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
2655 - The K-BASKET trial: A prospective phase II biomarker-driven multiple basket trial in Korean solid cancer patients.
Presenter: Seul Kim
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5938 - Cambridge Liquid biopsy “CALIBRATION” study: Can changes in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) predict durable tumour responses in patients with advanced oesophageal cancer receiving MEDI4736?
Presenter: Constanza Linossi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3799 - Validation of a tumour mutational burden workflow on routine histological samples of colorectal cancer and assessment of a cohort with synchronous hepatic metastases
Presenter: Andrea Mafficini
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4647 - Microsatellite Instability Testing and Lynch Syndrome Screening For Colorectal Cancer Patients Through Tumor Sequencing
Presenter: Li Liu
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3231 - "Liquid Withdarw" technique in CT-guided cutting needle lung biopsy: decreased incidence of complications and increased tissue amount for lung cancer molecular testing.
Presenter: Xue Wang
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3282 - WGS Implementation in standard cancer Diagnostics for Every cancer patient (WIDE)
Presenter: Paul Roepman
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5905 - Known and unknown gene fusion detection capabilities of solid tumor laboratories conducting next generation sequencing in 6 countries
Presenter: Steph Finucane
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4238 - Clinical and Analytical Accuracy of a 523 Gene Panel Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) Assay on Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded (FFPE) Solid Tumor Samples
Presenter: Ina Deras
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2493 - Methylation analysis of MLH1 using droplet digital PCR and methylation sensitive restriction enzyme.
Presenter: Celine De Rop
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2963 - Analytical performance of the Resolution-HRD plasma assay used to identify mCRPC patients with biallelic disruption of DNA repair genes for treatment with niraparib
Presenter: Ira Pekker
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract