Preferences for breast cancer prevention among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have high lifetime risks of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The decision to embark on risk reduction strategies is a difficult and personal one. We surveyed an international group of women with BRCA mutations and measured choices and sequence of breast cancer risk reduction strategies. METHODS: Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation and no previous cancer diagnosis were recruited from the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, and from a national advocacy group. Using an online survey, we asked about cancer-risk reduction preferences including for one of two hypothetical medicines, randomly assigned, and women's recommendations for a hypothetical woman (Susan, either a 25- or 36-year-old). Sunburst diagrams were generated to illustrate hierarchy of choices. RESULTS: Among 598 respondents, mean age was 40.9 years (range 25-55 years). Timing of the survey was 4.8 years (mean) after learning their positive test result and 33% had risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) and bilateral mastectomy (RRBM), while 19% had RRBSO only and 16% had RRBM only. Although 30% said they would take a hypothetical medicine, 6% reported taking a medicine resembling tamoxifen. Respondents were 1.5 times more likely to select a hypothetical medicine for risk reduction when Susan was 25 than when Susan was 36. Women assigned to 36-year-old Susan were more likely to choose a medicine if they had a family member diagnosed with breast cancer and personal experience taking tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: Women revealed a willingness to undergo surgeries to achieve largest reduction in breast cancer risk, although this would not be recommended for a younger woman in her 20s. The goal of achieving the highest degree of cancer risk reduction is the primary driver for women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations in selecting an intervention and a sequence of interventions, regardless of whether it is non-surgical or surgical.

Predictors of long-term cancer-related distress among female BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers without a cancer diagnosis: an international analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation have high lifetime risks of developing breast and ovarian cancers. We sought to estimate the prevalence of cancer-related distress and to identify predictors of distress in an international sample of unaffected women with a BRCA mutation. METHODS: Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation and no previous cancer diagnosis were recruited from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and from a national advocacy group. Using an online survey, we asked about cancer risk reduction options and screening, and we measured cancer-related distress using the Impact of Event Scale. RESULTS: Among 576 respondents, mean age was 40.8 years (SD = 8.1). On average 4.9 years after a positive test result, 16.3% of women reported moderate-to-severe cancer-related distress. Women who had undergone risk-reducing breast and ovarian surgery were less likely to have (moderate or severe) cancer-related distress compared to other women (22.0% versus 11.4%, P value = 0.007). Women recruited from the advocacy group were more likely to have cancer-related distress than other women (21.6% versus 5.3%, P value = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 16% of women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation experience distress levels comparable to those of women after a cancer diagnosis. Distress was lower for women who had risk-reducing surgery.

Patient Preferences for Endometriosis Pain Treatments in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify patient preferences for endometriosis-associated pain treatments and risk tolerance in exchange for pain reduction and to explore whether preferences vary on the basis of patient characteristics. METHODS: US women with a self-reported physician diagnosis of endometriosis and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea and nonmenstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) completed an online discrete choice experiment survey. Each choice question had a pair of hypothetical treatments characterized by attributes with varying levels: improvements in severe dysmenorrhea, severe NMPP, and severe dyspareunia; mode of administration; and treatment-related risks of pregnancy-related problems, bone fracture later in life, and moderate to severe hot flashes. A random-parameters logit model was used to quantify preferences and the attributes' conditional relative importance. RESULTS: A total of 250 women (mean age 34 years) completed the survey. The conditional relative importance of attributes was 3.66 for risk of moderate to severe hot flashes among respondents with and 3.58 among respondents without experience with moderate to severe hot flashes; 1.70, 1.49, and 1.48 for improvements in dyspareunia, NMPP, and dysmenorrhea, respectively; 0.60 for risk of pregnancy-related problems; 0.53 for mode of administration; and 0.49 for bone fracture risk. Preference weights for bone fracture risk levels were not statistically significantly different. In exchange for a greater improvement in dysmenorrhea from severe to mild (vs moderate), respondents without a history of hot flashes accepted a greater increase in the risk of moderate to severe hot flashes (38%) than did respondents with this history (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents placed the greatest weight on risk of hot flashes, followed by improvements in dyspareunia, NMPP, dysmenorrhea. Bone fracture risk did not drive preferences.

