Patient-reported experiences of cancer care related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland.

PURPOSE: This study aims to describe the experience of Swiss oncological patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A national multi-center study including five hospitals covering the three main language regions of Switzerland was conducted between March and July 2021. Patients with melanoma, breast, lung, or colon cancer receiving active systemic anti-cancer treatment at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic were included. We conducted semi-structured telephone or onsite interviews alongside the administration of distress and resilience-validated questionnaires. Thematic analysis was performed for the qualitative data and descriptive statistics for the quantitative data. RESULTS: Sixty-two cancer patients with a mean age of 61 (SD=14) (58% female) were interviewed. Based on the interviews, we identified that the experience of having cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic was related to five dimensions: psychological, social, support, healthcare, and vaccination. Three themes transverse the five dimensions: (a) needs, (b) positive changes, and (c) phases of the pandemic. In general, patients did not experience delays or disruptions in their cancer treatment nor felt additionally burdened by the pandemic. Lockdown and isolation were reported as mixed experiences (positive and negative), and access to vaccination reassured patients against the risk of infection and instilled hope to return to normalcy. Additionally, we found low distress levels (M=2.9; SD=2.5) and high resilience scores (M=7; SD=1.3) in these patients. CONCLUSION: Swiss patients with cancer did not express major needs or disruptions in their care during this period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results identify the mixed experiences of patients and highlight the high resilience levels.

Patient and General Population Preferences Regarding the Benefits and Harms of Treatment for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Background: Patient preferences for treatment outcomes are important to guide decision-making in clinical practice, but little is known about the preferences of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Objective: To evaluate patient preferences regarding the attributed benefits and harms of systemic treatments for mHSPC and preference heterogeneity between individuals and specific subgroups. Design setting and participants: We conducted an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) preference survey among 77 patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) and 311 men from the general population in Switzerland between November 2021 and August 2022. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We evaluated preferences and preference heterogeneity related to survival benefits and treatment-related adverse effects using mixed multinomial logit models and estimated the maximum survival time participants were willing to trade to avert specific adverse effects. We further assessed characteristics associated with different preference patterns via subgroup and latent class analyses. Results and limitations: Patients with mPC showed an overall stronger preference for survival benefits in comparison to men from the general population (p = 0.004), with substantial preference heterogeneity between individuals within the two samples (both p < 0.001). There was no evidence of differences in preferences for men aged 45-65 yr versus ≥65 yr, patients with mPC in different disease stages or with different adverse effect experiences, or general population participants with and without experiences with cancer. Latent class analyses suggested the presence of two groups strongly preferring either survival or the absence of adverse effects, with no specific characteristic clearly associated with belonging to either group. Potential biases due to participant selection, cognitive burden, and hypothetical choice scenarios may limit the study results. Conclusions: Given the relevant heterogeneity in participant preferences regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for mHSPC, patient preferences should be explicitly discussed during decision-making in clinical practice and reflected in clinical practice guidelines and regulatory assessment regarding treatment for mHSPC. Patient summary: We examined the preferences (values and perceptions) of patients and men from the general population regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. There were large differences between men in how they balanced the expected survival benefits and potential adverse effects. While some men strongly valued survival, others more strongly valued the absence of adverse effects. Therefore, it is important to discuss patient preferences in clinical practice.

Patient preferences for allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: how much benefit is worthwhile from the patient's perspective?

Oncological studies have shown that patients consider small benefits sufficient to make adjuvant chemotherapy worthwhile. We sought to determine the minimal survival benefits that patients considered enough to legitimate allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) and the factors associated with patient preferences. One hundred eighty-four patients having previously received allogeneic HCT at our centre were included and completed a questionnaire exploring patient expectations elicited by time trade-off scenarios as well as quality of life (QoL), symptoms of graft-versus host disease (GvHD) and sociodemographic characteristics. The majority of patients considered a minimal survival benefit of at least 5 (38.6%) or 10 years (41.9%) sufficient to justify HCT, with less than 5% considering survival < 1 year sufficient to warrant HCT. In terms of minimal cure rate, a cumulative 14.8% of patients accepted cure rates below 30% and 30.6% rates below 50%. Likelihood-ratio tests were significant for the effect of age at transplant on expected minimal survival (p = 0.007) and cure rates (p = 0.0001); that is, younger patients at HCT were more likely to accept smaller survival and cure rates. Pre-transplant risk score, QoL, GvHD score and sociological factors did not seem to influence patients' expectations. In conclusion, patient expectations of treatment were much higher than what had been reported in oncological studies. Patients who experienced HCT considered a survival superior to 1 year and cure rates above 50% sufficient to make it worthwhile. Younger patients were more likely to accept smaller benefits; no other predictors for preferences could be detected.

Prospective long-term follow-up after first-line subcutaneous cladribine in hairy cell leukemia: a SAKK trial.

Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) remains an incurable disease. However, first-line treatment with either intravenous or subcutaneous cladribine generally leads to long-lasting remissions. Although there are excellent long-term data for intravenous application, similar data regarding subcutaneous administration are lacking. We therefore analyzed the long-term outcome of 3 prospective multicenter clinical trials on subcutaneous cladribine performed by the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), which recruited 221 patients with classical HCL between 1993 and 2005. Median overall survival from start of treatment was not reached. Pretreatment anemia, higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, and higher age were associated with poorer overall survival in multivariable analysis, whereas early progression at 24 and 36 months had no significant impact on overall survival. Second-line treatment was necessary in 53 (23.7%) patients after a median of 5 (range, 0.2-20.4) years, and first retreatment was mainly monotherapy with cladribine (66%) or rituximab (15.1%) or a combination of these drugs (15.1%). A total of 44 (19.9%) patients developed second primary malignancies with a median time to occurrence of 5.7 (range, 0.01-17.5) years. Second primary malignancies were the main cause for death (14; 27.5%). Compared with a matched normal Swiss population, the incidence of second primary malignancies was not increased. However, survival of patients with HCL was slightly inferior by comparison (P = .036). In conclusion, the outcome of HCL patients treated with subcutaneous cladribine is excellent, and in most patients, 1 cycle of subcutaneous cladribine is sufficient for long-term disease control.