Patient preferences for frontline therapies for Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a discrete choice experiment

Patient Preferences for Treatment in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Leukemia in the United Kingdom: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Background

Acute leukemia is a cancer of the white blood cells which progresses rapidly and aggressively. There are two types: acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The latter has a rare subtype: acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). For some patients, following first-line treatment, remission is not achieved ("refractory disease"), and for others the leukemia returns after achieving remission ("relapse"). For these individuals, outcomes are typically poor. It is, therefore, important to understand patients' treatment priorities in this context.

Methods

Building upon formative qualitative research, an online survey containing a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was designed to explore patients' treatment preferences in the relapsed/refractory setting. The DCE attributes were mode of administration; quality of life during treatment; chance of response; duration of response; and quality of life during response. Each respondent completed twelve scenarios containing two hypothetical treatments. Participants were eligible if they lived in the United Kingdom and had a diagnosis of acute leukemia. The data were analysed using a latent class model.

Results

A total of 95 patients completed the survey. The latent class analysis identified two classes. For both, chance of response was the most important attribute. For class 1, every attribute was important, whereas for class 2, the only important attributes were quality of life (during treatment and response) and chance of response. A greater proportion of respondents would fall into class 1 overall, and those with ALL or APL and those more recently diagnosed were more likely to be in class 2.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that patients are strongly concerned about the chance of response, as well as quality of life (to a lesser extent), when faced with different treatment options in the relapsed/refractory setting. However, there is significant preference heterogeneity within the patient population, and other treatment characteristics also matter to many.

Patient and Physician Preferences for Acute Myeloid Leukemia Maintenance Treatments Following Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Purpose

This study assessed and compared preferences for treatment attributes of maintenance therapies post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and in physicians who treat these patients.

Patients and Methods

Patients with AML post HSCT and physicians from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia (physicians only) completed a web-based discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE used inputs identified via a targeted literature review and qualitative interviews to ascertain relevant treatment attributes and associated levels. Six treatment attributes were selected (chance of 2-year relapse-free survival, quality of life [QoL], risk of serious infections, risk of nausea, chance of achieving transfusion independence, and duration of hospitalization annually), each with three or four levels. The experimental design included 36 choice tasks that presented a pair of hypothetical treatment profiles with varying attribute levels; participants chose a preferred treatment for each choice task. Choice tasks were divided into three blocks of 12 tasks each in the patient survey and 4 blocks of 9 tasks each in the physician survey; survey participants were randomly assigned to one of the blocks. Random parameter logit regression models were used to assess the impact of stated attributes on preferences for maintenance treatment post HSCT.

Results

Surveys from 84 patients and 149 physicians were assessed. For patients, QoL was the most important attribute, followed by duration of hospitalization and chance of 2-year relapse-free survival. For physicians, chance of 2-year relapse-free survival was the most important attribute, followed by QoL and risk of serious infections.

Conclusion

Differences in how patients and physicians valued post-HSCT maintenance treatment attributes were identified. These differences suggest that patient-centered decision-making may help physicians choose maintenance treatments for patients with AML post HSCT that better meet their treatment needs and improve their treatment satisfaction.

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.