While overall survival (OS) has historically been the primary endpoint for clinical trials in oncology, progression-free survival (PFS) has gained acceptance as a valuable surrogate endpoint. However, there are no known published reports about the value of PFS from the patient's perspective. We developed a questionnaire that included items regarding quality of life (QoL) and the importance of different treatment outcomes and presented hypothetical scenarios for which respondents were asked to indicate their preferences concerning treatments as they relate to PFS. 282 women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), ranging in age from 21 to 80 years completed an online version of this questionnaire. The majority of women (66 %) had been diagnosed with MBC within the previous 3 years and 56 % had been told their MBC had progressed. When asked to rank five treatment characteristics from most important to least important, respondents ranked "extending PFS" as the second most important treatment outcome after OS. When presented with a hypothetical scenario of two women receiving different treatments, respondents preferred the treatment that resulted in longer PFS (16 vs. 12 months), even when OS and side effects were assumed to be equal. Specifically, when asked to consider which woman within the hypothetical scenario had better QoL, physical functioning, and emotional well-being, respondents more often chose the woman who experienced longer PFS (QoL: 40 vs. 6 %; physical functioning: 32 vs. 8 %; emotional well-being: 58 vs. 6 %) compared to the woman within the hypothetical scenario who had a shorter time of progression. Respondents rated their own QoL highest after being told their MBC was responding to treatment (mean score 76.6) versus after the initial diagnosis of breast cancer and MBC (68.5 and 60.3). These findings suggest that extending PFS is an important treatment outcome and, from a patient perspective, improves overall QoL, physical functioning, and emotional well-being.