Search

Simon Fifer,1 Jayne Galinsky,2 Sarah Richard3 1Community and Patient Preference Research (CaPPRe), Sydney, NSW, Australia; 2Myeloma UK, Edinburgh, Scotland; 3PRMA, Edinburgh, ScotlandCorrespondence: Simon FiferCommunity and Patient Preference Research (CaPPRe), Sydney, NSW, AustraliaTel +61 403 862 091Email simon.fifer@cappre.com.auBackground: Myeloma is an incurable life-threatening hematological cancer. Recent treatment developments have seen improvements in survival; however, while patients are living longer, they are living with symptoms and treatment side effects.Objective: To evaluate myeloma patients’ preferences for treatment using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This study set out to define the relative importance of key treatment attributes, characterize the risk-benefit trade-offs in patients’ decision-making, and to analyze the predictive power of basic demographic factors.Methods: Four hundred seventy-five myeloma patients in the UK were invited to participate by Myeloma UK. Data were collected using DCEs through an online survey. The DCEs presented patients with 10 choice scenarios, each with 2 treatment options described by 7 attributes, and a “no treatment” option. The DCE data were modelled using a latent class model (LCM). The effects of demographic characteristics were also examined.Results: Not surprisingly, average survival was most important to all patients but there were significant contrasts between the class preferences. The LCM revealed two classes of patients. Patients in Class 1 placed greater importance on average survival and mild-to-moderate side effects, whereas patients in Class 2 focused on the mode of administration and the average out-of-pocket costs. Patients living with others and those diagnosed in the last 5 years were more likely to be in Class 1.Conclusion: Different treatment features were not valued equally among all myeloma patients. This has important implications for healthcare policy decisions and could be used to guide decisions around the value of new myeloma medicines.Keywords: discrete choice experiment, patient preferences, myeloma, health technology assessment, dashboards

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, functioning, and other health-related quality-of-life concepts are gaining a more prominent role in the benefit-risk assessment of cancer therapies. However, varying ways of analysing, presenting, and interpreting PRO data could lead to erroneous and inconsistent decisions on the part of stakeholders, adversely affecting patient care and outcomes. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints in Cancer Clinical Trials-Innovative Medicines Initiative (SISAQOL-IMI) Consortium builds on the existing SISAQOL work to establish recommendations on design, analysis, presentation, and interpretation for PRO data in cancer clinical trials, with an expanded set of topics, including more in-depth recommendations for randomised controlled trials and single-arm studies, and for defining clinically meaningful change. This Policy Review presents international stakeholder views on the need for SISAQOL-IMI, the agreed on and prioritised set of PRO objectives, and a roadmap to ensure that international consensus recommendations are achieved., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SR is a current employee of Pfizer and a former employee of Novartis Pharma. JC, PC, and JR are current employees of Pfizer. VP and IG are current employees of EMD Serono. MS is a current employee of Merk. GV has received consulting fees or payment from or related to the following organisations: Pfizer, Eisai, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group, and the EORTC Board. KO's organisation has received sponsorship funding or grants for various annual programmes and activities from Bristol Myers Squibb, Novocure, Pfizer, Bayer, Novartis, Northwest Biotherapeutics, Karyopharm, MagForce, Medac, Photonamic, Apogenix, Elekta, and GW Pharmaceuticals/Jazz Pharmaceuticals; consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis; and honoraria from Sanofi, Sharing Progress in Cancer Care, and Seagen. KO participated in an advisory board for Novartis, Novocure, Seagen, Eisai, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Sanofi, and has leadership roles in a number of organisations. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic required clinicians to care for a disease with evolving characteristics while also adhering to care changes (e.g., physical distancing practices) that might lead to diagnostic errors (DEs)., Objective: To determine the frequency of DEs and their causes among patients hospitalized under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19., Design: Retrospective cohort., Setting: Eight medical centers affiliated with the Hospital Medicine ReEngineering Network (HOMERuN)., Target Population: Adults hospitalized under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19 infection between February and July 2020., Measurements: We randomly selected up to 8 cases per site per month for review, with each case reviewed by two clinicians to determine whether a DE (defined as a missed or delayed diagnosis) occurred, and whether any diagnostic process faults took place. We used bivariable statistics to compare patients with and without DE and multivariable models to determine which process faults or patient factors were associated with DEs., Results: Two hundred and fifty-seven patient charts underwent review, of which 36 (14%) had a diagnostic error. Patients with and without DE were statistically similar in terms of socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, risk factors for COVID-19, and COVID-19 test turnaround time and eventual positivity. Most common diagnostic process faults contributing to DE were problems with clinical assessment, testing choices, history taking, and physical examination (all p < 0.01). Diagnostic process faults associated with policies and procedures related to COVID-19 were not associated with DE risk. Fourteen patients (35.9% of patients with errors and 5.4% overall) suffered harm or death due to diagnostic error., Limitations: Results are limited by available documentation and do not capture communication between providers and patients., Conclusion: Among PUI patients, DEs were common and not associated with pandemic-related care changes, suggesting the importance of more general diagnostic process gaps in error propagation., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Given the rapid increase in novel treatments for patients with multiple myeloma (MM), this patient preference study aimed to establish which treatment attributes matter most to MM patients and evaluate discrete choice experiment (DCE) and swing weighting (SW) as two elicitation methods for quantifying patients' preferences., Methods: A survey incorporating DCE and SW was disseminated among European MM patients. The survey included attributes and levels informed by a previous qualitative study with 24 MM patients. Latent class and mixed logit models were used to estimate the DCE attribute weights and descriptive analyses were performed to derive SW weights. MM patients and patient organisations provided extensive feedback during survey development., Results: 393 MM patients across 21 countries completed the survey ( M years since diagnosis =6; M previous therapies =3). Significant differences (p<.01) between participants' attribute weights were revealed depending on participants' prior therapy experience, and their experience with side-effects and symptoms. Multivariate analyses showed that participants across the three MM patient classes identified via the latent class model differed regarding their past number of therapies ( F =4.772, p =.009). Patients with the most treatments (class 1) and those with the least treatments (class 3) attached more value to life expectancy versus quality of life-related attributes such as pain, mobility and thinking problems. Conversely, patients with intermediary treatment experience (class 2) attached more value to quality of life-related attributes versus life expectancy. Participants highlighted the difficulty of trading-off between life expectancy and quality of life and between physical and mental health. Participants expressed a need for greater psychological support to cope with their symptoms, treatment side-effects, and uncertainties. With respect to patients' preferences for the DCE or SW questions, 42% had no preference, 32% preferred DCE, and 25% preferred SW., Conclusions: Quality of life-related attributes affecting MM patients' physical, mental and psychological health such as pain, mobility and thinking problems were considered very important to MM patients, next to life expectancy. This underscores a need to include such attributes in decision-making by healthcare stakeholders involved in MM drug development, evidence generation, evaluation, and clinical practice. This study highlights DCE as the preferred methodology for understanding relative attribute weights from a patient's perspective., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Janssens, Lang, Vallejo, Galinsky, Morgan, Plate, De Ronne, Verschueren, Schoefs, Vanhellemont, Delforge, Schjesvold, Cabezudo, Vandebroek, Stevens, Simoens and Huys.)

