Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 10, 2025

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Patient and physician preferences for cancer panel testing in Japan: a best-worst scaling study
Yoshiyuki Suehara1,2, Kazuo Hasegawa3, Yoshiyuki Majima4
1Department of Medicine for Orthopaedics and Motor Organ, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Objective:
To examine the relative importance of the benefits and burdens of comprehensive genomic profiling testing from the perspectives of patients and physicians in Japan.
Design:
Cross-sectional preference elicitation via a mixed method centred on best-worst scaling (BWS) case 2 (profile case), including qualitative stages to define the attributes and pilot the survey.
Setting:
Online surveys for patients who are members of patient advocacy groups and for physicians registered with a survey panel.
Participants:
A preference study was conducted among 229 patients with lung or rare cancers and 329 physicians treating lung or rare cancers.
Primary And Secondary Outcome Measures:
BWS scores indicating patient and physician preferences for comprehensive genomic profiling tests.
Results:
The best benefit of panel testing for the patients was that all samples would yield results (coefficient 5.36). They also valued that the cost of the test paid directly by the patient is ¥0 (coefficient 5.28) and that a blood sample is used (coefficient 4.87). They perceived the cost of ¥800 000, duration of the testing process (3 months) and the lack of a detailed explanation of the test as the primary disadvantages (coefficients -0.45, reference level, 0.09, respectively). The physicians highlighted the following essential attributes for panel testing: all samples will yield results, a blood sample is used and a sample collected in the past is used (coefficients 4.66, 4.17, 4.10, respectively). In their view, the most negative attribute level was that the cost of the test is ¥800 000, followed by the duration of the testing process (3 months) and the possibility that 4 in 10 tests will not yield results due to a problem with the sample (coefficients -0.32, reference level, 0.41, respectively).
Conclusions:
The results of this study provide insights that will help patients and physicians improve the panel testing process. The results will also guide the further development of panel testing technologies and the optimisation of regulatory and healthcare policies.
Trial Registration Number:
NCT04607889.
More Related Videos
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
07:59Author Spotlight: Advancements in Molecular Biomarker Testing for Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Published on: September 8, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Survival Analysis
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...