SynthesisThe patient2020
Quantitative Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment from the Patients' Perspective: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The patient, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stated Preferences for Systemic Treatments for Prostate Cancer: A Targeted Review of the Discrete-Choice Experiment Literature.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- Patient Preferences in Targeted Pharmacotherapy for Cancers: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Quality of life with docetaxel plus cisplatin versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer: quality of life analysis of TORG 0503.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Trial
- Patient, Physician, and Caregiver Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Driving Best Practices Throughout the Treatment Journey for Patients with NSCLC with Actionable Alterations: A Podcast Discussion.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Patient Preference on Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatment: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Treatment preferences among Japanese patients and physicians for epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review.The patient · 2022Article
- Patient-based benefit-risk assessment of medicines: development, refinement, and validation of a content search strategy to retrieve relevant studies.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2022Article
- Central European journal of operations research (CJOR) "operations research applied to health services (ORAHS) in Europe: general trends and ORAHS 2020 conference in Vienna, Austria".Central European journal of operations research · 2022Article
- Hormone-Dependent Tumors and Sexuality in the Neuro-Oncology of Women (N.O.W.): Women's Brain Tumors, Gaps in Sexuality Considerations, and a Need for Evidence-Based Guidelines.Current oncology reports · 2021Review
- What Matters Most to Lung Cancer Patients? A Qualitative Study in Italy and Belgium to Investigate Patient Preferences.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Key Determinants of Health-Related Quality of Life Among Advanced Lung Cancer Patients: A Qualitative Study in Belgium and Italy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Patient Preferences for Attributes of Chemotherapy for Lung Cancer: Discrete Choice Experiment Study in Japan.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Application of Discrete Choice Experiment in Health Care: A Bibliometric Analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRegulatory agencies as well as private organizations pursue programs that advocate patient centricity and emphasize the importance of dialog with patients. Various methods are applied to elicit the preferences of patients regarding the aspects of treatment they lend more importance to. Decisions on treatment choices are critical to patients with lung cancer because of their poor prognosis and the serious trade-off between safety and efficacy in traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of quantitative patient preference studies of patients with lung cancer. Our exhaustive search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PLOS, and SpringerLink identified 15 relevant studies published from January 2000 to April 2020 that enabled us to assess the relative importance of treatment attributes according to lung cancer patients' perspective.
resultsThe literature review revealed that patients with lung cancer tend to place a higher weight on efficacy and quality of life (QoL) attributes than on other attributes. Overall survival was found to be the most important among the efficacy attributes. The consequences of adverse events seemed less important than the possible efficacy from therapies. The clinical utility of treatment, such as the route of administration, was generally not considered important. It remains inconclusive whether sociodemographic factors and/or medical history affect the relative importance of a patient's preference.
conclusionOur systematic review clarified that patients generally prefer a better efficacy profile to a better safety profile, which underscores the importance of improved benefits in anti-lung cancer drug development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.