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
3489 - Overall Survival (OS) and Metastasis-Free Survival (MFS) in men with Biochemically Relapsed (BCR) Prostate Cancer after radical prostatectomy (RP) managed with deferred Androgen Deprivation Treatment (ADT): A combined Johns Hopkins and CPDR study
Presenter: Catherine Marshall
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4606 - ARCHES – the role of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with enzalutamide (ENZA) or placebo (PBO) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC): Post hoc analyses of high and low disease volume and risk groups
Presenter: Arnulf Stenzl
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2975 - Updated survival analyses of a multicentric phase II randomized trial of docetaxel (D) plus enzalutamide (E) versus docetaxel (D) as first line chemotherapy for patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) (CHEIRON study).
Presenter: Orazio Caffo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2708 - Real-world analysis of patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving vs not receiving chemotherapy in the treatment sequence
Presenter: Alicia Morgans
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2134 - Baseline fracture risk in men with prostate cancer starting the STAMPEDE trial
Presenter: Janet Brown
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3504 - Risk of falls and fractures in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treated with new hormonal agents – a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Presenter: Rodrigo Coutinho Mariano
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2342 - Pain progression at initiation of chemotherapy in metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) is associated with a poor prognosis: a post-hoc analysis of FIRSTANA
Presenter: Nicolas Delanoy
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5331 - Pain evaluation in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with radium-223 (Ra-223) in the PARABO observation study
Presenter: Holger Palmedo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2823 - Time to castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and the risk of developing immune disorders
Presenter: Vincenza Conteduca
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1500 - Retrospective evaluation of neutropenic admission events in metastatic or high-risk hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) patients having docetaxel chemotherapy upfront or for castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in STAMPEDE
Presenter: Harriet Mintz
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract