Patient Preferences Influencing Treatment Decision-Making in Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Germany, Italy, and Japan

References

• World Health Organization. Breast cancer. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/breast-cancer. Accessed October 4, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• American Cancer Society. Key statistics for breast cancer. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/about/how-common-is-breast-cancer. Accessed October 4, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• European Cancer Information System (ECIS). Breast cancer burden in EU-27. Available from: https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/2020-cancer-incidence-and-mortality-eu-27-countries-2020-07-22_en#:~:text=Over%20355%2C000%20women%20in%20the%20EU-27%20are%20estimated,prostate%20%28336%2C000%2C%2012.5%25%29%20and%20lung%20cancer%20%28318%2C000%2C%2011.9%25%29. Accessed July 11, 2024.
   Google Scholar
• Huang J, Chan PS, Lok V, et al. Global incidence and mortality of breast cancer: a trend analysis. Aging. 2021;13(4):5748–5803. doi:10.18632/aging.202502
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zubair M, Wang S, Ali N. Advanced approaches to breast cancer classification and diagnosis. Front Pharmacol. 2020;11:632079. doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.632079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andre F, Ismaila N, Allison KH, et al. Biomarkers for adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(16):1816–1837. doi:10.1200/jco.22.00069
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelosci A. Adjuvant olaparib approved in European Union for BRCA1/2-positive, HER2-negative high-risk early breast cancer. Cancer Network. Available from: https://www.cancernetwork.com/view/adjuvant-olaparib-approved-in-european-union-for-brca1-2-positive-her2-negative-high-risk-early-breast-cancer. Accessed October 4, 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Beusterien K, Will O, Flood E, McCutcheon S, Mackie DS, Mokiou S. A novel approach to computing preference estimates for different treatment pathways: an application in oncology. Patient. 2024;17(4):397–406 doi:10.1007/s40271-024-00680-z.
   Google Scholar
• Mahmoodi N, Jones GL, Muskett T, Sargeant S. Exploring shared decision making in breast cancer care: a case-based conversation analytic approach. Commun Med. 2020;16(1):40–45. doi:10.1558/cam.36775
   Google Scholar
• Goutsouliak K, Veeraraghavan J, Sethunath V, et al. Towards personalized treatment for early stage HER2-positive breast cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2020;17(4):233–250. doi:10.1038/s41571-019-0299-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aristei C, Perrucci E, Alì E, et al. Personalization in modern radiation oncology: methods, results and pitfalls. Personalized interventions and breast cancer. Front Oncol. 2021;11:616042. doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.616042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakai H, Umeda M, Okuyama H, Nakamura S. Differences in perception of breast cancer treatment between patients, physicians, and nurses and unmet information needs in Japan. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(5):2331–2338. doi:10.1007/s00520-019-05029-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stamuli E, Corry S, Ross D, Konstantopoulou T. Patient preferences for breast cancer treatments: a discrete choice experiment in France, Ireland, Poland and Spain. Future Oncol. 2022;18(9):1115–1132. doi:10.2217/fon-2021-0635
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerra RL, Castaneda L, de Albuquerque RCR, et al. Patient preferences for breast cancer treatment interventions: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments. Patient. 2019;12(6):559–569. doi:10.1007/s40271-019-00375-w
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 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(4):403–413. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gennari A, Shimizu C, McCutcheon S, et al. Factors influencing patient treatment decision-making in early breast cancer. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(Suppl. 1):S81 (abstract 1006). doi:10.1007/s11136-021-02976-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Peters TJ, Coast J. Best--worst scaling: what it can do for health care research and how to do it. J Health Econ. 2007;26(1):171–189. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.04.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams CP, Miller-Sonet E, Nipp RD, Kamal AH, Love S, Rocque GB. Importance of quality-of-life priorities and preferences surrounding treatment decision making in patients with cancer and oncology clinicians. Cancer. 2020;126(15):3534–3541. doi:10.1002/cncr.32961
