Search

Background: In the treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) the combination of Immuno- Oncotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy (CT) has been found to be superior to IO or CT alone for patients’ survival. Patients and clinicians are confronted with a preference sensitive choice between a more aggressive treatment with a greater negative effect on quality of life versus alternatives that are less effective but have fewer side effects. Objectives: The aims of this study were to: (a) quantify patients’ preferences for relevant attributes related to Immuno-Oncotherapy treatment alternatives, and (b) evaluate the maximum acceptable risk (MAR)/Minimum acceptable benefit (MAB) that patients would accept for treatment alternatives. Methods: An online preference survey using discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was completed by NSCLC patients from two hospitals in Italy and Belgium. The survey asked patients’ preferences for five patient- relevant treatment attributes. The DCE was developed using a Bayesian D-efficient design. DCE analyses were performed using mixed logit models. Information regarding patient demographics, health literacy, locus of control, and quality of life was also collected. Results: 307 patients (158 Italian, 149 Belgian), stage I to IV, completed the survey. Patients preferred treatments with a higher 5-year survival chance as the most important attribute over all the other attributes. Preference heterogeneity for the attribute weights depended on health literacy, patients’ age and locus of control. Patients were willing to accept a substantially increased risks of developing side effects in exchange for the slightest increase (1%) in the chance of surviving at least 5 years from the diagnosis of cancer. Similarly, patients were willing to accept a switch in the mode of administration or complete loss of hair to obtain an increase in survival. Conclusion: In this study, the proportion of respondents who systematically preferred survival over all other

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perform, IMI-PREFER

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perfo

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and mortality following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy in patients with and without coronary artery disease (CAD).METHODS: Multicentre retrospective analysis of 1699 patients undergoing VATS lobectomy (January 2012-March 2015). CAD definition: previous acute myocardial infarct (AMI), angina, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). MACE definition: postoperative acute myocardial ischemia, cardiac arrest or any cardiac death. Propensity score analysis was performed to match patients with and without CAD. Outcomes of the 2 matched groups were compared.RESULTS: The incidence of MACE and mortality for the entire population was 0.4% (7 patients) and 1.7% (29 patients); 218 patients (13%) had a history of CAD: 106 previous AMI, 55 angina, 32 CABG, and 81 PCI. The propensity score yielded 2 well-balanced groups of 218 pairs with and without CAD. MACE (CAD 2 [0.9%] vs no-CAD 1 [0.5%]; P = 1), cardiovascular and pulmonary complications (CAD 61 [28%] vs no-CAD 51 [23%]; P = .3) and postoperative stay (CAD 7.3 days vs no-CAD 6.2 days; P = .3) were not different between the groups. The incidence of atrial fibrillation (CAD 31 [14%] vs no-CAD 18 [8.2%]; P = .07), 30-day mortality (CAD: 11 [5%] vs no-CAD 2 [0.9%]; P = .02) and death among complicated patients (CAD 18% vs no-CAD 3.9%; P = .009) were higher in the CAD group.CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of MACE following VATS lobectomy in patients with CAD is low and similar to patients without CAD. However, their risk of postoperative mortality is fivefold higher compared with non-CAD patients, warranting refined preoperative functional evaluation and more intense postoperative monitoring.