A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.
Decision-making
Glioblastoma
Tumor treating fields
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Apr 2024
25 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
29
09
2023
accepted:
22
02
2024
medline:
26
4
2024
pubmed:
26
4
2024
entrez:
25
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences.
METHODS
METHODS
Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38664630
doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12042-x
pii: 10.1186/s12885-024-12042-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
527Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States. CBTRUS Statistical Report:Primary Brain and Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2004–2008. 2012.
Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127(12):2893–917.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.25516
pubmed: 21351269
Stupp R, Roila F, Group EGW. Malignant glioma: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2009;20(Suppl 4):126–8.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp151
pubmed: 19454432
Novocure O. Elevate Expectations. Available from: https://www.optune.com/ .
Swanson KD, Lok E, Wong ET. An overview of Alternating Electric fields Therapy (NovoTTF Therapy) for the treatment of malignant glioma. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2016;16(1):8.
doi: 10.1007/s11910-015-0606-5
pubmed: 26739692
pmcid: 4703612
Jain KK. A critical overview of targeted therapies for Glioblastoma. Front Oncol. 2018;8:419.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00419
pubmed: 30374421
pmcid: 6196260
Oldfield EH, Ram Z, Culver KW, Blaese RM, DeVroom HL, Anderson WF. Gene therapy for the treatment of brain tumors using intra-tumoral transduction with the thymidine kinase gene and intravenous ganciclovir. Hum Gene Ther. 1993;4(1):39–69.
doi: 10.1089/hum.1993.4.1-39
pubmed: 8384892
Kanner AA, Wong ET, Villano JL, Ram Z, Investigators EF. Post Hoc analyses of intention-to-treat population in phase III comparison of NovoTTF-100A system versus best physician’s choice chemotherapy. Semin Oncol. 2014;41(Suppl 6):25–34.
doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2014.09.008
Stupp R, Taillibert S, Kanner AA, Kesari S, Steinberg DM, Toms SA, et al. Maintenance Therapy with Tumor-Treating Fields Plus Temozolomide vs Temozolomide alone for Glioblastoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2015;314(23):2535–43.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.16669
pubmed: 26670971
Stupp R, Taillibert S, Kanner A, Read W, Steinberg D, Lhermitte B, et al. Effect of Tumor-Treating Fields Plus maintenance temozolomide vs maintenance temozolomide alone on survival in patients with glioblastoma: a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318(23):2306–16.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.18718
pubmed: 29260225
pmcid: 5820703
U.S, Food. & Drug Administration. NovoTTF™-100L System - H180002 2019. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/recently-approved-devices/novottftm-100l-system-h180002 .
Thomas AA, Rauschkolb PK. Tumor treating fields for glioblastoma: should it or will it ever be adopted? Curr Opin Neurol. 2019;32(6):857–63.
doi: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000762
pubmed: 31609738
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Guidelines: Central Nervous System Cancers 2021. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1425 .
Degner LF, J. KL DB, et al. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA. 1997;277(18):1485–92.
doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540420081039
pubmed: 9145723
Degner LF, Sloan JA. Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play? J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(9):941–50.
doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90110-9
pubmed: 1432023
Tariman JD, Berry DL, Cochrane B, Doorenbos A, Schepp K. Preferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(6):1145–51.
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp534
pubmed: 19940010
Taphoorn MJB, Dirven L, Kanner AA, Lavy-Shahaf G, Weinberg U, Taillibert S, et al. Influence of Treatment with Tumor-Treating fields on Health-related quality of life of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a secondary analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(4):495–504.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5082
pubmed: 29392280
pmcid: 5885193
Halasz LM, Mitin T. Tumor-treating fields: answering the concern about quality of life. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(4):504–5.
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5062
pubmed: 29392273
Audrey S, Abel J, Blazeby JM, Falk S, Campbell R. What oncologists tell patients about survival benefits of palliative chemotherapy and implications for informed consent: qualitative study. BMJ. 2008;337:a752.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.a752
pubmed: 18669570
pmcid: 2492574
Bloom JR, Marshall DC, Rodriguez-Russo C, Martin E, Jones JA, Dharmarajan KV. Prognostic disclosure in oncology - current communication models: a scoping review. BMJ Supportive Palliat Care. 2022;12(2):167.
doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003313
Liu PH, Landrum MB, Weeks JC, Huskamp HA, Kahn KL, He Y, et al. Physicians’ propensity to discuss prognosis is associated with patients’ awareness of prognosis for metastatic cancers. J Palliat Med. 2014;17(6):673–82.
doi: 10.1089/jpm.2013.0460
pubmed: 24742212
pmcid: 4038989
De Snoo-Trimp JC, Brom L, Pasman HR, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Widdershoven GA. Perspectives of medical specialists on sharing decisions in Cancer Care: a qualitative study concerning chemotherapy decisions with patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Oncologist. 2015;20(10):1182–8.
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0095
pubmed: 26245676
pmcid: 4591958
Brom L, De Snoo-Trimp JC, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Widdershoven GA, Stiggelbout AM, Pasman HR. Challenges in shared decision making in advanced cancer care: a qualitative longitudinal observational and interview study. Health Expect. 2017;20(1):69–84.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12434
pubmed: 26669902
Kiely BE, Stockler MR, Tattersall MH. Thinking and talking about life expectancy in incurable cancer. Semin Oncol. 2011;38(3):380–5.
doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2011.03.007
pubmed: 21600367
Hagerty RG, Butow PN, Ellis PA, Lobb EA, Pendlebury S, Leighl N, et al. Cancer patient preferences for communication of prognosis in the metastatic setting. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(9):1721–30.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.095
pubmed: 15117995
Greisinger AJ, Lorimor RJ, Aday LA, Winn RJ, Baile WF. Terminally ill cancer patients. Their most important concerns. Cancer Pract. 1997;5(3):147–54.
pubmed: 9171550
Parker SM, Clayton JM, Hancock K, Walder S, Butow PN, Carrick S, et al. A systematic review of prognostic/end-of-life communication with adults in the advanced stages of a life-limiting illness: patient/caregiver preferences for the content, style, and timing of information. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007;34(1):81–93.
doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.09.035
pubmed: 17531434
Epstein AS, Prigerson HG, O’Reilly EM, Maciejewski PK. Discussions of life expectancy and changes in illness understanding in patients with Advanced Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(20):2398–403.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.6696
pubmed: 27217454
pmcid: 4981977
Mack JW, Cronin A, Keating NL, Taback N, Huskamp HA, Malin JL, et al. Associations between End-of-life discussion characteristics and Care received Near Death: a prospective cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(35):4387–95.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.43.6055
pubmed: 23150700
pmcid: 3675701
Clayton JM, Butow PN, Tattersall MHN, Devine RJ, Simpson JM, Aggarwal G, et al. Randomized Controlled Trial of a prompt list to help Advanced Cancer patients and their caregivers to ask questions about prognosis and end-of-Life Care. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(6):715–23.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.7827
pubmed: 17308275
Renjith V, Yesodharan R, Noronha JA, Ladd E, George A. Qualitative methods in Health Care Research. Int J Prev Med. 2021;12:20.
pubmed: 34084317
pmcid: 8106287