Virtual Library

Start Your Search

Ellen Janssen



Author of

  • +

    MA07 - Towards Survivorship: The Landscape, Supports and Barriers (ID 904)

    • Event: WCLC 2018
    • Type: Mini Oral Abstract Session
    • Track: Advocacy
    • Presentations: 1
    • Moderators:
    • Coordinates: 9/24/2018, 13:30 - 15:00, Room 205 AC
    • +

      MA07.02 - Line of Therapy and Patient Preferences Treating Lung Cancer: A Discrete-Choice Experiment (ID 14107)

      13:35 - 13:40  |  Author(s): Ellen Janssen

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background

      Patient preferences now play an important role in cancer research, regulatory science, and value assessment. While there is a growing literature exploring the preference of patients with lung cancer, few studies have explored how preferences vary with patients’ treatment experience. We sought to quantify patient preferences for the benefits and risks of therapy and explore how they vary across line of treatment.

      a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method

      Preferences were estimated using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) developed in partnership with a patient and stakeholder advisory boards. A D-optimal experimental design was used to generate 3 blocks of 9 choice tasks spanning five attributes: progression-free survival (PFS), short-term side effects, long-term side effects, risk of developing late-onset side effects, and mode of administration – each defined across 3 relevant levels. A diverse sample was recruited via email sent to the LUNGevity lung cancer patient database and via social media. A choice mode was estimated use a conditional logistic regression where the dependent variable was the respondents preferred treatment in each profile. The relative attribute importance (conditioned on the chosen attribute levels) was then compared across the respondents’ self-reported line of treatment.

      4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result

      In total we had 350 eligible respondents, of which 279 (80%) completed as least on DCE task of which 3% did not receive a pharmacotherapy, 39% received first line therapy, and 58% had two or more lines of theory. As with previous studies, PFS was the most important attribute for patients and was similarly valued (P=0.406) among first- and later (second lines and more) lines of treatment (33.4% v 33.8%). Patients on first-line treatment placed great emphasis (P<0.001) on long-term side (18.9% v 14.1%) and late onset side effects (15.3% v 10.3%), but less emphasis (P<0.001) on short-term side effects (27.8% v 29.8 %) and mode of administration (4.6% v 12.0%) than those on later lines.

      8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion

      Population estimate of patient preference remain important, but more effort is needed to understand how patient preference vary across patient with different backgrounds and treatment experiences. We show that line of treatment does not effect how patients value time, but their experience may have an impact on treatment characteristics. Latent class analysis may allow for the identification of groups with similar preferences that could allow for multivariate analyses to explain preference heterogeneity.

      6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    OA10 - Right Patient, Right Target & Right Drug - Novel Treatments and Research Partnerships (ID 910)

    • Event: WCLC 2018
    • Type: Oral Abstract Session
    • Track: Targeted Therapy
    • Presentations: 1
    • Moderators:
    • Coordinates: 9/25/2018, 10:30 - 12:00, Room 106
    • +

      OA10.01 - Patient Preferences for Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Treatments for EGFR Mutation Positive Metastatic NSCLC (ID 13735)

      10:30 - 10:40  |  Author(s): Ellen Janssen

      • Abstract
      • Presentation
      • Slides

      Background

      EGFR mutation positive (EGFRm) NSCLC responds to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). First-, second-, and third-generation EGFR-TKI treatment attributes vary in efficacy, side effects, and dosing regimen. We used two different methods to explore treatment preferences among patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC.

      a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method

      Patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC were recruited in the US to participate in an online survey containing two complimentary preference elicitation methods. First, preferences were assessed through direct elicitation exercises where participants chose between competing treatment profiles. The first exercise compared two profiles with a large difference in progression-free survival (PFS) (6 vs 18 months). The second exercise compared two profiles with a smaller difference (10 vs 18 months). Both exercises compared the same side effect risks (0–1% vs 2–16% risk). Second, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to assess preferences for variation in treatments in terms of PFS, severity of side effects (mild/moderate/severe), and mode of administration. These attributes and levels were varied based on a D-efficient design. Participants completed 10 DCE choice tasks where they saw pairs of hypothetical treatments with different attribute levels and selected their preferred treatment. A choice model was estimated using conditional logit regression.

      4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result

      Between 10/2017 and 03/2018, 90 patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC were recruited and completed the survey: 42% female; 79% white; 76% taking first-line or second-line EGFR-TKIs at time of survey. Median time since diagnosis: 2.1 years (inter-quartile range: 1.1–2.7). In the direct elicitation exercise, participants opted for shorter PFS in exchange for more favorable side effects, but were less likely to do so for a large difference in PFS (52% of participants) vs a smaller difference (66%; p<0.001). Participants who chose shorter PFS when difference in PFS was large were more likely to be taking EGFR-TKIs (odds ratio: 21.4; 95% confidence interval: 2.24, 204.88). No relationship between choice and treatment characteristic was observed when difference in PFS was small. In the DCE, conditional logit regression indicated that to avoid severe levels of nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, rash, or fatigue, participants on average would accept reductions in PFS of 13, 11, 9, and 8 months, respectively. Participants would accept reduction in PFS of 7 months for oral treatment taken with/without food vs IV.

      8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion

      In this online survey of patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC, some patients were willing to accept shorter PFS for a better safety profile and dosing convenience; however, PFS remained an important attribute in treatment choice.

      6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53

      Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.

      Only Active Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.