Patient preferences and predicted relative uptake for targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: a discrete

Xin Yi Wong1, Andrew Qi Jun Lim2, Qianyu Shen1

  • 1Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Republic of Singapore.

Abstract

Insights

Metastatic colorectal cancer patients prioritize cost and side effect avoidance over progression-free survival. Many would not take their preferred treatment if it involved severe side effects, highlighting the need for shared decision-making.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Health Economics
  • Patient-Reported Outcomes

Background:

  • Ras wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment involves anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR agents.
  • Patient preferences are crucial for optimizing treatment selection in mCRC.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To estimate patient preferences for mCRC treatments.
  • To determine the relative importance of cost, efficacy, side effects, and convenience.
  • To assess uptake of Bevacizumab- and Cetuximab-like profiles.

Main Methods:

  • Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) administered to Stage 2/3 colon cancer patients.
  • Attributes included progression-free survival (PFS), skin rashes, bleeding, cost, and administration frequency.
  • Mixed logit model used to calculate preference weights.

Main Results:

  • Cost was the most heavily weighted attribute, followed by bleeding and skin rashes, then PFS and administration frequency.
  • A scenario with shorter PFS but less severe side effects had higher uptake (55%).
  • One quarter of respondents would not take their preferred treatment due to side effects.

Conclusions:

  • Patients are willing to trade efficacy for reduced side effect severity.
  • Shared decision-making is vital to align treatment choices with patient priorities and circumstances.
  • Understanding patient trade-offs between benefits and risks is essential for effective mCRC management.