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。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估血液学肿瘤学家对费城染色体阳性急性淋巴细胞白血病(Ph+ ALL)一线治疗使用酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs) +化疗的偏好。参与者和方法:在美国血液学肿瘤学家中进行了在线离散选择实验。参与者查看了具有不同获益和风险水平的假设TKI +化疗的概况(最小残留疾病阴性完全缓解[mrd阴性CR],动脉闭塞事件,3-4级肝毒性,3-4级血液毒性),并为五种患者概况选择了他们推荐的治疗方法:“不太复杂”基线;年龄≥65岁;ECOG评分3分;糖尿病;高血压。数据分析采用混合多项逻辑模型。结果:121名血液学肿瘤学家参与。增加mrd阴性CR对血液学肿瘤学家来说是最重要的,在患者档案中驱动了65%-87%的决策。获益/风险的相对重要性因患者情况而异。综合患者资料,肝毒性是最令人担忧的风险,占决策的14%。基于PhALLCON数据和引起的偏好,预测血液学肿瘤学家在所有纳入的患者资料中选择波纳替尼+化疗方案而不是伊马替尼+化疗方案。预测选择波纳替尼而不是伊马替尼的概率在87%-98%之间。结论:血液学肿瘤学家在推荐一线治疗Ph+ ALL时优先考虑实现mrd阴性CR,如果mrd阴性CR有意义的改善,则接受一些风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Future oncology
Future oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.00%
发文量
335
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信