Abstract 6062
Background
A standardized evaluation approach in oncology is essential to optimize treatment and management of patients. In particular, a medical software designed to provide standard metrics and reports may help the communication among health care professionals, facilitating the decision process. To this aim, a large survey study was conducted across the United Kingdom (UK), Spain (ES) and Italy (IT) exploring existing unmet needs and questioning the way oncological data is tracked in daily routine practice with the aim of offering some ideas for improvement.
Methods
Physicians were enrolled by an independent Market Research Company according to diiferent inclusion criteria: a) 2-35 years in practice; b) ≥50% of practice time in direct patient care; c) involvement in making treatment decisions ; d) involvement in ordering and reviewing tumour assessment reports; e) to be an investigator or author of an oncology clinical trial in the past 5 years.The study was conducted in November-December, 2018.
Results
A total number of 270 physicians (medical oncologists: n = 180, radio-oncologists: n = 90) participated (UK/100, ES/95, IT/75). The vast majority of physicians use Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria in their daily practice (86%). Guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics (iRECIST) and modified RECIST (mRECIST) are also used by between third and a quarter of physicians. Of note, almost half of the physicians indicated that there is a low level of data management in oncology and 2 out of 3 agree that this negatively impacts therapeutic decisions. Over a third of ES physicians believe that there is a low level of data management in oncology and a similar proportion in IT and ES report that it is impacting therapeutic decision making.
Conclusions
Only a third of physicians view their current reporting systems as adequate. All participants agree that any reporting system is in need of a common shared template for radiologists and oncologists. Thus, physicians identify a lack of consistency in diagnostic assessments and delays in receiving the reports as key unmet needs in tumor reporting systems –indicating the need for a streamlined system.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Wehealth Digital Medicine.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2901 - IFN-γ/IL-10 ratio as predictive biomarker for response to anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma patients
Presenter: Emilio Giunta
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2306 - Multiplex Chromogenic Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Spatial Analysis of Checkpoint-Positive Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs)
Presenter: Scott Ely
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1678 - The role of PD-L1 expression as a predictive biomarker in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Presenter: Alberto Carretero-Gonzalez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5138 - Radiomic Features as a Non-invasive Biomarker to Predict Response to Immunotherapy in Recurrent or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma
Presenter: Kye Jin Park
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5800 - Integrative combination of high-plex digital profiling techniques and cluster analysis to reveal complex immune biology in the tumor microenvironment of mesothelioma
Presenter: Carmen Ballesteros-Merino
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5736 - Predictive factors of response to immunotherapy in 198 patients with metastatic non-microcytic lung cancer (mNSCLC): real world data from 2 university hospitals in Spain
Presenter: Juan Felipe Cordoba Ortega
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5645 - Evaluating Lung CT Density Changes Among Patients with Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer (ES-SCLC) Treated with Thoracic Radiotherapy (TRT) alone or TRT Followed by Combined Ipilimumab (IPI) and Nivolumab (NIVO).
Presenter: Kujtim Latifi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1540 - Immuno-oncology therapy biomarkers differences between polyoma-virus positive and negative Merkel cell carcinomas
Presenter: Zoran Gatalica
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4538 - Can we improve patient selection for phase 1 clinical trials (Ph1) based on Immuno-Oncology score prognostic index (VIO)?
Presenter: Ignacio Matos Garcia
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5544 - Evaluation of a radiomic signature of CD8 cells in patients treated with immunotherapy-radiotherapy in three clinical trials.
Presenter: Roger Sun
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract