Oncologist and Patient Preferences for Attributes of CDK4/6 Inhibitor Regimens for the Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic HR Positive/HER2 Negative Breast Cancer: Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling

Patient Preferences Influencing Treatment Decision-Making in Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Germany, Italy, and Japan

Purpose

Patients with early breast cancer (eBC) are increasingly provided with different options, which may involve a sequence of different treatments and treatment modalities, and eligibility for certain adjuvant treatments depending upon pre-surgical and surgical outcomes. This study examined patient preferences around aspects of treatment decision-making in eBC.

Patients and Methods

A total of 452 patients with self-reported eBC in Germany (n=151), Italy (n=151), and Japan (n=150) completed an online survey about physician interactions and treatment side effects. The survey included best-worst scaling (BWS) to assess prioritization of 13 statements reflecting aspects of treatment decision-making. In a series of choice tasks, participants chose their most and least preferred options among subsets of 4 statements. Hierarchical Bayesian modeling was used to estimate BWS preference scores for each statement. BWS scores were based on the number of times a statement was chosen as most versus least preferred; scores total 100 for each patient.

Results

The most preferred aspects of treatment decision-making were "treatment aggressiveness matches personal risk" (mean BWS score = 13.49), "being told about what is coming" (13.18), deciding based on "own surgical outcome" (11.90), "avoiding unnecessary treatment" (10.35), and "involving in treatment decisions" (9.44). The least preferred aspects were "not being asked about treatment decisions along the way" (3.27) and "receiving the same treatment as other patients" (3.41). Patients in Japan preferred "being told about what is coming", "deciding based on own surgical outcome", "avoiding unnecessary treatment", and being "involved in decisions" more than patients in Italy and Germany. Patients in Germany were more satisfied with their physician interactions and care, although their outcomes were not always better than those in Italy and Japan.

Conclusion

Patients value individualized treatment tailored to their risk of recurrence and tolerance of side effects, highlighting the need for focused patient education about options, to encourage their engagement.

Differences in Preferences for Drug Therapy Between Patients with Metastatic Versus Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Compared with early stages (eBC) metastatic BC (mBC) is incurable. In mBC, aggressive treatment may increase the duration of survival but may also cause severe treatment side effects. A better understanding how patients with BC value different aspects of drug therapy might improve treatment effectiveness, satisfaction and adherence. This systematic review aims to identify and summarise studies evaluating patient preferences for drug therapy of BC and to compare preferences of patients with eBC and mBC.

METHODS

The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched on 22 June 2023. All studies published to this point were considered. Original studies reporting patient preferences on BC drug therapy determined by any type of choice experiment were eligible. A narrative synthesis of the effect measures presented as relative importance ratings, trade-offs (required benefit to make a therapy worthwhile) or monetary values of the treatment attributes was reported for each study. Risk of bias assessment for individual studies was performed using the checklist for observational studies from the STROBE Statement and the checklist from 'Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making: A User's Guide'. The study protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022377031).

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis evaluating the preferences of patients with eBC (n = 18), mBC (n = 10) or any stage BC (n = 6) on, for example, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, hormonal therapy or CKD4/6-inhibitors using different types of choice experiments. Regardless of the stage, most patients valued treatment effectiveness in terms of survival gains higher than potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Treatment cost, mode of administration, treatment regimen and monitoring aspects were considered as least important treatment attributes. In addition, preferences concerning 16 different types of ADRs were described, showing high heterogeneity within BC stages. Yet, comparable results across BC stages were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the stage, patients with BC consistently valued survival gains as the most important attribute and were willing to accept the risk of potential ADRs. Incorporating patient preferences in shared decision making may improve the effectiveness of interventions by enhancing adherence to drug therapy in patients suffering from BC.

Digging in real-word electronic database for assessing CDK 4/6 inhibitors adherence in breast cancer patients from Romania

