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
3630 - Results of phase 1 clinical trial of high doses of Seleno-L-methionine (SLM) in sequential combination with Axitinib in previously treated and relapsed clear cell renal carcinoma (ccRCC) patients
Presenter: Yousef Zakharia
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2356 - Safety and Efficacy of CDX-014 , an Antibody-Drug Conjugate against T Cell immunoglobulin mucin-1 (TIM-1), in advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma
Presenter: Bradley McGregor
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1028 - SPAZO2 (SOGUG): Outcomes and prognostic significance of IMDC intermediate prognosis subclassification in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in patients treated with 1st-line pazopanib (1stPz).
Presenter: Begona P. Valderrama
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2293 - Effect of Antacid Intake on the Therapeutic Efficacy of Sunitinib (SUN) in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Patients (pts): a Sub-Analysis of the STAR-TOR Registry
Presenter: Katrin Schlack
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1451 - Randomized phase 3 trial of avelumab + axitinib vs sunitinib as first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma: JAVELIN Renal 101 Japanese subgroup analysis
Presenter: Motohide Uemura
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4399 - Overall and progression-free survival according to MSKCC scores in 1st line sunitinib treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)
Presenter: Jindrich Finek
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1344 - Combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Presenter: Kyaw Thein
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3462 - A phase II trial of TKI induction followed by a randomized comparison between nivolumab or TKI continuation in renal cell carcinoma (NIVOSWITCH)
Presenter: Viktor Grünwald
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5268 - Nivolumab (N) treatment beyond progression in a real-world cohort of patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)
Presenter: Sophie Hans
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4235 - First results of safety profile of nivolumab (NIVO) in combination with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in II and III line of patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in NIVES Study
Presenter: Cristina Masini
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract