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
2108 - Biomarker analyses of ramucirumab in patients with platinum refractory urothelial cancer from RANGE, a global, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study.
Presenter: Michiel Van der Heijden
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3090 - Comparison of Immuno-Oncology (IO) Biomarkers in Adenocarcinoma (ACB), Urothelial Carcinoma (UCB) and Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCCB) of the Bladder, with interim results from PURE01
Presenter: Daniele Raggi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5211 - Potential role of a clinical, taxonomical classification and RNA expression integrated signature to predict response to neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients
Presenter: Albert Font
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3206 - Hyperphosphatemia due to Erdafitinib (a Pan-FGFR Inhibitor) and Anti-tumor Activity Among Patients (Pts) with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma (UC)
Presenter: Scott Tagawa
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3110 - Prognostic role of FGFR Mutations and FGFR mRNA expression in metastatic urothelial cancer treated with anti-PD(L1) inhibitors in first and second line setting
Presenter: Florian Roghmann
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3564 - Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) utility as a biomarker for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC)
Presenter: Jean-Michel Lavoie
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2760 - Comparative analysis of tumor mutational burden (TMB) prediction methods and its association with determinants of the tumor immune microenvironment of urothelial bladder cancer (UBC)
Presenter: Markus Eckstein
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2513 - The Immunoscore in patients with urothelial carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: clinical significance for pathological response and survival
Presenter: Elise Nassif
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2835 - Genomic analysis of urothelial cancer and associations with treatment choice and outcome
Presenter: David Sarid
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5763 - cfDNA is an acceptable but insufficient means of characterizing FGFR3 mutation in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC)
Presenter: Sumanta Pal
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract