Abstract 613P
Background
Physicians have frequent interactions with the pharmaceutical industry (pharma), however, there is concern for possible corporate influence on physicians’ prescribing behaviours. We sought to understand perceptions and interactions between pharma and medical oncologists (MO), in comparison with infectious diseases (ID) physicians.
Methods
We conducted an anonymous online cross-sectional survey of Australian MO and ID physicians comparing self-reported interactions and attitudes with pharma. An additional survey was undertaken at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.
Results
A total of 204 Australian and Singaporean physicians were surveyed including 102 oncologists and 102 ID physicians. Demographics including age, gender and years of practice between the two Australian specialties were similar, with an exception that most ID physicians had mainly public work (95% vs. 78% for oncologists, p<0.001). Oncologists had more frequent contact with pharma, the majority (69%) negotiating compassionate access for patients on a monthly/annual basis, compared with ID physicians who had never done so (45%), p<0.001. More ID physicians had never attended a sponsored meeting (15% ID vs. 27% MO respectively, p=0.01) or received travel/accommodation grants from pharma (42% ID vs. 85% MO respectively, p<0.001). However, most physicians (92%) had never received gifts from pharma, with no difference between groups (p=0.17). Most Australian oncologists believed that interacting with pharma was overall beneficial for patient care (78%) compared to ID physicians (34%, p<0.001). This statement was shared by 71% of Singaporean oncologists. Similar rates of Australian oncologists and ID physicians (83% vs. 88%, respectively) felt comfortable for patients to know the details of their interactions with pharma, however, only 57% of Singaporean oncologists agreed with this statement. Most Australian respondents (77%) agreed that there was strong public skepticism of these interactions (p=0.35).
Conclusions
Medical oncologists had more interactions with pharma than ID physicians and were more likely to believe that this was overall beneficial to patient care despite the negative public perception associated with this.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
P.L. Chia: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Merck, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Funding: Merck, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen. T. John: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker, Speaker tour Vietnam: AstraZeneca; Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker, CTIO: Merck Sharp Dohme; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BMS, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Specialised Therapeutics; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Amgen, Takeda, PharmaMar; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Speaker/Chair: ACE Oncology. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
297P - The utilization rate of radiotherapy and chemotherapy for cervical cancer in Indonesia: Optimal versus actual, how far the gap?
Presenter: Charity Kotambunan
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
298P - Managing locally advanced cervical cancer: Insights from a tertiary care center and a 3-year follow-up on outcomes
Presenter: Ambedkar Yadala
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
299P - Sexual dysfunction assessment in longterm survivors of carcinoma cervix using LENT SOMA scale
Presenter: Niharika Sethi
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
300P - Assessing ovarian function in Vietnamese cervical cancer patients who underwent ovary transposition prior to pelvic radiation therapy
Presenter: Cuong Nguyen
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
301P - Correlation between cervical cancer recurrence after radiation therapy and vaginal microbiome
Presenter: Xiaoxian Xu
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
302P - Expression of ERCC4 gene and its correlation with clinical and pathological parameters in cervical cancer
Presenter: Himanshu Mishra
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
303P - Prognostic value of body composition and systemic inflammatory markers in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer following chemoradiotherapy
Presenter: Hui Guo
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
305P - A real-world multicenter cohort study of lenvatinib (LEN) plus pembrolizumab (PEM) in Japanese patients with endometrial cancer: Interim analysis of GOGO-EM4 study
Presenter: Yoshikazu Nagase
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
306P - Adjuvant treatment and impact on relapse in stage IA uterine papillary serous and clear cell carcinomas: A single center retrospective study
Presenter: Sachin Khurana
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
307P - Hormonal therapy vs combination chemotherapy in metastatic leiomyosarcomas: A systematic review
Presenter: Patricia Angel
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract