Preferences of women with epithelial ovarian cancer for aspects of genetic testing

Preferences for Genetic Testing to Predict the Risk of Developing Hereditary Cancer: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

BACKGROUND

Understanding service user preferences is key to effective health care decision making and efficient resource allocation. It is of particular importance in the management of high-risk patients in whom predictive genetic testing can alter health outcomes.

PURPOSE

This review aims to identify the relative importance and willingness to pay for attributes of genetic testing in hereditary cancer syndromes.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, and EconLit using discrete choice experiment (DCE) terms combined with terms related to hereditary cancer syndromes, malignancy synonyms, and genetic testing.

STUDY SELECTION

Following independent screening by 3 reviewers, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, being a DCE investigating patient or public preferences related to predictive genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Extracted data included study and respondent characteristics, DCE attributes and levels, methods of data analysis and interpretation, and key study findings.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Studies covered colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer syndromes. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis and the quality assessed using the Lancsar and Louviere framework.

LIMITATIONS

This review focuses only on DCE design and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes rather than other complex diseases. Challenges also arose from heterogeneity in attributes and levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Test effectiveness and detection rates were consistently important to respondents and thus should be prioritized by policy makers. Accuracy, cost, and wait time, while also important, showed variation between studies, although overall reduction in cost may improve uptake. Patients and the public would be willing to pay for improved detection and clinician over insurance provider involvement. Future studies should seek to contextualize findings by considering the impact of sociodemographic characteristics, health system coverage, and insurance policies on preferences.

HIGHLIGHTS

Test effectiveness and detection rates are consistently important to respondents in genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.Reducing the cost of genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes may improve uptake.Individuals are most willing to pay for a test that improves detection rates, identifies multiple cancers, and for which results are shared with a doctor rather than with an insurance provider.

Willingness to pay for an mRNA-based anti-cancer treatment: results from a contingent valuation study in Israel

BACKGROUND

mRNA technology is currently being investigated for a range of oncology indications. We assessed the willingness to pay (WTP) of the general population in Israel for a hypothetical novel mRNA-based treatment for oncology indications.

METHODS

We used a contingent valuation methodology to elicit WTP using a web-based questionnaire. A sample of adult participants were presented with a hypothetical scenario in which an mRNA-based intervention increased the likelihood of a cure for various cancer types from 20% to 40% (half of the sample), or 60% (the other half of the sample).

RESULTS

531 respondents completed the questionnaire. The mean, median and mode WTP for the proposed hypothetical treatment in both scenarios were ILS65,000 (± ILS114,000), ILS20,000 and ILS50,000, respectively (1USD = 3.4ILS). The WTP was skewed towards zero, and 9.6% of the respondents were not willing to pay any amount. WTP higher amounts was significantly associated with higher income (p < 0.01), self-reported good health (p < 0.05), supplementary health insurance (p < 0.05), Jews compared to other populations (p < 0.01), interest in technology (p < 0.001) and a tendency to adopt medical innovations (p < 0.001). No statistical difference between the 40% vs. the 60% potential cure scenarios was found. Logistic and OLS regressions indicated that age, religion, income, and interest in adopting medical innovations were the best predictors of respondents' WTP.

CONCLUSION

Despite the scientific breakthroughs in oncology treatment over the last few decades, many types of cancer are still incurable. Given the expected development of innovative mRNA-based treatments for cancer, these results should inform policymakers, the pharmaceutical industry and other stakeholders on the future coverage and reimbursement of these technologies incorporating patients' and societal views. To date, WTP considerations have not been given much weight in prioritization of drug reimbursement processes, neither in Israel nor in other countries. As a pioneer in adoption of the mRNA technology, Israel can also lead the incorporation of WTP considerations in this field.

Willingness to pay for cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Willingness to pay (WTP) studies examine the maximum amount of money an individual is willing to pay for a specified health intervention, and can be used to inform coverage and reimbursement decisions. Our objectives were to assess how people value cancer-related interventions, identify differences in the methodologies used, and review the trends in studies' publication.

AREAS COVERED

We extracted PubMed and EconLit articles published in 1997-2020 that reported WTP for cancer-related interventions, characterized the methodological differences and summarized each intervention's mean and median WTP values. We reviewed 1,331 abstracts and identified 103 relevant WTP studies, of which 37 (36%) focused on treatment followed by screening (26), prevention (21), diagnosis (7) and other interventions (12). The methods used to determine WTP values were primarily discrete-choice questions (n = 54, 52%), bidding games (15), payment cards (12) and open-ended questions (12). We found a wide variation in WTP reported values ranged from below $100 to over $20,000.

EXPERT OPINION

The WTP literature on oncology interventions has grown rapidly. There is considerable heterogeneity with respect to the type of interventions and diseases assessed, the respondents' characteristics, and the study methodologies. This points to the need to establish international guidelines for best practices in this field.

