Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2020

01-02-2020 | Melanoma | Melanoma

Preferences for Immunotherapy in Melanoma: A Systematic Review

Authors: Ann Livingstone, RN, MHSM, GradDipHlthEc, Anupriya Agarwal, MBBS, FRACP, Martin R. Stockler, MBBS(Hons), MSc(Clin Epi), FRACP, Alexander M. Menzies, BSc(Med), MBBS(Hons), FRACP, PhD, Kirsten Howard, BSc(Hons I), MAppSci(Biopharm), MPH, MHlthEc, PhD, Rachael L. Morton, MScMed(Clin Epi)(Hons), PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 2/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Immunotherapy improves overall survival for patients with metatstatic melanoma and improves recurrence–free survival in the adjuvant setting, but is costly and has adverse effects. Little is known about the preferences of patients and clinicians regarding immunotherapy. This study aimed to identify factors important to patients and clinicians when deciding about immunotherapy for stages 2–4 melanoma.

Methods

This study searched the Medline, EMBASE, ECONLIT, PsychINFO, and COCHRANE Systematic Reviews databases from inception to June 2018 for immunotherapy choice and preference studies. Findings were tabulated and summarized, and study reporting was assessed against recommended checklists.

Results

This investigation identified eight studies assessing preferences for melanoma treatment; four studies regarding nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or ipilimumab; and four studies regarding interferon conducted in the United States, Germany, and Australia. The following 10 factors were important to decision-making: overall survival, recurrence-free survival, treatment side effects, dosing regimen, patient or payer cost, patient age, clinician or family/friend treatment recommendation, quality of life, and psychosocial effects. Overall survival was the most important factor for all respondents. The patients judged severe toxicities to be tolerable for small survival gains. The description of information about treatment harms and benefits was limited in most studies.

Conclusions

Overall survival was of primary importance to patients and clinicians considering immunotherapy. Impaired quality of life due to adverse effects appeared to be a second-order consideration. Future research is required to determine preferences for contemporary combination therapies, extended treatment durations, and avoidance of chronic side effects.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42018095899.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration, Fitzmaurice C, Allen C et al. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life years for 32 cancer groups, 1990 to 2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:524–48.CrossRef Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration, Fitzmaurice C, Allen C et al. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life years for 32 cancer groups, 1990 to 2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:524–48.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Gershenwald JE, Hess KR, Sondak VK, et al. (2017) Melanoma staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 67:472–92.CrossRef Gershenwald JE, Hess KR, Sondak VK, et al. (2017) Melanoma staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 67:472–92.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:522–30.CrossRef Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:522–30.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Eggermont AMM, Blank CU, Mandala M, et al. Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1789–801.CrossRef Eggermont AMM, Blank CU, Mandala M, et al. Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1789–801.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1824–35.CrossRef Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1824–35.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, et al. The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient’s experience. Oncologist. 2013;18:381–90.CrossRef Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, et al. The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient’s experience. Oncologist. 2013;18:381–90.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.CrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health–a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14:403–13.CrossRef Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health–a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14:403–13.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e297.CrossRef Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e297.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ryan M, Gerard, K, Amaya-Amaya, M. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Springer, New York, 2008.CrossRef Ryan M, Gerard, K, Amaya-Amaya, M. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Springer, New York, 2008.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Gafni A. The standard gamble method: what is being measured and how it is interpreted. Health Services Res. 1994;29:207–24. Gafni A. The standard gamble method: what is being measured and how it is interpreted. Health Services Res. 1994;29:207–24.
17.
go back to reference Beusterien K, Middleton MR, Wang PF, et al. Patient and physician preferences for treating adjuvant melanoma: a discrete choice experiment. J Cancer Ther. 2017;08:37–50.CrossRef Beusterien K, Middleton MR, Wang PF, et al. Patient and physician preferences for treating adjuvant melanoma: a discrete choice experiment. J Cancer Ther. 2017;08:37–50.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Bramlette TB, Lawson DH, Washington CV, et al. Interferon alfa-2b or not 2b? Significant differences exist in the decision-making process between melanoma patients who accept or decline high-dose adjuvant interferon alfa-2b treatment. Dermatol Surg. 2007;33:11–6.PubMed Bramlette TB, Lawson DH, Washington CV, et al. Interferon alfa-2b or not 2b? Significant differences exist in the decision-making process between melanoma patients who accept or decline high-dose adjuvant interferon alfa-2b treatment. Dermatol Surg. 2007;33:11–6.PubMed
19.
go back to reference Kaehler KC, Blome C, Forschner A, et al. Preferences of German melanoma patients for interferon (IFN) alpha-2b toxicities (the DeCOG “GERMELATOX survey”) versus melanoma recurrence to quantify patients’ relative values for adjuvant therapy. Medicine. 2016;95:e5375.CrossRef Kaehler KC, Blome C, Forschner A, et al. Preferences of German melanoma patients for interferon (IFN) alpha-2b toxicities (the DeCOG “GERMELATOX survey”) versus melanoma recurrence to quantify patients’ relative values for adjuvant therapy. Medicine. 2016;95:e5375.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kahler KC, Blome C, Forschner A, et al. The outweigh of toxicity versus risk of recurrence for adjuvant interferon therapy: a survey in German melanoma patients and their treating physicians. Oncotarget. 2018;9:26217–25.CrossRef Kahler KC, Blome C, Forschner A, et al. The outweigh of toxicity versus risk of recurrence for adjuvant interferon therapy: a survey in German melanoma patients and their treating physicians. Oncotarget. 2018;9:26217–25.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Kilbridge KL, Weeks JC, Sober AJ, et al. Patient preferences for adjuvant interferon alfa-2b treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:812–23.CrossRef Kilbridge KL, Weeks JC, Sober AJ, et al. Patient preferences for adjuvant interferon alfa-2b treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:812–23.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Huynh E, Rose J, Lambides M, et al. Preferences for advanced melanoma immuno-oncology treatments. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2018;31:149. Huynh E, Rose J, Lambides M, et al. Preferences for advanced melanoma immuno-oncology treatments. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2018;31:149.
23.
go back to reference Krammer R, Heinzerling L. Therapy preferences in melanoma treatment: willingness to pay and preference of quality versus length of life of patients, physicians and healthy controls. PLoS One. 2014;9:e111237.CrossRef Krammer R, Heinzerling L. Therapy preferences in melanoma treatment: willingness to pay and preference of quality versus length of life of patients, physicians and healthy controls. PLoS One. 2014;9:e111237.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Mansfield C, Ndife B, Chen J, et al. Patient preferences for treatment of metastatic melanoma. Future Oncol. 2019;15:1255–68.CrossRef Mansfield C, Ndife B, Chen J, et al. Patient preferences for treatment of metastatic melanoma. Future Oncol. 2019;15:1255–68.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Preferences for Immunotherapy in Melanoma: A Systematic Review
Authors
Ann Livingstone, RN, MHSM, GradDipHlthEc
Anupriya Agarwal, MBBS, FRACP
Martin R. Stockler, MBBS(Hons), MSc(Clin Epi), FRACP
Alexander M. Menzies, BSc(Med), MBBS(Hons), FRACP, PhD
Kirsten Howard, BSc(Hons I), MAppSci(Biopharm), MPH, MHlthEc, PhD
Rachael L. Morton, MScMed(Clin Epi)(Hons), PhD
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07963-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2020 Go to the issue