IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v17y2024i4d10.1007_s40271-024-00679-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in Preferences for Drug Therapy Between Patients with Metastatic Versus Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Lilly Sophia Brandstetter

    (Julius-Maximilian University Würzburg)

  • Steffi Jírů-Hillmann

    (Julius-Maximilian University Würzburg)

  • Stefan Störk

    (University Hospital Würzburg
    University Hospital Würzburg)

  • Peter Ulrich Heuschmann

    (Julius-Maximilian University Würzburg
    University Hospital Würzburg
    University Hospital Würzburg)

  • Achim Wöckel

    (University Hospital of Würzburg, University Hospital Würzburg)

  • Jens-Peter Reese

    (Julius-Maximilian University Würzburg)

Abstract

Introduction Compared with early stages (eBC) metastatic BC (mBC) is incurable. In mBC, aggressive treatment may increase the duration of survival but may also cause severe treatment side effects. A better understanding how patients with BC value different aspects of drug therapy might improve treatment effectiveness, satisfaction and adherence. This systematic review aims to identify and summarise studies evaluating patient preferences for drug therapy of BC and to compare preferences of patients with eBC and mBC. Methods The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched on 22 June 2023. All studies published to this point were considered. Original studies reporting patient preferences on BC drug therapy determined by any type of choice experiment were eligible. A narrative synthesis of the effect measures presented as relative importance ratings, trade-offs (required benefit to make a therapy worthwhile) or monetary values of the treatment attributes was reported for each study. Risk of bias assessment for individual studies was performed using the checklist for observational studies from the STROBE Statement and the checklist from ‘Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making: A User’s Guide’. The study protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022377031). Results A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis evaluating the preferences of patients with eBC (n = 18), mBC (n = 10) or any stage BC (n = 6) on, for example, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, hormonal therapy or CKD4/6-inhibitors using different types of choice experiments. Regardless of the stage, most patients valued treatment effectiveness in terms of survival gains higher than potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Treatment cost, mode of administration, treatment regimen and monitoring aspects were considered as least important treatment attributes. In addition, preferences concerning 16 different types of ADRs were described, showing high heterogeneity within BC stages. Yet, comparable results across BC stages were observed. Conclusions Regardless of the stage, patients with BC consistently valued survival gains as the most important attribute and were willing to accept the risk of potential ADRs. Incorporating patient preferences in shared decision making may improve the effectiveness of interventions by enhancing adherence to drug therapy in patients suffering from BC.

Suggested Citation

  • Lilly Sophia Brandstetter & Steffi Jírů-Hillmann & Stefan Störk & Peter Ulrich Heuschmann & Achim Wöckel & Jens-Peter Reese, 2024. "Differences in Preferences for Drug Therapy Between Patients with Metastatic Versus Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(4), pages 349-362, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00679-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-024-00679-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-024-00679-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-024-00679-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-024-00679-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.