Cargando…

Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer

PURPOSE: The main aim of the study was to explore the expectations and knowledge of advanced-stage cancer patients about immunotherapy. METHODS: This mixed methods study included 53 cancer patients on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), 55 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy (CT), and 53 non-ca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ihrig, Andreas, Richter, Jenniffer, Grüllich, Carsten, Apostolidis, Leonidas, Horak, Peter, Villalobos, Matthias, Grapp, Miriam, Friederich, Hans-Christoph, Maatouk, Imad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7679331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32813113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03336-1
_version_ 1783612318028922880
author Ihrig, Andreas
Richter, Jenniffer
Grüllich, Carsten
Apostolidis, Leonidas
Horak, Peter
Villalobos, Matthias
Grapp, Miriam
Friederich, Hans-Christoph
Maatouk, Imad
author_facet Ihrig, Andreas
Richter, Jenniffer
Grüllich, Carsten
Apostolidis, Leonidas
Horak, Peter
Villalobos, Matthias
Grapp, Miriam
Friederich, Hans-Christoph
Maatouk, Imad
author_sort Ihrig, Andreas
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The main aim of the study was to explore the expectations and knowledge of advanced-stage cancer patients about immunotherapy. METHODS: This mixed methods study included 53 cancer patients on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), 55 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy (CT), and 53 non-cancer patients. Participants’ expectations about ICIs and CT were compared. Additional qualitative data were derived from semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Among patients who did not receive ICIs, 63 (58%) had never heard of ICIs and 94 (87%) had large gaps in their knowledge of ICIs. Among ICI patients, 33 (62%) simply described ICIs without errors. ICI perception was positive, regardless of whether respondents received or had heard of ICIs, which became particularly evident when compared to CT. ICIs were rated as more promising, and all adverse effects were expected to be significantly lower than those of CT. Knowledge about ICIs was also limited in the interviewed ICI patients. Some patients reported adverse effects of ICIs that were mostly mild and well-tolerated or easily treated. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of understanding of ICIs should be improved by activities to increase the knowledge of ICI patients and the general population. In contrast to CT, ICIs invoked fewer negative associations with efficacy and toxicity. Therefore, attention should be paid to risk awareness when educating patients. (Clinical trial registration number: DRKS00011868) Trial Registration: German clinical trials register, www.germanctr.de, number DRKS00011868.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7679331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76793312020-11-23 Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer Ihrig, Andreas Richter, Jenniffer Grüllich, Carsten Apostolidis, Leonidas Horak, Peter Villalobos, Matthias Grapp, Miriam Friederich, Hans-Christoph Maatouk, Imad J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Original Article – Cancer Research PURPOSE: The main aim of the study was to explore the expectations and knowledge of advanced-stage cancer patients about immunotherapy. METHODS: This mixed methods study included 53 cancer patients on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), 55 cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy (CT), and 53 non-cancer patients. Participants’ expectations about ICIs and CT were compared. Additional qualitative data were derived from semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Among patients who did not receive ICIs, 63 (58%) had never heard of ICIs and 94 (87%) had large gaps in their knowledge of ICIs. Among ICI patients, 33 (62%) simply described ICIs without errors. ICI perception was positive, regardless of whether respondents received or had heard of ICIs, which became particularly evident when compared to CT. ICIs were rated as more promising, and all adverse effects were expected to be significantly lower than those of CT. Knowledge about ICIs was also limited in the interviewed ICI patients. Some patients reported adverse effects of ICIs that were mostly mild and well-tolerated or easily treated. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of understanding of ICIs should be improved by activities to increase the knowledge of ICI patients and the general population. In contrast to CT, ICIs invoked fewer negative associations with efficacy and toxicity. Therefore, attention should be paid to risk awareness when educating patients. (Clinical trial registration number: DRKS00011868) Trial Registration: German clinical trials register, www.germanctr.de, number DRKS00011868. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-08-19 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7679331/ /pubmed/32813113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03336-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Article – Cancer Research
Ihrig, Andreas
Richter, Jenniffer
Grüllich, Carsten
Apostolidis, Leonidas
Horak, Peter
Villalobos, Matthias
Grapp, Miriam
Friederich, Hans-Christoph
Maatouk, Imad
Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title_full Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title_fullStr Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title_full_unstemmed Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title_short Patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
title_sort patient expectations are better for immunotherapy than traditional chemotherapy for cancer
topic Original Article – Cancer Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7679331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32813113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03336-1
work_keys_str_mv AT ihrigandreas patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT richterjenniffer patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT grullichcarsten patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT apostolidisleonidas patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT horakpeter patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT villalobosmatthias patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT grappmiriam patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT friederichhanschristoph patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer
AT maatoukimad patientexpectationsarebetterforimmunotherapythantraditionalchemotherapyforcancer