PREFERENCES OF PATIENTS WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FOR ATTRIBUTES OF INJECTABLE MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS TREATMENTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND FRANCE.

OBJECTIVES: Adherence to injectable disease-modifying treatments in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) impacts outcomes and can be influenced by perceptions of treatment efficacy, side effects, injection frequency, and the duration of injection. This study aimed to quantify preferences for selected attributes of injectable treatments among individuals with MS in the United Kingdom and France. METHODS: Respondents with a self-reported diagnosis of MS completed an online discrete-choice-experiment survey, consisting of a series of treatment-choice questions. Each choice question presented two hypothetical treatments, each with six attributes (years until disability progression, relapses in the next 4 years, injection time, injection frequency, flu-like symptoms (FLS), and injection-site reactions), each with various levels. Mixed-logit regression analysis was used to estimate preference weights for attribute levels and to calculate the relative importance of changes in treatment attributes (vertical distance between preference weights). Minimum acceptable efficacy estimates indicate improvement in efficacy that respondents would require in exchange for worsening injection frequency and FLS. RESULTS: In both countries, 100 respondents completed the survey. In the United Kingdom and France, respectively, improving the time until disability progression from 2 to 4 years, reducing injection frequency from "daily" to "every 2 weeks", and reducing FLS from 3 days after every injection to none had a relative importance of 2.9 and 2.6, 3.0 and 3.5, and 2.5 and 3.1. Given the ranges included in the study, changes in these attributes were more important than most changes in other attributes assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in the injection frequency of MS treatments and FLS can be as important to patients as improvements in treatment efficacy.

Comparison of US patient, rheumatologist, and dermatologist perceptions of psoriatic disease symptoms: results from the DISCONNECT study.

BACKGROUND: The perceived bother of skin and joint-related manifestations of psoriatic disease may differ among patients, rheumatologists, and dermatologists. This study identified and compared the patient and dermatologist/rheumatologist-perceived bother of psoriatic disease manifestations. METHODS: Online surveys were administered to patients with both psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis and to dermatologists and rheumatologists. Object-case best-worst scaling was used to identify the most and least bothersome items from a set of five items in a series of questions. Each item set was drawn from 20 items describing psoriatic disease skin and joint symptoms and impacts on daily activities. Survey responses were analyzed using random-parameters logit models for each surveyed group, yielding a relative-bother weight (RBW) for each item compared with joint pain, soreness, or tenderness. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 200 patients, 150 dermatologists, and 150 rheumatologists. Patients and physicians agreed that joint pain, soreness, and tenderness are among the most bothersome manifestations of psoriatic disease (RBW 1.00). For patients, painful, inflamed, or broken skin (RBW 1.03) was more bothersome, while both rheumatologists and dermatologists considered painful skin much less bothersome (RBW 0.17 and 0.22, respectively) than joint pain. Relative to joint pain, rheumatologists were more likely to perceive other joint symptoms as bothersome, while dermatologists were more likely to perceive other skin symptoms as bothersome. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified important areas of discordance both between patients and physicians and between rheumatologists and dermatologists about the relative bother of a comprehensive set of psoriatic disease symptoms and functional impacts. Both physician specialists should ask patients which manifestations of psoriatic disease are most bothersome to them, as these discussions may have important implications for drug and other patient management options.

Trading Health Risks for Glory: A Reformulation of the Goldman Dilemma.