Background: Investigational and marketed drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) are associated with a range of characteristics and uncertainties regarding long term side-effects and efficacy. This raises questions about what matters most to patients living with this disease. This study aimed to understand which characteristics MM patients find most important, and hence should be included as attributes and levels in a subsequent quantitative preference survey among MM patients. Methods: This qualitative study involved: (i) a scoping literature review, (ii) discussions with MM patients ( n = 24) in Belgium, Finland, Romania, and Spain using Nominal Group Technique , (iii) a qualitative thematic analysis including multi-stakeholder discussions. Results: MM patients voiced significant expectations and hopes that treatments would extend their lives and reduce their cancer signs and symptoms. Participants however raised concerns about life-threatening side-effects that could cause permanent organ damage. Bone fractures and debilitating neuropathic effects (such as chronic tingling sensations) were highlighted as major issues reducing patients' independence and mobility. Patients discussed the negative impact of the following symptoms and side-effects on their daily activities: thinking problems, increased susceptibility to infections, reduced energy, pain, emotional problems, and vision problems. MM patients were concerned with uncertainties regarding the durability of positive treatment outcomes, and the cause, severity, and duration of their symptoms and side-effects. Patients feared short-term positive treatment responses complicated by permanent, severe side-effects and symptoms. Conclusions: This study gained an in-depth understanding of the treatment and disease-related characteristics and types of attribute levels (severity, duration) that are most important to MM patients. Results from this study argue in favor of MM drug development and individual treatment decision-making that focuses not only on extending patients' lives but also on addressing those symptoms and side-effects that significantly impact MM patients' quality of life. This study underscores a need for transparent communication toward MM patients about MM treatment outcomes and uncertainties regarding their long-term efficacy and safety. Finally, this study may help drug developers and decision-makers understand which treatment outcomes and uncertainties are most important to MM patients and therefore should be incorporated in MM drug development, evaluation, and clinical practice., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Janssens, Lang, Vallejo, Galinsky, Plate, Morgan, Cabezudo, Silvennoinen, Coriu, Badelita, Irimia, Anttonen, Manninen, Schoefs, Vandebroek, Vanhellemont, Delforge, Stevens, Simoens and Huys.)

