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
1885 - Factors associated with disease progression in patients treated with trametinib in combination with dabrafenib for unresectable advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma: an open label, non randomized study
Presenter: Philippe Saiag
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5259 - Integrative RNAseq and Target panel sequencing reveals common and distinct innate and adaptive resistance mechanisms to BRAF inhibitors
Presenter: Phil Cheng
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5619 - Effective treatment with T-VEC monotherapy in Stage IIIB/C-IVM1a Melanoma of the Head & Neck Region
Presenter: Viola Franke
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5666 - Re-introduction of T-VEC Monotherapy in Recurrent Stage IIIB/C-IVM1a melanoma is effective
Presenter: Viola Franke
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4117 - Efficacy of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) in melanoma patients (pts) with locoregional (LR) recurrence, including in-transit metastases (ITM): subgroup analysis of the phase 3 OPTiM study
Presenter: Mark Middleton
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5303 - Real Life Use of Talimogene Laherparepvec in Melanoma in Centers in Austria and Switzeland
Presenter: Christoph Hoeller
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4130 - Outcomes of advanced melanoma patients who discontinued pembrolizumab (pembro) after complete response (CR) in the French early access program (EAP)
Presenter: Philippe Saiag
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2050 - Outcome of patients with elevated LDH treated with first-line targeted therapy (TT) or PD-1 based immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)
Presenter: Sarah Knispel
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1618 - Comparative-Effectiveness of Pembrolizumab vs. Nivolumab for Patients with Metastatic Melanoma
Presenter: Justin Moser
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3556 - Long-term efficacy of combination nivolumab and ipilimumab for first-line treatment of advanced melanoma: a network meta-analysis
Presenter: Peter Mohr
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract