Abstract 4787
Background
Comparison of options from clinical decision-support (CDS) systems and decisions made in practice may be biased towards the treating institution. In this retrospective study, bias was minimized by blinding evaluators to the source of treatment recommendations, either Watson for Oncology® (WFO®) or treatments patients received at Bumrungrad International Hospital (BIH), a user of WFO®.
Methods
Treatments given were compared to therapeutic options provided by WFO®. Treatments that were identical to WFO® “recommended” (green, acceptable) were not evaluated further. Paired treatments were evaluated independently in a blinded fashion by each oncologist before consensus ranking of each pair as either acceptable, acceptable alternatives, or unacceptable treatment. The consensus for each treatment was compared to WFO®, with WFO® “for consideration” (yellow, acceptable alternative), and “not recommended” (red, unacceptable). Chi-squared tests analyzed the association between risk factors and discordant recommendations.
Results
Of 228 treatments given to patients with lung, colon, breast and rectal cancers, 174 were identical to WFO® acceptable (green) and not evaluated further; 54 non-identical pairs were evaluated (Table). Overall, 88.6% of decisions were either the same or viewed as equally acceptable by oncologists; oncologists preferred 3.9% of BIH treatments and 4.4% of WFO treatments. In cases where reasons for discordance were provided, 70% were due to BIH oncologist preference, 20% to patient preference and 10% to WFO treatment availability. We found no association between discordant recommendations and patient age or stage of cancer.Table: 1435P
Treatments | N (%) 228 Total |
---|---|
Treatments are identical | 174 (76.3%) |
Oncologists’ Evaluations | |
Acceptable alternatives | 28 (12.3%) |
BIH Preferred | 9 (3.9%) |
WFO Preferred | 10 (4.4%) |
Both WFO and BIH-Rx unacceptable | 7 (3.1%) |
Conclusions
This blinded study suggests WFO®’s therapeutic options are at as least as good as (or are an acceptable alternative to) treatments in practice. Blinding evaluators to source of treatment may minimize bias in comparisons of CDS systems and decisions made in practice.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
Bumrungrad International Hospital.
Funding
Bumrungrad International Hospital.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
5650 - Tissue-based activation of mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells in combination ipilimumab and nivolumab checkpoint inhibitor (CI) colitis.
Presenter: Sarah Sasson
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5944 - Significance of severe immune-related adverse effects (irAE) on patients with advanced tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors being admitted for secondary toxicity: Clinical relevance and next steps
Presenter: Leyre Zubiri
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5989 - Implementation of a dedicated immuno-oncology toxicity service reduces the acute impact of immune-related adverse events
Presenter: Anna Olsson-Brown
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3267 - Cardiotoxic and pro-inflammatory effects induced by the association of immune checkpoint inhibitor Pembrolizumab and Trastuzumab in preclinical models
Presenter: Nicola Maurea
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3417 - Interstitial lung disease associated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in malignant diseases
Presenter: Akira Yamagata
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2071 - A Phase 1 Study of Intraperitoneal MCY-M11 Anti-Mesothelin CAR for Women with Platinum Resistant High Grade Serous Adenocarcinoma of the Ovary, Primary Peritoneum, or Fallopian Tube, or Subjects with Peritoneal Mesothelioma with Recurrence after Prior Chemotherapy
Presenter: Christina Annunziata
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4935 - Trial in progress: First-in-human study of a novel anti-NY-ESO-1–anti-CD3, TCR-based bispecific (IMCnyeso) as monotherapy in NY-ESO-1/LAGE-1A-positive advanced solid tumors (IMCnyeso-101)
Presenter: Juanita Lopez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5613 - Nimotuzumab-Cisplatin-Radiation versus Cisplatin-Radiation in HPV negative oropharyngeal cancer
Presenter: Kumar Prabhash
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2576 - Interim analysis of a single arm phase 2 study of adjuvant nivolumab after salvage resection in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients previously treated with definitive therapy.
Presenter: Trisha Wise-draper
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4758 - A Phase I Study of the CDK4/6 Inhibitor, Palbociclib in combination with Cetuximab and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) for Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (SCCHN); A Result of Dose Escalation Cohort
Presenter: Nuttapong Ngamphaiboon
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract