ABSTRACT
Shared decision-making (SDM) is a key component of patient-centered healthcare. SDM is particularly pertinent in the relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) setting, in which numerous treatment options can present challenges for identifying optimal care. However, few studies have assessed the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in RRMM. To describe treatment decision-making patterns between physicians and patients in the RRMM setting, we conducted online surveys of patients and physicians in the USA to compare their perspectives on the process of treatment decision-making. We analyzed the surveys descriptively. Two hundred hematologists/oncologists and 200 patients with RRMM receiving second-line (n = 89), third-line (n = 65), and fourth-line (n = 46) therapy participated. Top treatment goals for physicians and patients included extending overall survival (among 76% and 83% of physicians and patients, respectively) and progression-free survival (among 54% and 77% of physicians and patients, respectively), regardless of the number of prior relapses. Thirty percent of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making, while 40% of patients reported most often preferring a shared role in treatment decision-making. One-fourth of patients most often preferred physicians to make the final treatment decision after seriously considering their opinion. Thirty-two percent of physicians and 16% of patients recalled ≥3 treatment options presented at first relapse. Efficacy was a primary treatment goal for patients and physicians. Discrepancies in their perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making exist, indicating that communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC.
Shared decision-making (SDM) is an important facet of patient-centered healthcare. Multiple myeloma (MM) is a cancer of the bone marrow that can return (relapse) after treatment. SDM may be especially pertinent for relapsed MM as there is no uniform standard of care and treatment selection can be complex. Few studies have examined the extent and relevance of SDM and patient-centered communication (PCC) in this relapsed and/or refractory (RRMM) setting. We conducted online surveys of 200 patients who had received 13 previous therapies and 200 physicians to compare treatment decision-making patterns in RRMM in the USA. Both physicians and patients felt that extending patient survival was a top treatment goal, regardless of the number of prior relapses. A lower percentage of physicians believed patients preferred a shared approach to treatment decision-making than patients who reported preferring such a shared role. Twice as many physicians than patients recalled ≥3 treatment options presented at first relapse. In conclusion, while improving survival was an important treatment goal for physicians and patients, there are discrepancies in physician and patient perceptions during RRMM treatment decision-making. Thus, communication tools are needed to facilitate SDM and PCC.
Subject(s)
Multiple Myeloma , Oncologists , Physicians , Humans , Multiple Myeloma/therapy , Decision Making , Physician-Patient Relations , Patient ParticipationABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To understand the extent to which metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients receive education on the prevention and management associated with skin rash following Vectibix treatment. Furthermore, to investigate how this adverse event affects a patient's quality of life (QoL) and influences their treatment decisions. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to 200 mCRC patients (100 Vectibix users and 100 Vectibix non-users). After excluding respondents who had used cetuximab, 61 Vectibix users and 56 Vectibix non-users remained. RESULTS: Most Vectibix users (79%) experienced a skin rash in response to treatment of which 65% considered the rash moderate, 27% mild, and 8% severe. Vectibix users generally felt they were adequately informed about the rash (83%), with the most common messages received related to sun protection. However, sunscreen was used by only 42% of patients prior to rash and 60% of patients following the appearance of rash. The use of oral antibiotics was low prior to rash (21%) and following rash (46%). Among patients experiencing a rash within the past week (n=16), 75% reported the rash had a large negative impact on their QoL based on the Dermatology Life Quality Index. CONCLUSION: There was a disconnect between patients feeling they were adequately informed and use of prevention and management strategies such as sun protection. This suggests a gap in patient education and adoption currently exists on management strategies both prior to and following the appearance of rash. Given the negative impact that skin toxicity has on the patient's quality of life, it is essential that patients receive and subsequently utilize all information that can minimize rash severity.