Introduction: It is imperative for patients to respect the prescribed treatments to achieve the anticipated clinical outcomes, including the outpatients receiving oral anti-cancer drugs such as selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK 4/6i). With the introduction of three CDK 4/6i drugs in the Romanian pharmaceutical market in 2018, our study aimed to evaluate medication adherence and the influencing factors among patients undergoing treatment with palbociclib, ribociclib, or abemaciclib for advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Methods: Medication adherence was assessed using the Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) method, and Spearman correlation analysis was conducted to explore the relationships between adherence, age, gender, and follow-up duration. Results: The study enrolled 330 breast cancer patients, with an average follow-up period of 14.6 ± 12.5 months for palbociclib, 10.6 ± 7.1 months for ribociclib, and 8.6 ± 6.4 months for abemaciclib-treated patients. A small proportion of patients demonstrated non-adherence: 12.8% for palbociclib, 14.6% for ribociclib, and 14.7% for abemaciclib. Among patients receiving palbociclib, there was no significant correlation between adherence, age (rho = 0.07, p = 0.35), or gender (rho = -0.144, p = 0.054). However, a significant correlation was found with the duration of follow-up (rho = -0.304, p < 0.0001). Similar results were observed for patients receiving ribociclib or abemaciclib. Most patients received combination therapy with letrozole (46%) and exemestane (13%) for palbociclib, letrozole (48%) and fulvestrant (19%) for ribociclib, and fulvestrant (39%) and letrozole (27%) for abemaciclib, Discussion: High adherence rates were observed among patients treated with CDK 4/6i drugs, with no significant differences noted among the three drugs in this class. However, the collected patient data was limited, lacking information on adverse reactions that could potentially lead to treatment discontinuation, as determined by the oncologist's decision not to prescribe. Consequently, a comprehensive understanding of all factors contributing to the low adherence levels is hindered.

Distinct Mechanisms of Resistance to CDK4/6 Inhibitors Require Specific Subsequent Treatment Strategies: One Size Does Not Fit All

Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors have transformed the treatment landscape of patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. However, despite improvements in clinical outcomes, the approximately 70% of patients with tumors that are not intrinsically resistant to a CDK4/6 inhibitor still ultimately acquire resistance, which leads to a dilemma for clinicians when deciding which treatment to offer patients when they demonstrate disease progression on a CDK4/6 inhibitor. As such, many groups have sought to understand the mechanisms of resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors, mostly focusing on genetic alterations associated with resistance. Though several recurrent mutations have been described, they are not consistent enough to guide clinical practice or generate novel rational treatment options. Two recent publications have used transcriptomic analysis to unravel distinct mechanisms driving resistance to individual CDK4/6 inhibitors and in doing so have identified biomarkers that could potentially help identify the next course of treatment for patients following disease progression.

Patient Preferences in Metastatic Breast Cancer Care: A Scoping Review

People with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have diverse medical, physical, and psychosocial needs that require multidimensional care. Understanding patient preferences is crucial to tailor treatments, services, and foster patient-centered care. A scoping review was performed to summarize the current evidence on the preferences of people with MBC regarding their care to identify knowledge gaps and key areas for future research. The Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycInfo databases were searched. Twenty studies enrolling 3354 patients met the study eligibility criteria. Thirteen quantitative studies, four mixed methods studies, and three qualitative studies were included. Seven studies captured healthcare provider perspectives; thirteen studies evaluated patient preferences relating specifically to cancer treatments; three studies evaluated preferences relating to supportive care; and four studies evaluated communication and decision-making preferences. The current literature evaluating MBC patient preferences is heterogeneous with a focus on cancer treatments. Future research should explore patient preferences relating to multidisciplinary, multi-modal care that aims to improve quality of life. Understanding MBC patient preferences regarding their comprehensive care can help tailor healthcare delivery, enhance the patient experience, and improve outcomes.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors: existing and emerging differences

The cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are standard-of-care therapy for hormone receptor-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer, based on randomized trials showing improved progression-free survival for all 3 drugs and overall survival for ribociclib and abemaciclib. Results in early breast cancer are discordant, with sustained improvement in invasive disease-free survival demonstrated for abemaciclib but not other CDK4/6 inhibitors to date. We review nonclinical studies exploring mechanistic differences between the drugs, the impact of continuous dosing on treatment effect, and translational research into potential resistance mechanisms and prognostic and predictive markers. We focus particularly on how emerging findings may help us understand similarities and differences between the available CDK4/6 inhibitors. Even at late-stage clinical development, there remains much to learn about how agents in this class exert their varying effects.

Assessment of patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs in China: a best-worst discrete choice experiment on three common cancer types

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.

