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
1908 - Androgen Receptor (AR) Aberrations in Patients (Pts) With Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (mCSPC) Treated With Apalutamide (APA) Plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) in TITAN
Presenter: Kim Chi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4058 - 68Ga-PSMA guided bone biopsies for molecular diagnostics in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer patients
Presenter: Anouk de Jong
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2226 - Spatial-Temporal Change in Quantitative Total Bone Imaging (QTBI) and Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) Treated With Enzalutamide (ENZA)
Presenter: Glenn Liu
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5795 - Efficacy of Enzalutamide in Hormone-sensitive Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Clinical Utility of 18F-Choline PET and Whole Body MRI.
Presenter: Susanne Osanto
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
899 - Urine extracellular vesicle GATA2 mRNA alone and in a multigene test predicts initial prostate biopsy result
Presenter: Jungreem Woo
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3094 - Circulating tumor cell (CTC) genomic landscape in neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) by single cell copy number analysis
Presenter: Vincenza Conteduca
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2527 - Circulating Tumor Cells (CTC) count and Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) response measures in metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) treated with Docetaxel (Doc)
Presenter: Rebeca Lozano Mejorada
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
6106 - Assessing the clinical relevance of drug–drug interactions (DDI) with darolutamide (DARO)
Presenter: Christian Zurth
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2237 - KEYNOTE-921: phase 3 study of pembrolizumab (pembro) plus docetaxel and prednisone for enzalutamide (enza)- or abiraterone (abi)-pretreated patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).
Presenter: Daniel Petrylak
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2241 - KEYNOTE-641: Phase 3 Study of Pembrolizumab (pembro) Plus Enzalutamide for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC)
Presenter: Julie Graff
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract