Top

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology

Published in:

01-03-2016 | Original Article – Clinical Oncology

Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment

Authors: Alex Z. Fu, Kristi D. Graves, Roxanne E. Jensen, John L. Marshall, Margaret Formoso, Arnold L. Potosky

Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology | Issue 3/2016

Abstract

Purpose

Some medical treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) may have marginal survival benefit, but cause toxicities. The purpose of this study is to determine metastatic CRC patients’ tradeoffs in making a decision to undergo new medical treatment.

Methods

We conducted a survey of patients with a diagnosis of advanced CRC who were currently receiving or completed one chemotherapy regimen. First, patients were asked to rate the importance of 15 medical treatment-related adverse events that may arise as a consequence of chemotherapy or biological therapy in their treatment decision-making. Then, the patient identified his or her top five most important events and solicited preferences in hypothetical metastatic CRC treatment vignettes using the standard gamble technique.

Results

A total of 107 patients responded to the survey. From the list of medical treatment-related adverse events, patients identified clinically serious ones such as stroke, heart attack, and gastrointestinal perforation as the most important in their medical treatment decision-making, yet placed lower willingness to tolerate symptom-related events such as pain, fatigue, and depression. Generally, patients who were older, stage III versus IV and who had prior radiotherapy, lower educational attainment, and lower household income (all p <0.05) were less willing to tolerate any medical treatment-related adverse events after adjusting for other demographic and clinical characteristics.

Conclusions

Variations in patients’ willingness to tolerate different treatment-related adverse events underscore the need for improved communications between physicians and patients about the risks and benefits of their medical treatment, which helps make a more personalized decision for metastatic CRC treatment.

Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti AE (eds) (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, Berlin

Arora NK, Hesse BW, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, Clayman ML, Croyle RT (2008) Frustrated and confused: the American public rates its cancer-related information-seeking experiences. J Gen Intern Med 23:223–228PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Audrey S, Abel J, Blazeby JM, Falk S, Campbell R (2008) What oncologists tell patients about survival benefits of palliative chemotherapy and implications for informed consent: qualitative study. BMJ 337:a752PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Back A, Arnold RM, Baile WF, Tulsky JA, Fryer-Edwards K (2010) Improving oncologists’ communication skills. http://depts.washington.edu/oncotalk. Accessed 20 Dec 2013

Choueiri TK, Mayer EL, Je Y et al (2011) Congestive heart failure risk in patients with breast cancer treated with bevacizumab. J Clin Oncol 29:632–638CrossRefPubMed

CMS (2014) Clinical quality measures. http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/EHRIncentivePrograms/ClinicalQualityMeasures.html

Cowen ME, Miles BJ, Cahill DF, Giesler RB, Beck JR, Kattan MW (1998) The danger of applying group-level utilities in decision analyses of the treatment of localized prostate cancer in individual patients. Med Decis Making 18:376–380CrossRefPubMed

Craig BM, Reeve BB, Cella D, Hays RD, Pickard AS, Revicki DA (2014) Demographic differences in health preferences in the United States. Med Care 52:307–313PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Epner DE, Baile WF (2014) Difficult conversations: teaching medical oncology trainees communication skills one hour at a time. Acad Med 89:578–584CrossRefPubMed

Fischer G, Kamlet MS, Fienberg S, Schkade D (1986) Risk preference for gains and losses in multiple objective decision making. Manag Sci 31:1065–1086CrossRef

Fu AZ, Kattan MW (2006) Racial and ethnic differences in preference-based health status measure. Curr Med Res Opin 22:2439–2448CrossRefPubMed

Galfrascoli E, Piva S, Cinquini M et al (2011) Risk/benefit profile of bevacizumab in metastatic colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Liver Dis 43:286–294CrossRefPubMed

Ganz P (2015) Quality of cancer care, plenary address. Washington, DC, world congress of psycho-oncology, from national to global: implementing the standard of psychosocial care in oncology

Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH (2001) Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med 52:1865–1878CrossRefPubMed

Goelz T, Wuensch A, Stubenrauch S et al (2011) Specific training program improves oncologists’ palliative care communication skills in a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 29:3402–3407CrossRefPubMed

Grothey A, Van CE, Sobrero A et al (2013) Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 381:303–312CrossRefPubMed

Hahn EA, Cella D, Dobrez DG et al (2007) The impact of literacy on health-related quality of life measurement and outcomes in cancer outpatients. Qual Life Res 16:495–507CrossRefPubMed

Harris KA (1998) The informational needs of patients with cancer and their families. Cancer Pract 6:39–46CrossRefPubMed

Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W et al (2004) Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2335–2342CrossRefPubMed

