Comparing the Relative Importance of Attributes of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatments to Patients and Physicians in the United States: A Discrete-Choice Experiment

Juan Marcos González, Justin Doan, David J. Gebben, Marco Boeri and Mayer Fishman
Additional contact information
Juan Marcos González: Duke University
Justin Doan: Bristol-Myers Squibb
David J. Gebben: RTI Health Solutions
Mayer Fishman: Moffitt Cancer Center

PharmacoEconomics, 2018, vol. 36, issue 8, No 8, 973-986

Abstract: Abstract Objectives Value assessments of new treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) should include outcomes that are most important to patients. This study aimed to quantify and compare the conditional relative importance of the attributes of RCC treatments to patients and physicians in the United States. Methods Patients with RCC and physicians who treat RCC completed an online discrete-choice experiment survey with a fractional factorial D-optimal experimental design. In a series of 12 questions, respondents chose between two hypothetical treatments defined in terms of six attributes: progression-free survival (PFS), probability of living ≥ 3 years (PL3Y), skin reactions, severity of fatigue, mode of administration, and monthly co-payment. Treatment choices were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model to estimate relative preference weights for the attribute levels and conditional relative attribute importance (i.e. the importance of an attribute relative to all other attributes conditional on the range of levels of that attribute). Results Overall, 201 patients and 142 physicians completed the survey. For both patients and physicians, PL3Y was the attribute with the greatest and statistically significant conditional relative importance. Estimates of the conditional relative importance of PFS, skin reactions, and mode of administration for patients, and for PFS and mode of administration for physicians, were not statistically significant. The preferences for improvements in PFS were independent of the level of PL3Y for both patients and physicians. Conditional relative attribute importance varied by patient disease stage. Conclusions Patients and physicians indicated that PL3Y was the most important treatment attribute and was significantly more important than PFS. Importance rankings differed between physicians and patients and between all patients and those with advanced/metastatic disease.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-018-0640-7 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:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-018-0640-7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0640-7

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().