BACKGROUND: The Goldman dilemma presented athletes with a Faustian bargain that guaranteed winning an Olympic gold medal in their sport but resulted in certain death 5 years later. Athletes' responses to Goldman's bargain were reported from 1982 to 1995. Several studies subsequently evaluated people's willingness to accept the bargain proposed in the Goldman question. Our study updates Goldman's question using contingent-behavior questions, a preference-elicitation method widely applied in economics, marketing and psychology to understand people's choice behavior. Contingent-behavior questions ask people to evaluate hypothetical tradeoffs between outcomes when real-world decisions are unobservable, nonexistent, or unreliable. METHODS: A web-enabled survey was conducted with athletes in 50 sports between June, 2012 and April, 2013. Athletes were invited by their sport governing bodies in the United States to complete the online survey. Responses from 2888 athletes were collected. Our reformulation elicited athletes' willingness to accept a performance-enhancing drug (PED) associated with the risk of a realistic fatal event, not certain death. A double-bounded dichotomous-choice question format was used to elicit athletes' maximum acceptable mortality risk (MAMR) for winning an Olympic gold medal. Data were analyzed using an interval regression model to estimate the implicit probability of accepting a continuous risk level. MAMR was defined as the mortality risk level with a 0.50 probability of acceptance. RESULTS: Estimated mean MAMRs varied between 7 and 14% across athletes in different ranks and sports. Elite athletes were generally the most willing to accept a fatal cardiovascular risk to win a gold medal in the Olympics. This range was similar to the levels of risk that patients accept for life-changing interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that very few athletes would be expected to accept a PED in the bargain postulated by the Goldman dilemma. Risk tolerance among elite athletes suggest they may be more aware of the potential financial and nonfinancial benefits of such a win, and/or less optimistic about their potential to move up in the level of competition without the use of PEDs.

Hemodialysis patients' preferences for the management of secondary hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement and patient-centered care are critical in optimally managing patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Understanding patient preferences is a key element of patient-centered care and shared decision making. The objective of this study was to elicit patients' preferences for the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) associated with ESRD using a discrete-choice experiment survey. METHODS: Clinical literature, nephrologist input, patient-education resources, and a patient focus group informed development of the survey instrument, which was qualitatively pretested before its administration to a broader sample of patients. The National Kidney Foundation invited individuals in the United States with ESRD who were undergoing hemodialysis to participate in the survey. Respondents chose among three hypothetical SHPT treatment alternatives (two medical alternatives and surgery) in each of a series of questions, which were defined by attributes of efficacy (effect on laboratory values and symptoms), safety, tolerability, mode of administration, and cost. The survey instrument included a best-worst scaling exercise to quantify the relative bother of the individual attributes of surgery. Random-parameters logit models were used to evaluate the conditional relative importance of the attributes. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients with ESRD completed the survey. The treatment attributes that were most important to the respondents were whether a treatment was a medication or surgery and out-of-pocket cost. Patients had statistically significant preferences for efficacy attributes related to symptom management and laboratory values, but placed less importance on the attributes related to mode of administration and side effects. The most bothersome attribute of surgery was the risk of surgical mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ESRD and SHPT who are undergoing hemodialysis understand SHPT and have clear and measurable treatment preferences. These results may help inform clinicians about patients' preferences regarding treatment options for a common complication of ESRD.

Hemodialysis patients' preferences for the management of anemia.

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is expected to result in a more patient-centered approach to care that aligns with patients' values, preferences, and goals for treatment. Nevertheless, no previous studies of which we are aware have evaluated patients' benefit-risk preferences for the management of anemia associated with ESRD. The primary objective of this study was to quantify the tradeoffs patients are willing to make between cardiovascular risks associated with some anemia medicines and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. A secondary objective was to quantify the importance of avoiding transfusion-related risks. METHODS: A survey instrument was developed from the clinical literature, clinician input, patient-education resources, and a patient focus group. The survey instrument was qualitatively pretested before its administration to a broader sample of patients. The National Kidney Foundation invited individuals in the United States to participate in the survey. In a discrete-choice experiment (DCE), respondents chose between two hypothetical anemia medications in a series of questions. Each medication was defined by symptom relief, frequency of transfusions, cardiovascular risk, mode of administration, and out-of-pocket cost. The survey also included a best-worst scaling (BWS) exercise to quantify the importance of avoiding attributes of blood transfusions. Results from the DCE were used to estimate relative importance and marginal willingness to pay. Results from the BWS were converted to relative importance weights. RESULTS: A total of 200 individuals completed the survey. Patients were willing to accept a 6% medication-related risk of heart attack to avoid having two RBC transfusions per month. Symptom relief and mode of administration were of moderate importance. The most important transfusion-related risk to avoid was transfusion-related lung injury. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ESRD and anemia have measurable treatment preferences and are willing to accept risks associated with anemia medications to avoid transfusions.

