Patient preferences and predicted relative uptake for targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Preferences of older adults for healthcare models designed to improve care coordination: evidence from Western Switzerland

Implementing innovations in care delivery in Switzerland is challenging due to the fragmented nature of the system and the specificities of the political process (i.e., direct democracy, decentralized decision-making). In this context, it is particularly important to account for population preferences when designing policies. We designed a discrete choice experiment to study population preferences for coordination-improving care models. Specifically, we assessed the relative importance of model characteristics (i.e., insurance premium, presence of care coordinator, access to specialists, use of EMR, cost-sharing for chronic patients, incentives for informal care), and predicted uptake under different policy scenarios. We accounted for heterogeneity in preferences for the status quo option using an error component logit model. Respondents attached the highest importance to the price attribute (i.e. insurance premium) (0.31, CI: 0.27- 0.36) and to the presence of a care coordinator (0.27, CI: 0.23 - 0.31). Policy scenarios showed for instance that gatekeeping would be preferred to free access to specialists if the model includes a GP or an interprofessional team as a care coordinator. Although attachment to the status quo is high in the studied population, there are potential ways to improve acceptance of alternative care models by implementation of positively valued innovations.

Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Modalities Among the General Population in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) could be a leading explanation for cancer-related death. Numerous studies have shown the benefit of early screening for colorectal cancer in reducing mortality. Screening for colorectal cancer is a rational and cost-effective strategy for reducing the incidence of colorectal cancer and related mortality. Despite endorsement by academic and healthcare organizations, patient awareness and compliance with screening are low, partly due to patient-related barriers to screening.

AIM

This study aimed to explore the preferred screening method for colorectal cancer in Saudi Arabia in general.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study conducted among the Saudi adult population from September 2021 through February 2022. A self-developed questionnaire was distributed among the population using an online platform. Data were tabulated in Google Forms, and all statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).

RESULTS

During this study, data from 10,781 participants were analyzed. Among them, the most preferred screening modality for colorectal cancer was the stool fecal immunochemical test (41.7%) and the most suitable (33.5%). The most commonly mentioned qualities that influenced choosing a particular screening test were "how the test was performed" (50.4%).

CONCLUSION

Because the stool fecal immunochemical test is the most preferred screening modality for colorectal cancer, this study could serve as a database to aid in the implementation of a colorectal cancer screening program that meets the preferences of the general population of Saudi Arabia.

Patient Preferences in Targeted Pharmacotherapy for Cancers: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

BACKGROUND

Targeted pharmacotherapy has been increasingly applied in cancer treatment due to its breakthroughs. However, the unmet needs of cancer patients are still significant, highlighting the urgency to investigate patient preferences. It is unclear how patients deliberate their choices between different aspects of targeted therapy, including cost, efficacy, and adverse events. Since discrete choice experiments (DCEs) have been widely applied to patient preference elicitation, we reviewed DCEs on targeted therapy for different cancers. We also synthesized evidence on the factors influencing patients' choices and their willingness-to-pay (WTP) for survival when treated by targeted therapy.

METHODS

We searched databases, including PubMed, EMBASE and MEDLINE, up to August 16, 2022, supplemented by a reference screening. The attributes from the selected studies were categorized into three groups: outcomes, costs, and process. We also calculated the relative importance of attributes and WTP for survival whenever possible. The purpose, respondents, explanation, findings, significance (PREFS) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included DCE studies.

RESULTS

The review identified 34 eligible studies from 13 countries covering 14 cancers, such as breast, ovarian, kidney, prostate, and skin cancers. It also reveals a rising trend of DCEs on this topic, as most studies were published after 2018. We found that patients placed higher weights on the outcome (e.g., overall survival) and cost attributes than on process attributes. On average, patients were willing to pay $561 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $415-$758) and $716 (95% CI $524-$958) out-of-pocket for a 1-month increase in progression-free survival and overall survival, respectively. PREFS scores of the 34 studies ranged from 2 to 4, with a mean of 3.38 (SD: 0.65), suggesting a reasonable quality based on the checklist. However, most studies (n = 32, 94%) did not assess the impact of non-responses on the results.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review focusing on patient preferences for targeted cancer therapy. We showcased novel approaches for evidence synthesis of DCE results, especially the attribute relative importance and WTP. The results may inform stakeholders about patient preferences toward targeted therapy and their WTP estimates. More studies with improved study design and quality are warranted to generate more robust evidence to assist decision making.

