Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,952 studies31 sourcesUpdated 46 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0The Patient

Patient Preferences and Treatment Decision Drivers in IDH-Mutant Grade 2 Glioma: An International Discrete Choice Experiment

  • Ashley Parham Ghiaseddin1
  • Kismet Hossain-Ibrahim2
  • Antje Wick3
  • Céline Aubin4
  • Marc Massetti4
  • Anaïs Ragon4
  • Fatemeh Amini5
  • Alasdair Fellows5
  • Daniel Aggio5
5 affiliations
  1. 1University of Florida Health, Gainesville, FL USA
  2. 2University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
  3. 3Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
  4. 4Servier International, Suresnes, France
  5. 5Vitaccess Limited, London, UK
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background: Grade 2 isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant (mIDH) glioma imposes significant health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and economic burden.

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore patient preferences and socioeconomic burden in grade 2 mIDH glioma and its treatment.

Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was administered to patients across the US, UK, Canada and Germany. Attributes included life expectancy, time until tumour progression, side effects, future risk of challenges performing work/usual activities and treatment modality. DCE data were analysed using a mixed-effects logit model. Relative attribute importance scores and trade-offs between attributes were estimated.

Results: A total of 118 participants (56% male; mean age 41.9 years; 67.8% employed) were included in the final analysis. Four of the five attributes were independent drivers of patients’ treatment preferences. Participants preferred treatments with additional years of life expectancy and tumour-free progression and were averse to treatments with higher risks of side effects and future challenges performing work/usual activities. Treatment modality did not significantly influence preferences. Based on 10% risk increments, relative attribute importance scores showed life expectancy was the most important driver of choice (26.5%), followed by side effects (21.6%). Side effects (31.9–37.9%) and future issues with work/usual activities (20.6–24.4%) became relatively more important when expressed as 20–30% increments. Patients were willing to trade life expectancy to avoid increased risk of side effects.

Conclusions: Patients placed the greatest value on gains in survival. Avoidance of risks of side effects or impacts to daily activities were also significant predictors of choice, with patients willing to trade life expectancy to avoid risk attributes. Incorporating patient preferences is essential to support shared treatment decision making and ensure treatment strategies align with patients’ values and expectations.

Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6.

Related

  1. Lived experience preferences for mental health peer support services in Australian primary care: a discrete choice experiment with qualitative analysis
    Billingsley Kaambwa, Belinda Fuss, Taylor-Jade Woods +4
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedLicence not statedGeneral medicineCrossref
  2. Preferences of community-dwelling older adults with depressive symptoms for key components of a multidomain intervention combining exercise and sleep promotion: a discrete choice experiment
    Nan Zhang, Jingpeng Gao, Yanni Wang +7
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedLicence not statedGeneral medicineCrossref
  3. Public preferences for investigative genetic genealogy (IGG) programs: A discrete choice experiment.
    Nijole P Tjader, Natalie Riva Smith, Nicola B Campoamor +4
    Genetics in medicine openPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGenetics & genomicsEurope PMC
  4. Dairy farmers’ preferences for reducing pesticide use: does workload matter? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment among dairy farmers in Brittany, France
    Julia Denantes, Aude Ridier, Carole Ropars-Collet +2
    Journal of Rural StudiesPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral biologyHAL
  5. An information ecology approach to preferences for online medical consultation platforms in China: a discrete choice experiment
    Li Sun, Dakun Xu
    Frontiers in Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Epidemiology & public healthCrossref

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{ghiaseddin2026patient,
  title = {{Patient Preferences and Treatment Decision Drivers in IDH-Mutant Grade 2 Glioma: An International Discrete Choice Experiment}},
  author = {Ashley Parham Ghiaseddin and Kismet Hossain-Ibrahim and Antje Wick and Céline Aubin and Marc Massetti and Anaïs Ragon and Fatemeh Amini and Alasdair Fellows and Daniel Aggio},
  journal = {The Patient},
  year = {2026},
  month = jun,
  doi = {10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6},
  note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Patient Preferences and Treatment Decision Drivers in IDH-Mutant Grade 2 Glioma: An International Discrete Choice Experiment
AU  - Ashley Parham Ghiaseddin
AU  - Kismet Hossain-Ibrahim
AU  - Antje Wick
AU  - Céline Aubin
AU  - Marc Massetti
AU  - Anaïs Ragon
AU  - Fatemeh Amini
AU  - Alasdair Fellows
AU  - Daniel Aggio
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/06/13
JO  - The Patient
DO  - 10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6
AB  - Background: Grade 2 isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant (mIDH) glioma imposes significant health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and economic burden.  Objective: The aim of this study was to explore patient preferences and socioeconomic burden in grade 2 mIDH glioma and its treatment.  Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was administered to patients across the US, UK, Canada and Germany. Attributes included life expectancy, time until tumour progression, side effects, future risk of challenges performing work/usual activities and treatment modality. DCE data were analysed using a mixed-effects logit model. Relative attribute importance scores and trade-offs between attributes were estimated.  Results: A total of 118 participants (56% male; mean age 41.9 years; 67.8% employed) were included in the final analysis. Four of the five attributes were independent drivers of patients’ treatment preferences. Participants preferred treatments with additional years of life expectancy and tumour-free progression and were averse to treatments with higher risks of side effects and future challenges performing work/usual activities. Treatment modality did not significantly influence preferences. Based on 10% risk increments, relative attribute importance scores showed life expectancy was the most important driver of choice (26.5%), followed by side effects (21.6%). Side effects (31.9–37.9%) and future issues with work/usual activities (20.6–24.4%) became relatively more important when expressed as 20–30% increments. Patients were willing to trade life expectancy to avoid increased risk of side effects.  Conclusions: Patients placed the greatest value on gains in survival. Avoidance of risks of side effects or impacts to daily activities were also significant predictors of choice, with patients willing to trade life expectancy to avoid risk attributes. Incorporating patient preferences is essential to support shared treatment decision making and ensure treatment strategies align with patients’ values and expectations.  Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-026-00821-6.
SN  - 1178-1653
SN  - 1178-1661
ER  -