BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to elucidate relative preferences of women with ovarian cancer for symptoms, treatment-related side effects, and progression-free survival (PFS) relevant to choosing a treatment regimen. METHODS: Women with advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer participated in a survey that included 3 methods to measure patient preferences (ratings, rankings, and a discrete-choice experiment) for 7 attributes: mode of administration, visit frequency, peripheral neuropathy, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, abdominal discomfort, and PFS. Participants were asked to choose between 2 unlabeled treatment scenarios that were characterized using the 7 attributes. Each participant completed 12 choice questions in which attribute levels were assigned according to an experimental design and a fixed-choice question representing 2 chemotherapy regimens for ovarian cancer. RESULTS: In total, 95 women completed the survey. Participants' ratings and rankings revealed greater concern and importance for PFS than for any other attribute (P < .0001 for all). The discrete-choice experiment revealed that the relative odds that a participant would choose a scenario with 18 months, 21 months, and 24 months of PFS versus 15 months of PFS were 1.5 (P = .01), 3.4 (P < .001), and 7.5 (P < .001), respectively. However, participants' choices indicated that they were willing to accept a shorter PFS to avoid severe side effects: 6.7 months to reduce nausea and vomiting from severe to mild, 5.0 months to reduce neuropathy from severe to mild, and 3.7 months to reduce abdominal symptoms from severe to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: PFS is the predominant driver of patient preferences for chemotherapy regimens. However, women in the current study were willing to trade significant PFS time for reductions in treatment-related toxicity.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to elucidate relative preferences of women with ovarian cancer for symptoms, treatment-related side effects, and progression-free survival (PFS) relevant to choosing a treatment regimen. METHODS:Women with advanced or recurrent ovarian cancer participated in a survey that included 3 methods to measure patient preferences (ratings, rankings, and a discrete-choice experiment) for 7 attributes: mode of administration, visit frequency, peripheral neuropathy, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, abdominal discomfort, and PFS. Participants were asked to choose between 2 unlabeled treatment scenarios that were characterized using the 7 attributes. Each participant completed 12 choice questions in which attribute levels were assigned according to an experimental design and a fixed-choice question representing 2 chemotherapy regimens for ovarian cancer. RESULTS: In total, 95 women completed the survey. Participants' ratings and rankings revealed greater concern and importance for PFS than for any other attribute (P < .0001 for all). The discrete-choice experiment revealed that the relative odds that a participant would choose a scenario with 18 months, 21 months, and 24 months of PFS versus 15 months of PFS were 1.5 (P = .01), 3.4 (P < .001), and 7.5 (P < .001), respectively. However, participants' choices indicated that they were willing to accept a shorter PFS to avoid severe side effects: 6.7 months to reduce nausea and vomiting from severe to mild, 5.0 months to reduce neuropathy from severe to mild, and 3.7 months to reduce abdominal symptoms from severe to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: PFS is the predominant driver of patient preferences for chemotherapy regimens. However, women in the current study were willing to trade significant PFS time for reductions in treatment-related toxicity.
Authors: Deborah K Armstrong; Brian Bundy; Lari Wenzel; Helen Q Huang; Rebecca Baergen; Shashikant Lele; Larry J Copeland; Joan L Walker; Robert A Burger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-01-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gavin C E Stuart; Henry Kitchener; Monica Bacon; Andreas duBois; Michael Friedlander; Jonathan Ledermann; Christian Marth; Tate Thigpen; Edward Trimble Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: John F P Bridges; A Brett Hauber; Deborah Marshall; Andrew Lloyd; Lisa A Prosser; Dean A Regier; F Reed Johnson; Josephine Mauskopf Journal: Value Health Date: 2011-04-22 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: John F P Bridges; Ateesha F Mohamed; Henrik W Finnern; Anette Woehl; A Brett Hauber Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2012-02-25 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Robert A Burger; Mark F Brady; Michael A Bookman; Gini F Fleming; Bradley J Monk; Helen Huang; Robert S Mannel; Howard D Homesley; Jeffrey Fowler; Benjamin E Greer; Matthew Boente; Michael J Birrer; Sharon X Liang Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Neal J Meropol; Brian L Egleston; Joanne S Buzaglo; Al B Benson; Donald J Cegala; Michael A Diefenbach; Linda Fleisher; Suzanne M Miller; Daniel P Sulmasy; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jonathan Ledermann; Philipp Harter; Charlie Gourley; Michael Friedlander; Ignace Vergote; Gordon Rustin; Clare Scott; Werner Meier; Ronnie Shapira-Frommer; Tamar Safra; Daniela Matei; Euan Macpherson; Claire Watkins; James Carmichael; Ursula Matulonis Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Larissa A Meyer; Angel M Cronin; Charlotte C Sun; Kristin Bixel; Michael A Bookman; Mihaela C Cristea; Jennifer J Griggs; Charles F Levenback; Robert A Burger; Gina Mantia-Smaldone; Ursula A Matulonis; Joyce C Niland; David M O'Malley; Alexi A Wright Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L Wenzel; D Mukamel; K Osann; L Havrilesky; L Sparks; J Lipscomb; A A Wright; J Walker; R Alvarez; L Van Le; K Robison; R Bristow; R Morgan; B J Rimel; H Ladd; S Hsieh; A Wahi; D Cohn Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-03-19 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: André Tichelli; Eric Beohou; Myriam Labopin; Gérard Socié; Alicia Rovó; Manuela Badoglio; Anja van Biezen; Peter Bader; Rafael F Duarte; Grzegorz Basak; Nina Salooja Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Michael Friedlander; Val Gebski; Emma Gibbs; Lucy Davies; Ralph Bloomfield; Felix Hilpert; Lari B Wenzel; Daniel Eek; Manuel Rodrigues; Andrew Clamp; Richard T Penson; Diane Provencher; Jacob Korach; Tomasz Huzarski; Laura Vidal; Vanda Salutari; Clare Scott; Maria Ornella Nicoletto; Kenji Tamura; David Espinoza; Florence Joly; Eric Pujade-Lauraine Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Katie A Greenzang; Hasan Al-Sayegh; Clement Ma; Mehdi Najafzadeh; Eve Wittenberg; Jennifer W Mack Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2020-04-13 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Vito Andrea Capozzi; Andrea Rosati; Luigi Carlo Turco; Giulio Sozzi; Matteo Riccò; Benito Chiofalo; Giuseppe Vizzielli Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2020-08
Authors: Alexi A Wright; Angel Cronin; Dana E Milne; Michael A Bookman; Robert A Burger; David E Cohn; Mihaela C Cristea; Jennifer J Griggs; Nancy L Keating; Charles F Levenback; Gina Mantia-Smaldone; Ursula A Matulonis; Larissa A Meyer; Joyce C Niland; Jane C Weeks; David M O'Malley Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-03 Impact factor: 44.544