Genetic Testing in the Latinx community: Impact of acculturation and provider relationships

OBJECTIVES

The current study aimed to explore attitudes toward genetic germline testing and intentions to test in Latinas from Southern California. We hypothesized that patients' acculturation and education levels, as well as comfort with health care providers, are positively associated with attitudes and intentions toward genetic testing.

METHODS

A survey was offered concurrently to Latinx female patients at a gynecologic oncology practice and to unaffiliated Latinx community members. The survey assessed demographics, structural, psychosocial, and acculturation factors and genetic testing attitudes and intentions via validated scales.

RESULTS

Of 148 surveys collected, 66% of responders had low levels of acculturation. 50% of women had government-subsidized insurance; 22% had no schooling in the US. 67% of participants did not carry a diagnosis of cancer. Women with higher acculturation levels were more likely to consider genetic testing (r_s = 0.54, p = .001). Higher acculturated women and less acculturated women under 50 were more likely to consider testing if it had been recommended by a female, trusted, or Hispanic/Latinx provider (r_s = 0.22, p = .01, r_s = 0.27, p = .003 and r_s = 0.19, p = .003, respectively) or if there was a recent cancer diagnosis (self or family, r_s = 0.19, p = .03). Overall, education correlated with intention to test. The more education outside of the US, the less negative was the attitude toward being tested (r_s = -0.41, p = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct experiences with cancer, more schooling and higher acculturation coupled with provider characteristics determined if Latinas were more open to testing. Provider characteristics mattered: having a female, Latinx, Spanish speaking provider was important for genetic testing decision-making. These findings are particularly pertinent in areas with high Latinx populations.

Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Understanding patient preferences in cancer management is essential for shared decision-making. Patient or societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) for desired outcomes in cancer management represents their preferences and values of these outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review is to critically evaluate how current literature has addressed WTP in relation to cancer treatment and achievement of outcomes.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched from inception until 2 March 2021 to include studies with primary data of WTP values for cancer treatments or achievement of outcomes that were elicited using stated preference methods.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies were included in this review. All studies were published after year 2000 and more than 90% of the studies were conducted in high-income countries. Sample size of the studies ranged from 35 to 2040, with patient being the most studied population. There was a near even distribution between studies using contingent valuation and discrete choice experiment. Based on the included studies, the highest WTP values were for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ($11,498-$589,822), followed by 1-year survival ($3-$198,576), quality of life (QoL) improvement ($5531-$139,499), and pain reduction ($79-$94,662). Current empirical evidence suggested that improvement in QoL and pain reduction had comparable weights to survival in cancer management.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides a summary on stated preference studies that elicited patient preferences via WTP and summarised their respective values. Respondents in this review had comparable WTP for 1-year survival and QoL, suggesting that improvement in QoL should be emphasised together with survival in cancer management.

Conjoint Analysis: A Research Method to Study Patients’ Preferences and Personalize Care

This article aims to describe the conjoint analysis (CA) method and its application in healthcare settings, and to provide researchers with a brief guide to conduct a conjoint study. CA is a method for eliciting patients’ preferences that offers choices similar to those in the real world and allows researchers to quantify these preferences. To identify literature related to conjoint analysis, a comprehensive search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was conducted without language or date restrictions. To identify the trend of publications and citations in conjoint analysis, an online search of all databases indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection was conducted on the 8th of December 2021 without time restriction. Searching key terms covered a wide range of synonyms related to conjoint analysis. The search field was limited to the title, and no language or date limitations were applied. The number of published documents related to CA was nearly 900 during the year 2021 and the total number of citations for CA documents was approximately 20,000 citations, which certainly shows that the popularity of CA is increasing, especially in the healthcare sciences services discipline, which is in the top five fields publishing CA documents. However, there are some limitations regarding the appropriate sample size, quality assessment tool, and external validity of CA.

A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analysis on Genetic Testing

BACKGROUND

Although genetic testing has the potential to offer promising medical benefits, concerns regarding its potential negative impacts may influence its acceptance. Users and providers need to weigh the benefits, costs and potential harms before deciding whether to take up or recommend genetic testing. Attribute-based stated-preference methods, such as discrete choice experiment (DCE) or conjoint analysis, can help to quantify how individuals value different features of genetic testing.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of DCE and conjoint analysis studies on genetic testing, including genomic tests.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in seven databases: Web of Science, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCO), PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library and SCOPUS. The search was conducted in February 2021 and was limited to English peer-reviewed articles published until the search date. The search keywords included relevant keywords such as 'genetic testing', 'genomic testing', 'pharmacogenetic testing', 'discrete choice experiment' and 'conjoint analysis'. Narrative synthesis of the studies was conducted on survey population, testing type, recruitment and data collection, survey development, questionnaire content, survey validity, analysis, outcomes and other design features.

