Oncologists’ and Urologists’ Preferences for First-Line (1L) Treatment of Locally Advanced/Unresectable Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (AUC): A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Conducted in 5 European Countries

Author(s)

Panattoni L1, Kearney M2, Land N3, Flottemesch T4, Sullivan P4, Kirker M5, Bharmal M6, Hauber B5
1Precision Value and Health, Seattle, WA, USA, 2the healthcare business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, HE, Germany, 3Precision Value and Health, Livermore, CA, USA, 4Precision Value and Health, New York, NY, USA, 5Pfizer, New York, NY, USA, 6EMD Serono, Rockland, MA, USA

Presentation Documents

OBJECTIVES: The treatment landscape for people with aUC is currently evolving. Treatment choice involves trade-offs between efficacy, safety, and administration schedule. This study aimed to quantify preferences for 1L treatment attributes and treatment profiles among physicians who treat patients with aUC using a DCE in 5 European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK).

METHODS: During August-September 2022, 498 oncologists and urologists completed an online survey including 12 treatment choice tasks, each comparing 2 hypothetical therapy choices based on treatments for aUC that varied in 5 treatment attributes: grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), 1L induction and 1L maintenance administration schedule, time to disease progression, and overall survival (OS). A mixed-effects logit model was used to estimate preference weights and compute the relative importance (RI) of each attribute. Preference shares were calculated for 4 treatment profiles and stratified by country.

RESULTS: The study included 343 oncologists (69%) and 155 urologists (31%). Most were male (72%), were in practice for >10 years (69%), and treated 5-19 patients with aUC per month (58%). OS had the strongest influence on physicians’ preferences (RI=62%), followed by frequency of grade 3/4 TRAEs (RI=27%). The remaining 3 attributes had a combined RI of 11%. Among the hypothetical treatment profiles, a sequential induction + maintenance therapy (chemotherapy followed by immune checkpoint inhibitor [ICI] maintenance therapy after disease control) profile had the largest preference share (51%), followed by ICI monotherapy (29%), ICI combination therapy (ICI + chemotherapy followed by ICI after disease control; 12%), and chemotherapy alone (9%). Across the 5 countries, the preference share for a sequential induction + ICI maintenance therapy profile ranged from 38% (Italy) to 56% (UK).

CONCLUSIONS: OS was the dominant attribute driving physicians’ choice of 1L therapy, followed by TRAEs. Future 1L therapies for aUC will need to provide substantial OS benefit to influence prescribing preferences.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2023-05, ISPOR 2023, Boston, MA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 26, Issue 6, S2 (June 2023)

Acceptance Code

P48

Topic

Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Stated Preference & Patient Satisfaction

Disease

Urinary/Kidney Disorders

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×