Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36226867›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Understanding what matters to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients when considering treatment options: A US patient preference survey.

Daniel J George, Ateesha F Mohamed, Jui-Hua Tsai, Milad Karimi, Ning Ning, Sayeli Jayade, Marc Botteman

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Cost-utility analysis ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel J GeorgeDuke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1499-7203
Ateesha F MohamedBayer U.S. LLC, Whippany, New Jersey, USA.
Jui-Hua TsaiEvidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7046-9216
Milad KarimiEvidence and Access, OPEN Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ning NingEvidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA.
Sayeli JayadeEvidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA.
Marc BottemanEvidence and Access, OPEN Health, Parsippany, New Jersey, USA.
Open Evidence · ESBayer (United States) · USDuke University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding how patients perceive the efficacy, safety, and administrative burden of treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can facilitate shared-decision making for optimal management. This study sought to elicit patient preferences for mCRPC treatments in the US.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey using the discrete-choice experiment method. Participants were asked to state their choices over successive sets of treatment alternatives, defined by varying levels of treatment attributes: overall survival (OS), months until patients develop a fracture or bone metastasis, likelihood of requiring radiation to control bone pain, fatigue, nausea, and administration (i.e., oral/IV injection/IV infusion). Using mixed logit models, we determined the value (i.e., preference weights) that respondents placed on each attribute. Relative attribute importance (RAI) and marginal rates of substitution (MRS) were calculated to understand patients' willingness to make tradeoffs among different attributes.

resultsThe final data set numbered 160 participants, with a mean age of 71.6 years old and a mean of 8.96 years since prostate cancer diagnosis. Participants' treatment preferences were as follows: OS (RAI: 31%), bone pain control (23%), nausea (16%), delaying fracture or bone metastasis (15%), fatigue (11%), and administration (3%). The MRS demonstrated that respondents were willing to trade 1.9 months of OS to eliminate moderate nausea and 3.3 months of OS for a reduction in fatigue from severe to mild.

conclusionsImproving OS is the highest priority for patients with mCRPC, but they are willing to trade some survival to reduce the risk of requiring radiation to control bone pain, delay a fracture or bone metastasis, and experience less severe nausea and fatigue.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsProstatic Neoplasms, Castration-ResistantAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFatigueHumansMaleNauseaPainPatient PreferenceSurveys and Questionnairesbone painmetastasispreferencesprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID36226867
PMCPMC10028042
OpenAlexW4306168113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read114
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.