OBJECTIVES: New treatments options are available for patients with advanced melanoma, which can vary in their efficacy, safety and dosing schedules. The objective of this study was to compare different stakeholder perspectives (patients, oncologists, and oncology nurses) on the importance of drug treatment attributes in advanced melanoma. METHODS: Online panels were used to conduct a series of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) in US-based patients, oncologists and oncology nurses. In a series of scenarios, respondents were asked to choose between two hypothetical treatments, each with 7 attributes: mode of administration , dosing schedule, duration of therapy (3, 8, and 12 months), objective response rate (ORR) (15%, 33% and 65% chance of response), progression free survival (PFS) (3, 5, and 11.5 months), overall survival (OS) (45, 55, and 75% survival to 12 months), and grade 3/4 toxicities/adverse events (AEs) (10%, 32%, and 55% likelihood). Each attribute had 3 levels except dosing schedule (8 levels). Bayesian logistic regression models were used to estimate preference weights. RESULTS: Participants included 200 patients with advanced melanoma, 226 practicing oncologists, and 150 oncology nurses. The relative importance estimates of attributes by oncologists, patients and nurses were, respectively, as follows: OS (34%, 33%, 28%), AEs (49%, 29%, 26%), ORR (12%, 25%, 27%), PFS (3%, 12%, 15%), dosing schedule (3%, 2%, 3%), median duration of therapy (0%, 0%, 0%), and mode of administration (0%, 0%, 0%). Oncologists significantly differed from nurses and patients in the weights assigned to ORR, PFS and AEs (p-values<0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Patients and nurses have similar views on the relative importance of treatment attributes for advanced melanoma, while oncologists assigned greater importance to AEs, and less importance to ORR and PFS. Future research could seek to qualify how these differences impact treatment selection.