Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session 3

3350 - Selection of a set of quality indicators (QI) for oncological clinical pathway


30 Sep 2019


Poster Display session 3


Bioethical Principles and GCP

Tumour Site


Aude Fourcade


Annals of Oncology (2019) 30 (suppl_5): v671-v682. 10.1093/annonc/mdz263


A. Fourcade1, M. Ferrua1, M. Chirrane2, M.J. De la Cruz Vega2, E. Minvielle1, M. di Palma3

Author affiliations

  • 1 Research Department, Gustave Roussy, 94805 - Villejuif/FR
  • 2 Oncology, Novartis, 92500 - Rueil-Malmaison/FR
  • 3 Chief Medical Officer, American hospital of Paris, 92200 - Neuilly-sur-Seine/FR


Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 3350


Clinical pathways in oncology have become increasingly complex, involving several different healthcare professionals inside and outside the hospital setting who need particular coordination to provide appropriate care for patients. Very few QI exist to evaluate the oncological clinical pathway in its entirety, particularly regarding the various stages between patient admissions and discharges and the liaisons with non-hospital healthcare professionals (e.g. GPs, pharmacists). Our objective is to select a number of QI describing the oncological clinical pathway with an expert panel.


A systematic review of available QI describing the oncological clinical pathways in the literature was conducted. The list of selected QI was presented to an expert panel (oncologists, pharmacists and SRNs) of various hospitals in France. The selection involved a two-step process: a preliminary selection was conducted based on the title and rationale of the QI by consensus (nominal group), assigning a value to each QI reviewed on the basis of its appropriateness and its feasibility (1st working group). The pre-selected QI were then described in detail and presented to the expert panel (2nd working group) in order to validate the selection.


5731 QI were identified in the literature review and 131 included. 17 indicators were pre-selected by the experts (1st working group). After presentation of the 17 detailed descriptors, the QIs were clustered or eliminated. Ultimately, 10 QI were selected (Table): outcome (2), process (3) and structure (5).Table: 1658P

1Symptoms and disease progressionStructure
2Assessment of tolerance to treatmentProcess
3Management of patients receiving oral therapyStructure
4Quality of the liaison documentProcess
5Composite score for supportive careStructure
6Patient therapeutic educationStructure
7Medication reconciliationProcess
8Unscheduled admissionsOutcome
9Declaration and follow-up upon serious adverse events in clinical pathwayStructure
10Patient’s experience (PREMS)Outcome


This approach will be developed further by presenting the IQs to patient associations and primary care physicians in order to gather their feedback, refine, adapt and ultimately create a representative set of indicators.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.


Novartis Oncology France.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.