fatigue vs. no fatigue were compared by and independent t test. Results Data of 68 mCRPC patients were included for analysis. Plasma levels were not different for age or BMI. No difference in TTP between both studies was observed (383 days (95% CI 287–859), and 567 days (95% CI 351–NR), p = 0.36). Kaplan–Meier analysis of quartiles of sum levels showed no difference for TTP. Fatigue was reported by 22 patients, no difference in sum plasma levels was observed between patients with and without fatigue. Conclusions We observed that age and BMI did not influence systemic exposure in patients treated with enzalutamide. No relation of exposure with efficacy or fatigue was observed. Further research using enzalutamide at a lower dose is needed to understand the relation of enzalutamide exposure and fatigue.
Collapse
|
27
|
Kwan EM, Semira MC, Bergin ART, Muttiah C, Beck S, Anton A, Campbell D, Wong S, Rosenthal M, Gibbs P, Tran B. Impact of access to novel therapies on the initial management of castrate‐resistant prostate cancer: an Australian multicentre study. Intern Med J 2019; 49:1378-1385. [DOI: 10.1111/imj.14262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2018] [Revised: 01/20/2019] [Accepted: 02/05/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Edmond M. Kwan
- Department of Medical OncologyMonash Health Melbourne Victoria Australia
- Department of Medicine, School of Clinical SciencesMonash University Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Marie C. Semira
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
- Division of Systems Biology and Personalised MedicineWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Alice R. T. Bergin
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Christine Muttiah
- Department of Medical OncologyWestern Health Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Sophie Beck
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
- Division of Systems Biology and Personalised MedicineWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Angelyn Anton
- Division of Systems Biology and Personalised MedicineWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - David Campbell
- Department of Medical OncologyWestern Health Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Shirley Wong
- Department of Medical OncologyWestern Health Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Mark Rosenthal
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Peter Gibbs
- Division of Systems Biology and Personalised MedicineWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Ben Tran
- Department of Medical OncologyPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
- Division of Systems Biology and Personalised MedicineWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research Melbourne Victoria Australia
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
de Freitas HM, Ito T, Hadi M, Al-Jassar G, Henry-Szatkowski M, Nafees B, Lloyd AJ. Patient Preferences for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treatments: A Discrete Choice Experiment Among Men in Three European Countries. Adv Ther 2019; 36:318-332. [PMID: 30617763 PMCID: PMC6824341 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-018-0861-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2018] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Various treatment options are available for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. This study aimed to quantify how men with prostate cancer in the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, and Spain perceive the risks and benefits of hypothetical abiraterone acetate plus prednisone treatment and docetaxel-based chemotherapy treatment options. Methods A targeted literature review, exploratory interviews with prostate cancer patients and oncologists, and pre-test interviews were used to develop a discrete choice experiments (DCE). The final DCE included 32 choice sets, selected using a main-effects orthogonal design, divided into two survey blocks. Paired profiles presented hypothetical treatments for prostate cancer through six attributes that could be presented at two or four levels each. Preference estimates were estimated using a conditional logit regression model. Preference results were stratified by cancer stage. Results A total of 152 participants (mean age 69 years) completed the DCE in the UK, Germany, and Spain. Treatment effectiveness was the main concern for the patients (difference in preference estimates between 8 and 32 months 1.443). Participants wanted to avoid pain that was not well controlled (preference dummy coding estimate − 1.157). Participants valued a change from an oral medication to an intravenous treatment (change in preference estimate − 0.416) more negatively than a change from a 1% to a 5% risk of infection (change in preference estimate − 0.313). Conclusions This study shows that treatment effectiveness and pain control were the most important attributes for patients with prostate cancer. These two attributes influenced more than 50% of their decision-making in this study. The risk of fatigue and mode of administration were least prioritised by patients. This study highlights the relative importance that Spanish, German, and British patients place on various aspects of treatment options for prostate cancer. Understanding patient preference and taking them into consideration shall help physicians when developing their treatment strategies for their patients. Funding Janssen. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-018-0861-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
29
|
Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, Vass CM. Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2019; 37:201-226. [PMID: 30392040 PMCID: PMC6386055 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 394] [Impact Index Per Article: 78.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly advocated as a way to quantify preferences for health. However, increasing support does not necessarily result in increasing quality. Although specific reviews have been conducted in certain contexts, there exists no recent description of the general state of the science of health-related DCEs. The aim of this paper was to update prior reviews (1990-2012), to identify all health-related DCEs and to provide a description of trends, current practice and future challenges. METHODS A systematic literature review was conducted to identify health-related empirical DCEs published between 2013 and 2017. The search strategy and data extraction replicated prior reviews to allow the reporting of trends, although additional extraction fields were incorporated. RESULTS Of the 7877 abstracts generated, 301 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. In general, the total number of DCEs per year continued to increase, with broader areas of application and increased geographic scope. Studies reported using more sophisticated designs (e.g. D-efficient) with associated software (e.g. Ngene). The trend towards using more sophisticated econometric models also continued. However, many studies presented sophisticated methods with insufficient detail. Qualitative research methods continued to be a popular approach for identifying attributes and levels. CONCLUSIONS The use of empirical DCEs in health economics continues to grow. However, inadequate reporting of methodological details inhibits quality assessment. This may reduce decision-makers' confidence in results and their ability to act on the findings. How and when to integrate health-related DCE outcomes into decision-making remains an important area for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vikas Soekhai
- Section of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre (ECMC), Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), P.O. Box 1738, Rotterdam, 3000 DR The Netherlands
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, Rotterdam, 3000 CA The Netherlands
| | - Esther W. de Bekker-Grob
- Section of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre (ECMC), Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), P.O. Box 1738, Rotterdam, 3000 DR The Netherlands
| | - Alan R. Ellis
- Department of Social Work, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC USA
| | - Caroline M. Vass
- Manchester Centre for Health Economics, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
de Angst IB, Kil PJM, Bangma CH, Takkenberg JJM. Should we involve patients more actively? Perspectives of the multidisciplinary team on shared decision-making for older patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. J Geriatr Oncol 2019; 10:653-658. [PMID: 30639265 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2018] [Revised: 11/10/2018] [Accepted: 12/19/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate perspectives of the multidisciplinary team concerning shared decision-making (SDM) in treatment decisions for older patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS A survey among Dutch healthcare providers was conducted to assess healthcare providers' perspectives on patient involvement in decision-making and the value of a decision aid (DA) in the decision-making process. Treatment recommendations were assessed using hypothetical cases in which providers were asked to evaluate their likelihood of pursuing listed treatment options. RESULTS In total, 170 Dutch healthcare providers, including 82 urologists, 31 oncologists, and 57 oncology nurses completed the survey. Sixty-two percent of urologists, 65% of oncologists, and 51% of oncology nurses found that mCRPC patients take a passive role in decision-making and delegate treatment decisions to doctors due to advanced age (p = .45). Yet, 70% of urologists, 71% of oncologists, and 63% of oncology nurses agreed that mCRPC patients should be always involved in decision-making (p = .91). Fifty-two percent of urologists and 55% of oncologists stated that they are inadequately trained to apply SDM in clinical practice. Conversely, only 20% of oncology nurses believed that oncology nurses are inadequately trained. Fifty-four percent of all providers considered a DA suitable to support these patients and their healthcare providers in the decision-making process. All hypothetical cases showed variation in treatment recommendations among providers, with each of the five treatments ranging from extremely likely to extremely unlikely. CONCLUSIONS The wide variation of treatment recommendations observed among the multidisciplinary team suggests that mCRPC patients and their healthcare providers may benefit from implementation of informed SDM. Given the perceived passive role of older patients with mCRPC in decision-making, interventions to engage them are needed. With slightly more than half of respondents finding DAs useful to facilitate the decision-making process, development and implementation of a DA would be an interesting field of research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isabel B de Angst
- Department of Urology, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Hilvarenbeekseweg 60, 5022, GC, Tilburg, the Netherlands; Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
| | - Paul J M Kil
- Department of Urology, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Hilvarenbeekseweg 60, 5022, GC, Tilburg, the Netherlands.
| | - Chris H Bangma
- Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
| | - Johanna J M Takkenberg
- Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Thiery-Vuillemin A, Hvid Poulsen M, Lagneau E, Ploussard G, Birtle A, Dourthe LM, Beal-Ardisson D, Pintus E, Trepiakas R, Antoni L, Lukac M, Van Sanden S, Pissart G, Reid A. Impact of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or enzalutamide on fatigue and cognition in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: initial results from the observational AQUARiUS study. ESMO Open 2018; 3:e000397. [PMID: 30116592 PMCID: PMC6088345 DOI: 10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2018] [Revised: 05/29/2018] [Accepted: 05/30/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and enzalutamide (ENZ) are commonly prescribed for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Data comparing their effects on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from routine clinical practice are limited. Methods AQUARiUS (NCT02813408) is an ongoing, two-cohort, prospective, observational, non-randomised, multicentre, phase IV European study assessing the effects of AAP and ENZ on PROs in 211 patients with mCRPC over 12 months. Patients receive AAP or ENZ per routine clinical practice. Data on cognition, fatigue, pain and health-related quality of life are measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function, Brief Fatigue Inventory-Short Form, Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-C30 questionnaires, respectively. Results This 3-month analysis was conducted in 105 patients; 46 received AAP and 59 received ENZ. There were statistically significant differences in mean change from baseline favouring AAP over ENZ at months 1, 2 and 3 for perceived cognitive impairments and cognitive functioning. At each time-point, ENZ-treated patients had a significantly higher risk of experiencing clinically meaningful worsening in perceived cognitive impairments versus those receiving AAP. Statistically significant differences in mean change from baseline favouring AAP over ENZ were seen for usual level of fatigue and fatigue interference at months 2 and 3 and for current fatigue and worse level of fatigue at month 3. Differences favouring AAP versus ENZ were seen for the fatigue scale of the QLQ-C30 questionnaire (months 1 and 3). There was a significantly higher risk of clinically meaningful worsening in usual level of fatigue with ENZ versus AAP at month 3. No significant differences between cohorts were observed for pain (BPI-SF) at any time-point. Conclusion This analysis suggests more favourable outcomes with AAP versus ENZ for cognition and fatigue in the first 3 months of treatment initiation for mCRPC. These findings require confirmation from future analyses of data from AQUARiUS from a larger number of patients with a longer follow-up period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antoine Thiery-Vuillemin
- Department of Medical Oncology, CHU Jean MINJOZ, Franche-Comté, France; UMR1098, INSERM, Besançon, France.
| | | | - Edouard Lagneau
- Oncologie Medicale, Institut de Cancérologie de Bourgogne, Dijon, France
| | | | - Alison Birtle
- Royal Lancaster Infirmary and Rosemere Cancer Centre, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK
| | | | | | - Elias Pintus
- oncology, Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Slough, UK
| | | | - Laurent Antoni
- EMEA oncology, Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V, Beerse, Belgium
| | - Martin Lukac
- CRO, PAREXEL International Czech Republic s.r.o, on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V, Beerse, Belgium
| | | | | | - Alison Reid
- Prostate Cancer Targeted Therapy Group and Drug Development Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Nakayama M, Kobayashi H, Okazaki M, Imanaka K, Yoshizawa K, Mahlich J. Patient Preferences and Urologist Judgments on Prostate Cancer Therapy in Japan. Am J Mens Health 2018; 12:1094-1101. [PMID: 29774804 PMCID: PMC6131454 DOI: 10.1177/1557988318776123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2017] [Revised: 04/09/2018] [Accepted: 04/13/2018] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to investigate the concordance of treatment preferences between patients and physicians in prostate cancer (PCa) in Japan. An internet-based discrete choice experiment was conducted. Patients and physicians were asked to select their preferred treatment from a pair of hypothetical treatments consisting of four attributes: quality of life (QOL), treatment effectiveness, side effects, and accessibility of treatment. The data were analyzed using a conditional logistic regression model to calculate coefficients and the relative importance (RI) of each attribute. A total of 103 PCa patients and 127 physicians responded. The study looked at 37 patients considered as advanced PCa and 66 who were non-advanced PCa. All of the physicians were urologists. Advanced PCa patients ranked the attributes as follows: treatment effectiveness (RI: 32%), accessibility of treatment (RI: 26%), QOL (RI: 23%), and side effects (RI: 19%). For physicians, the RI ranking was the same as for advanced PCa patients; treatment effectiveness (RI: 29%), accessibility of treatment (RI: 27%), QOL (RI: 26%), and side effects (RI: 18%). For non-advanced PCa patients, accessibility of treatment ranked the highest RI (27%) and treatment effectiveness ranked as the lowest RI (14%). Our study suggests that the ranking of the attributes was consistent between advanced PCa patients and physicians. The most influential attribute was treatment effectiveness. Treatment preferences also vary by disease stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Masateru Okazaki
- Medical Affairs Division, Janssen
Pharmaceutical K.K., Tokyo, Japan
| | - Keiichiro Imanaka
- Research and Development Division, Janssen
Pharmaceutical K.K., Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Jörg Mahlich
- Health Economics Division, Janssen
Pharmaceutical K.K., Tokyo, Japan
- Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics
(DICE), University of Düsseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|