ArticleThe patient2026
Patient Preferences and Treatment Decision Drivers in IDH-Mutant Grade 2 Glioma: An International Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in The patient, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrade 2 isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant (mIDH) glioma imposes significant health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and economic burden.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to explore patient preferences and socioeconomic burden in grade 2 mIDH glioma and its treatment.
methodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was administered to patients across the US, UK, Canada and Germany. Attributes included life expectancy, time until tumour progression, side effects, future risk of challenges performing work/usual activities and treatment modality. DCE data were analysed using a mixed-effects logit model. Relative attribute importance scores and trade-offs between attributes were estimated.
resultsA total of 118 participants (56% male; mean age 41.9 years; 67.8% employed) were included in the final analysis. Four of the five attributes were independent drivers of patients' treatment preferences. Participants preferred treatments with additional years of life expectancy and tumour-free progression and were averse to treatments with higher risks of side effects and future challenges performing work/usual activities. Treatment modality did not significantly influence preferences. Based on 10% risk increments, relative attribute importance scores showed life expectancy was the most important driver of choice (26.5%), followed by side effects (21.6%). Side effects (31.9-37.9%) and future issues with work/usual activities (20.6-24.4%) became relatively more important when expressed as 20-30% increments. Patients were willing to trade life expectancy to avoid increased risk of side effects.
conclusionsPatients placed the greatest value on gains in survival. Avoidance of risks of side effects or impacts to daily activities were also significant predictors of choice, with patients willing to trade life expectancy to avoid risk attributes. Incorporating patient preferences is essential to support shared treatment decision making and ensure treatment strategies align with patients' values and expectations.
Identifiers
42287505What 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.