TY - JOUR
T1 - Willingness to Travel for Cellular Therapy
T2 - The Influence of Follow-Up Care Location, Oncologist Continuity, and Race
AU - Frosch, Zachary A.K.
AU - Namoglu, Esin C.
AU - Mitra, Nandita
AU - Landsburg, Daniel J.
AU - Nasta, Sunita D.
AU - Bekelman, Justin E.
AU - Iyengar, Raghuram
AU - Guerra, Carmen E.
AU - Schapira, Marilyn M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - PURPOSE Patients weigh competing priorities when deciding whether to travel to a cellular therapy center for treatment. We conducted a choice-based conjoint analysis to determine the relative value they place on clinical factors, oncologist continuity, and travel time under different post-treatment follow-up arrangements. We also evaluated for differences in preferences by sociodemographic factors. METHODS We administered a survey in which patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma selected treatment plans between pairs of hypothetical options that varied in travel time, follow-up arrangement, oncologist continuity, 2-year overall survival, and intensive care unit admission rate. We determined importance weights (which represent attributes’ value to participants) using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS Three hundred and two patients (62%) responded. When all follow-up care was at the center providing treatment, plans requiring longer travel times were less attractive (v 30 minutes, importance weights [95% CI] of –0.54 [–0.80 to –0.27], –0.57 [–0.84 to –0.29], and –0.17 [–0.49 to 0.14] for 60, 90, and 120 minutes). However, the negative impact of travel on treatment plan choice was mitigated by offering shared follow-up (importance weights [95% CI] of 0.63 [0.33 to 0.93], 0.32 [0.08 to 0.57], and 0.26 [0.04 to 0.47] at 60, 90, and 120 minutes). Black participants were less likely to choose plans requiring longer travel, regardless of follow-up arrangement, as indicated by lower value importance weights for longer travel times. CONCLUSION Reducing travel burden through shared follow-up may increase patients’ willingness to travel to receive cellular therapies, but additional measures are required to facilitate equitable access.
AB - PURPOSE Patients weigh competing priorities when deciding whether to travel to a cellular therapy center for treatment. We conducted a choice-based conjoint analysis to determine the relative value they place on clinical factors, oncologist continuity, and travel time under different post-treatment follow-up arrangements. We also evaluated for differences in preferences by sociodemographic factors. METHODS We administered a survey in which patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma selected treatment plans between pairs of hypothetical options that varied in travel time, follow-up arrangement, oncologist continuity, 2-year overall survival, and intensive care unit admission rate. We determined importance weights (which represent attributes’ value to participants) using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS Three hundred and two patients (62%) responded. When all follow-up care was at the center providing treatment, plans requiring longer travel times were less attractive (v 30 minutes, importance weights [95% CI] of –0.54 [–0.80 to –0.27], –0.57 [–0.84 to –0.29], and –0.17 [–0.49 to 0.14] for 60, 90, and 120 minutes). However, the negative impact of travel on treatment plan choice was mitigated by offering shared follow-up (importance weights [95% CI] of 0.63 [0.33 to 0.93], 0.32 [0.08 to 0.57], and 0.26 [0.04 to 0.47] at 60, 90, and 120 minutes). Black participants were less likely to choose plans requiring longer travel, regardless of follow-up arrangement, as indicated by lower value importance weights for longer travel times. CONCLUSION Reducing travel burden through shared follow-up may increase patients’ willingness to travel to receive cellular therapies, but additional measures are required to facilitate equitable access.
KW - Aftercare
KW - Humans
KW - Oncologists
KW - Sociodemographic Factors
KW - Surveys and Questionnaires
KW - Travel
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123645855&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=purepublist2023&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:000819596100021&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS
U2 - 10.1200/OP.21.00312
DO - 10.1200/OP.21.00312
M3 - Article
C2 - 34524837
SN - 2688-1527
VL - 18
SP - E193-E203
JO - JCO Oncology Practice
JF - JCO Oncology Practice
IS - 1
ER -