Yeuk-lam Hong , Chi-fai Ng , Kenneth Chun-wai Wong , Wing-yan Kong , Peter Ka-Fung Chiu , Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh , Chi-ho Leung , Pui-tak Lai
{"title":"患者对转移性前列腺癌治疗的偏好:离散选择实验。","authors":"Yeuk-lam Hong , Chi-fai Ng , Kenneth Chun-wai Wong , Wing-yan Kong , Peter Ka-Fung Chiu , Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh , Chi-ho Leung , Pui-tak Lai","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>To examine the preference weightings for risk/benefit attributes of therapy in metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients, encompassing hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) and castration-resistant (mCRPC) settings.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><div>A noninterventional cross-sectional survey employing a discrete choice experiment was conducted, recruiting 200 mHSPC and 100 mCRPC patients within 5 years of diagnosis from the urology and oncology specialty clinics between Feb 2023 and Jul 2023. Patients were randomized into 2 blocks of 9 questions, choosing 1 out of 2 medication profiles consisting 5 attributes, each with 3 levels, determined from a group interview of 5 patients. A mixed logit model estimated attribute-level preference weightings, with tradeoff points calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Median age was 75 (IQR:71-81), 170 (56.7%) had no income, 245 (81.7%) cared for themselves, mean maximum out-of-pocket treatment cost was US$20,456 (SD:43,568), and 160 (53.3%) claimed not to consider further treatment when cost exceeding their affordability. Patients favoured self-care ability (4.37, <em>P</em> < .001) and life expectancy extension (2.83, <em>P</em> < .001), disfavoured adverse effects (−6.97, <em>P</em> < .001) and treatment cost (in HK$million or USD$128,205) (−3.14, <em>P</em> < .001). mCPRC patients was more sensitive to treatment cost (−3.61 vs. −2.97), life expectancy extension (3.47 vs. 2.55) and adverse effects (−7.55 vs. −6.80) compared to mHSPC patients. Higher financial affordability patients exhibited higher sensitivity to self-care ability (4.89 vs. 4.02) and adverse effects (−7.57 vs. −6.70).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The chance of adverse effects was pivotal in treatment decisions, followed by self-care ability, with cost remaining a major access barrier.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10380,"journal":{"name":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","volume":"23 1","pages":"Article 102254"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Preferences for Metastatic Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Discrete Choice Experiment\",\"authors\":\"Yeuk-lam Hong , Chi-fai Ng , Kenneth Chun-wai Wong , Wing-yan Kong , Peter Ka-Fung Chiu , Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh , Chi-ho Leung , Pui-tak Lai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>To examine the preference weightings for risk/benefit attributes of therapy in metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients, encompassing hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) and castration-resistant (mCRPC) settings.</div></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><div>A noninterventional cross-sectional survey employing a discrete choice experiment was conducted, recruiting 200 mHSPC and 100 mCRPC patients within 5 years of diagnosis from the urology and oncology specialty clinics between Feb 2023 and Jul 2023. Patients were randomized into 2 blocks of 9 questions, choosing 1 out of 2 medication profiles consisting 5 attributes, each with 3 levels, determined from a group interview of 5 patients. A mixed logit model estimated attribute-level preference weightings, with tradeoff points calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Median age was 75 (IQR:71-81), 170 (56.7%) had no income, 245 (81.7%) cared for themselves, mean maximum out-of-pocket treatment cost was US$20,456 (SD:43,568), and 160 (53.3%) claimed not to consider further treatment when cost exceeding their affordability. Patients favoured self-care ability (4.37, <em>P</em> < .001) and life expectancy extension (2.83, <em>P</em> < .001), disfavoured adverse effects (−6.97, <em>P</em> < .001) and treatment cost (in HK$million or USD$128,205) (−3.14, <em>P</em> < .001). mCPRC patients was more sensitive to treatment cost (−3.61 vs. −2.97), life expectancy extension (3.47 vs. 2.55) and adverse effects (−7.55 vs. −6.80) compared to mHSPC patients. Higher financial affordability patients exhibited higher sensitivity to self-care ability (4.89 vs. 4.02) and adverse effects (−7.57 vs. −6.70).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The chance of adverse effects was pivotal in treatment decisions, followed by self-care ability, with cost remaining a major access barrier.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 102254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical genitourinary cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324002246\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical genitourinary cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324002246","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Patient Preferences for Metastatic Prostate Cancer Treatment: A Discrete Choice Experiment
Background
To examine the preference weightings for risk/benefit attributes of therapy in metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients, encompassing hormone-sensitive (mHSPC) and castration-resistant (mCRPC) settings.
Patients and Methods
A noninterventional cross-sectional survey employing a discrete choice experiment was conducted, recruiting 200 mHSPC and 100 mCRPC patients within 5 years of diagnosis from the urology and oncology specialty clinics between Feb 2023 and Jul 2023. Patients were randomized into 2 blocks of 9 questions, choosing 1 out of 2 medication profiles consisting 5 attributes, each with 3 levels, determined from a group interview of 5 patients. A mixed logit model estimated attribute-level preference weightings, with tradeoff points calculated.
Results
Median age was 75 (IQR:71-81), 170 (56.7%) had no income, 245 (81.7%) cared for themselves, mean maximum out-of-pocket treatment cost was US$20,456 (SD:43,568), and 160 (53.3%) claimed not to consider further treatment when cost exceeding their affordability. Patients favoured self-care ability (4.37, P < .001) and life expectancy extension (2.83, P < .001), disfavoured adverse effects (−6.97, P < .001) and treatment cost (in HK$million or USD$128,205) (−3.14, P < .001). mCPRC patients was more sensitive to treatment cost (−3.61 vs. −2.97), life expectancy extension (3.47 vs. 2.55) and adverse effects (−7.55 vs. −6.80) compared to mHSPC patients. Higher financial affordability patients exhibited higher sensitivity to self-care ability (4.89 vs. 4.02) and adverse effects (−7.57 vs. −6.70).
Conclusion
The chance of adverse effects was pivotal in treatment decisions, followed by self-care ability, with cost remaining a major access barrier.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research in genitourinary cancers. Clinical Genitourinary Cancer is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of genitourinary cancers. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to genitourinary malignancies. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.