Dataset Information

Patient Preferences in Treatment Choices for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

ABSTRACT: Decision-making for lung cancer treatment can be complex because it involves both provider recommendations based on the patient's clinical condition and patient preferences. This study describes the relative importance of several considerations in lung cancer treatment from the patient's perspective.A conjoint preference experiment began by asking respondents to imagine that they had just been diagnosed with lung cancer. Respondents then chose among procedures that differed regarding treatment modalities, the potential for treatment-related complications, the likelihood of recurrence, provider case volume, and distance needed to travel for treatment. Conjoint analysis derived relative weights for these attributes.A total of 225 responses were analyzed. Respondents were most willing to accept minimally invasive operations for treatment of their hypothetical lung cancer, followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT); they were least willing to accept thoracotomy. Treatment type and risk of recurrence were the most important attributes from the conjoint experiment (each with a relative weight of 0.23), followed by provider volume (relative weight of 0.21), risk of major complications (relative weight of 0.18), and distance needed to travel for treatment (relative weight of 0.15). Procedural and treatment preferences did not vary with demographics, self-reported health status, or familiarity with the procedures.Survey respondents preferred minimally invasive operations over SBRT or thoracotomy for treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Treatment modality and risk of cancer recurrence were the most important factors associated with treatment preferences. Provider experience outweighed the potential need to travel for lung cancer treatment.

SUBMITTER: Tong BC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5142526 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient Preferences in Treatment Choices for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

Tong Betty C BC Wallace Scott S Hartwig Matthew G MG D'Amico Thomas A TA Huber Joel C JC

The Annals of thoracic surgery 20160909 6

<h4>Background</h4>Decision-making for lung cancer treatment can be complex because it involves both provider recommendations based on the patient's clinical condition and patient preferences. This study describes the relative importance of several considerations in lung cancer treatment from the patient's perspective.<h4>Methods</h4>A conjoint preference experiment began by asking respondents to imagine that they had just been diagnosed with lung cancer. Respondents then chose among procedures ...[more]

PMID: 27623277

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement.

Project description:There is no clear consensus regarding systemic treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer (OC). Clinical trials are challenging because of the relatively low incidence and good prognosis. Initial results of the International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON)1 trial demonstrated benefit in both overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) with adjuvant chemotherapy. We report results of 10-year follow-up to establish whether benefits are maintained longer term and discuss how this and other available evidence from randomised trials can be used to guide treatment options regarding the need for, and choice of, adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.ICON1 recruited women with OC following primary surgery in whom there was uncertainty as to whether adjuvant chemotherapy was indicated. Patients were randomly assigned to adjuvant or no adjuvant chemotherapy. Platinum-based chemotherapy was recommended and 87% received single-agent carboplatin. Analyses of long-term treatment benefits and interaction with risk groups were carried out. A high-risk group of women was defined with stage 1B/1C grade 2/3, any stage 1 grade 3 or clear-cell histology.With a median follow-up of 10 years, the estimated hazard ratio (HR) for RFS was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.94, P = 0.02] and OS 0.71 (95% CI 0.52-0.98, P = 0.04) in favour of chemotherapy. In absolute terms, there was a 10% (60%-70%) improvement in RFS and a 9% (64%-73%) improvement in OS; the benefit of chemotherapy might be greater in high-risk disease (18% improvement in OS). Uncertainty remains about the optimal chemotherapy regimen. The only randomised trial data available are from a subset of 120 stage 1 patients in ICON3 where the treatment difference, comparing carboplatin with carboplatin/paclitaxel was estimated with relatively wide CIs [progression-free survival HR = 0.71 (95% CI 0.39-1.32) and OS HR = 0.98 (95% CI 0.49-1.93)].Extended follow-up from ICON1 confirms that adjuvant chemotherapy should be offered to women with early-stage OC, particularly those with high-risk disease.ISRCTN11916376 for ICON1 and ISRCTN57157825 for ICON3.

Project description:Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, together with the recent advances in targeted and immunotherapies, have shown to improve non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survival. Furthermore, screening has increased the number of early stage-detected tumors, allowing for surgical resection and multimodality treatments when needed. The need for improved sensitivity and specificity of NSCLC screening has led to increased interest in combining clinical and radiological data with molecular data. The development of biomarkers is poised to refine inclusion criteria for LDCT screening programs. Biomarkers may also be useful to better characterize the risk of indeterminate nodules found in the course of screening or to refine prognosis and help in the management of screening detected tumors. The clinical implications of these biomarkers are still being investigated and whether or not biomarkers will be included in further decision-making algorithms in the context of screening and early lung cancer management still needs to be determined. However, it seems clear that there is much room for improvement even in early stage lung cancer disease-free survival (DFS) rates; thus, biomarkers may be the key to refine risk-stratification and treatment of these patients. Clinicians' capacity to register, integrate, and analyze all the available data in both high risk individuals and early stage NSCLC patients will lead to a better understanding of the disease's mechanisms, and will have a direct impact in diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of these patients. In this review, we aim to summarize all the available data regarding the role of biomarkers in LDCT screening and early stage NSCLC from a multidisciplinary perspective. We have highlighted clinical implications, the need to combine risk stratification, clinical data, radiomics, molecular information and artificial intelligence in order to improve clinical decision-making, especially regarding early diagnostics and adjuvant therapy. We also discuss current and future perspectives for biomarker implementation in routine clinical practice.

Dataset Information

Patient Preferences in Treatment Choices for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

Publications

Patient Preferences in Treatment Choices for Early-Stage Lung Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets