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
2108 - Biomarker analyses of ramucirumab in patients with platinum refractory urothelial cancer from RANGE, a global, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study.
Presenter: Michiel Van der Heijden
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3090 - Comparison of Immuno-Oncology (IO) Biomarkers in Adenocarcinoma (ACB), Urothelial Carcinoma (UCB) and Squamous Cell Carcinoma (SCCB) of the Bladder, with interim results from PURE01
Presenter: Daniele Raggi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5211 - Potential role of a clinical, taxonomical classification and RNA expression integrated signature to predict response to neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients
Presenter: Albert Font
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3206 - Hyperphosphatemia due to Erdafitinib (a Pan-FGFR Inhibitor) and Anti-tumor Activity Among Patients (Pts) with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma (UC)
Presenter: Scott Tagawa
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3110 - Prognostic role of FGFR Mutations and FGFR mRNA expression in metastatic urothelial cancer treated with anti-PD(L1) inhibitors in first and second line setting
Presenter: Florian Roghmann
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3564 - Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) utility as a biomarker for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC)
Presenter: Jean-Michel Lavoie
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2760 - Comparative analysis of tumor mutational burden (TMB) prediction methods and its association with determinants of the tumor immune microenvironment of urothelial bladder cancer (UBC)
Presenter: Markus Eckstein
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2513 - The Immunoscore in patients with urothelial carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: clinical significance for pathological response and survival
Presenter: Elise Nassif
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2835 - Genomic analysis of urothelial cancer and associations with treatment choice and outcome
Presenter: David Sarid
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5763 - cfDNA is an acceptable but insufficient means of characterizing FGFR3 mutation in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC)
Presenter: Sumanta Pal
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract