This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Menís preferences for treatment of early stage prostate cancer: Results from a discrete choice experiment, CHERE Working Paper 2006/14

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Madeleine King () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
Rosalie Viney () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
Ishrat Hossain () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
David Smith (Cancer Council, NSW)
Sandra Fowler (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
Elizabeth Savage () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)
Bruce Armstrong (University of Sydney)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in Australia; each year over 10,000 Australians are diagnosed with this disease. There are a number of treatment options for early stage prostate cancer (ESPC); radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, hormonal therapy and combined therapy. Treatment can cause serious side-effects, including severe sexual and urinary dysfunction, bowel symptoms and fatigue. Furthermore, there is no evidence as yet to demonstrate that any of these treatments confers a survival gain over active surveillance (watchful waiting). While patient preferences should be important determinants in the type of treatment offered, little is known about patientsí views of the relative tolerability of side effects and of the survival gains needed to justify these. To investigate this, a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in a sample of 357 men who had been treated for ESPC and 65 age-matched controls. The sample was stratified by treatment, with approximately equal numbers in each treatment group. The DCE included nine attributes: seven side-effects and two survival attributes (duration and uncertainty). An orthogonal fractional set of 108 scenarios from the full factorial was used to generate three versions of the questionnaire, with 18 scenarios per respondent. Multinomial logit (MNL) and mixed logit (MXL) models were estimated. A random intercept MXL model provided a significantly better fit to the data than the simple MNL model, and adding random coefficients for all attributes dramatically improved model fit. Each side-effect had a statistically significant mean effect on choice, as did survival duration. Most attributes had significant variance parameters, suggesting considerable heterogeneity among respondents in their preferences. To model this heterogeneity, we included menís health-related quality of life scores following treatment as covariates to see whether their preferences were influenced by their previous treatment experience. This study demonstrate how DCEs can be used to quantify the trade-offs patients make between side-effects and survival gains. The results provide useful insights for clinicians who manage patients with ESPC, highlighting the importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au/pdf/wp2006_14.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function: First version, July 2006
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney in its series Working Papers with number 2006/14.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:her:chewps:2006/14

Contact details of provider:
Postal: PO Box 123 Broadway NSW 2007, Level 2, Block D, Building 5, 1-59 Quay Street Haymarket NSW 2000
Phone: 61 2 9514 4720
Fax: 61 2 9514 4730
Email:
Web page: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Liz Chinchen).

Related research
Keywords: Prostate cancer; discrete choice experiment; preferences; quality of life;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Andrews, Donald W. K., 1998. "Hypothesis testing with a restricted parameter space," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 155-199, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Bleichrodt, Han & Wakker, Peter & Johannesson, Magnus, 1997. "Characterizing QALYs by Risk Neutrality," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 107-14, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470. [Downloadable!]
  5. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2, March. [Downloadable!]
  7. Geweke, John & Keane, Michael, 2001. "Computationally intensive methods for integration in econometrics," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 56, pages 3463-3568 Elsevier. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Hall, Jane & Fiebig, Denzil G. & King, Madeleine T. & Hossain, Ishrat & Louviere, Jordan J., 2006. "What influences participation in genetic carrier testing?: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 520-537, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Over 1000 institutions contribute their bibliographic data directly to this service.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.