A Novel Approach to Computing Preference Estimates for Different Treatment Pathways: An Application in Oncology

Kathleen Beusterien (), Oliver Will, Emuella Flood, Susan McCutcheon, deMauri S. Mackie and Stella Mokiou
Additional contact information
Kathleen Beusterien: Oracle
Oliver Will: Oracle
Emuella Flood: AstraZeneca
Susan McCutcheon: AstraZeneca
deMauri S. Mackie: Oracle
Stella Mokiou: AstraZeneca

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2024, vol. 17, issue 4, No 5, 397-406

Abstract: Abstract Background Patients with cancer may progress through multiple treatments with differing adverse effect profiles. Moreover, pathways may be fixed or flexible in allowing for escalation or de-escalation of treatment depending on interim outcomes. We sought to develop a methodology capable of estimating preferences for the entirety of a pathway involving a sequence of different treatments. Methods Patients with early breast cancer completed an online discrete choice experiment to assess preferences for eight key early breast cancer attributes. Hierarchical Bayesian modeling was used to calculate attribute-level preference weights. Preference weights for hypothetical pathways were estimated by summing the respective weights for efficacy, flexible or fixed pathway, duration, administration regimen, and adverse event risk, the last two of which were time-adjusted by multiplying each weight by the proportion of time spent on a selected treatment. Results Increases in the risk of a serious adverse event were most influential in treatment pathway preferences, followed by increases in efficacy and decreases in overall pathway duration. Patients preferred a flexible pathway versus a fixed pathway. Pathway preference estimates fluctuated in a logically consistent manner. Switching from a flexible to a fixed pathway yielded a significantly lower pathway preference. For this same pathway, when adjuvant treatment was replaced with a treatment with a more favorable toxicity profile and shorter duration, it offset the negative impact of the more toxic neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions This novel methodology accounts for patient preference throughout a sequence of treatments, allowing for comparison of preferences across complex treatment pathways.

Date: 2024
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-024-00680-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00680-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-024-00680-z

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().