CDK4/6 Inhibitors—Overcoming Endocrine Resistance Is the Standard in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

Purpose of review: Tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors can be considered as some of the first targeted therapies. For the past 30 years, they were the endocrine treatment standard in the advanced and early breast cancer setting. CDK4/6 inhibitors, however, are the first substances in almost two decades to broadly improve the therapeutic landscape of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients for the upcoming years. This review is designed to discuss the recent history, current role, future directions and opportunities of this substance class. Recent findings: The CDK4/6 inhibitors abemaciclib, dalpiciclib, palbociclib and ribociclib have all demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival in advanced disease. However, to date, abemaciclib and ribociclib are the only CDK4/6 inhibitors to have shown an improvement in overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Moreover, abemaciclib is the first CDK4/6 inhibitor to also reduce the risk of recurrence in those with early-stage disease. Further CDK inhibitors, treatment combinations with other drugs and different therapy sequences are in development. Summary: Achieving significant improvements in survival rates in the advanced and early breast cancer treatment setting, CDK4/6 inhibitors have set a new standard of care for patients with advanced breast cancer. It remains important to better understand resistance mechanisms to be able to develop novel substances and treatment sequences.

Quality of life with ribociclib versus abemaciclib as first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison

Background

A cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) + endocrine therapy is recommended as first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Quality of life (QoL) is an important endpoint that affects treatment decisions. Understanding the relevance of CDK4/6i treatment on QoL is gaining importance given use in earlier treatment lines for ABC and an emerging role in treating early breast cancer in which QoL may be more impactful. In the absence of head-to-head trial data, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) permits comparative efficacy between trials.

Objective

In this analysis, patient-reported QoL for MONALEESA-2 [ribociclib + aromatase inhibitor (AI)] and MONARCH 3 (abemaciclib + AI) was compared using MAIC with a focus on individual domains.

Design

An anchored MAIC of QoL comparing ribociclib + AI versus abemaciclib + AI was performed using data from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and BR-23 questionnaires.

Methods

Individual patient data from MONALEESA-2 and published aggregated data from MONARCH 3 were included in this analysis. Time to sustained deterioration (TTSD) was calculated as the time from randomization to a ⩾10-point deterioration with no later improvement above this threshold.

Results

Patients from the ribociclib (n = 205) and placebo (n = 149) arms of MONALEESA-2 were matched with patients from the abemaciclib (n = 328) and placebo (n = 165) arms of MONARCH 3. After weighting, baseline patient characteristics were well balanced. TTSD significantly favored ribociclib versus abemaciclib in appetite loss [hazard ratio (HR), 0.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.27-0.81], diarrhea (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.79), fatigue (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.96), and arm symptoms (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79). TTSD did not significantly favor abemaciclib compared with ribociclib in any functional or symptom scale of the QLQ-C30 or BR-23 questionnaires.

Conclusions

This MAIC indicates that ribociclib + AI is associated with better symptom-related QoL than abemaciclib + AI for postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- ABC treated in the first-line setting.

Trial registration

NCT01958021 (MONALEESA-2) and NCT02246621 (MONARCH 3).

Patient Preferences in Targeted Pharmacotherapy for Cancers: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

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.

Patient preferences for features of HER2-targeted treatment of advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a discrete-choice experiment study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to quantify patients' benefit-risk preferences for attributes associated with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted breast cancer treatments and estimate minimum acceptable benefits (MABs), denominated in additional months of progression-free survival (PFS), for given treatment-related adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

We conducted an online discrete-choice experiment (DCE) among patients with self-reported advanced/metastatic breast cancer in the United States, United Kingdom, and Japan (N = 302). In a series of nine DCE questions, respondents chose between two hypothetical treatment profiles created by an experimental design. Profiles were defined by six attributes with varying levels: PFS, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, liver function problems, risk of heart failure, and risk of serious lung damage and infections. Data were analyzed using an error component random-parameters logit model.

RESULTS

Among the attributes, patients placed the most importance on a change in PFS from 5 to 26 months; change from no diarrhea to severe diarrhea was the least important. Avoiding a 15% risk of heart failure had the largest MAB (5.8 additional months of PFS), followed by avoiding a 15% risk of serious lung damage and infections (4.6 months), possible severe liver function problems (4.2 months), severe nausea/vomiting (3.7 months), and severe diarrhea (2.3 months) compared with having none of the AEs. The relative importance of 21 additional months of PFS (increasing from 5 to 26 months) increased for women with HER2-negative disease and those with children.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients valued PFS gain higher than the potential risk of AEs when deciding between hypothetical breast cancer treatments.

The emerging role of real-world data in advanced breast cancer therapy: Recommendations for collaborative decision-making

Among stakeholders and decision-makers in advanced breast cancer, the demand for insights from real-world data (RWD) is increasing. Although RWD can be used to support decisions throughout different stages of a breast cancer drug's life cycle, barriers exist to its use and acceptance. We propose a collaborative approach to generating and using RWD that is meaningful to multiple stakeholders, and encourage frameworks toward international guidelines to help standardize RWD methodologies to achieve more efficient use of RWD insights.

