Using Nominal Group Technique to Identify Key Attributes of Oncology Treatments for a Discrete Choice Experiment

A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment

US patients with osteoporosis included in three focus groups identified efficacy, safety, cost, and convenience as important attributes of treatment when choosing between anabolic therapies with high stated preference for the solid Microstructured Transdermal System.

OBJECTIVE

The current study evaluated patient perspective and relative importance of treatment attributes of in-home daily self-administration of abaloparatide-solid Microstructured Transdermal System (sMTS) compared with other anabolic agents (i.e. in-home daily subcutaneous self-injections, and monthly subcutaneous injections at doctor office) among a group of US patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

The current study included systematic literature reviews, experts' consultation and three online patients focus groups (n=27), including patients ≥50 years of age at high risk for fracture. Nominal Group Technique was used by asking patients to (1) Individually identify characteristics that would be important for them when choosing between anabolic treatments, (2) Share ideas and discuss perspectives with other patients, (3) Review additional attributes generated from a systematic literature review, (4) Select and rank individually the 7 most important characteristics from the list and (5) Report their acceptability and stated preference ranking between the three treatment options.

RESULTS

Twenty women and 7 men with a mean age of 65 (range 51-85 years) participated in the focus groups. Twenty-four treatment characteristics were identified through focus groups and literature review. Efficacy, safety, out-of-pocket costs, strength of evidence and the option to self-administer were ranked as the most important attributes. The majority of patients stated preference for a daily sMTS if prescribed by their doctor.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that efficacy, safety, costs, and convenience are important attributes of osteoporosis treatment for US patients at high risk for fractures when choosing between anabolic therapies, with a high stated preference for sMTS.

Identifying Unmet Care Needs and Important Treatment Attributes in the Management of Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Qualitative Interview Study

Background and Objective

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is an inflammatory skin disease with a profound effect on patients’ quality of life. The patient’s journey to manage HS is often complex and unsuccessful, which motivates the aim of this research to gain insight into unmet needs and relevant treatment considerations from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

Methods

Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and HCPs experienced in treating HS to understand the perceived unmet care needs and to identify important treatment attributes. Prioritization of the five most important treatment attributes allowed elicitation of their relative importance.

Results

Interviews with 12 patients and 16 HCPs revealed 16 areas of unmet needs either related to treatment outcomes or the care process and 13 important treatment attributes. The most frequently reported unmet needs by patients and HCPs were lacking quality-of-life improvement, low treatment effectiveness, inadequate pain control, low disease awareness, and delayed diagnosis. Patients expressed unique concerns relating to pain management, access to HS specialists, and wound care guidance and costs, which HCPs did not. Treatment attributes related to effectiveness were considered most important by patients and HCPs. Patients additionally emphasized a strong preference for improved pain management.

Conclusions

Current HS treatments and care processes leave patients and HCPs with a high level of unmet need. It is critical to consider patients’ and HCPs’ perspectives when designing appropriate HS care as perceived unmet needs differ. Further quantitative preference elicitation studies are needed to assess the trade-offs between important care needs and treatment attributes.

Differences in Lung Cancer Treatment Preferences Among Oncologists, Patients and Family Members: A Semi-Structured Qualitative Study in China

BACKGROUND

Cancer treatment decision-making often needs to balance benefits, harms, and costs. This study sought to identify the differences in cancer treatment preference among oncologists, patients and their family members in China.

METHODS

A semi-structured face-to-face qualitative interview was conducted among oncologists, patients and their family members recruited in four tertiary hospitals in China. The interview guide was developed based on literature review and expert consultation. Participants were asked to indicate their preferences when making lung cancer treatment decisions. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and thematic analyzed. The preferences were compared among three groups of participants.

RESULTS

A total of 17 participants (5 oncologists, 6 dyads of patients and family members) were interviewed between June and July 2019. Five themes, namely, survival benefit, adverse effect/symptom, treatment process, treatment cost, and the impact on daily life were identified. The oncologists and family members gave highest priority on survival benefit, while the patients are concerned most about treatment cost and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This study reveals different preferences for cancer treatment among oncologists, patients and their family members in China. Education is needed to empower patients and family members and promote share decision-making in this country.