Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session 3

4503 - Prospective Comparison of Travel Burden, Cost and Time to Obtain Tumor Board Treatment Plan Through In-Person Visits vs. an AI Enabled Health Technology (N=1803)

Date

30 Sep 2019

Session

Poster Display session 3

Presenters

Rajendra Badwe

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2019) 30 (suppl_5): v816-v821. 10.1093/annonc/mdz272

Authors

R. Badwe1, C. Pramesh1, N. Feldman2, S. Gupta3, A. D'Cruz1, B. Anderson4

Author affiliations

  • 1 Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital Centre, 400068 - Mumbai/IN
  • 2 Medical Oncology, University of California Los Angeles, 90095 - Los Angeles/US
  • 3 Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, 400012 - Mumbai/IN
  • 4 Surgical Oncology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 98109 - Seattle/US
More

Resources

Abstract 4503

Background

NAVYA is a validated online cancer informatics solution that combines artificial intelligence (AI) and rapid review (2 mins/case) by multi-disciplinary tumor board experts at Academic Medical Centers (AMC) to deliver multidisciplinary expert treatment plan to patients within 24 hours. Initially developed for patients in India without ready access to expertise, over 28,000 patients across 68 countries have since reached out to NAVYA. Prior research (SABCS and ASCO 2014-2018) showed, 1) 97% concordance of NAVYA with an AMC in India and in the US 2) 97% of patients experienced significant anxiety relief due to 24 hours turnaround time. NAVYA scales access to expertise unlike the limitations of synchronized 1 patient: 1 doctor consults in telemedicine.

Methods

Three patient centered outcomes (travel distance, cost and time to receive expert treatment plan) were studied. All consecutive patients who reached out to NAVYA between 1/1/17-1/31/19 but ultimately opted for in-person visit to an AMC were contacted by prospective phone follow up. This was compared to a numerically balanced random sample of patients who only used NAVYA to obtain treatment plans.

Results

Prospective phone follow-ups with 902 in-person patients and 901 NAVYA patients were analyzed. The groups did not differ significantly in demographics or disease characteristics. In-person patients and NAVYA patients differed significantly with respect to 1) median travel distance (761 miles, IQR (152 -1083 miles) vs. 0 miles (p < 0.05)) 2) travel related costs of $1250 [95% CI +/- $54.5] vs $105 online processing fee 3) total time to receipt of treatment plan (4.66 days, IQR (0.4 - 20.3 days) vs. 1.04 day IQR (0.4-2.5) (p < 0.05)).

Conclusions

Cancer informatics solutions that combine AI with human clinical expertise to generate multidisciplinary treatment plans tailored to an individual patient, and vetted by experts at AMC, scale ready access to expertise around the world. For patients with limited access to AMC, such solutions eliminate travel burden, and significantly reduce cost and wait time. This has significant implications for creating access to specialty expertise, globally.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings