Estimating the preferences and willingness-to-pay for colorectal cancer screening: an opportunity to incorporate the perspective of population at risk into policy development in Thailand.

AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the public health burdens that can be lowered by early detection. This study aims to examine the preferences and willingness-to-pay of a population at risk for CRC screening in Thailand. Understanding the preferences for these individuals at risk would help Thailand, as an example of LMICs, to design effective population-based CRC screening programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among screening-naïve adults aged 50-75 years, who were at risk of CRC, in the out-patient department of a tertiary care hospital in Thailand. A DCE questionnaire was developed from six CRC screening attributes. Each questionnaire was composed of six choice sets and each contained two alternatives described by the different levels of attributes and an opt-out alternative. Participants were asked to choose one alternative from each choice set. A multinomial logit model was developed to determine the relative preference of each attribute. The willingness-to-pays for all attributes and screening modalities and the estimated preferred choices of the annual fecal immunochemical test (FIT), 10-yearly colonoscopy, 5-yearly double-contrast barium enema (DCBE), 5-yearly computed tomographic colonography (CTC), 5-yearly flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), and no screening was calculated and compared. RESULTS: Four hundred participants were included. All attributes, except pain and less bowel preparation, were statistically associated with the participants' preference (p < .05). They preferred screenings with a high-risk reduction of CRC-related mortality, no complication, 5-year interval, and lower cost. The estimated preferred choices of FIT, colonoscopy, DCBE, CTC, and FS were 38.2%, 11.4%, 14.6%, 9.2%, and 11.4%, respectively. The willingness-to-pays for each screening modality was US$251, US$189, US$183, US$154, and US$142 (8,107, 6,105, 5,911, 4,974, and 4,587 THB) per episode, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk reduction of CRC-related mortality, complication, screening interval, and cost influenced the CRC screening preferences of Thai adults. FIT was the most preferred. Policymakers can develop a successful CRC screening campaign using these findings, incorporating the perspective of the population at risk in policy formulation to accomplish their goals.

Immunotargeted therapy in melanoma: patient, provider preferences, and willingness to pay at an academic cancer center.

New melanoma therapies have shifted the expectations of patients and providers. Evaluating the impact of treatment characteristics may enhance shared decision making. A survey, including a discrete choice experiment, was utilized to evaluate perceived trade-offs of different melanoma treatments and to estimate out-of-pocket (OOP) willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds (January 2016 to March 2016). Participants included patients with melanoma at Huntsman Cancer Institute and their cancer care providers. Stakeholder focus groups were conducted to identify treatment attributes. Descriptive and comparative statistics and multinomial logit model were used to evaluate responses. Response rates were 41.9% (N = 220) for patients and 37.7% (N = 20) for providers. Immunotherapy and targeted therapy attributes considered important by participants were overall survival, immunotherapy-related side effects, and skin toxicities. Patients and providers had significantly different views of quality-of-life expectations, anxiety toward melanoma, trust to make treatment decisions, sharing concerns about treatment, time to discuss treatment, understanding OOP costs, and willingness to undergo/recommend treatment (half of the patients would undergo treatment if it was effective for > 24 months). Among patients, the average monthly OOP WTP for combination immunotherapy with nivolumab + ipilimumab was $ 2357 and for BRAF/MEK inhibitor was $1648. Among providers, these estimates were $ 2484 and $1350, respectively. Discordance existed between patients' and providers' perceptions about quality of life expectations, degree of anxiety, sharing of opinions, and progression-free survival. Our study suggests that patients and providers exhibit a higher OOP WTP for combination immunotherapy treatment compared with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, influenced predominately by overall survival expectations.

Benefit-risk assessment of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins): a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct the benefit-risk assessment of 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl (HMG) coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) using a discrete choice experiment, based on 3 major stakeholders' perspectives including patients, experts and policymakers in Thailand. DESIGN: A discrete choice experiment questionnaire survey in three stakeholders' perspectives. SETTING: Public hospitals in Thailand. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 353 policymakers, experts and patients. OUTCOMES: Stakeholders' preferences for assessment criteria (stroke reduction, myocardial infarction reduction, myalgia and hepatotoxicity). Statins' ranking and maximum acceptable risk in all perspectives were also calculated. RESULTS: For any perspective, the most and least important criteria were the risk of hepatotoxicity and the benefit of myocardial infarction reduction, respectively. Patients and experts agreed on the order of importance for myalgia and stroke reduction, but policymakers had different order of importance in these criteria. Overall, results showed that the highest and lowest chances of being chosen were atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, respectively. Only patients' ranking order was different from others. Maximum acceptable risk of hepatotoxicity was lower than that of myalgia, reflecting the greater concern of all perspectives to statin consequence on liver. CONCLUSIONS: The results of benefit-risk assessment from every perspective were somewhat consistent. This study demonstrated the feasibility of applying a discrete choice experiment in the benefit-risk assessment of drugs and encouraged the engagement of multiple stakeholders in the decision-making process.

Relative importance of attributes of drug benefit plans: Thai civil servants' perspective.

BACKGROUND: The drug benefit plan of Thailand's Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS) must be amended to control increasing costs; to that end, it is important to gather the views of beneficiaries before making changes to the benefit plan. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relative importance of attributes of drug benefit plans from the perspective of CSMBS beneficiaries. METHODS: Attributes and levels adopted from focus group discussions and a preliminary survey were used to develop a questionnaire concerning hypothetical drug benefit plans. A convenience sample of 650 CSMBS beneficiaries in Songkhla province was asked to rate the drug benefit plans. To determine the beneficiaries' decision models, judgment analysis was used. Policy-capturing analysis was used to examine the beneficiaries' preferences, and cluster analysis was conducted to explore the variability among judgment plans. Judgment policy insight was also examined. RESULTS: The results of the study showed that the beneficiaries weighed on cost-sharing as their most important attribute. The results remained unchanged, although only data from the beneficiaries who used the compensatory model were analyzed. The results of the cluster analysis showed that the largest cluster of beneficiaries weighed mostly on the cost-sharing attribute. The judgment policy insight results not only supported the finding that most beneficiaries focused on the cost-sharing attribute but also revealed that they might have the least understanding of how the formulary attribute affected beneficiaries' decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-sharing was the most important attribute for the CSMBS beneficiaries. This study indicated that a possible preferred drug benefit plan should have no cost-sharing, permit access only to drugs listed in a closed formulary, allow beneficiaries to obtain 3 months of drugs, and allow them to obtain drugs from either a community pharmacy or a government hospital.