Patient Preferences for Treatment Outcomes in Oncology with a Focus on the Older Patient:A Systematic Review

SIMPLE SUMMARY: In oncology, treatment outcomes can be competing, which means that one treatment could benefit one outcome, like survival, and negatively influence another, like independence. The choice of treatment therefore depends on the patient’s preference for outcomes, which needs to be assessed explicitly. Especially in older patients, patient preferences are important. Our systematic review summarizes all studies that assessed patient preferences for various treatment outcome categories. A total of 28 studies with 4374 patients were included, of which only six studies included mostly older patients. Although quality of life was only included in half of the studies, overall quality of life (79%) was most frequently prioritized as highest or second highest, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), treatment response (50%), and absence of transient short-term side effects (16%). In shared decision-making, these results can be used by healthcare professionals to better tailor the information provision and treatment recommendations to the individual patient. ABSTRACT: For physicians, it is important to know which treatment outcomes are prioritized overall by older patients with cancer, since this will help them to tailor the amount of information and treatment recommendations. Older patients might prioritize other outcomes than younger patients. Our objective is to summarize which outcomes matter most to older patients with cancer. A systematic review was conducted, in which we searched Embase and Medline on 22 December 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported some form of prioritization of outcome categories relative to each other in patients with all types of cancer and if they included at least three outcome categories. Subsequently, for each study, the highest or second-highest outcome category was identified and presented in relation to the number of studies that included that outcome category. An adapted Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. In total, 4374 patients were asked for their priorities in 28 studies that were included. Only six of these studies had a population with a median age above 70. Of all the studies, 79% identified quality of life as the highest or second-highest priority, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), and treatment response (50%). Absence of transient short-term side effects was prioritized in 16%. The studies were heterogeneous considering age, cancer type, and treatment settings. Overall, quality of life, overall survival, progression- and disease-free survival, and severe and persistent side effects of treatment are the outcomes that receive the highest priority on a group level when patients with cancer need to make trade-offs in oncologic treatment decisions

Information needs of older patients newly diagnosed with cancer

Background Understanding what information patients want and need is an important step in optimizing care. Therefore, we set out to collect all available evidence about the information that is most important to older patients with a new cancer diagnosis and whether or not these information needs are sufficiently addressed. Method A systematic literature review of Embase and Medline. Results We included eighteen studies addressing the importance of a range of information topics and studies addressing the sufficiency of information provided. On a scale from 1 to 10, patients ranked information about prognosis and the chance of cure as the most important category (median ranking 10, interquartile range (IQR) 8–10), followed by information on cancer itself (median 9, IQR 5.5–9), and treatment options (median 8, IQR 8–9). Information on side-effects of treatment (median 7, IQR 6–8), and practicalities (median 6, IQR 5–7.5) were also considered important. Patients rated information about the practicalities of treatment as the most insufficiently addressed (median 9.5), followed by self-care at home (median 9), and information about prognosis and side-effects (median 8 for both). Conclusion This systematic review demonstrates that information provision about the cancer itself and about treatment options is generally satisfactory to patients, while information about prognosis, practicalities of treatment and self-care at home could be improved. However, there is significant heterogeneity among older patients regarding which information is most important to them, thus requiring an ongoing dialogue between patients and health care providers about which information is most needed at any given time