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
2743 - The Impact of Targeted Therapies and Immunotherapy in Melanoma Brain Metastases: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Presenter: Mario Mandala
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5479 - Intracranial Anti-Tumor Activity in Melanoma Brain Metastases with Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib: A Multicenter, Retrospective Analysis
Presenter: Jose Lutzky
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3560 - Outcomes of Patients with Melanoma Brain Metastases (MBM) Treated with Standard of Care Therapy After Being Excluded from MBM-Specific Clinical Trials
Presenter: Kourtney Holbrook
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3175 - The analysis of current treatment outcomes in melanoma patients with brain metastases
Presenter: Joanna Placzke
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4550 - A multivariate model to define prognostic groups among patients with melanoma brain metastases: a 10-year retrospective cohort study
Presenter: Giacomo Pelizzari
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4191 - The immune landscape of melanoma significantly influences survival in patients with highly mutated tumors.
Presenter: Robert Ferguson
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1625 - Final Results from Phase II of Combination with Canerpaturev (formerly HF10), an Oncolytic Viral Immunotherapy, and Ipilimumab in Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma in 2nd-or later line treatment
Presenter: Kenji Yokota
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5346 - Evaluating polygenic risk score prediction model for melanoma prognosis
Presenter: Miriam Potrony
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5477 - Impact of sarcopenia in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with immunotherapy
Presenter: Maria Grazia Vitale
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3469 - Ancillary evaluation of systemic immune antitumor response (SIAR) and tumor growth rate (TGR) of patients (pts) with metastatic melanoma (MM) treated with radiotherapy (RT) combined with ipilimumab (ipi) in the phase 1 study Mel-Ipi-Rx.
Presenter: Celine Boutros
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract