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
3630 - Results of phase 1 clinical trial of high doses of Seleno-L-methionine (SLM) in sequential combination with Axitinib in previously treated and relapsed clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC) patients
Presenter: Yousef Zakharia
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2356 - Safety and Efficacy of CDX-014 , an Antibody-Drug Conjugate against T Cell immunoglobulin mucin-1 (TIM-1), in advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
Presenter: Bradley McGregor
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1028 - SPAZO2 (SOGUG): Outcomes and prognostic significance of IMDC intermediate prognosis subclassification in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in patients treated with 1st-line pazopanib (1stPz).
Presenter: Begona P. Valderrama
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2293 - Effect of Antacid Intake on the Therapeutic Efficacy of Sunitinib (SUN) in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Patients (pts): a Sub-Analysis of the STAR-TOR Registry
Presenter: Katrin Schlack
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1451 - Randomized phase 3 trial of avelumab + axitinib vs sunitinib as first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma: JAVELIN Renal 101 Japanese subgroup analysis
Presenter: Motohide Uemura
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4399 - Overall and progression-free survival according to MSKCC scores in 1st line sunitinib treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)
Presenter: Jindrich Finek
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1344 - Combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Presenter: Kyaw Thein
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3462 - A phase II trial of TKI induction followed by a randomized comparison between nivolumab or TKI continuation in renal cell carcinoma (NIVOSWITCH)
Presenter: Viktor Grünwald
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5268 - Nivolumab (N) treatment beyond progression in a real-world cohort of patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)
Presenter: Sophie Hans
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4235 - First results of safety profile of nivolumab (NIVO) in combination with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in II and III line of patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in NIVES Study
Presenter: Cristina Masini
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract