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
77P - Dual targeting oxidative phosphorylation and glycolysis in triple-negative breast cancers: En route to effective inhibition of tumour metabolism
Presenter: Alexander Scherbakov
Session: e-Poster Display Session
78P - Novel allogeneic cell immunotherapy for advanced cancers
Presenter: Ratnavelu Kananathan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
86P - The impact of sarcopenia on chemotherapy toxicity and survival rate among colorectal cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Timotius Hariyanto
Session: e-Poster Display Session
87P - Predictive risk factors and online nomograms for colon cancer with synchronous liver metastasis
Presenter: Yajuan Zhu
Session: e-Poster Display Session
88P - Research of radiomics based on indeterminate lung nodules predicting prognosis of LARC patients
Presenter: Zhang Zhiyuan
Session: e-Poster Display Session
89P - Biomarker analysis of regorafenib dose escalation study (RECC study): A phase II multicenter clinical trial in Japan
Presenter: Masanobu Enomoto
Session: e-Poster Display Session
90P - The role of miR-133a-3p/SP1/IGF1R axis in the progression of colorectal cancer
Presenter: Hui Li
Session: e-Poster Display Session
91P - Prognostic biomarker of clinical outcome in locally advanced rectal cancer in Chinese patients
Presenter: Sandy Ho
Session: e-Poster Display Session
92P - Development and validation of risk and prognostic nomograms for bone metastases in advanced colorectal cancer patients
Presenter: Nan Wang
Session: e-Poster Display Session
93P - Assessment of nutritional status of colorectal cancer patients in a tertiary government hospital
Presenter: Rogelio Velasco
Session: e-Poster Display Session