Preferences for breast cancer risk reduction among BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: a discrete-choice experiment.

PURPOSE: Unaffected women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations face difficult choices about reducing their breast cancer risk. Understanding their treatment preferences could help us improve patient counseling and inform drug trials. The objective was to explore preferences for various risk-reducing options among women with germline BRCA1/2 mutations using a discrete-choice experiment survey and to compare expressed preferences with actual behaviors. METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment survey was designed wherein women choose between hypothetical treatments to reduce breast cancer risk. The hypothetical treatments were characterized by the extent of breast cancer risk reduction, treatment duration, impact on fertility, hormone levels, risk of uterine cancer, and ease and mode of administration. Data were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model. Women were also asked to express their preference between surgical and chemoprevention options and to report on their actual risk-reduction actions. Women aged 25-55 years with germline BRCA1/2 mutations who were unaffected with breast or ovarian cancer were recruited through research registries at five clinics and a patient advocacy group. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and March 2016, 622 women completed the survey. Breast cancer risk reduction was the most important consideration expressed, followed by maintaining fertility. Among the subset of women who wished to have children in future, the ability to maintain fertility was the most important factor, followed by the extent of risk reduction. Many more women said they would take a chemoprevention drug than had actually taken chemoprevention. CONCLUSIONS: Women with BRCA1/2 mutations indicated strong preferences for breast cancer risk reduction and maintaining fertility. The expressed desire to have a safe chemoprevention drug available to them was not met by current chemoprevention options.

Patient and physician preferences for anticancer drugs for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a discrete-choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: Many publications describe preferences for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening; however, few studies elicited preferences for anticancer-drug treatment for metastatic CRC (mCRC). This study was designed to elicit preferences and risk tolerance among patients and oncologists in the USA for anticancer drugs to treat mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or older with a self-reported diagnosis of mCRC and board-certified (or equivalent) oncologists who had treated patients with mCRC were recruited by two survey research companies from existing online patient panels in the USA. Additional oncologists were recruited from a list of US physicians. Patients and oncologists completed a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey. DCEs offer a systematic method of eliciting preferences and quantifying both the relative importance of treatment attributes and the tradeoffs respondents are willing to make among benefits and risks. Treatment attributes in the DCE were progression-free survival (PFS) and risks of severe papulopustular rash, serious hemorrhage, cardiopulmonary arrest, and gastrointestinal perforation. Patients' and physicians' maximum levels of acceptable treatment-related risks for two prespecified increases in efficacy were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients and 150 oncologists completed the survey. Relative preferences for the treatment attributes in the study were mostly consistent with the expectation that better clinical outcomes were preferred over worse clinical outcomes. Risk tolerance varied between patients and physicians. On average, physicians were willing to tolerate higher risks than patients, although these differences were mostly not statistically significant. Post hoc latent-class analyses revealed that some patients and physicians were unwilling to forgo any efficacy to avoid toxicities, while others were willing to make such tradeoffs. CONCLUSION: Differences in preferences between patients and physicians suggest that there is the potential for improvement in patients' well-being. Initiating or enhancing discussions about patient tolerance for toxicities, such as skin rash and gastrointestinal perforations, may help prescribe treatments that entail more appropriate benefit-risk tradeoffs.

