Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38421441›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

PREF-NET: a patient preference and experience study of lanreotide autogel administered in the home versus hospital setting among patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours in the UK.

Mohid S Khan, Kathryn Cook, Martin O Weickert, Louise Davies, D Mark Pritchard, Melissa Day, Tahir Shah, Diana Hull, Martyn Caplin, Melissa Back and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Hospital at home for oncologic patients: SEOM-SEHAD consensus on clinical practice.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

12 authors.

Mohid S KhanCardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK. KhanMS14@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1272-241X
Kathryn CookCardiff and Vale University Health Board, Cardiff, UK.
Martin O WeickertThe ARDEN NET Centre, ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4070-8164
Louise DaviesThe ARDEN NET Centre, ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
D Mark PritchardLiverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7971-3561
Melissa DayLiverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Tahir ShahUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0420-0304
Diana HullUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0425-541X
Martyn CaplinRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0177-1352
Melissa BackRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-4430-6289
Christelle PommieIpsen, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-8771-2304
Kate HiggsIpsen, Slough, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePREF-NET reported patients' experience of Somatuline® (lanreotide) Autogel® (LAN) administration at home and in hospital among patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs).

methodsPREF-NET was a multicentre, cross-sectional study of UK adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with GEP-NETs receiving a stable dose of LAN, which comprised of (1) a quantitative online survey, and (2) qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted with a subgroup of survey respondents. The primary objective was the description of overall patient preference for home versus hospital administration of LAN. Secondary objectives included describing patient-reported opinions on the experience and associated preference for each administration setting, and the impact on healthcare utilisation, societal cost, activities of daily living and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

resultsIn the primary analysis (80 patients; mean age 63.9 years), 98.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.1-100.0) of patients preferred to receive LAN at home, compared with 1.3% (95% CI: 0.0-3.9) who preferred the hospital setting. Among participants, over half (60.3%) received their injection from a non-healthcare professional. Most patients (79.5% [95% CI: 70.5-88.4]) reported a positive effect on HRQoL after the switch from hospital to home administration. Qualitative interviews (20 patients; mean age 63.6 years) highlighted that patients preferred home administration because it improved overall convenience; saved time and costs; made them feel more comfortable and relaxed, and less stressed; and increased confidence in their ability to self-manage their treatment.

conclusionAlmost all patients preferred to receive LAN treatment at home rather than in hospital with increased convenience and psychological benefits reported as key reasons for this preference.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingNeuroendocrine TumorsPeptides, CyclicAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHospitalsHumansMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceQuality of LifeSomatostatinUnited KingdomlanreotidePeptides, CyclicSomatostatinGastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumoursHomecareLanreotidePatient preferenceSomatostatin analogue

Identifiers

PMID38421441
PMCPMC10904552

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.