Simon Fifer1, Jayne Galinsky2, Sarah Richard3. 1. Community and Patient Preference Research (CaPPRe), Sydney, NSW, Australia. 2. Myeloma UK, Edinburgh, Scotland. 3. PRMA, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myeloma is an incurable life-threatening hematological cancer. Recent treatment developments have seen improvements in survival; however, while patients are living longer, they are living with symptoms and treatment side effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate myeloma patients' preferences for treatment using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This study set out to define the relative importance of key treatment attributes, characterize the risk-benefit trade-offs in patients' decision-making, and to analyze the predictive power of basic demographic factors. METHODS: Four hundred seventy-five myeloma patients in the UK were invited to participate by Myeloma UK. Data were collected using DCEs through an online survey. The DCEs presented patients with 10 choice scenarios, each with 2 treatment options described by 7 attributes, and a "no treatment" option. The DCE data were modelled using a latent class model (LCM). The effects of demographic characteristics were also examined. RESULTS: Not surprisingly, average survival was most important to all patients but there were significant contrasts between the class preferences. The LCM revealed two classes of patients. Patients in Class 1 placed greater importance on average survival and mild-to-moderate side effects, whereas patients in Class 2 focused on the mode of administration and the average out-of-pocket costs. Patients living with others and those diagnosed in the last 5 years were more likely to be in Class 1. CONCLUSION: Different treatment features were not valued equally among all myeloma patients. This has important implications for healthcare policy decisions and could be used to guide decisions around the value of new myeloma medicines.
BACKGROUND: Myeloma is an incurable life-threatening hematological cancer. Recent treatment developments have seen improvements in survival; however, while patients are living longer, they are living with symptoms and treatment side effects. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate myeloma patients' preferences for treatment using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This study set out to define the relative importance of key treatment attributes, characterize the risk-benefit trade-offs in patients' decision-making, and to analyze the predictive power of basic demographic factors. METHODS: Four hundred seventy-five myeloma patients in the UK were invited to participate by Myeloma UK. Data were collected using DCEs through an online survey. The DCEs presented patients with 10 choice scenarios, each with 2 treatment options described by 7 attributes, and a "no treatment" option. The DCE data were modelled using a latent class model (LCM). The effects of demographic characteristics were also examined. RESULTS: Not surprisingly, average survival was most important to all patients but there were significant contrasts between the class preferences. The LCM revealed two classes of patients. Patients in Class 1 placed greater importance on average survival and mild-to-moderate side effects, whereas patients in Class 2 focused on the mode of administration and the average out-of-pocket costs. Patients living with others and those diagnosed in the last 5 years were more likely to be in Class 1. CONCLUSION: Different treatment features were not valued equally among all myeloma patients. This has important implications for healthcare policy decisions and could be used to guide decisions around the value of new myeloma medicines.
Authors: A Brett Hauber; Juan Marcos González; Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Thomas Prior; Deborah A Marshall; Charles Cunningham; Maarten J IJzerman; John F P Bridges Journal: Value Health Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: S J Jansen; J Kievit; M A Nooij; J C de Haes; I M Overpelt; H van Slooten; E Maartense; A M Stiggelbout Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2001-06-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Douwe Postmus; Sarah Richard; Nathalie Bere; Gert van Valkenhoef; Jayne Galinsky; Eric Low; Isabelle Moulon; Maria Mavris; Tomas Salmonsson; Beatriz Flores; Hans Hillege; Francesco Pignatti Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-10-27
Authors: Petronella A L Nelleke Seghers; Anke Wiersma; Suzanne Festen; Mariken E Stegmann; Pierre Soubeyran; Siri Rostoft; Shane O'Hanlon; Johanneke E A Portielje; Marije E Hamaker Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Daniel Auclair; Carol Mansfield; Mark A Fiala; Ajai Chari; Craig E Cole; Jonathan L Kaufman; Gregory J Orloff; David S Siegel; Jeffrey A Zonder; Brennan Mange; Jennifer Yesil; Mehul Dalal; Joseph R Mikhael Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 2.711
Authors: Simon Fifer; Brittany Keen; Richard Newton; Andrea Puig; Marija McGeachie Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 2.314