Background In recent years, monoclonal antibodies such as ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have made a significant impact on the treatment of advanced melanoma. Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors leads to improved survival and response rates of 58%‐61% as compared to monotherapy (36%‐44%). However, the price for the better response rates is also a higher frequency of severe adverse events (59%) as compared to monotherapy (17%‐21%). This study examines attitudes towards melanoma therapy options of physicians, healthy individuals, melanoma patients, and physicians with oncological disease, their willingness to pay, and preference of quality versus length of life. Methods After obtaining ethical approval and informed consent surveys were conducted in 111 participants divided into four groups: melanoma patients (n = 30), healthy individuals as controls (n = 30), physicians (n = 27), and physicians with oncological disease (n = 24). Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS statistics (version 25, IBM), applying the Pearson´s chi‐squared test, Spearman correlation coefficient, Wilcoxon‐Mann‐Whitney test, and Kruskal‐Wallis test. Results Life prolongation is more valued by melanoma patients and physicians with oncological disease compared to healthy controls and healthy physicians. In total, 30% of melanoma patients opt for a life prolonging therapy in all cases, even if this life prolongation is only marginal. Physicians are the strongest proponents of combination immunotherapy.    Conclusion The valuation of the different treatment options differs in the four study groups with affected people valuing life prolongation much more. The individual value of cancer therapies is high, but differs from the societal standpoint.

In 8453 colonoscopies with optimal preparations, most recommendations (95%) were guideline-adherent. No guideline recommendation currently exists for fair preparation, but in this investigation into community practice, the majority of the fair preparation group received 10-year follow-up recommendations. A strikingly high proportion of examinations with poor preparation received a follow-up recommendation greater than the 1-year guideline recommendation. Provider education is needed to ensure that patients with poor bowel preparation are followed appropriately to reduce the risk of missing important lesions.

No abstract

No abstract