Treatment preferences among Japanese patients and physicians for epidermal growth factor receptor‐mutant non‐small cell lung cancer

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionEvidence is limited on preferences of Japanese patients and physicians in treatment for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐mutant non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several oral or intravenous novel agents for EGFR exon 20 insertions are under development. The aim of our study was to investigate which attributes of novel treatments influenced selection of oral or intravenous agents among treated patients and treating physicians in Japan.MethodsThe study was designed by board‐certified oncologists, patient representatives, and analytics specialists. Eligible participants completed an online survey with a discrete choice experiment presenting two treatment profiles described by attributes: mode of administration (oral or intravenous); frequency of administration; overall response rate (ORR); average progression‐free survival (PFS); chance of experiencing severe side effects (SEs); mild–moderate gastrointestinal SEs; mild–moderate skin‐related SEs; and patient out‐of‐pocket costs.ResultsFifty‐four patients (all self‐reported EGFR‐mutant) and 74 physicians participated from December 2021 to August 2022. All attributes being equal, there was greater preference for oral administration. However, there was greater preference for intravenous over oral, when ORR and PFS improved by 10% and 1 month, and severe SEs reduced by 10%. Physicians exhibited greater preference for PFS compared to patients (p < 0.01). Ranked order of attribute importance was as follows: (1) PFS; (2) ORR; (3) severe SEs, expressed by patients and physicians alike.ConclusionsOur study revealed Japanese physician and patient preferences in treatment options for EGFR‐mutant NSCLC. Compared to the strong preference for a more efficacious drug, the preference of oral versus intravenous revealed a smaller impact.