Shared decision-making in early stage non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review

Background

The United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend that patients and professionals make shared decisions between surgery and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) when treating early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Variation by centre suggests treatment decisions may be disproportionately influenced by clinician judgment and treatment availability rather than patient preference. This systematic review critically evaluates studies of patient and clinician preferences for treatment of early stage NSCLC.

Methods

Primary empirical research up to 30 April 2020 was identified from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and Web of Science databases. Data extracted included: study characteristics and methods, preferences for NSCLC treatment and involvement in decision-making and risk of bias using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings were synthesized using descriptive data and narrative synthesis.

Results

23 studies were included in the review; 18 measured patient preferences, 4 clinician preferences and 1 both clinician and patient preferences. Patients and clinicians were both most likely to prefer a collaborative role in treatment decisions. Most patients did not recall there being a choice between surgery or SABR options, and thus experienced minimal decisional conflict.

Conclusions

For professionals to support patients in making informed, value based decisions about NSCLC treatments, better quality evidence is needed of the clinical and quality of life trade offs for both surgery and SABR.