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 lunch

2086 - Insight or Confusion: Comparative Study of Perception and Praxis in Comprehensive Genomic Profiling among Community Oncologists in Singapore and Taiwan (576P)

Date

18 Nov 2017

Session

Poster lunch

Presenters

Allen Lai

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_10): x177-x182. 10.1093/annonc/mdx668

Authors

A. Lai

Author affiliations

  • Management, ACT Genomics Singapore, 138623 - Singapore/SG
More

Resources

Abstract 2086

Background

Targeted and immune-cancer therapy options are increasingly available among oncologists and patients in Asia. Devising the most appropriate personalized treatment for each and every cancer patient has become possible thanks to the introduction of multiplexed next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology – comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). However, the adopting CGP in the clinical setting remains much laggard even in the most advanced Asian countries. This study compares and contrasts how CGP is perceived and practiced in patients with cancer in Singapore and Taiwan.

Methods

A group of 30 community-based medical oncologists in Singapore and Taiwan were surveyed to gain their insight and perception of using (or not using) NGS-based CGP as a diagnostic toolkit in their clinical decision making. The survey questions are categorized into four dimensions: clinical utility, value for money, literacy of tests, and socio-cultural issues.

Results

Most (65%) of participants consider the use of CGP can provide clinical insight and value in advanced stages of cancer. Around two fifths of community oncologists expressed concern that CGP rarely provides clinically actionable, evidence-based information, especially for cancers that either lack robust clinical evidence on genomic pathways or without access to clinical trials. One third attributed the slow uptake of CGP to the uncertain value for money. One fifth opined there are often insufficient samples available for genomic testing, and one third complained of the long turnaround time in getting the results frustrated. Taiwanese participants are more acceptable in deciphering lengthy reports through interactive communication than their Singaporean counterpart, whereas the latter expresses that socio-cultural issues, such as reimbursement and insurance exclusivity, are not as significant in patients.

Conclusions

In Asia, due to its heterogeneity and diversity in socio-economic and cultural aspects, the clinical utility of deploying CGP remains unclear given the paucity of loco-regional data and evidence. This paper points out the barriers of CGP adoption in Asia.

Clinical trial identification

Nil

Legal entity responsible for the study

N/A

Funding

None

Disclosure

A. Lai: The author\'s work is related to NGS.

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