OBJECTIVES: To determine how Japanese patients with lung cancer weigh the chance of cure and potential survival against the potential toxicity of different treatment strategies for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We used a questionnaire describing a hypothetical situation involving locally advanced NSCLC. Seventy-three patients with lung cancer who had received chemotherapy and a control group of 120 patients without cancer were asked to state the minimal benefit that would make two hypothetical treatments acceptable. RESULTS: Patients with lung cancer were significantly more likely than were patients without cancer to accept either intensive or less-intensive chemoradiotherapy for a potentially small benefit for 'chance of cure' and 'response but not cure'. The percentages of patients who would accept intensive or less-intensive chemoradiotherapy to prolong survival did not differ significantly between the two groups. When the chance of cure was 20%, 56 and 64% of patients with lung cancer were willing to receive intensive and less-intensive chemoradiotherapy, respectively. If their lives were prolonged by 6 months, 20 and 30% of patients with lung cancer would choose to receive intensive and less-intensive chemoradiotherapy, respectively. The chance of cure and the survival advantage that patients require for accepting chemoradiotherapy varied widely. No factors were associated with the choice of chemoradiotherapy in patients with lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians must consider the substantial range of attitudes to chemoradiotherapy among patients when selecting treatment and give patients opportunities to be included in the treatment-selection process. Copyright (c) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
OBJECTIVES: To determine how Japanese patients with lung cancer weigh the chance of cure and potential survival against the potential toxicity of different treatment strategies for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We used a questionnaire describing a hypothetical situation involving locally advanced NSCLC. Seventy-three patients with lung cancer who had received chemotherapy and a control group of 120 patients without cancer were asked to state the minimal benefit that would make two hypothetical treatments acceptable. RESULTS:Patients with lung cancer were significantly more likely than were patients without cancer to accept either intensive or less-intensive chemoradiotherapy for a potentially small benefit for 'chance of cure' and 'response but not cure'. The percentages of patients who would accept intensive or less-intensive chemoradiotherapy to prolong survival did not differ significantly between the two groups. When the chance of cure was 20%, 56 and 64% of patients with lung cancer were willing to receive intensive and less-intensive chemoradiotherapy, respectively. If their lives were prolonged by 6 months, 20 and 30% of patients with lung cancer would choose to receive intensive and less-intensive chemoradiotherapy, respectively. The chance of cure and the survival advantage that patients require for accepting chemoradiotherapy varied widely. No factors were associated with the choice of chemoradiotherapy in patients with lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians must consider the substantial range of attitudes to chemoradiotherapy among patients when selecting treatment and give patients opportunities to be included in the treatment-selection process. Copyright (c) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Regina Gironés; Dolores Torregrosa; José Gómez-Codina; Inma Maestu; Jose María Tenias; Rafael Rosell Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Patricia M Davidson; Moyez Jiwa; Alice J Goldsmith; Sarah J McGrath; Michelle Digiacomo; Jane L Phillips; Meera Agar; Phillip J Newton; David C Currow Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-05-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ryan D Nipp; Areej El-Jawahri; Joel N Fishbein; Justin Eusebio; Jamie M Stagl; Emily R Gallagher; Elyse R Park; Vicki A Jackson; William F Pirl; Joseph A Greer; Jennifer S Temel Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Dimitris Bertsimas; Jack Dunn; Colin Pawlowski; John Silberholz; Alexander Weinstein; Ying Daisy Zhuo; Eddy Chen; Aymen A Elfiky Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2018-12
Authors: Ryan D Nipp; Joseph A Greer; Areej El-Jawahri; Samantha M Moran; Lara Traeger; Jamie M Jacobs; Juliet C Jacobsen; Emily R Gallagher; Elyse R Park; David P Ryan; Vicki A Jackson; William F Pirl; Jennifer S Temel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-06-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ryan D Nipp; Areej El-Jawahri; Sara M D'Arpino; Andy Chan; Charn-Xin Fuh; P Connor Johnson; Daniel E Lage; Risa L Wong; William F Pirl; Lara Traeger; Barbara J Cashavelly; Vicki A Jackson; David P Ryan; Ephraim P Hochberg; Jennifer S Temel; Joseph A Greer Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kah Poh Loh; Supriya G Mohile; Jennifer L Lund; Ronald Epstein; Lianlian Lei; Eva Culakova; Colin McHugh; Megan Wells; Nikesha Gilmore; Mostafa R Mohamed; Charles Kamen; Valerie Aarne; Alison Conlin; James Bearden; Adedayo Onitilo; Marsha Wittink; William Dale; Arti Hurria; Paul Duberstein Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-04-23
Authors: A El-Jawahri; L Traeger; K Kuzmuk; J Eusebio; H Vandusen; T Keenan; J Shin; E R Gallagher; J A Greer; W F Pirl; V A Jackson; K K Ballen; T R Spitzer; T A Graubert; S McAfee; B Dey; Y-B A Chen; J S Temel Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2015-05-11 Impact factor: 5.483