Abstract 324P
Background
Cancer being a lethal disease, delay in treatment may be fatal. International organizations have come up with useful guidelines for cancer management. Still the availability of resources, infrastructure, state health policy, COVID incidence and approach of healthcare professionals differ. This study aims to find out the perception and approaches of Indian oncologists - which might prove to be useful in nation specific delivery of cancer care during COVID Pandemic.
Methods
After taking consent, a survey form was circulated online amongst oncologists (haemato/ radiation/ medical/ surgical) across the country and responses collected.
Results
79.2% oncologists represent private sector, 16.8% government sector. 50% oncologists were willing to postpone investigations for stable cancer patients. 42.6% willing to start treatment without knowing the COVID status, while 44.6% were against the idea and 12.9% were indecisive. 73% willing to perform surgery right away for operable nonemergency cases with a negative COVID status and rest 27 % willing to postpone surgery. Concurrent Chemoradiation (57%) was preferred over sequential approach (43%). Majority (53.5%) were comfortable prescribing chemotherapy via telemedicine. Asymptomatic COVID positive patients requiring chemotherapy 64.4% were willing to wait for the virus to resolve and then start therapy and 35.6% were suggesting some form of oral therapy and ongoing isolation. 89.1% preferred oral route if option present. 83.7 % preferred targeted therapy, 8.2% immunotherapy and rest went for other options. 93.1 % preferred day care chemotherapy during COVID and not admission. 61 % thought extended course of dexamethasone given as premedication during chemotherapy did not have a protective role for patients during COVID outbreak. Treatment initiation criteria in descending order - 39.6% stage of the disease, 36.6 % performance status, 22.8% COVID status and for rest it was the cost. 91% oncologists thought nurses were at a higher risk of exposure to COVID infection than the doctors. 54.5% were not taking anti COVID prophylaxis..
Conclusions
Greater homogeneity in practice was noticed amongst oncologists of a developing nation during COVID outbreak. The above information might be useful in policy making.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The author.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
The author has declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
104P - Safety and efficacy of HLX04 versus reference bevacizumab in combination with XELOX or mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: A randomised, double-blind phase III study
Presenter: Shukui Qin
Session: e-Poster Display Session
105P - Prospective, open-label, observational study of cetuximab for metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC): The OPTIM1SE study
Presenter: Tsai-Sheng Yang
Session: e-Poster Display Session
106P - Efficacy and tolerability of capecitabine and mitomycin-C based concurrent radiotherapy in patients with anal canal cancer
Presenter: Prabhat Bhargava
Session: e-Poster Display Session
107P - Safety and efficacy of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Results from the Australian cohort of the phase IIIb, international, open-label, early-access PRECONNECT study
Presenter: Timothy Price
Session: e-Poster Display Session
108P - Comparative analysis of two-stage hepatectomy and enhanced one-stage hepatectomy in the setting of bilobar colorectal liver metastases
Presenter: Hayk Torgomyan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
109P - Efficacy and safety of biweekly or triweekly XELOX regimen for adjuvant chemotherapy of colorectal cancer
Presenter: hangyu zhang
Session: e-Poster Display Session
110P - Analysis for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) effect for colorectal liver metastases
Presenter: Wei Zou
Session: e-Poster Display Session
111P - A meta-analysis study on safety and effectiveness comparison between FOLFOX and XELOX regiments on advanced stage colorectal cancer
Presenter: Ida Bagus Budhi
Session: e-Poster Display Session
112P - Pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: Asia subgroup results of the phase III KEYNOTE-177 study
Presenter: Takayuki Yoshino
Session: e-Poster Display Session
122P - Nomogram to predict short-term effect of radiotherapy based on pre/post-treatment inflammatory biomarkers and their dynamic changes in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Presenter: Shuai Liang
Session: e-Poster Display Session