Literature DB >> 29947418

Patients' preferences for treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer.

B J Noordman1, E W de Bekker-Grob2,3, P P L O Coene4, E van der Harst4, S M Lagarde1, J Shapiro1, B P L Wijnhoven1, J J B van Lanschot1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery for oesophageal cancer, 29 per cent of patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen. Active surveillance after nCRT (instead of standard oesophagectomy) may improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but patients need to undergo frequent diagnostic tests and it is unknown whether survival is worse than that after standard oesophagectomy. Factors that influence patients' preferences, and trade-offs that patients are willing to make in their choice between surgery and active surveillance were investigated here.
METHODS: A prospective discrete-choice experiment was conducted. Patients with oesophageal cancer completed questionnaires 4-6 weeks after nCRT, before surgery. Patients' preferences were quantified using scenarios based on five aspects: 5-year overall survival, short-term HRQoL, long-term HRQoL, the risk that oesophagectomy is still necessary, and the frequency of clinical examinations using endoscopy and PET-CT. Panel latent class analysis was used.
RESULTS: Some 100 of 104 patients (96·2 per cent) responded. All aspects, except the frequency of clinical examinations, influenced patients' preferences. Five-year overall survival, the chance that oesophagectomy is still necessary and long-term HRQoL were the most important attributes. On average, based on calculation of the indifference point between standard surgery and active surveillance, patients were willing to trade off 16 per cent 5-year overall survival to reduce the risk that oesophagectomy is necessary from 100 per cent (standard surgery) to 35 per cent (active surveillance).
CONCLUSION: Patients are willing to trade off substantial 5-year survival to achieve a reduction in the risk that oesophagectomy is necessary.
© 2018 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29947418     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10897

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  15 in total

1.  Laparoscopic experience and attitudes toward a low-cost laparoscopic system among surgeons in East, Central, and Southern Africa: a survey study.

Authors:  Norma E Farrow; Sarah J Commander; Christopher R Reed; Jenna L Mueller; Aryaman Gupta; Amos H P Loh; John Sekabira; Tamara N Fitzgerald
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  [Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer : Implications for surgery].

Authors:  Julian Hipp; Michael Thomaschewski; Richard Hummel; Jens Hoeppner
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Long-Term, Health-Related Quality of Life after Open and Robot-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Procedures-A Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Authors:  Anne-Sophie Mehdorn; Thorben Möller; Frederike Franke; Florian Richter; Jan-Niclas Kersebaum; Thomas Becker; Jan-Hendrik Egberts
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 4.  Towards an Organ-Sparing Approach for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Berend Jan van der Wilk; Ben M Eyck; Manon C W Spaander; Roelf Valkema; Sjoerd M Lagarde; Bas P L Wijnhoven; J Jan B van Lanschot
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 2.588

5.  Preoperative Prediction of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients With Esophageal Cancer Using 18F-FDG PET/CT and DW-MRI: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Alicia S Borggreve; Lucas Goense; Peter S N van Rossum; Sophie E Heethuis; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jan J W Lagendijk; Marnix G E H Lam; Astrid L H M W van Lier; Stella Mook; Jelle P Ruurda; Marco van Vulpen; Francine E M Voncken; Berthe M P Aleman; Annemarieke Bartels-Rutten; Jingfei Ma; Penny Fang; Benjamin C Musall; Steven H Lin; Gert J Meijer
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-01-25       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments.

Authors:  Hannah Collacott; Vikas Soekhai; Caitlin Thomas; Anne Brooks; Ella Brookes; Rachel Lo; Sarah Mulnick; Sebastian Heidenreich
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 7.  Multidisciplinary treatment of esophageal cancer: The role of active surveillance after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Authors:  Tania Triantafyllou; Bas Wijnhoven
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol Surg       Date:  2020-07-25

8.  Impact of Age on Surgical Outcomes for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Norma E Farrow; Vignesh Raman; Oliver K Jawitz; Soraya L Voigt; Betty C Tong; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Immune surveillance activation after neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma and complete response.

Authors:  Andromachi Kotsafti; Melania Scarpa; Francesco Cavallin; Matteo Fassan; Roberta Salmaso; Andrea Porzionato; Luca Saadeh; Matteo Cagol; Rita Alfieri; Carlo Castoro; Massimo Rugge; Ignazio Castagliuolo; Marco Scarpa
Journal:  Oncoimmunology       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 8.110

10.  What are patients' preferences for revision surgery after periprosthetic joint infection? A discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Fran E Carroll; Rachael Gooberman-Hill; Simon Strange; Ashley W Blom; Andrew J Moore
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.