RESULTS

Of the 292 articles retrieved, 38 full-text articles were included in this review. Nearly two-thirds of the studies were published since 2015 and all were conducted in high-income countries. Survey samples included patients, parents, general population and healthcare providers. The articles assessed preferences for pharmacogenetic testing (28.9%), predictive testing and diagnostic testing (18.4%), while only one (2.6%) study investigated preferences for carrier testing. The most common sampling method was convenience sampling (57.9%) and the majority recruited participants via web-enabled surveys (60.5%). Review of literature (84.6%), discussions with healthcare professionals (71.8%) and cognitive interviews (53.8%) were commonly used for attribute identification. A survey validity test was included in only one-quarter of the studies (28.2%). Cost attributes were the most studied attribute type (76.9%), followed by risk attributes (61.5%). Among those that reported relative attribute importance, attributes related to benefits were the most commonly reported attributes with the highest relative attribute importance. Preference heterogeneity was investigated in most studies by modelling, such as via mixed logit analysis (82.1%) and/or by using interaction effects with respondent characteristics (74.4%). Willingness to pay was the most commonly estimated outcome and was presented in about two-thirds (n = 25; 64.1%) of the studies.

CONCLUSION

With the continuous advancement in genetic technology resulting in expanding options for genetic testing and improvements in delivery methods, the application of genetic testing in clinical care is expected to rise. DCEs and conjoint analysis remain robust and useful methods to elicit preferences of potential stakeholders. This review serves as a summary for future researchers when designing similar studies.

"I think that a brief conversation from their provider can go a very long way": Patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators of genetic testing after ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Identify predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting genetic counseling/testing among ovarian cancer patients guided by Green and Kreuter's PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

METHODS

Gynecologic oncology providers (N = 4), genetic counselors (N = 4), and ovarian cancer patients (N = 9) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews exploring participants' knowledge of and experiences with genetic counseling/testing. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using inductive content analysis by two independent raters.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis identified predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting referral for and uptake of genetic counseling/testing. Predisposing factors included participant's knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes related to genetic counseling/testing. Both patients and providers also cited that insurance coverage and out-of-pocket cost are major concerns for ovarian cancer patients considering genetic testing. Finally, both patients and providers emphasized that genetic counseling/testing would provide additional information to an ovarian cancer patient. While providers emphasized that genetic testing results were useful for informing a patient's personal treatment plan, patients emphasized that this knowledge would be beneficial for their family members.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients exist at multiple levels, including the patient (e.g., knowledge, attitudes), the provider (e.g., workload, availability of services), the institution (e.g., difficulty with referrals/scheduling), and the healthcare system (e.g., insurance/cost). Interventions aiming to increase genetic testing among ovarian cancer patients will likely need to target multiple levels of influence. Future quantitative studies are needed to replicate these results. This line of work will inform specific multilevel intervention strategies that are adaptable to different practice settings, ultimately improving guideline concordant care.

Patient Preferences Around Extent of Surgery in Low-Risk Thyroid Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Background: Patient preferences pertaining to surgical options for thyroid cancer management are not well studied. Our aim was to conduct a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to characterize participants' views on the relative importance of various risks and benefits associated with lobectomy versus total thyroidectomy for low-risk thyroid cancer. Methods: Adult participants with low-risk thyroid cancer or a thyroid nodule requiring surgery were asked to choose between experimentally designed surgical options with varying levels of risk of nerve damage (1%, 9%, 14%), hypocalcemia (0%, 3%, 8%), risk of needing a second surgery (0%, 40%), cancer recurrence (1%, 3%, 5%), and need for daily thyroid hormone supplementation (yes, no). Their choices were analyzed using random-parameters logit regression. Results: One hundred fifty participants completed an online DCE survey. Median age was 58 years; 82% were female. Twenty-four participants (16%) had a diagnosis of thyroid cancer at the time of completing the survey, and 126 (84%) had a thyroid nodule necessitating surgery. On average, 35% of participants' choices were explained by differences in the risk of cancer recurrence; 28% by the chance of needing a second surgery; 19% by the risk of nerve damage; and 9% by differences in risks of hypocalcemia and the need for thyroid hormone supplementation. When accounting for differences in postoperative risks, the average patient favored lobectomy over total thyroidectomy as long as the chance of needing a second (i.e., completion) surgery after initial lobectomy remained below 30%. Participants would accept a 4.1% risk of cancer recurrence if the risk of a second surgery could be reduced from 40% to 10%. Conclusions: While patients with thyroid cancer may have clear preferences for extent of surgery, common themes moderating preferences for surgical interventions were identified in the DCE. Adequate preoperative evaluation to decrease the chance of a second surgery and providing patients with a good understanding of risks and benefits associated with extent of surgery can lead to better treatment decision-making.