Institute of Medicine (2013) Delivering high-quality cancer care: charting a new course for a system in crisis. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Kaldjian LC, Curtis AE, Shinkunas LA, Cannon KT (2008) Goals of care toward the end of life: a structured literature review. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 25:501–511CrossRefPubMed

Kattan MW (2003) Comparing treatment outcomes using utility assessment for health-related quality of life. Oncology (Williston Park) 17:1687–1693

Kattan MW, Cowen ME, Miles BJ (1997) A decision analysis for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Gen Intern Med 12:299–305PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Laryionava K, Heussner P, Hiddemann W, Winkler EC (2015) Framework for timing of the discussion about forgoing cancer-specific treatment based on a qualitative study with oncologists. Support Care Cancer 23:715–721CrossRefPubMed

Leighl NB, Butow PN, Tattersall MH (2004) Treatment decision aids in advanced cancer: when the goal is not cure and the answer is not clear. J Clin Oncol 22:1759–1762CrossRefPubMed

Leighl NB, Shepherd HL, Butow PN et al (2011) Supporting treatment decision making in advanced cancer: a randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with advanced colorectal cancer considering chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 29:2077–2084CrossRefPubMed

Ness RM, Holmes A, Klein R, Greene J, Dittus R (1998) Outcome states of colorectal cancer: identification and description using patient focus groups. Am J Gastroenterol 93:1491–1497PubMed

Ness RM, Holmes AM, Klein R, Dittus R (1999) Utility valuations for outcome states of colorectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 94:1650–1657CrossRefPubMed

O’Connor AM, Rostom A, Fiset V et al (1999) Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ 319:731–734PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Prigerson HG, Bao Y, Shah MA et al (2015) Chemotherapy use, performance status, and quality of life at the end of life. JAMA Oncol 1:778–784CrossRefPubMed

Ramlau R, Gorbunova V, Ciuleanu TE et al (2012) Aflibercept and Docetaxel versus Docetaxel alone after platinum failure in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized, controlled phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 30:3640–3647CrossRefPubMed

Ross PL, Littenberg B, Fearn P, Scardino PT, Karakiewicz PI, Kattan MW (2003) Paper standard gamble: a paper-based measure of standard gamble utility for current health. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 19:135–147CrossRefPubMed

Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J et al (2008) Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 358:1250–1261CrossRefPubMed

Semenza GL (2008) A new weapon for attacking tumor blood vessels. N Engl J Med 358:2066–2067CrossRefPubMed

Street RL Jr, Voigt B (1997) Patient participation in deciding breast cancer treatment and subsequent quality of life. Med Decis Making 17:298–306CrossRefPubMed

Stryker JE, Wray RJ, Emmons KM, Winer E, Demetri G (2006) Understanding the decisions of cancer clinical trial participants to enter research studies: factors associated with informed consent, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret. Patient Educ Couns 63:104–109CrossRefPubMed

Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF, Ghushchyan V (2005) A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Care 43:736–749CrossRefPubMed

Torrance GW (1987) Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chronic Dis 40:593–603CrossRefPubMed

Walling A, Lorenz KA, Dy SM et al (2008) Evidence-based recommendations for information and care planning in cancer care. J Clin Oncol 26:3896–3902CrossRefPubMed

Weeks JC, Catalano PJ, Cronin A et al (2012) Patients’ expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer. N Engl J Med 367:1616–1625PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Wright AA, Zhang B, Ray A et al (2008) Associations between end-of-life discussions, patient mental health, medical care near death, and caregiver bereavement adjustment. JAMA 300:1665–1673PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Zafar SY, Malin JL, Grambow SC et al (2013) Chemotherapy use and patient treatment preferences in advanced colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study. Cancer 119:854–862PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Title: Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment
Authors: Alex Z. Fu
Kristi D. Graves
Roxanne E. Jensen
John L. Marshall
Margaret Formoso
Arnold L. Potosky
Publication date: 01-03-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 0171-5216
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1335
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-015-2073-4

Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin

Prof. Florian Limbourg

Prof. Anoop Chauhan

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

Improved health perception after genetic counselling for women at high risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer: construction of new questionnaires—an Italian exploratory study

Radionuclide therapy using 131I-labeled anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted nanoparticles suppresses cancer cell growth caused by EGFR overexpression

MicroRNA-206 functions as a tumor suppressor in colorectal cancer by targeting FMNL2

TH and DCX mRNAs in peripheral blood and bone marrow predict outcome in metastatic neuroblastoma patients

A novel long noncoding RNA-LOWEG is low expressed in gastric cancer and acts as a tumor suppressor by inhibiting cell invasion

Caveolae as a target to quench autoinduction of the metastatic phenotype in lung cancer

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

At a glance: The STEP trials