ArticleIranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR
Systematic Review of Patient Preference Studies in Non-metastatic Breast Cancer Adjuvant Medication Therapy: Attribute Selection.
Article in Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Breast cancer poses significant challenges due to its high incidence and prevalence, necessitating heightened attention. Understanding how patients prioritize different treatment options based on various attributes can assist healthcare decision-makers in maximizing patient utility. The discrete choice experiment, a conjoint method, facilitates preference elicitation by presenting different attributes and choices. This systematic review aims to identify key factors in patient preference research related to adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer characterized by hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative status. Evidence Acquisition: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from 01.01.2000 to 31.03.2023. Original English articles reporting patient preferences in adjuvant breast cancer treatment were retrieved based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies were examined through a narrative synthesis approach, with descriptive statistics employed for analysis. Results: Out of 1163 articles reviewed, four met the inclusion criteria and were conducted in the USA, Canada, and the Netherlands. Attributes extracted from all studies included alopecia, sensory neuropathy, motor neuropathy, myalgia/arthralgia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, neutropenia, mucositis/stomatitis, hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, prevention of breast cancer recurrence, osteoporosis, risk of endometrial cancer, joint and muscle pain, fluid retention, libido decrease, hot flashes, ECG monitoring, efficacy, treatment regimen, 5-year invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), dosing schedule, and treatment duration. The most frequently reported attributes were side effects, efficacy, and treatment regimen. Systematic review was commonly used to determine which attributes and levels to include. The minimum number of attributes identified per study was seven, and the maximum was 12. Sample sizes ranged from 102 to 300, with none of the studies mentioning the method of sample size estimation. Ordinary Least Squares, logistic regression, and hierarchical Bayes regression were the most frequent analysis methods. Conclusions: Side effects, 5-year iDFS, and treatment regimen are three attributes identified for conducting discrete choice experiment studies. Utilizing conjoint analysis to assess patient preferences for breast cancer treatment can aid in selecting optimal treatment regimens and improving patient adherence. Moreover, adhering to guidelines for developing experimental designs and conducting data analysis is essential for yielding robust results when employing preference elicitation methods.
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.