Patient preferences and predicted relative uptake for targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: a discrete choice experiment
- 4 August 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Informa UK Limited in Current Medical Research and Opinion
- Vol. 36 (10), 1677-1686
- https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2020.1790348
Abstract
Objective Ras wild-type metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) may be treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. We aim to estimate patients’ preferences for mCRC treatment and relative importance of cost, efficacy improvement, avoidance of side effects and therapy convenience, and relative uptake between profiles that resemble Bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) and Cetuximab (anti-EGFR), two commonly prescribed mCRC targeted therapies. Methods Discrete choice experiment (DCE) was administered to English- or Chinese-speaking Stage 2 or 3 colon cancer patients at the National Cancer Centre Singapore. DCE attributes comprise progression-free survival (PFS), severity of acne-like skin rashes, severity of bleeding, out-of-pocket cost per month and frequency of drug administration. Mixed logit model was used to calculate preference weights for all attribute levels. Subgroup analyses were conducted by interacting attribute levels with selected respondent characteristics. Relative uptake rates for various medication scenarios were studied. Results 169 respondents aged 61.5 ± 10.5 years completed the survey. They placed the greatest weight on cost, followed by bleeding and skin rashes, then PFS and finally frequency of drug administration. This was similarly observed in the subgroup analyses. A scenario with shorter PFS but less severe side effects has a slightly higher relative uptake at 55%. One quarter of respondents reported that they would not take the treatment they preferred in the choice task. Conclusion Patients were willing to trade off some degree of efficacy to avoid certain severity of side effects. It is therefore crucial for patients and physicians to discuss patients’ preferences and circumstances to understand which attributes are more important, as well as patients’ views on the trade-offs between treatment benefits and risks.Keywords
This publication has 35 references indexed in Scilit:
- The predictive role of skin rash with cetuximab and panitumumab in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published trialsTargeted Oncology, 2013
- Constructing Experimental Designs for Discrete-Choice Experiments: Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task ForceValue in Health, 2013
- Visual Aids for Multimodal Treatment Options to Support Decision Making of Patients with Colorectal CancerBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 2012
- Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health—a Checklist: A Report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task ForceValue in Health, 2011
- Adjuvant chemotherapy for early colon cancer: What survival benefits make it worthwhile?European Journal of Cancer, 2010
- Measuring Preferences for Colorectal Cancer ScreeningThe Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2010
- Analysis of physicians’ perspectives versus patients’ preferences: direct assessment and discrete choice experiments in the therapy of multiple myelomaThe European Journal of Health Economics, 2010
- Cancer Therapy Costs Influence Treatment: A National Survey Of OncologistsHealth Affairs, 2010
- Patient preference and pharmacokinetics of oral modulated UFT versus intravenous fluorouracil and leucovorin: a randomised crossover trial in advanced colorectal cancerEuropean Journal Of Cancer, 2002
- Conjoint Analysis of a New ChemotherapyPharmacoEconomics, 2002