Objective: This study examined productivity losses in European patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), to better understand and model the impact of NDMM and lenalidomide maintenance therapy on productivity from a patient and societal perspective., Methods: A cross-sectional online patient survey was conducted across the UK, Germany, France, Spain and Italy. A partitioned survival model was used to estimate productivity loss and the impact of maintenance therapy, using human capital (HC) and friction cost approaches., Results: Of the 115 eligible survey respondents, 76.5% were economically active at the time of diagnosis and highlighted return to work as an important factor affecting their quality of life; only 39.1% of respondents were economically active post-ASCT. HC analyses estimated average total productivity losses per ASCT patient at EUR 290,601 over a 20-year period. Modelling the impact of maintenance therapy alone for these patients reduced average productivity losses by just over 10%., Conclusion: Patients with NDMM aspire to engage in productive lives post-ASCT, but most are unable to do so. Access to treatments extending remission and supporting engagement in a productive life can have a positive impact both for patients and wider society., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Few studies explore stroke survivor views and motivations towards stem cell therapy (SCT). This qualitative study explores the views and motivations of both stroke survivors and their partners/carers towards a proposed 2-arm Phase III Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) comparing intracerebral insertion of stem cells with placebo neurosurgery in stroke survivors with disability., Objective: To explore views and motivations towards a proposed 2-arm stem cell trial and identify factors that may impede and enhance participation., Design: This study adopts a naturalistic design to explore the complexity of this field, employing a participatory action-research approach comprising a specialized Conversation (World) Café form of focus group. Data were collected via 5 Conversation Cafés with stroke survivors (age 40-75) and partners/carers between June and October 2016. Of 66 participants, 53 (31 male, 22 female) were stroke survivors and 13 (6 female, 7 male) were partners/carers. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic approach., Discussion and Conclusion: Stroke survivor views and motivations reflect anticipation of the personal and future benefits of regenerative medicine. Partners/carers sought to balance the value of stroke survivor hope with carrying the weight of hope as carer, a conflict burden adding to known caregiver burden. All participants expressed the need for during and post-trial psychological support. This study provides a rare opportunity to explore the prospective views and motivations of stroke survivors and their partners/carers towards a proposed Phase III 2-arm RCT. This adds weight to qualitative evidence exploring capacity, consent, decision making, perceptions of treatment risk and supports required for clinical trial participation., (© 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The objectives of this study were to elicit the preferences of patients with multiple myeloma regarding the possible benefits and risks of cancer treatments and to illustrate how such data may be used to estimate patients' acceptance of new treatments., Patients and Methods: Patients with multiple myeloma from the cancer charity Myeloma UK were invited to participate in an online survey based on multicriteria decision analysis and swing weighting to elicit individual stated preferences for the following attributes: (a) 1-year progression-free survival (PFS, ranging from 50% to 90%), (b) mild or moderate toxicity for 2 months or longer (ranging from 85% to 45%), and (c) severe or life-threatening toxicity (ranging from 80% to 20%)., Results: A total of 560 participants completed the survey. The average weight given to PFS was 0.54, followed by 0.32 for severe or life-threatening toxicity and 0.14 for mild or moderate chronic toxicity. Participants who ranked severe or life-threatening toxicity above mild or moderate chronic toxicity (56%) were more frequently younger, working, and looking after dependent family members and had more frequently experienced severe or life-threatening side effects. The amount of weight given to PFS did not depend on any of the collected covariates. The feasibility of using the collected preference data to estimate the patients' acceptance of specific multiple myeloma treatments was demonstrated in a subsequent decision analysis example., Conclusion: Stated preference studies provide a systematic approach to gain knowledge about the distribution of preferences in the population and about what this implies for patients' acceptance of specific treatments., Implications for Practice: This study demonstrated how quantitative preference statements from a large group of participants can be collected through an online survey and how such information may be used to explore the acceptability of specific treatments based on the attributes studied. Results from such studies have the potential to become an important new tool for gathering patient views and studying heterogeneity in preferences in a systematic way, along with other methods, such as focus groups and expert opinions., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2017.)

Background: This article reports the results of a service evaluation designed to assess children's dream fulfillment charity, Dreams Come True., Aims and Objectives: With the objective to gain the opinions of those who have used and are involved with the charity, parents (n=10), staff (n=10), and key informants (n=18) were asked what the charity does most and least well., Method: Focus group meetings using the nominal group technique were held for parents and staff and an email survey was sent to key informants., Results: Conclusions, in the form of voted responses to the question of what the charity does most and least well are presented., Conclusions: Popular themes arising from each group were the benefit of dreams, the importance of empathy, staff communication, and fundraising. Implications for the charity and third sector are discussed.