Year: 2018
Type: article
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Advanced (including Drug Therapy) II1 Apr 2018MP66-17 PATIENTS PERSPECTIVES ON ADJUVANT THERAPY IN RENAL CELL CARCINOMA Dena Battle, Hans Hammers, Eric Jonasch, Ithaar Derweesh, Daniel George, Börje Ljungberg, Axel Bex, and Michael Staehler Dena BattleDena Battle More articles by this author , Hans HammersHans Hammers More articles by this author , Eric JonaschEric Jonasch More articles by this author , Ithaar DerweeshIthaar Derweesh More articles by this author , Daniel GeorgeDaniel George More articles by this author , Börje LjungbergBörje Ljungberg More articles by this author , Axel BexAxel Bex More articles by this author , and Michael StaehlerMichael Staehler More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.1889AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES At this point in time, there is no approved adjuvant therapy (AT) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The discussion on AT is driven by the pending maturation of overall survival (OS) data for sunitinib in patients at high risk for recurrence. Data on patient's perception of AT are missing. The purpose of this study was to assess the value of specific adjuvant outcome measures to patients with RCC METHODS We conducted a survey-monkey survey in n=450 patients with RCC on the perspective on AT. The survey was promoted via kccure.org, facebook and smartpatients.com. Question were not related to specific results of adjuvant trials but asking only about the attitude towards AT as an intervention. RESULTS Median age was 55.6 years (17-82 years) and 56.4% of the patients were female. 73.6% of the patients underwent nephrectomy as primary therapy, while 22.0% had a partial nephrectomy. 76.4% of the patients had clear cell RCC. 39.1% had recurrence of RCC and 35.3% were receiving systemic therapy for metastatic RCC. 63.1% of patients would use AT if it prolonged OS, followed by 60.1% if AT prolonged disease free survival (DFS), 42.7% if AT demonstrated acceptable toxicity, and 36.7% if guaranteed insurance coverage and efficacy. Experience with systemic therapy was correlated with a wish for a prolonged OS (p<0.0001). Patients with a history of systemic therapy rely on the physician's recommendation in contrast to patients without a history of systemic therapy (p<0.0001). The recurrence status, age, initial stage and type of surgery had no influence on the patients' decisions.28.0% of the patients would need more information prior to their decision, 24.2% would only take AT with a proven OS benefit, 16.9% would use AT if there was moderate toxicity, 13.6% would use AT independent of the associated toxicity level, 8.2% would only use AT without any toxicity. 3.8% of the patients would not use AT. Patients on systemic therapy had a significant higher acceptance of toxicity (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Patients are willing to use AT to achieve OS and DFS benefits, and place lower emphasis on toxicity. These data provide an important perspective on patient perceptions of AT, and emphasize the need for patient education on harms and benefits of AT. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e875 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Dena Battle More articles by this author Hans Hammers More articles by this author Eric Jonasch More articles by this author Ithaar Derweesh More articles by this author Daniel George More articles by this author Börje Ljungberg More articles by this author Axel Bex More articles by this author Michael Staehler More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Source: The Journal of Urology
Language: English
Subfield: Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2796289487