ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021
Preferences for Renal Cell Carcinoma Pharmacological Treatment: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Patients and Oncologists.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Differences between physician and patient preferences for cancer treatments: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Willingness to Pay for Treatment Attributes in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- Article
- Cancer patient preferences for traditional Chinese medicine treatment: a discrete choice experiment study.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Patient Preferences for Post-Radical Cystectomy Treatment in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Japan.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Article
- Oncologists' and urologists' preferences for adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma: a discrete-choice experiment.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Patient preferences for adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma: a discrete-choice experiment.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Cross-sectional study of therapy-related expectations/concerns of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and physicians in Japan.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Treatment Preferences Among Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- The impact of China's zero markup drug policy on drug costs for managing Parkinson's disease and its complications: an interrupted time series analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Patient Preferences for Adjuvant Treatment in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multi-Country Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of this investigation was to explore patients' and oncologists' preferences for the characteristics of a pharmacological regimen for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). MATERIAL AND
methodsCross-sectional observational study based on a discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted in Spain. A literature review, a focus group with oncologists and interviews with patients informed the DCE design. Five attributes were included: progression survival gain, risk of serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), administration mode, and treatment cost. Preferences were analyzed using a mixed-logit model to estimate relative importance (RI) of attributes (importance of an attribute in relation to all others), which was compared between aRCC patients and oncologists treating aRCC. Willingness to pay (WTP, payer: health system) for a benefit in survival or in risk reduction and maximum acceptable risk (MAR) in SAEs for improving survival were estimated from the DCE. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify factors that influence preference.
resultsA total of 105 patients with aRCC (77.1% male, mean age 65.9 years [SD: 10.4], mean time since RCC diagnosis 6.3 years [SD: 6.1]) and 67 oncologists (52.2% male, mean age 41.9 years [SD: 8.4], mean duration of experience in RCC 10.2 years [SD: 7.5]) participated in the study. The most important attribute for patients and oncologists was survival gain (RI: 43.6% vs. 54.7% respectively, p<0.05), followed by HRQoL (RI: 35.5% vs. 18.0%, respectively, p<0.05). MAR for SAEs was higher among oncologists than patients, while WTP (for the health system) was higher for patients. Differences in preferences were found according to time since diagnosis and education level (patients) or length of professional experience (oncologists).
conclusionPatients' and oncologists' preferences for aRCC treatment are determined mainly by the efficacy (survival gain) but also by the HRQoL provided. The results of the study can help to inform decision-making in the selection of appropriate aRCC treatment.
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.