MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417002560 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-519

WM-voice: An international discrete choice experiment on treatment preferences in 1,455 patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia

2025· article· en· W4417002560 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Pythia T. Nieuwkerk, Michelle Postek, Karima Amaador, Sophie Bernelot Moens, Linda Bronsgeest, Shirley D’Sa, Pierre F. Faubert, Carl Harrington, Paul Kitchen, David R. Macdonald, Monique C. Minnema, Lia Palomba, Ibrahim Tohidi‐Esfahani, Judith Trotman, Andrew Warden, Marie José Kersten, Josephine M. I. Vos

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensOttawa HospitalMining Association of Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLogitPreferenceMixed logitChoice setDiscrete choiceSet (abstract data type)Duration (music)Logistic regression

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare and incurable low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Therapeutic options are rapidly expanding, with no consensus on the preferred approach. Available options vary in their properties, such as efficacy, mode of administration, and side effects. An improved understanding of patients' preferences and trade-offs may guide individual management in clinical practice and set priorities in therapeutic innovation. To date, structured data on this topic in WM are limited to one small Dutch study. The WM-VOICE study was designed to quantify international WM patient preferences for treatment properties and identify preference variation across subgroups. Methods: This study employed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) amongst WM patients in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States of America (USA). Attributes and levels were selected through interviews with WM patients and expert hematologists. These included: response duration (2, 4, 6, or 8 years), administration mode (hospital infusions or pills at home), treatment duration (6 months, 2 years, or ongoing), temporary toxicities (grade 0-1, 2, or 3-4), persistent toxicities (grade 0-1 or 2), and risk of secondary malignancies (increased or not). Following DCE design generation and pilot testing, the final anonymous web-based survey was disseminated via patient organizations and clinics. It included demographic and clinical questions, as well as 16 DCE choice sets. Each set asked respondents to choose between 2 hypothetical unlabeled treatment options, defined by 6 key attributes. Repeated choice data were analyzed using a panel mixed logit model, yielding conditional relative importance (CRI), reflecting each attribute's influence on the likelihood of selecting a given option based on its levels, and willingness to trade, calculated by dividing level coefficients by the marginal utility of a 1-year response duration increase (assuming linear coding across the 2-, 4-, 6-, and 8-year levels). Results: A total of 1,455 WM patients participated in the DCE (Australia: n=209, Canada: n=219, the Netherlands: n=340, UK: n=214, USA: n=473). Most respondents (75%) were 61-80 years old, and 818 (56%) were male. With a median time since diagnosis of 6 years (IQR 3-10), 79% were previously treated for WM. In the DCE, all attribute levels had significant impact on respondents’ treatment choices. Preferences were largely consistent across all 5 countries. Response duration and temporary toxicity had the highest importance (CRI 29.7%, 95% CI: 28.8–30.6 and 25.6%, 95% CI: 24.8–26.5, respectively), followed by secondary malignancy (17.7%, 95% CI: 16.8–18.6) and persistent toxicity (17.4%, 95% CI: 16.5–18.2). Administration mode (4.9%, 95% CI: 4.0–5.8) and treatment duration (4.6%, 95% CI: 3.8–5.4) had the lowest CRIs, favoring oral treatment at home over hospital infusions, and fixed-duration over ongoing therapy. Prior BTK inhibitor treatment significantly increased preference for oral over intravenous therapy (p=0.03). Other patient characteristics, including sex, age (≤70 vs >70 years), treatment status (untreated vs treated), prior chemotherapy, travel time to the hospital (<1 vs >1 hour), educational level, and current treatment status, did not impact choices. Within the context of the DCE, respondents were willing to trade 3.8 years and 5.6 years of response duration to move from short-term grade 3-4 toxicity to grade 2, or to grade 0-1, respectively. They would also trade 3.8 years to move from persistent grade 2 toxicity to grade 0-1, and 3.7 years to avoid an increased risk of secondary malignancy. Respondents accepted a 1.0 year reduction in response duration to take treatment orally instead of via infusions, 0.2 years to switch from ongoing to fixed-duration treatment of 2 years, and 1.0 year to switch to a 6-month treatment. Conclusion: The WM-VOICE study is the first to investigate international WM patients' treatment preferences. We identified 6 treatment properties significantly influencing choices, with strong similarity across 5 Western countries. Our results highlight that patients' choices are mainly driven by long response duration and avoidance of severe toxicity, whereas mode of administration and treatment duration are less influential. These results could be implemented in clinical practice to support shared decision-making and inform drug development and clinical trial design in WM.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,020
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,106

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0200,032
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,332
Écart entre enseignants0,316 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207