Patient choice in colorectal cancer treatment - A systematic review and narrative synthesis of attribute-based stated preference studies

AIM

The global burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is set to increase by 60% by 2030. An aging population and increasing treatment complexity add difficulties for patients and clinicians in CRC management. Patient preferences can be investigated using attribute-based stated preference (AbSP) techniques to explore trade-offs between different treatments. These techniques include discrete-choice experiments (DCEs), conjoint analysis and time-trade off (TTO) methods. This systematic review with a narrative synthesis aimed to determine the use and design of AbSP studies in CRC treatment and to identify patient choice themes.

METHODS

The searches were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and Cochrane Library in March 2021. All manuscripts featuring the use of AbSP techniques in CRC treatment were included. Data synthesis was performed using a narrative approach.

RESULTS

The search strategy returned 271 articles. Eighteen AbSP studies were included featuring 1890 patients and 296 clinicians. AbSP techniques compromised DCE (38.9%, n = 7), TTO (38.9%, n = 7) and conjoint analysis (22.2%, n = 4). Eleven studies (61.1%) involved piloting of tasks and the average task completion rate was 75%. CRC treatments included chemotherapy (33%, n = 6), combined treatments (33%, n = 6), surgery (17%, n = 3), targeted therapy (11%, n = 2) and radiotherapy (6%, n = 1). The most examined domain was physical health, investigated with 49 (59.8%) attributes.

CONCLUSIONS

Life expectancy was the main attribute in chemotherapy treatment. With surgery, patients were willing to trade life-expectancy to avoid adverse outcomes or a permanent stoma. Communication skills, treatment cost, and clinicians' views were important attributes for patients in cancer services. Further research in the elderly population, and other quality of life domains, are needed to deliver patient-centred CRC care.

Patient Preferences for Treatment Outcomes in Oncology with a Focus on the Older Patient-A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

In oncology, treatment outcomes can be competing, which means that one treatment could benefit one outcome, like survival, and negatively influence another, like independence. The choice of treatment therefore depends on the patient’s preference for outcomes, which needs to be assessed explicitly. Especially in older patients, patient preferences are important. Our systematic review summarizes all studies that assessed patient preferences for various treatment outcome categories. A total of 28 studies with 4374 patients were included, of which only six studies included mostly older patients. Although quality of life was only included in half of the studies, overall quality of life (79%) was most frequently prioritized as highest or second highest, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), treatment response (50%), and absence of transient short-term side effects (16%). In shared decision-making, these results can be used by healthcare professionals to better tailor the information provision and treatment recommendations to the individual patient.

Abstract

For physicians, it is important to know which treatment outcomes are prioritized overall by older patients with cancer, since this will help them to tailor the amount of information and treatment recommendations. Older patients might prioritize other outcomes than younger patients. Our objective is to summarize which outcomes matter most to older patients with cancer. A systematic review was conducted, in which we searched Embase and Medline on 22 December 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported some form of prioritization of outcome categories relative to each other in patients with all types of cancer and if they included at least three outcome categories. Subsequently, for each study, the highest or second-highest outcome category was identified and presented in relation to the number of studies that included that outcome category. An adapted Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. In total, 4374 patients were asked for their priorities in 28 studies that were included. Only six of these studies had a population with a median age above 70. Of all the studies, 79% identified quality of life as the highest or second-highest priority, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), and treatment response (50%). Absence of transient short-term side effects was prioritized in 16%. The studies were heterogeneous considering age, cancer type, and treatment settings. Overall, quality of life, overall survival, progression- and disease-free survival, and severe and persistent side effects of treatment are the outcomes that receive the highest priority on a group level when patients with cancer need to make trade-offs in oncologic treatment decisions.

Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A critical gap exits in understanding the dynamics of patient-based benefit-risk assessment (BRA) of medicines in chronic diseases during the disease journey.

PURPOSE

To systematically review and synthesize current evidence on the changes of patients' preferences about the benefits and risks of medicines during their disease journey including the influence of disease duration and severity, and previous treatment experience.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies identified in PubMed and Embase, from inception to November 2020, was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Articles were eligible if they analyzed adult patient-based BRA of medicines with a chronic disease, based on at least one of the pre-specified dimensions: disease severity, disease duration, or previous treatment experience.

