Abstract 353P
Background
To date, there is limited information on Indian oncologists' views and experiences of geriatric oncology. This study aimed to explore the views of Indian oncologists regarding the perception of, and barriers to the incorporation of geriatric screening tools, GA and collaboration with geriatricians in routine clinical practice.
Methods
This was an anonymized cross-sectional survey. The online survey, based on a literature review and expert opinion, comprised 12 questions covering: (i) respondent characteristics, clinical practice environment and patient population; (ii) challenges and treatment decision-making factors in the management of older patients with cancer; and (iii) benefits of and barriers to the implementation of GA or geriatrician review in cancer care for older patients. Qualitative variables were reported as numbers (N) and percentages. Statistical analyses were performed using χ 2 or Fisher’s exact test. Results were considered statistically significant with p < 0.05. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software (version 20).
Results
Between March 2019 and June 2019, 100 answers were collected. Only 74 centres (48%) had a geriatrics department and a mere 21 (14%) medical oncology departments had a person dedicated to GO. The vast majority (n = 100; 88%) had the perception that the number of elderly patients with cancer seen in clinical practice had increased. Eighteen (12%) oncologists had specific protocols and geriatric scales were used at 55 (31%) centres. Almost all (91%) claimed not to apply special management practices using specific tools for every geriatric patient. There was agreement that GO afforded certain potential advantages. Finally, 99% of the oncologists surveyed believed it and that training in GO had to be improved.
Conclusions
From the nationwide survey, we conclude that there is currently no defined care structure for elderly cancer patients. There is an increasing perception of the need for training in GO. This survey reflects a reality in which specific needs are perceived.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Tata Memorial Hospital.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
The author has declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
34P - Clinical significance of neoadjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy for II and III stage breast cancer: A meta-analysis of published studies
Presenter: Meng chen Liu
Session: e-Poster Display Session
35P - Pathological response to weekly nabpaclitaxel and carboplatin followed by anthracycline regimen in triple negative breast cancer
Presenter: Goteti Sharat Chandra
Session: e-Poster Display Session
36P - Survival in patients with contralateral breast cancer
Presenter: Sergey Kamishov
Session: e-Poster Display Session
37P - Correlation between haematological toxicity with quality of life in breast cancer patients after first-cycle chemotherapy
Presenter: felix Wijovi
Session: e-Poster Display Session
38P - Evaluation of the prognostic value of innate immunity-related biomarkers in early breast cancer (BC)
Presenter: Veronica Martini
Session: e-Poster Display Session
39P - CSF-1R inhibitor (C019199) enhances antitumor effect in combination with anti-PD-1 therapy on murine breast cancer models
Presenter: Jiani Zheng
Session: e-Poster Display Session
40P - Molecular subtypes and imaging phenotypes of breast cancer: MRI
Presenter: Yulduz Khatamovna
Session: e-Poster Display Session
41P - Mir-223 overexpression is associated with increased expression of EGFR and worse prognosis in Indonesian TNBC patients
Presenter: Ibnu Purwanto
Session: e-Poster Display Session
42P - Impact of germline mutations on breast cancer prognosis in Kazakh population
Presenter: Dilyara Kaidarova
Session: e-Poster Display Session
50P - Efficacy and safety analysis of pyrotinib in lapatinib resistant HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: A retrospective study
Presenter: Yijia Hua
Session: e-Poster Display Session