Search

Candice Yong,1 M Janelle Cambron-Mellott,2 Brian Seal,1 Oliver Will,2 Martine C Maculaitis,2 Kelly Clapp,2 Emily Mulvihill,2 Ion Cotarla,1 Ranee Mehra3 1AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA; 2Cerner Enviza, Malvern, PA, USA; 3University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD, USACorrespondence: M Janelle Cambron-MellottCerner Enviza, 51 Valley Stream Pkwy, Malvern, PA, 19355, USATel +1 816 201 2190Email Janelle.CambronMellott@cernerenviza.comPurpose: The approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic non-small-cell lung carcinomas (mNSCLC) treatment has presented more care options. Therefore, it is important to identify the benefit-risk trade-offs patients and caregivers are willing to make among potential treatment options. This study quantified the preferences of patients and caregivers for attributes of mNSCLC treatment.Methods: Patients with mNSCLC and caregivers completed an online survey assessing preferences using a discrete choice experiment. Respondents chose between hypothetical treatment profiles, with varying levels for 7 attributes associated with first-line treatment, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, select adverse events (AEs), and regimen (caregivers). Hierarchical Bayesian modeling was used to estimate attribute-level preference weights.Results: Patients (n = 308) and caregivers (n = 166) most valued increasing OS from 11 to 30 months, followed by decreasing the risk of a serious AE (grade 3/4) that may lead to hospitalization from 70% to 18%. These attributes were over twice as important to both sets of respondents as the other attributes measured. Patients and caregivers would accept increases in the risks of a serious AE (grade 3/4) from 18% to 70% and all grades nausea from 10% to 69% if OS increased by 16.8 and 4.0 months, respectively. The least valued attributes were all grades of pneumonitis (patients) and all grades of skin rash (caregivers).Conclusion: Patients and caregivers are willing to make trade-offs between efficacy and toxicity and may require up to 1.5 years of increased OS to accept a higher risk of AEs. These results can provide guidance to oncologists when engaging in shared-decision making discussions.Keywords: immune checkpoint inhibitors, metastases, non-small-cell lung carcinomas, overall survival, patient preference, toxicities

M Janelle Cambron-Mellott,1 Jaromir Mikl,2 Joana E Matos,1 Jennifer G Erensen,2 Kathleen Beusterien,1 Marc J Cataldo,2 Bernadette Hallissey,1 Gregory W Mattingly3– 5 1Kantar Health, New York, NY, USA; 2Purdue Pharma L.P./Adlon Therapeutics, L.P., Stamford, CT, USA; 3Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA; 4Midwest Research Group, St. Charles, MO, USA; 5St. Charles Psychiatric Associates, St. Charles, MO, USACorrespondence: M Janelle Cambron-MellottKantar Health, 3 World Trade Center, 175 Greenwich Street, 35th Floor, New York, NY, 10007, USATel +1 212 706 3961Email janelle.cambron-mellott@kantar.comBackground and Objective: Treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) requires a multifaceted approach including psychosocial interventions and pharmacological treatment. This study evaluates preferences for specific attributes associated with different long-acting stimulant treatment among US adults with ADHD.Methods: Patients completed an online, cross-sectional survey, incorporating a discrete choice experiment to assess preferences for attributes.Results: Analyses included 200 adults with ADHD (mean age 33.0 years; 60% self-reporting moderate severity); the mean (SD) Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale-v1.1 score was 45.9 (12.4). Overall, patients valued speed of onset most and risk of rebound least. Three population groups with distinct preferences were identified: side effect-driven (n=69, 35%), quick onset-driven (n=47, 24%) and quick onset and long duration-driven (n=84, 42%).Conclusion: This study shows differences in how adults with ADHD value and assess benefit-risk trade-offs when considering the desired attributes of stimulant treatments, highlighting the importance of patient-physician shared decision-making to optimize the desired benefits of individualized treatment.Keywords: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, choice behavior, CNS stimulants, discrete choice experiment, patient preference