RESULTS

A total of 26,228 articles were identified and 105 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 85 detected a variation in patient-based BRA of medicines with at least one of the pre-specified criteria. Patients with higher disease severity and more treatment experience have increased risk tolerance. It remains inconclusive whether disease duration directly affects the relative importance of a patient's preference.

CONCLUSION

Factors important for patients' BRA of their medicines during a chronic disease journey vary more with their clinical situation and previous treatment experience than with time since diagnosis. Due to the importance of these factors on patients' perspectives and potential impact on their decision-making and eventually their clinical outcomes, there is a need for more studies to assess the dynamics of patients' BRA in every disease.

Assessment of the satisfaction with public health insurance programs by patients with chronic diseases in China: a structural equation modeling approach

BACKGROUND

China has successfully sustained its universal health insurance coverage over the past decade. Although patient satisfaction has been recognized as an important indicator to measure the performance of insurance programs in China, there is a lack of evidence on how patients with chronic diseases are satisfied with China's public health insurance programs and whether their satisfaction differs by type of insurance. We aimed to fill the evidence gap.

METHODS

We established a hypothetical model that comprised patients' awareness of insurance policies, the fulfillment of patients' expectations of insurance benefits, patients' perceived value of health insurance coverage, patients' satisfaction with health insurance programs, patients' complaints, and trust in health insurance programs. We performed a confirmatory factor analysis by using a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to examine the hypothesized model. A model-testing survey in 10 tertiary hospitals was conducted between June and October 2018, with a valid sample of 922 insured patients with chronic diseases.

RESULTS

The SEM model, with good fit indices, showed that patients' awareness of health insurance policies, insurance program's fulfillment of expectations, and patients' perceived value of insurance coverage, positively predicted patient satisfaction (P < 0.01). The fulfillment of patients' expectations of insurance benefits was the major predictor of satisfaction with health insurance (coefficient = 0.593, P < 0.001), while the patients' perceived value of insurance coverage had the largest impact on their trust in health insurance (coefficient = 0.409, P < 0.01). Compared to patients with Urban-Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance, Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance enrollees had a higher degree of satisfaction with insurance on average (P < 0.01). Despite differences in the degree of satisfaction, the main findings from the SEM were also proved by the multi-group analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the importance of incorporating patients' perceived value as part of the ongoing efforts to increase satisfaction with health insurance by patients, especially those who have chronic diseases. Policymakers are also suggested to formulate evidence-informed reimbursement policies that meet patients' expectations.

Patient preferences for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: a multicountry stated preference study

The present study aimed to explore patient preferences for attributes of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatments. A stated preference survey was completed by 150 patients with HCC living in Europe. Overall survival (OS) was the most important attribute, closely followed by risk of diarrhea and hypertension, and other adverse event (AE) risks. Patients were willing to trade OS to reduce AE risks. While less important than OS and AEs, patients also preferred shorter waiting times, and one-off administration of selective internal radiation therapy and oral tablets over intravenous infusions. Although patients placed the most value on extending OS, they were willing to forego OS to avoid risk of treatment-related AEs, to maintain their quality of life.

Application of Discrete Choice Experiment in Health Care: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) as a tool that can measure medical stakeholders' preferences especially patients recently has been increasingly applied in health care.

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the hotspots and trends of the application of DCE in health care and to provide reference and direction for further development of DCE in the future.

Method: A bibliometric method was implemented using the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection for the period from the database established to December 8, 2020. The data files are imported into CiteSpace and Excel to analyze and visualize the annual volume of productive, authors, countries, cited journals, cited articles, and keywords.

Results: A total of 1,811 articles were retrieved, then we read the abstract of each paper one by one, and 1,562 articles were included after screening, with an exponential increase in publication volume. John F. P. Bridges contributed to 40 publications and ranked first, followed by F. Reed Johnson (n = 37), Julie Ratcliffe (n = 36). The majority of the papers were conducted in the United States (n = 513) and the United Kingdom (n = 433). The top three cited journals were “Health Economics” (n = 981), “Value in Health” (n = 893), and “Pharmaceutical Economics” (n = 774), and the top three articles were “Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force,” “Conjoint analysis applications in health-a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force,” and “Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.” The research hotspots and trends included “health technology assessment,” “survival,” “preference based measure,” and “health state valuation.”

Conclusion: The size of the literature about DCE studies in health care showed a noticeable increase in the past decade. The application of DCE in health care remains in an early growth phase, and “health technology assessment,” “survival,” “preference based measure,” and “health state valuation” reflected the latest research hotpots and future trends.