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH, De Haes JC. Shared decision making: concepts, evidence, and practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(10):1172–1179. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.06.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Josfeld L, Keinki C, Pammer C, Zomorodbakhsch B, Hübner J. Cancer patients’ perspective on shared decision-making and decision aids in oncology. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2021;147(6):1725–1732. doi:10.1007/s00432-021-03579-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rake EA, Box ICH, Dreesens D, et al. Bringing personal perspective elicitation to the heart of shared decision-making: a scoping review. Patient Educ Couns. 2022;105(9):2860–2870. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2022.05.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin S, Tolaney SM, Cambron-Mellott MJ, et al. Benefit-risk trade-offs in treatment choice in advanced HER2 negative breast cancer: patient and oncologist perspectives. Future Oncol. 2022;18(16):1927–1941. doi:10.2217/fon-2021-0761
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maculaitis MC, Liu X, Will O, et al. Oncologist and patient preferences for attributes of CDK4/6 inhibitor regimens for the treatment of advanced/metastatic HR positive/HER2 negative breast cancer: discrete choice experiment and best–worst scaling. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:2201–2214. doi:10.2147/ppa.S254934
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konstantopoulou T, Stamuli E, Ross D, Pacheco R. Patient preferences for breast cancer treatments: a discrete choice experiment from four European countries. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(Suppl. 5):v135 (abstract 370P). doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz242.065
   Google Scholar
• Reinisch M, Marschner N, Otto T, Korfel A, Stoffregen C, Wöckel A. Patient preferences: results of a German adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis (market research study sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company) in patients on palliative treatment for advanced breast cancer. Breast Care. 2021;16(5):491–499. doi:10.1159/000513139
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maes-Carballo M, Muñoz-Núñez I, Martín-Díaz M, Mignini L, Bueno-Cavanillas A, Khan KS. Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review. Health Expect. 2020;23(5):1045–1064. doi:10.1111/hex.13112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shickh S, Leventakos K, Lewis MA, Bombard Y, Montori VM. Shared decision making in the care of patients with cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023;43:e389516. doi:10.1200/EDBK_389516
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Metsälä E, Kivistik S, Straume K, Marmy L, Jorge JAP, Strom B. Breast cancer patients’ experiences on their individual care pathway: a qualitative study. Radiography. 2022;28(3):697–703. doi:10.1016/j.radi.2022.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimman ML, Dellaert BG, Boersma LJ, Lambin P, Dirksen CD. Follow-up after treatment for breast cancer: one strategy fits all? An investigation of patient preferences using a discrete choice experiment. Acta Oncol. 2010;49(3):328–337. doi:10.3109/02841860903536002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azuma K, Kawaguchi T, Yamaguchi T, et al. Development of Japanese versions of the Control Preferences Scale and Information Needs Questionnaire: role of decision-making and information needs for Japanese breast cancer patients. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2021;15:1017–1026. doi:10.2147/ppa.S295383
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shimizu C, Sakata Y, Sakai R, Ikezawa H, Uetaki Y, Matsuoka T. Pharmacotherapy decision-making among patients with breast cancer in Japan: results of an online survey. Breast Cancer. 2019;26(6):799–807. doi:10.1007/s12282-019-00986-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandelblatt J, Kreling B, Figeuriedo M, Feng S. What is the impact of shared decision making on treatment and outcomes for older women with breast cancer? J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(30):4908–4913. doi:10.1200/jco.2006.07.1159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauh S, Arnold D, Braga S, et al. Challenge of implementing clinical practice guidelines. Getting ESMO’s guidelines even closer to the bedside: introducing the ESMO Practising Oncologists’ checklists and knowledge and practice questions. ESMO Open. 2018;3(5):e000385. doi:10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(8):1194–1220. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruhnke GW, Tak HJ, Meltzer DO. Association of preferences for participation in decision-making with care satisfaction among hospitalized patients. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(10):e2018766. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.18766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindhiem O, Bennett CB, Trentacosta CJ, McLear C. Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(6):506–517. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2014.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar