Does Real Option Value Influence Oncologists' Treatment Recommendations? A Survey of US Oncologists.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Meng Li, Zizi Elsisi, William Wong, Stacey Kowal, David L Veenstra, Louis P Garrison
{"title":"Does Real Option Value Influence Oncologists' Treatment Recommendations? A Survey of US Oncologists.","authors":"Meng Li, Zizi Elsisi, William Wong, Stacey Kowal, David L Veenstra, Louis P Garrison","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Survival benefit from anticancer treatments, even if modest, improves a patient's chances of accessing future innovations, thereby creating real option value. There is no empirical evidence on the impact of potential future innovations on oncologists' treatment recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a national online survey of practicing medical and hematological oncologists. We presented a hypothetical metastatic cancer patient with median survival of 6 months under 4 decision-making scenarios with varying expected efficacy and time to arrival of future innovations. We assessed the likelihood of discussing future innovations with their patients and the likelihood that future innovations would influence their current treatment recommendation, as well as factors associated with these 2 outcomes using multivariate logistic regressions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 201 oncologists completed the survey. When future innovations were expected to improve survival by 6 months and be available in 6 months, 76% of oncologists were likely or very likely to discuss the innovations with their patients, and 68% reported they would influence their current treatment recommendations. A 1-month increase in the expected survival improvement of future innovation was associated with a 1.17 greater odds (95% CI 1.1-1.25) of reporting likely or very likely to discuss future innovations with their patients, whereas a 1-month increase in the expected time to arrival was associated with a 0.91 lower odds (95% CI 0.88-0.94).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given that potential future innovations seem to influence oncologists' treatments recommendations, evidence to inform clinical guidelines and value assessments should consider data on real option value impacts to support informed treatment decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.021","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Survival benefit from anticancer treatments, even if modest, improves a patient's chances of accessing future innovations, thereby creating real option value. There is no empirical evidence on the impact of potential future innovations on oncologists' treatment recommendations.

Methods: We conducted a national online survey of practicing medical and hematological oncologists. We presented a hypothetical metastatic cancer patient with median survival of 6 months under 4 decision-making scenarios with varying expected efficacy and time to arrival of future innovations. We assessed the likelihood of discussing future innovations with their patients and the likelihood that future innovations would influence their current treatment recommendation, as well as factors associated with these 2 outcomes using multivariate logistic regressions.

Results: A total of 201 oncologists completed the survey. When future innovations were expected to improve survival by 6 months and be available in 6 months, 76% of oncologists were likely or very likely to discuss the innovations with their patients, and 68% reported they would influence their current treatment recommendations. A 1-month increase in the expected survival improvement of future innovation was associated with a 1.17 greater odds (95% CI 1.1-1.25) of reporting likely or very likely to discuss future innovations with their patients, whereas a 1-month increase in the expected time to arrival was associated with a 0.91 lower odds (95% CI 0.88-0.94).

Conclusions: Given that potential future innovations seem to influence oncologists' treatments recommendations, evidence to inform clinical guidelines and value assessments should consider data on real option value impacts to support informed treatment decision making.

实际期权价值会影响肿瘤学家的治疗建议吗?对美国肿瘤学家的调查。
目标:抗癌治疗带来的生存获益,即使微不足道,也能提高患者获得未来创新治疗的机会,从而创造实际期权价值(ROV)。关于未来潜在创新对肿瘤学家治疗建议的影响,目前尚无实证证据:我们对执业的内科和血液肿瘤专家进行了一次全国性在线调查。我们假设一名中位生存期为 6 个月的转移性癌症患者在四种决策情景下接受治疗,这些情景的预期疗效和未来创新的到来时间各不相同。我们使用多变量逻辑回归评估了与患者讨论未来创新的可能性和未来创新影响其当前治疗建议的可能性,以及与这两种结果相关的因素。当未来的创新技术有望在6个月内提高生存率并在6个月内上市时,76%的肿瘤学家可能或非常可能与患者讨论这些创新技术,68%的肿瘤学家表示这些创新技术将影响他们目前的治疗建议。未来创新疗法的预期生存期改善率每增加一个月,肿瘤专家表示可能或非常可能与患者讨论未来创新疗法的几率就会增加1.17(95% CI:1.1-1.25),而预期到达时间每增加一个月,几率就会降低0.91(95% CI:0.88-0.94):由于潜在的未来创新似乎会影响肿瘤学家的治疗建议,因此临床指南和价值评估的参考证据应考虑有关ROV影响的数据,以支持知情的治疗决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信