Preferences of lung cancer patients for treatment and decision-making: a systematic literature review

Schmidt, Katharina; Damm, Kathrin; Prenzler, Anne; Golpon, Heiko; Welte, Tobias

doi:10.1111/ecc.12425

Cited by 52 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(101 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 4 – 9 However, we performed a systematic literature review which showed that, in general, patients do not wish to decide on their therapy personally and would prefer their physician to make the decision. 10 , 11 Here, a conflict can occur, because the therapy that is provided to patients should be adjusted to meet their preferences regarding HRQoL and adverse effects. Previous studies on other diseases have shown that satisfaction with therapy can have a significant effect on disease outcomes and further treatment decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Schmidt

Damm

Vogel

et al. 2017

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThere is increasing interest in studies that examine patient preferences to measure health-related outcomes. Understanding patients’ preferences can improve the treatment process and is particularly relevant for oncology. In this study, we aimed to identify the subgroup-specific treatment preferences of German patients with lung cancer (LC) or colorectal cancer (CRC).MethodsSix discrete choice experiment (DCE) attributes were established on the basis of a systematic literature review and qualitative interviews. The DCE analyses comprised generalized linear mixed-effects model and latent class mixed logit model.ResultsThe study cohort comprised 310 patients (194 with LC, 108 with CRC, 8 with both types of cancer) with a median age of 63 (SD =10.66) years. The generalized linear mixed-effects model showed a significant (P<0.05) degree of association for all of the tested attributes. “Strongly increased life expectancy” was the attribute given the greatest weight by all patient groups. Using latent class mixed logit model analysis, we identified three classes of patients. Patients who were better informed tended to prefer a more balanced relationship between length and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than those who were less informed. Class 2 (LC patients with low HRQoL who had undergone surgery) gave a very strong weighting to increased length of life. We deduced from Class 3 patients that those with a relatively good life expectancy (CRC compared with LC) gave a greater weight to moderate effects on HRQoL than to a longer life.ConclusionOverall survival was the most important attribute of therapy for patients with LC or CRC. Differences in treatment preferences between subgroups should be considered in regard to treatment and development of guidelines. Patients’ preferences were not affected by sex or age, but were affected by the cancer type, HRQoL, surgery status, and the main source of information on the disease.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Schmidt

Damm

Vogel

et al. 2017

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2013Sadique [30]2011Women’s preferences regarding optionsfor management of atypical, borderlineor low-grade cervical cytological abnormalities: a review of the evidence“To identify empirical studies evaluating women’s preferences regarding alternative management pathways & to compare the impact of alternative elicitation methods on results.”March 2009Schatz [31]2015Systematic review of patients’ & parents’ preferences for ADHD treatment options& processes of care“To synthesize reports across existing DCE, BWS, TTO, & SGI studies to assess which aspects of ADHD treatment are most studied as well as most preferred & influential in treatment decisions.”Oct. 2014Schmidt [32]2016Preferences of lung cancer patients for treatment & decision-making: asystematic literature review“To identify the preferences of lung cancer patients with regard to their treatment & involvement in the decision-making process.”Sept. 2012Showalter [33]2015Factors that influence patient preferences for prostate cancer management options:a systematic review“We performed a systematic review to evaluate evidence regarding factors that influence patient preferences for management options for localized prostate cancer.”April 2014Stewart [34]2016Preference for pharmaceuticalformulation & treatment processattributes“To examine studies on preferences for pharmaceutical treatment process attributes, focusing on research in diabetes, oncology, osteoporosis, & autoimmune disorders.”Oct.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods to perform systematic reviews of patient preferences: a literature survey

Enkh-Amgalan

Zorigt

2017

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSystematic reviews are a commonly used research design in the medical field to synthesize study findings. At present—although several systematic reviews of patient preference studies are published—there is no clear guidance available for researchers to conduct this type of systematic review. The aim of our study was to learn the most current practice of conducting these systematic reviews by conducting a survey of the literature regarding reviews of quantitative patient preference studies.MethodsOur survey included systematic reviews of studies that used a stated quantitative preference design to elicit patient preferences. We identified eligible reviews through a search of the PubMed database. Two investigators with knowledge of the design of patient preference studies independently screened the titles and abstracts, and where needed, screened the full-text of the reviews to determine eligibility. We developed and pilot-tested a form to extract data on the methods used in each systematic review.ResultsOur search and screening identified 29 eligible reviews. A large proportion of the reviews (19/29, 66%) were published in 2014 or after; among them, nine reviews were published in 2016. The median number of databases searched for preference studies was four (interquartile range = 2 to 7). We found that less than half of the reviews (13/29, 45%) clearly reported assessing risk of bias or the methodological quality of the included preference studies; not a single review was able to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) of the data on patient preferences.ConclusionThese results suggest that several methodological issues of performing systematic reviews of patient preferences are not yet fully addressed by research and that the methodology may require future development.

show abstract

“…Desire for substantial engagement in decision-making has previously been demonstrated among breast cancer patients [46,47]. Furthermore, Schmidt and colleagues [2016], observed that preferences were not homogenous among lung cancer patients, and some subjects seemed to prefer a passive rather than an active role in decision-making [48]. The present study has shown a greater preference in patients for being involved in the decision-making process rather than choosing their own treatment after consulting the doctor, as already reported in the literature for colorectal cancer [49].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tailoring chemotherapy supply according to patients’ preferences: a quantitative method in colorectal cancer care

Rosato

Cuonzo

Ritorto

et al. 2019

Current Medical Research and Opinion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to conduct a discrete choice experiment with patients affected by colorectal cancer to understand their preferences for different attributes of the chemotherapy supply. Our overall goal is to provide evidence on the relative importance of each attribute in order to tailor chemotherapy supply according to patients' priorities in the design or reorganization processes of cancer services. Methods: Focus groups were used to identify the attributes and levels for the discrete choice experiment. The attributes were: continuity of care, understanding, information, treatment choice, and time for therapy. Respondents were asked to choose between two mutually exclusive hypothetical alternatives of chemotherapy supply. Patients completed the discrete choice experiment along with health-related quality of life and patients' satisfaction questions. Conditional and mixed logistic models were used to analyses the data. Results: Patients with colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy (n=76) completed the survey. The most important aspects of chemotherapy supply were: "Providing detailed and complete information" and "High ability in understanding" patients. Preferences were also influenced by the availability of a trusted doctor. Except for one attribute (waiting time for therapy), all other characteristics significantly influenced respondents' preferences. Conclusions: Results should support a policy of strengthening medical doctors' capabilities to communicate with patients, providing them complete information and involving them in the clinical decisions. Specifically, the findings should be used to improve current provision of cancer care by identifying areas of preferred intervention from the perspectives of patients in order to tailor the service supply accordingly.

show abstract

Preferences of lung cancer patients for treatment and decision-making: a systematic literature review

Cited by 52 publications

References 38 publications

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment

Methods to perform systematic reviews of patient preferences: a literature survey

Tailoring chemotherapy supply according to patients’ preferences: a quantitative method in colorectal cancer care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About