Patient, Oncologist, and Payer Preferences for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy and CDK4/6 Inhibitor Regimens in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment
Authors Beusterien K, Maculaitis MC, Hallissey B, Gaschler MM, Smith ML, Law EH
Received 22 December 2020
Accepted for publication 6 February 2021
Published 18 March 2021 Volume 2021:15 Pages 611—623
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen
Kathleen Beusterien,1 Martine C Maculaitis,2 Bernadette Hallissey,1 Michael M Gaschler,2 Mary Lou Smith,3 Ernest H Law4
1Kantar, Health Division, Horsham, PA, USA; 2Kantar, Health Division, New York, NY, USA; 3Research Advocacy Network, Plano, TX, USA; 4Pfizer Oncology, Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA
Correspondence: Ernest H Law
Global Health Economics & Outcomes Research (Breast) Oncology, Patient & Health Impact, Pfizer Inc., 235 E 42nd Street (Office: 219/06/86), New York, NY, 10017, USA
Tel +1 212 733-0785
Email [email protected]
Purpose: Several adjuvant phase III trials are evaluating cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) in hormonal receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer (eBC). This study examines preferences for this combination regimen and ET alone among patients, oncologists, and payers in the United States.
Methods: A web-based questionnaire, including a discrete choice experiment (DCE), was administered to patients, practicing oncologists, and payers. In the DCE, respondents selected between hypothetical treatment profiles with attributes associated with ET monotherapy and CDK4/6i + ET regimens. Each treatment alternative was defined by the following attributes: 5-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), nausea, diarrhea, neutropenia, alopecia, dosing schedule, and electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring. Payers had the additional attribute of annual per-patient treatment cost. Hierarchical Bayesian models were used to estimate relative preference weights for each attribute-level and relative attribute importance.
Results: For patients (n=300) and oncologists (n=200), iDFS was most important (2 to 3 times more important than the next most important attribute), followed by neutropenia and diarrhea risks for patients and oncologists, respectively. Patients and oncologists required an improvement in iDFS of 8.0 and 5.6 percentage-points, respectively, to accept an increase in diarrhea risk from 11% to 81%. Payers (n=60) viewed annual per-patient cost as most important for treatment access decision-making, closely followed by iDFS. Payers required an improvement in iDFS of 21.8 percentage-points to accept an increase in cost from $5,100 to $149,400. Across all stakeholder groups, dosing schedule, alopecia risk, and ECG monitoring were perceived as least important.
Conclusion: Patients, oncologists, and payers expect a large absolute risk reduction in efficacy to offset the potential risks and costs of adding a CDK4/6i to current standard of care. An open discussion between all stakeholders is necessary to ensure that decision-making, whether at patient- or system-level, is informed by preferences for novel treatments, like CDK4/6is.
Keywords: cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, endocrine therapy, treatment preferences, stage II/III breast cancer
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]