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
61P - Clinical implication of BRCA mutation in breast cancer with central nervous system metastasis
Presenter: Jwa Hoon Kim
Session: e-Poster Display Session
62P - IGF axis in breast cancer recurrence and metastasis
Presenter: Hajara Akhter
Session: e-Poster Display Session
63P - Butterfly pea (<italic>Clitoria ternatea</italic> Linn.) flower extract prevents MCF-7 HER2-positive breast cancer cell metastasis in-vitro
Presenter: Azzahra Asysyifa
Session: e-Poster Display Session
64P - Pre-treatment absolute white blood cell profile count as metastatic predictive factors in invasive ductal carcinoma breast cancer
Presenter: Wikania I Gede
Session: e-Poster Display Session
65P - The new mouse anti-nNav1.5 monoclonal antibody
Presenter: Nur Aishah Sharudin
Session: e-Poster Display Session
66P - The TILs near solid structures is a potential prognostic factor of distant metastases in the luminal HER2-negative breast cancer
Presenter: Vladimir Alifanov
Session: e-Poster Display Session
73P - Selinexor in combination with carboplatin and pemetrexed (CP) in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors: Results of an open label, single-center, multi-arm phase Ib study
Presenter: Kyaw Thein
Session: e-Poster Display Session
74P - Comprehensive transcriptome analysis of endoplasmic reticulum stress in osteosarcomas
Presenter: Yoshiyuki Suehara
Session: e-Poster Display Session
75P - The evaluation of selective sensitivity of EZH2 inhibitors based on synthetic lethality in ARID1A-deficient gastric cancer
Presenter: Leo Yamada
Session: e-Poster Display Session
76P - Targeted tumour photoImmunotherapy against triple-negative breast cancer therapy
Presenter: Vivek Raju
Session: e-Poster Display Session