Preferences for Renal Cell Carcinoma Pharmacological Treatment: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Patients and Oncologists

IntroductionThe purpose of this investigation was to explore patients’ and oncologists’ preferences for the characteristics of a pharmacological regimen for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).Material and MethodsCross-sectional observational study based on a discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted in Spain. A literature review, a focus group with oncologists and interviews with patients informed the DCE design. Five attributes were included: progression survival gain, risk of serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), administration mode, and treatment cost. Preferences were analyzed using a mixed-logit model to estimate relative importance (RI) of attributes (importance of an attribute in relation to all others), which was compared between aRCC patients and oncologists treating aRCC. Willingness to pay (WTP, payer: health system) for a benefit in survival or in risk reduction and maximum acceptable risk (MAR) in SAEs for improving survival were estimated from the DCE. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify factors that influence preference.ResultsA total of 105 patients with aRCC (77.1% male, mean age 65.9 years [SD: 10.4], mean time since RCC diagnosis 6.3 years [SD: 6.1]) and 67 oncologists (52.2% male, mean age 41.9 years [SD: 8.4], mean duration of experience in RCC 10.2 years [SD: 7.5]) participated in the study. The most important attribute for patients and oncologists was survival gain (RI: 43.6% vs. 54.7% respectively, p<0.05), followed by HRQoL (RI: 35.5% vs. 18.0%, respectively, p<0.05). MAR for SAEs was higher among oncologists than patients, while WTP (for the health system) was higher for patients. Differences in preferences were found according to time since diagnosis and education level (patients) or length of professional experience (oncologists).ConclusionPatients’ and oncologists’ preferences for aRCC treatment are determined mainly by the efficacy (survival gain) but also by the HRQoL provided. The results of the study can help to inform decision-making in the selection of appropriate aRCC treatment.

Incidence, mortality and survival in multiple myeloma compared to other hematopoietic neoplasms in Sweden up to year 2016

Survival in multiple myeloma (MM) has developed favorably over the past decades for reasons that have been ascribed to new medications and treatment. However, development of survival over a long period and comparison to other hematopoietic neoplasms (HN) is less well known. Here we used Swedish cancer data from the Nordcan database, spanning a 50-year period from 1967 to 2016, and analyzed 1- and 5-year survival data. As a novel type of analysis we calculate the difference in survival between year 1 and 5 which indicates how well survival was maintained in the 4-year period following year 1 after diagnosis. The relative 1- and 5- year survival increased constantly; the 5-year survival graph for women was almost linear. The difference between 1- and 5-year survival revealed that the 5-year survival gain was entirely due to the improvement in 1-year survival, except for the last period. Survival improvement in all HNs exceeded that in MM. The linear 5-year survival increase for female MM patients suggests a contribution by many small improvements in the first year care rather than single major events. The future challenges are to push the gains past year 1 and to extend them to old patients.

Reduced Impact of Endovascular Thrombectomy on Disability in Real-World Practice, Relative to Randomized Controlled Trial Evidence in Australia

Background and Aims: Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) are an important measure of the global burden of disease that informs patient outcomes and policy decision-making. Our study aimed to compare the DALYs saved by endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in the Australasian-based EXTEND-IA trial vs. clinical registry data from EVT in Australian routine clinical practice.Methods: The 3-month modified Rankin scale (mRS) outcome and treatment status of consecutively enrolled Australian patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke were taken from the International Stroke Perfusion Imaging Registry (INSPIRE). DALYs were calculated as the summation of years of life lost (YLL) due to premature death and years lived with a disability (YLD). A generalized linear model (GLM) with gamma family and log link was used to compare the difference in DALYs for patients receiving/not receiving EVT while controlling for key covariates. Ordered logit regression model was utilized to compare the difference in functional outcome at 3 months between the treatment groups. Cox regression analysis was undertaken to compare the difference in survival over an 18-year time horizon. Estimated long-term DALYs saved based on the EXTEND-IA randomized controlled trial (RCT) results were used as the comparator.Results: INSPIRE patients who received EVT treatment only achieved nominally better functional outcomes than the non-EVT group (p = 0.181) at 3 months. There was no significant survival gain from EVT over the first 3 months of stroke in both INSPIRE and EXTEND-IA patients. However, measured against no EVT in the long-term, EVT in INSPIRE was associated with no significant survival gain [hazard ratio (HR): 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–1.08, p = 0.287] compared with the survival benefit extrapolated from the EXTEND-IA trial (HR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.22–0.82, p = 0.01]. Offering EVT to patients with LVO stroke was also associated with fewer DALYs lost (11.04, 95% CI: 10.45–11.62) than those not receiving EVT in INSPIRE (12.13, 95% CI: 11.75–12.51), a reduction of −1.09 DALY (95% CI: −1.76 to −0.43, p = 0.002). The absolute magnitude of the treatment effect was lower than that seen in EXTEND-IA (−2.72 DALY reduction in EVT vs non-EVT patients).Conclusions: EVT for the treatment of LVO in a registry of routine care was associated with significantly lower DALYs lost than medical care alone, but the saved DALYs are less than those reported in clinical trials, as there were major differences in the baseline characteristics of the patients.

Patients' and gynecologists' views on sentinel lymph node mapping in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer: a Dutch vignette study

ObjectiveSentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping in endometrial cancer is gaining ground. However, patient views on this new technique are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine factors important to patients and gynecologists when considering SLN mapping in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer.MethodsWe performed a vignette study. Patients who underwent a total hysterectomy for low- or intermediate-risk endometrial cancer between 2012 and 2015 were invited. Dutch gynecologists specializing in gynecologic oncology were also invited. We based the selection for attributes in the vignettes on literature and interviews: risk of complications of SLN mapping; chance of finding a metastasis; survival gain; risk of complications after radiotherapy; operation time; and hospital of surgery (travel time). We developed a questionnaire with 18 hypothetical scenarios. Each attribute level varied and for each scenario, participants were asked how strongly they would prefer SLN on a scale from 1 to 7. The strength of preference for each scenario was analyzed using linear mixed effects models.ResultsA total of 38% of patients (41/108) and 33% of gynecologists (42/126) participated in the study. Overall, they had a preference for SLN. The mean preference for patients was 4.29 (95% CI 3.72 to 4.85) and 4.39 (95% CI 3.99 to 4.78) for gynecologists. Patients’ preferences increased from 3.4 in the case of no survival gain to 4.9 in the case of 3-year survival gain (P<0.05) and it decreased when travel time increased to >60 min (−0.4, P=0.024), or with an increased risk of complications after adjuvant radiotherapy (−0.6, P=0.002). For gynecologists all attributes except travel time were important.ConclusionsOverall, patients and gynecologists were in favor of SLN mapping in low- and intermediate-risk endometrial cancer. Most important to patients were survival gain, travel time, and complication risk after adjuvant radiotherapy. These preferences should be taken into account when counseling about SLN mapping.