Literature DB >> 28237198

Patient Versus Physician Valuation of Durable Survival Gains: Implications for Value Framework Assessments.

Jason Shafrin1, Taylor T Schwartz2, Tony Okoro3, John A Romley4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous research indicates that patients value therapies that provide durable or tail-of-the-curve survival gains, but it is unclear whether physicians share these preferences.
OBJECTIVE: To compare patient and physician preferences for treatments with a positive probability of durable survival gains relative to those with fixed survival gains.
METHODS: Patients with advanced stage melanoma or lung cancer and the oncologists who treated these patients were surveyed. The primary end point was the share of respondents who selected a therapy with a variable survival profile, with some patients experiencing long-term durable survival and others experiencing much shorter survival, compared to a therapy with a fixed survival duration. Parameter estimation by sequential testing was applied to calculate the length of nonvarying survival that would make respondents indifferent between that survival and therapy with durable survival.
RESULTS: The sample comprised 165 patients (lung = 84, melanoma = 81) and 98 physicians. For lung cancer, 65.5% of patients preferred the therapy with a variable survival profile, compared with 40.8% of physicians (Δ = 24.7%; P < 0.001). For melanoma, these figures were 63.0% for patients and 29.7% for physicians (Δ = 33.3%; P < 0.001). Patients' indifference point implied that therapies with a variable survival profile are preferred unless the treatment with fixed survival had 13.6 months (melanoma) or 11.6 months (lung) longer mean survival; physicians would prescribe treatments with a fixed survival if the treatment had 7.5 months (melanoma) or 1.0 month (lung) shorter survival than the variable survival profile.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients place a high value on therapies that provide a chance of durable or "tail-of-the-curve" survival, whereas physicians do not. Value frameworks should incorporate measures of tail-of-the-curve survival gains into their methodologies.
Copyright © 2017 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer; preferences; survival; value framework

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28237198     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  5 in total

1.  Comparative Survival Associated With Use of Targeted vs Nontargeted Therapy in Medicare Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Pengxiang Li; Jordan Jahnke; Amy R Pettit; Yu-Ning Wong; Jalpa A Doshi
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-06-05

2.  The Value of Hope: Patients' and Physicians' Preferences for Survival in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Brett Hauber; John R Penrod; David Gebben; Lina Musallam
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 2.711

3.  Preferences of adults with cancer for systemic cancer treatment: do preferences differ based on age?

Authors:  Prajwal Dhakal; Christopher S Wichman; Bunny Pozehl; Meaghann Weaver; Alfred L Fisher; Julie Vose; R Gregory Bociek; Vijaya R Bhatt
Journal:  Future Oncol       Date:  2021-11-11       Impact factor: 3.674

4.  Immunotherapy: Cancer immunotherapy and the value of cure.

Authors:  Joseph C Del Paggio
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of EGFR Mutation Testing And Afatinib Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin As First-Line Therapy For Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer In China.

Authors:  Ruxu You; Jinyu Liu; David Bin-Chia Wu; XinYu Qian; Boxiang Lyu; Yu Zhang; Nan Luo
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 3.989

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.