Eliciting men's preferences for decision-making relative to treatments of localized prostate cancer with a good or moderate prognosis
- PMID: 37173454
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04416-w
Eliciting men's preferences for decision-making relative to treatments of localized prostate cancer with a good or moderate prognosis
Abstract
Purpose: In diseases where there is no real consensus regarding treatment modalities, promoting shared decision-making can contribute to improving safety and quality of care. This is the case in low- or intermediate-risk localized prostate cancer (PC) treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences guiding men's decisions regarding the characteristics of the treatment strategies for PC to help physicians adopt a more patient-centered approach.
Methods: This prospective multicenter study used a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The attributes and the modalities were identified from a qualitative study and a literature review. Relative preferences were estimated using a logistic regression model. Interaction terms (demographic, clinical and socio-economic characteristics) were added to the model to assess heterogeneity in preferences.
Results: 652 men were enrolled in the study and completed a questionnaire with 12 pairs of hypothetical therapeutic alternatives between which they had to choose. Men's choices were significantly negatively influenced by the risk of impotence and urinary incontinence, death, and the length and frequency of care. They preferred treatments with a rescue possibility in case of deterioration or recurrence and the use of innovative technology. Surprisingly, the possibility of undergoing prostate ablation negatively influenced their choice. The results also highlighted differences in trade-offs according to socio-economic level.
Conclusion: This study confirmed the importance of considering patients' preferences in the decision-making process. It appears essential to better understand these preferences to allow physicians to improve communication and promote case-by-case decision-making.
Keywords: Discrete choice experiment; Preference; Prostate cancer; Treatment.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Elwyn G, Frosch DL, Kobrin S (2016) Implementing shared decision-making: consider all the consequences. Implement Sci 11:114. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-016-0480-9 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Mohler JL, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ et al (2019) Prostate cancer, version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN 17:479–505. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2019.0023 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Resnick MJ, Koyama T, Fan K-H et al (2013) Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 368:436–445. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1209978 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA et al (2016) 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 375:1415–1424. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606220 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Say RE, Thomson R (2003) The importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions: challenges for doctors. BMJ 327:542–545. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.542 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical