Preferences of lung cancer patients for treatment and decision-making: a systematic literature review

• Published in: European journal of cancer care Vol. 25; no. 4; pp. 580 - 591
• Main Authors: Schmidt, K., Damm, K., Prenzler, A., Golpon, H., Welte, T.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01-07-2016; Hindawi Limited
• Subjects: Decision Making; Humans; Life Support Care - psychology; Literature reviews; Lung cancer; Lung Neoplasms - psychology; Lung Neoplasms - therapy; Measurement techniques; Nursing; patient; Patient Participation - psychology; Patient Preference; preference; Quality of Life; systematic review; treatment; lung cancer; treatment; systematic review; decision-making; patient; preference
• ISSN: 0961-5423; 1365-2354
• DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12425

The consideration of patient preferences in decision‐making has become more important, especially for life‐threatening diseases such as lung cancer. This paper aims to identify the preferences of lung cancer patients with regard to their treatment and involvement in the decision‐making process. We conducted a systematic literature review from 12 electronic databases and included studies published between 2000 and 2012. A total of 20 studies were included in this review. These revealed that lung cancer patients do have preferences that should be considered in treatment decisions; however, these preferences are not homogenous. We found that patients often consider life extension to be more important than the health‐related quality of life or undesirable side effects. This preference seems to depend on patient age. Nausea and vomiting are the most important side effects to be avoided; the relevance of other side effects differs highly between subgroups. The majority of lung cancer patients, nevertheless, seem to prefer a passive rather than an active role in decision‐making, although the self‐reported preferences differed partly from the physicians' perceptions. Overall, we identified an urgent need for larger studies that are suitable for subgroup analyses and incorporate multi‐attributive measurement techniques.