Search

Background: Understanding how patients perceive the efficacy, safety, and administrative burden of treatments for metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can facilitate shared‐decision making for optimal management. This study sought to elicit patient preferences for mCRPC treatments in the US. Methods: We conducted a cross‐sectional survey using the discrete‐choice experiment method. Participants were asked to state their choices over successive sets of treatment alternatives, defined by varying levels of treatment attributes: overall survival (OS), months until patients develop a fracture or bone metastasis, likelihood of requiring radiation to control bone pain, fatigue, nausea, and administration (i.e., oral/IV injection/IV infusion). Using mixed logit models, we determined the value (i.e., preference weights) that respondents placed on each attribute. Relative attribute importance (RAI) and marginal rates of substitution (MRS) were calculated to understand patients' willingness to make tradeoffs among different attributes. Results: The final data set numbered 160 participants, with a mean age of 71.6 years old and a mean of 8.96 years since prostate cancer diagnosis. Participants' treatment preferences were as follows: OS (RAI: 31%), bone pain control (23%), nausea (16%), delaying fracture or bone metastasis (15%), fatigue (11%), and administration (3%). The MRS demonstrated that respondents were willing to trade 1.9 months of OS to eliminate moderate nausea and 3.3 months of OS for a reduction in fatigue from severe to mild. Conclusions: Improving OS is the highest priority for patients with mCRPC, but they are willing to trade some survival to reduce the risk of requiring radiation to control bone pain, delay a fracture or bone metastasis, and experience less severe nausea and fatigue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: It is important to assess healthcare providers (HCPs) knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and preferences towards new pneumococcal vaccines for adults., Methods: HCPs who met eligibility criteria completed an online survey between March - May 2024 that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences., Results: Among 340 participating HCPs, the average age was 44.9 years old, and the majority were male (55.6%), and White (85.3%). Most HCPs reported that they would support (90.3%) and implement (91.5%) a lower age-based recommendation for pneumococcal vaccines (from adults 65+ years to adults 50+ years). A majority of HCPs would offer a supplemental dose of a pneumococcal vaccine to high-risk adults 19-49 years, at-risk or high-risk adults 50-64 years, and adults 65+ years regardless of risk status to increase protection after completing the recommended series. DCE results showed that coverage of pneumococcal pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in adults 65+ years were the two most important attributes in evaluating pneumococcal vaccines., Conclusions: HCPs preferred a pneumococcal vaccine with increased coverage against pneumococcal pneumonia and IPD, and they supported lowering the age recommendation for pneumococcal vaccination as well as a supplemental vaccine dose to provide additional coverage for adults.