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
2344 - Lung Cancer in Europe: strengthening policy responses to address unmet needs
Presenter: Mary Bussell
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1359 - Curative treatment timelines for breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer: Implications for medical leave coverage
Presenter: Selina Wong
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4433 - Acute Diagnostic Oncology Clinic: A Unique Primary Care-Oncology Service
Presenter: Abhijit Gill
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3506 - THE NEW MUTATIONAL MODEL IN ONCOLOGY. What changes in welfare, clinical practice, research, and regulatory procedures
Presenter: Nicola Normanno
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3350 - Selection of a set of quality indicators (QI) for oncological clinical pathway
Presenter: Aude Fourcade
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4400 - Sustainable drug prices at market launch: policy proposals and their empirical evidence
Presenter: Nora Fanzen
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4118 - Impact of financial considerations on French physicians’ prescription choices for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Presenter: Nathalie Olympios
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1340 - The direct medical cost of breast cancer in a Belgian hospital
Presenter: Hannan Lemhouer
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1863 - Does the healthcare system approaches cancer patients for using private services during diagnostic process?
Presenter: Karolina Osowiecka
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2637 - Measuring financial toxicity of cancer in the Italian health care system: initial results of the patient reported outcome for Fighting Financial Toxicity of cancer project (proFFiT).
Presenter: Silvia Riva
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract