Work

Patients' Perceptions and Preferences on the Choice of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer Management in the United Kingdom

Year: 2025

Type: article

Abstract: ABSTRACT This study aimed to understand participants' experiences with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and to evaluate their preferences regarding treatment options. Individuals in the United Kingdom with a diagnosis of prostate cancer and experience with ADT were enroled in either a qualitative survey conducted via online video teleconferencing or a quantitative cross‐sectional online survey. The qualitative survey examined participants' perspectives on ADT, while the quantitative survey included an anchored maximum difference scaling (MaxDiff) analysis to identify treatment preferences based on 11 attributes associated with ADT. Additionally, participants completed a treatment preference exercise where they were asked to rank five blinded treatment profiles (based on existing ADT products), each containing eight ADT attributes. Nineteen participants were included in the qualitative survey and nine key themes were identified, including challenges associated with ADT side effects, the value of clinical nurse specialists and patient support groups, and the need for greater patient involvement in treatment decisions. Forty‐eight participants completed the quantitative survey, with the MaxDiff analysis revealing that participants considered multiple attributes when selecting an ADT, such as treatment establishment, route of administration, and speed of testosterone recovery after treatment cessation. When presented with blinded treatment options, 63% of participants selected relugolix as their first‐choice treatment, primarily due to its oral route of administration, although other attributes also influenced their decision. This study highlights the substantial burden of ADT on individuals' lives and their desire to participate in treatment decision‐making. When selecting a treatment, participants consider multiple attributes to be important. Assuming comparable efficacy and safety profiles across products, participants prioritised factors such as treatment establishment and route of administration.

Source: Trends in Urology & Men s Health

DOI: 10.1002/tre.12004