In:
BMJ Open, BMJ, Vol. 10, No. 2 ( 2020-02), p. e032336-
Abstract:
To evaluate physician risk-benefit preferences and trade-offs when making chemotherapy decisions for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design A discrete choice experiment (DCE). Settings Tertiary hospitals in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Chengdu of China. Participants The participants were 184 physicians (mean age of 37 years) with more than 1 year of NSCLC chemotherapy practice. Outcomes The DCE survey was constructed by six attributes: progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), risk of moderate side effects, risk of severe side effects, mode of administration and out-of-pocket costs. Physicians’ relative preferences and trade-offs in patient out-of-pocket costs for each attribute level were estimated using a mixed logit model, and interaction terms were added to the model to assess preferences variation among physicians with different sociodemographic factors. Results Physicians had the strongest preferences for improvements in PFS, followed by reducing the risk of severe side effects. The DCR, risk of moderate side effects and mode of administration were ranked in decreasing order of importance. There was little variation in preferences among physicians with different sociodemographic characteristics. Physicians were willing to trade $4814 (95% CI $4149 to $5480) of patient out-of-pocket costs per month for a chemotherapy that guaranteed 11 months of PFS, followed by $1908 (95% CI $1227 to $2539) for reducing the risk of severe side effects to 2%. Conclusions With regard to chemotherapy for patients with NSCLC, prolonging PFS, reducing severe and moderate side effects were primary considerations for physicians in China. The mode of administration and treatment costs significantly influenced physicians’ therapeutic decision. The current findings could add some evidence to inform NSCLC chemotherapy implementation and promote shared decision-making.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
2044-6055
,
2044-6055
DOI:
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032336
Language:
English
Publisher:
BMJ
Publication Date:
2020
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2599832-8
