Ajibade Ashaye, Natasha Ramachandran, Matthew Quaife, Yanyu Wu, Álvaro Alberto Gutiérrez-Vargas, Angelica Jiongco, Vamsi Kota, Bipin Savani, Caitlin Thomas
{"title":"肿瘤学家对一线TKI治疗Ph+急性淋巴细胞白血病的偏好:离散选择实验。","authors":"Ajibade Ashaye, Natasha Ramachandran, Matthew Quaife, Yanyu Wu, Álvaro Alberto Gutiérrez-Vargas, Angelica Jiongco, Vamsi Kota, Bipin Savani, Caitlin Thomas","doi":"10.1080/14796694.2025.2565497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate hematologist-oncologists' preferences for frontline treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) using tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) + chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Participants & methods: </strong>An online discrete choice experiment was conducted among US-based hematologist-oncologists. Participants viewed profiles of hypothetical TKI + chemotherapy treatments with varied levels of benefit and risks (minimal residual disease-negative complete remission [MRD-negative CR], arterial occlusive events, grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity, grade 3-4 hematotoxicity) and chose their recommended treatment for five patient profiles: \"less-complex\" baseline; age ≥ 65; ECOG score 3; diabetes; hypertension. Data were analyzed using mixed multinomial logit models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>121 hematologist-oncologists participated. Increasing MRD-negative CR was most important to hematologist-oncologists, driving 65%-87% of decision-making across patient profiles. Relative importance of benefits/risks varied by patient profile. Pooled across patient profiles, hepatotoxicity was the most concerning risk, driving 14% of decision-making. Based on PhALLCON data and elicited preferences, hematologist-oncologists were predicted to select the profile of ponatinib + chemotherapy over imatinib + chemotherapy for all included patient profiles. Predicted probabilities of choosing ponatinib over imatinib ranged from 87%-98% across patient profiles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hematologist-oncologists prioritized achieving MRD-negative CR when recommending frontline treatments for Ph+ ALL, accepting some risks if offset by meaningful improvement in MRD-negative CR.</p>","PeriodicalId":12672,"journal":{"name":"Future oncology","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oncologists' preferences for frontline TKI treatment of Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a discrete choice experiment.\",\"authors\":\"Ajibade Ashaye, Natasha Ramachandran, Matthew Quaife, Yanyu Wu, Álvaro Alberto Gutiérrez-Vargas, Angelica Jiongco, Vamsi Kota, Bipin Savani, Caitlin Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14796694.2025.2565497\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate hematologist-oncologists' preferences for frontline treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) using tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) + chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Participants & methods: </strong>An online discrete choice experiment was conducted among US-based hematologist-oncologists. Participants viewed profiles of hypothetical TKI + chemotherapy treatments with varied levels of benefit and risks (minimal residual disease-negative complete remission [MRD-negative CR], arterial occlusive events, grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity, grade 3-4 hematotoxicity) and chose their recommended treatment for five patient profiles: \\\"less-complex\\\" baseline; age ≥ 65; ECOG score 3; diabetes; hypertension. Data were analyzed using mixed multinomial logit models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>121 hematologist-oncologists participated. Increasing MRD-negative CR was most important to hematologist-oncologists, driving 65%-87% of decision-making across patient profiles. Relative importance of benefits/risks varied by patient profile. Pooled across patient profiles, hepatotoxicity was the most concerning risk, driving 14% of decision-making. Based on PhALLCON data and elicited preferences, hematologist-oncologists were predicted to select the profile of ponatinib + chemotherapy over imatinib + chemotherapy for all included patient profiles. Predicted probabilities of choosing ponatinib over imatinib ranged from 87%-98% across patient profiles.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hematologist-oncologists prioritized achieving MRD-negative CR when recommending frontline treatments for Ph+ ALL, accepting some risks if offset by meaningful improvement in MRD-negative CR.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2025.2565497\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2025.2565497","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Oncologists' preferences for frontline TKI treatment of Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a discrete choice experiment.
Aims: To evaluate hematologist-oncologists' preferences for frontline treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) using tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) + chemotherapy.
Participants & methods: An online discrete choice experiment was conducted among US-based hematologist-oncologists. Participants viewed profiles of hypothetical TKI + chemotherapy treatments with varied levels of benefit and risks (minimal residual disease-negative complete remission [MRD-negative CR], arterial occlusive events, grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity, grade 3-4 hematotoxicity) and chose their recommended treatment for five patient profiles: "less-complex" baseline; age ≥ 65; ECOG score 3; diabetes; hypertension. Data were analyzed using mixed multinomial logit models.
Results: 121 hematologist-oncologists participated. Increasing MRD-negative CR was most important to hematologist-oncologists, driving 65%-87% of decision-making across patient profiles. Relative importance of benefits/risks varied by patient profile. Pooled across patient profiles, hepatotoxicity was the most concerning risk, driving 14% of decision-making. Based on PhALLCON data and elicited preferences, hematologist-oncologists were predicted to select the profile of ponatinib + chemotherapy over imatinib + chemotherapy for all included patient profiles. Predicted probabilities of choosing ponatinib over imatinib ranged from 87%-98% across patient profiles.
Conclusions: Hematologist-oncologists prioritized achieving MRD-negative CR when recommending frontline treatments for Ph+ ALL, accepting some risks if offset by meaningful improvement in MRD-negative CR.
期刊介绍:
Future Oncology (ISSN 1479-6694) provides a forum for a new era of cancer care. The journal focuses on the most important advances and highlights their relevance in the clinical setting. Furthermore, Future Oncology delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats - vital in delivering information to an increasingly time-constrained community.
The journal takes a forward-looking stance toward the scientific and clinical issues, together with the economic and policy issues that confront us in this new era of cancer care. The journal includes literature awareness such as the latest developments in radiotherapy and immunotherapy, concise commentary and analysis, and full review articles all of which provide key findings, translational to the clinical setting.