Cargando…

Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis

BACKGROUND: In precision medicine biomarkers stratify patients into groups that are offered different treatments, but this may conflict with the principle of equal treatment. While some patient characteristics are seen as relevant for unequal treatment and others not, it is known that they all may i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim, Strand, Roger, Ottersen, Trygve, Norheim, Ole Frithjof
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8108369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33971875
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00625-3
_version_ 1783690117135728640
author Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim
Strand, Roger
Ottersen, Trygve
Norheim, Ole Frithjof
author_facet Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim
Strand, Roger
Ottersen, Trygve
Norheim, Ole Frithjof
author_sort Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In precision medicine biomarkers stratify patients into groups that are offered different treatments, but this may conflict with the principle of equal treatment. While some patient characteristics are seen as relevant for unequal treatment and others not, it is known that they all may influence treatment decisions. How biomarkers influence these decisions is not known, nor is their ethical relevance well discussed. METHODS: We distributed an email survey designed to elicit treatment preferences from Norwegian doctors working with cancer patients. In a forced-choice conjoint analysis pairs of hypothetical patients were presented, and we calculated the average marginal component effect of seven individual patient characteristics, to estimate how each of them influence doctors’ priority-setting decisions. RESULTS: A positive biomarker status increased the probability of being allocated the new drug, while older age, severe comorbidity and reduced physical function reduced the probability. Importantly, sex, education level and smoking status had no significant influence on the decision. CONCLUSION: Biomarker status is perceived as relevant for priority setting decisions, alongside more well-known patient characteristics like age, physical function and comorbidity. Based on our results, we discuss a framework that can help clarify whether biomarker status should be seen as an ethically acceptable factor for providing unequal treatment to patients with the same disease. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00625-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8108369
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81083692021-05-11 Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim Strand, Roger Ottersen, Trygve Norheim, Ole Frithjof BMC Med Ethics Research BACKGROUND: In precision medicine biomarkers stratify patients into groups that are offered different treatments, but this may conflict with the principle of equal treatment. While some patient characteristics are seen as relevant for unequal treatment and others not, it is known that they all may influence treatment decisions. How biomarkers influence these decisions is not known, nor is their ethical relevance well discussed. METHODS: We distributed an email survey designed to elicit treatment preferences from Norwegian doctors working with cancer patients. In a forced-choice conjoint analysis pairs of hypothetical patients were presented, and we calculated the average marginal component effect of seven individual patient characteristics, to estimate how each of them influence doctors’ priority-setting decisions. RESULTS: A positive biomarker status increased the probability of being allocated the new drug, while older age, severe comorbidity and reduced physical function reduced the probability. Importantly, sex, education level and smoking status had no significant influence on the decision. CONCLUSION: Biomarker status is perceived as relevant for priority setting decisions, alongside more well-known patient characteristics like age, physical function and comorbidity. Based on our results, we discuss a framework that can help clarify whether biomarker status should be seen as an ethically acceptable factor for providing unequal treatment to patients with the same disease. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00625-3. BioMed Central 2021-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8108369/ /pubmed/33971875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00625-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Tranvåg, Eirik Joakim
Strand, Roger
Ottersen, Trygve
Norheim, Ole Frithjof
Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title_full Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title_fullStr Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title_full_unstemmed Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title_short Precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
title_sort precision medicine and the principle of equal treatment: a conjoint analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8108369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33971875
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00625-3
work_keys_str_mv AT tranvageirikjoakim precisionmedicineandtheprincipleofequaltreatmentaconjointanalysis
AT strandroger precisionmedicineandtheprincipleofequaltreatmentaconjointanalysis
AT ottersentrygve precisionmedicineandtheprincipleofequaltreatmentaconjointanalysis
AT norheimolefrithjof precisionmedicineandtheprincipleofequaltreatmentaconjointanalysis