A discrete-choice experiment to determine patient preferences for injectable multiple sclerosis treatments in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the relative importance of features of a hypothetical injectable disease-modifying treatment for patients with multiple sclerosis using a discrete-choice experiment. METHODS: German residents at least 18 years of age with a self-reported physician diagnosis of multiple sclerosis completed a 25-30 minute online discrete-choice experiment. Patients were asked to choose one of two hypothetical injectable treatments for multiple sclerosis, defined by different levels of six attributes (disability progression, the number of relapses in the next 4 years, injection time, frequency of injections, presence of flu-like symptoms, and presence of injection-site reactions). The data were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model. RESULTS: Of 202 adults who completed the survey, results from 189 were used in the analysis. Approximately 50% of all patients reported a diagnosis of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, and 31% reported secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Approximately 71% of patients had current or prior experience with injectable multiple sclerosis medication. Approximately 53% had experienced flu-like symptoms caused by their medication, and 47% had experienced mild injection-site reactions. At least one significant difference was seen between levels in all attributes, except injection time. The greatest change in relative importance between levels of an attribute was years until symptoms get worse from 1 to 4 years. The magnitude of this difference was about twice that of relapses in the next 4 years, frequency of injections, and flu-like symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Most attributes examined in this experiment had an influence on patient preference. Patients placed a significant value on improvements in the frequency of dosing and disability progression. Results suggest that changes in injection frequency can be as important as changes in efficacy and safety attributes. Understanding which attributes of injectable therapies influence patient preference could potentially improve outcomes and adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Patient Preferences for Injectable Treatments for Multiple Sclerosis in the United States: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients' perceptions and experiences of medication efficacy, medication adverse events, dosing frequency, and dosing complexity have been found to influence adherence to injectable disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). The aim of this study was to quantify patient preferences for features of injectable DMTs for MS. METHODS: Adult patients in the United States (US) with a self-reported diagnosis of MS completed an online discrete-choice experiment survey to assess preference for a number of features of a hypothetical injectable DMT. Patients chose hypothetical treatments in paired comparisons, where each treatment was described by features or attributes, including the number of years until disability progression, the number of relapses in the next 4 years, injection time, the frequency of injections, the occurrence of flu-like symptoms (FLS), and severity of injection-site reactions. Random-parameters logit regression parameters were used to calculate preference weights of attribute levels and the relative importance of changes in treatment features. RESULTS: Of the 205 patients who completed the survey, 192 provided sufficient data for analysis. The results indicated a broad range of tradeoffs that patients would be willing to make. With regard to this, the relative importance of an improvement in the number of years until disability progression from 1 to 2 (i.e., vertical distance between preference weights for these attribute levels) was 0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5-1.2], the relative importance of this change was approximately equivalent to that of an improvement from 12 injections per month to two (mean 0.8, 95% CI 0.4-1.2), or approximately equivalent to a decrease from four to one relapses in the next 4 years (mean 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.2), or FLS 3 days after every injection to 3 days after some injections (mean 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.4). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that an improvement in treatment efficacy may be as important as a reduction in injection frequency or a reduction in some adverse events for patients who self-administer injectable DMTs for MS. Understanding the preferences of patients who use injectable treatments will inform the development of such treatments, which may in turn improve patient medication adherence and well-being.

A discrete-choice experiment to quantify patient preferences for frequency of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist injections in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding patients' preferences for attributes of injectable antihyperglycemic regimens may improve patient satisfaction and medication adherence. Our objective was to quantify the preferences of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) for reducing the frequency of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist injections from once daily to once weekly. METHODS: A total of 643 respondents with a self-reported physician diagnosis of type 2 diabetes completed a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey. The sample included four prespecified subgroups: currently using exenatide once weekly (n = 150), liraglutide once daily (n = 153), insulin (but not exenatide once weekly or liraglutide) (n = 156), and no injectable treatment (n = 184). Device attributes included type of injection device, needle size and pain, injection frequency, refrigeration, and injection-site reactions. Random-parameters logit was used to estimate the relative impact of device attributes on treatment choice for each subgroup. RESULTS: In all subgroups, changing injection frequency from daily to weekly (independent of the effect of injection frequency on preferences for other attributes) was the most important predictor of treatment choice. Switching from a longer and thicker needle to a shorter and thinner needle and eliminating injection-site reactions were also statistically significant predictors of device choice (P < 0.05). Exenatide once weekly users and those not currently using injections were more likely to choose a treatment with characteristics similar to exenatide once weekly. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment attribute most important to patients choosing among hypothetical injectable treatments for T2DM was injection frequency: patients preferred weekly over daily injections. LIMITATIONS: The primary limitations of this study are that it included only a limited number of attributes that may not reflect the full complexity of patient choices, diagnosis was self-reported, and patients were recruited from an Internet panel and may not be representative of the T2DM patient population.

Patient preferences for treatments to delay bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) develop bone metastases (BM) and present with bone complications like fracture. Bone-targeted agents that prevent metastasis-induced bone complications can cause adverse events. Understanding how patients view treatment options may optimize care. This study aimed to quantify how PCa patients value a hypothetical treatment that delays BM but can cause osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). The study also assessed the value patients place on avoiding metastasis-induced bone complications versus increased survival. METHODS: PCa patients from the United Kingdom (n = 201) and Sweden (n = 200) on androgen-deprivation therapy or hormone therapy for ≥ 3 years completed a 10-question discrete-choice-experiment survey examining whether patients would accept a BM-delaying treatment. Two time-tradeoff questions assessed patients' willingness to tradeoff between survival and bone complications. Percentages of patients choosing treatment were summarized by levels of treatment efficacy and ONJ risk. Odds ratios from a logit model were used to evaluate how patient and medication characteristics affected treatment choice. Proportions of patients choosing each tradeoff scenario were calculated. RESULTS: A majority of patients accepted treatment at the lowest benefit level (5-month BM delay) and highest risk level (9% ONJ risk). PCa symptoms and prior treatment affected patient preferences. Nearly 80% of patients would tradeoff at least 3 months of survival to avoid bone complications. CONCLUSIONS: PCa patients in the U.K and Sweden may value a medication that delays BM, despite the risk of ONJ. Furthermore, patients were willing to tradeoff up to 5 months of survival for prevention of bone complications.

Seasonal nitrous oxide and methane fluxes from grain- and forage-based production systems in wisconsin, USA.

Agriculture in the midwestern United States is a major anthropogenic source of nitrous oxide (NO) and is both a source and sink for methane (CH), but the degree to which cropping systems differ in emissions of these gases is not well understood. Our objectives were to determine if fluxes of NO and CH varied among cropping systems and among crop phases within a cropping system. We compare NO and CH fluxes over the 2010 and 2011 growing seasons from the six cropping systems at the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trial (WICST), a 20-yr-old cropping systems experiment. The study is composed of three grain and three forage cropping systems spanning a spectrum of crop diversity and perenniality that model a wide range of realistic cropping systems that differ in management, crop rotation, and fertilizer regimes. Among the grain systems, cumulative growing season NO emissions were greater for continuous corn ( L.) (3.7 kg NO-N ha) than corn-soybean [ (L.) Merr.] (2.0 kg NO-N ha) or organic corn-soybean-wheat ( L.) (1.7 kg NO-N ha). Among the forage systems, cumulative growing-season NO emissions were greater for organic corn-alfalfa ( L.)-alfalfa (2.9 kg NO-N ha) and conventional corn-alfalfa-alfalfa-alfalfa (2.5 kg NO-N ha), and lower for rotational pasture (1.9 kg NO-N ha). Application of mineral or organic N fertilizer was associated with elevated NO emissions. Yield-scaled emissions (kg NO-N Mg) did not differ by cropping system. Methane fluxes were highly variable and no effect of cropping system was observed. These results suggest that extended and diversified cropping systems could reduce area-scaled NO emissions from agriculture, but none of the systems studied significantly reduced yield-scaled NO emissions.