Palbociclib versus abemaciclib in HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: an indirect comparison of patient-reported end points

Aim: To assess the relative impact of palbociclib plus fulvestrant (PAL + FUL) and abemaciclib plus fulvestrant (ABEM + FUL) on patient-reported outcomes in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer. Patients & methods: Anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparisons were conducted using individual patient data from PALOMA-3 (PAL + FUL) and summary-level data from MONARCH-2 (ABEM + FUL). Outcomes included the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 items (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its breast cancer-specific module (QLQ-BR23). Results: Significantly different changes from baseline favoring PAL + FUL compared with ABEM + FUL were observed in global quality of life (6.95 [95% CI: 2.19-11.71]; p = 0.004) and several functional/symptom scales, including emotional functioning, nausea/vomiting, appetite loss, diarrhea and systemic therapy side effects. Conclusion: PAL + FUL was associated with more favorable patient-reported outcomes than ABEM + FUL in patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Application of Discrete Choice Experiment in Health Care: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) as a tool that can measure medical stakeholders' preferences especially patients recently has been increasingly applied in health care.

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the hotspots and trends of the application of DCE in health care and to provide reference and direction for further development of DCE in the future.

Method: A bibliometric method was implemented using the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection for the period from the database established to December 8, 2020. The data files are imported into CiteSpace and Excel to analyze and visualize the annual volume of productive, authors, countries, cited journals, cited articles, and keywords.

Results: A total of 1,811 articles were retrieved, then we read the abstract of each paper one by one, and 1,562 articles were included after screening, with an exponential increase in publication volume. John F. P. Bridges contributed to 40 publications and ranked first, followed by F. Reed Johnson (n = 37), Julie Ratcliffe (n = 36). The majority of the papers were conducted in the United States (n = 513) and the United Kingdom (n = 433). The top three cited journals were “Health Economics” (n = 981), “Value in Health” (n = 893), and “Pharmaceutical Economics” (n = 774), and the top three articles were “Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force,” “Conjoint analysis applications in health-a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force,” and “Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.” The research hotspots and trends included “health technology assessment,” “survival,” “preference based measure,” and “health state valuation.”

Conclusion: The size of the literature about DCE studies in health care showed a noticeable increase in the past decade. The application of DCE in health care remains in an early growth phase, and “health technology assessment,” “survival,” “preference based measure,” and “health state valuation” reflected the latest research hotpots and future trends.

Patient, Oncologist, and Payer Preferences for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy and CDK4/6 Inhibitor Regimens in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Several adjuvant phase III trials are evaluating cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) in hormonal receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer (eBC). This study examines preferences for this combination regimen and ET alone among patients, oncologists, and payers in the United States.

METHODS

A web-based questionnaire, including a discrete choice experiment (DCE), was administered to patients, practicing oncologists, and payers. In the DCE, respondents selected between hypothetical treatment profiles with attributes associated with ET monotherapy and CDK4/6i + ET regimens. Each treatment alternative was defined by the following attributes: 5-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), nausea, diarrhea, neutropenia, alopecia, dosing schedule, and electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring. Payers had the additional attribute of annual per-patient treatment cost. Hierarchical Bayesian models were used to estimate relative preference weights for each attribute-level and relative attribute importance.

RESULTS

For patients (n=300) and oncologists (n=200), iDFS was most important (2 to 3 times more important than the next most important attribute), followed by neutropenia and diarrhea risks for patients and oncologists, respectively. Patients and oncologists required an improvement in iDFS of 8.0 and 5.6 percentage-points, respectively, to accept an increase in diarrhea risk from 11% to 81%. Payers (n=60) viewed annual per-patient cost as most important for treatment access decision-making, closely followed by iDFS. Payers required an improvement in iDFS of 21.8 percentage-points to accept an increase in cost from $5,100 to $149,400. Across all stakeholder groups, dosing schedule, alopecia risk, and ECG monitoring were perceived as least important.

CONCLUSION

Patients, oncologists, and payers expect a large absolute risk reduction in efficacy to offset the potential risks and costs of adding a CDK4/6i to current standard of care. An open discussion between all stakeholders is necessary to ensure that decision-making, whether at patient- or system-level, is informed by preferences for novel treatments, like CDK4/6is.