Germline and Somatic Tumor Testing in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations on genetic and tumor testing for women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer based on available evidence and expert consensus.

METHODS

A literature search and prospectively defined study selection criteria sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and comparative observational studies published from 2007 through 2019. Guideline recommendations were based on the review of the evidence.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 19 eligible studies. The evidence consisted of systematic reviews of observational data, consensus guidelines, and RCTs.

RECOMMENDATIONS

All women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer should have germline genetic testing for BRCA1/2 and other ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. In women who do not carry a germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic BRCA1/2 variant, somatic tumor testing for BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants should be performed. Women with identified germline or somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1/2 genes should be offered treatments that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved in the upfront and the recurrent setting. Women diagnosed with clear cell, endometrioid, or mucinous ovarian cancer should be offered somatic tumor testing for mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR). Women with identified dMMR should be offered FDA-approved treatment based on these results. Genetic evaluations should be conducted in conjunction with health care providers familiar with the diagnosis and management of hereditary cancer. First- or second-degree blood relatives of a patient with ovarian cancer with a known germline pathogenic cancer susceptibility gene variant should be offered individualized genetic risk evaluation, counseling, and genetic testing. Clinical decision making should not be made based on a variant of uncertain significance. Women with epithelial ovarian cancer should have testing at the time of diagnosis.

Are Videos or Text Better for Describing Attributes in Stated-Preference Surveys?

OBJECTIVE

In stated-preference research, the conventional approach to describing study attributes is through text, often with easy-to-understand graphics. More recently, researchers have begun to present attribute descriptions and content in videos. Some experts have expressed concern regarding internalization and retention of information conveyed via video.

OBJECTIVE

Our study aimed to compare respondents' understanding of attribute information provided via text versus video.

METHODS

Potential respondents were randomized to receive a text or video version of the survey. In the text version, all content was provided in text format along with still graphics. In the video version, text content was interspersed with four video clips, providing the same information as the text version. In both versions, 10 questions were embedded to assess respondents' understanding of the information presented relating to ovarian cancer treatments. Half of the questions were on treatment benefits and the other half were on treatment-related risks. Some questions asked about the decision context and definitions of treatment features, and others asked about the graphic presentation of treatment features. Preferences for ovarian cancer treatments were also compared between respondents receiving text versus video versions.

RESULTS

Overall, 150 respondents were recruited. Of the 95 who were eligible and completed the survey, 54 respondents received the text version and 41 received the video version. Median times to completion were 24 and 30 min in the video and text arms, respectively (p < 0.01). Both groups spent an average of 35 min completing the survey. On the first comprehension question, 43% in the text arm and 61% in the video arm provided the correct response (p = 0.08). Although the mean number of correct responses was significantly higher in the video versus text arms (9.1 vs. 8.6, p = 0.02), there were no systematic differences in preferences between arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of stated-preference data relies on respondents' understanding of study content. Information provided via video may better engage survey participants and improve their retention of content.

Patient preferences for maintenance PARP inhibitor therapy in ovarian cancer treatment

OBJECTIVE

To measure preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding risks, side effects, costs and benefits afforded by maintenance therapy (MT) with a poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor.

METHODS

A discrete-choice experiment elicited preferences of women with ovarian cancer regarding 6 attributes (levels in parentheses) relevant to decisions for MT versus treatment break: (1) overall survival (OS; 36, 38, 42 months); (2) progression-free survival (PFS; 15, 17, 21 months); (3) nausea (none, mild, moderate); (4) fatigue (none, mild, moderate); (5) probability of death from myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia (MDS/AML; 0% to 10%); (6) monthly out-of-pocket cost ($0 to $1000). Participants chose between 2 variable MT scenarios and a static scenario representing treatment break, with multiple iterations. Random-parameters logit regression was applied to model choices as a function of attribute levels.

RESULTS

95 eligible participants completed the survey; mean age was 62, 48% had recurrence, and 17% were ever-PARP inhibitor users. Participants valued OS (average importance weight 24.5 out of 100) and monthly costs (24.6) most highly, followed by risk of death from MDS/AML (17.9), nausea (14.7), PFS (10.5) and fatigue (7.8). Participants would accept 5% risk of MDS/AML if treatment provided 2.2 months additional OS or 4.8 months PFS. Participants would require gains of 2.6 months PFS to accept mild treatment-related fatigue and 4.4 months to accept mild nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering MT, women with ovarian cancer are most motivated by gains in OS. Women expect at least 3-4 months of PFS benefit to bear mild side effects of treatment.