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
4543 - Long-term real-world (RW) outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma (MEL) treated with ipilimumab (IPI) and non-IPI therapies: IMAGE study
Presenter: Stéphane Dalle
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4523 - Prognostic Factors for efficacy of Ipilimumab used after AntiPD1 and/or BRAF+MEK inhibitors in Melanoma Patients: an Italian Melanoma Intergroup study
Presenter: Riccardo Marconcini
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3632 - Rechallenge with combination ipilimumab and anti-PD-1 (IPI+PD1) in metastatic melanoma after acquired resistance to IPI+PD1 immunotherapy
Presenter: Adriana Hepner
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3732 - Clinicopathologic characteristics of immune colitis in melanoma patients treated with combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 (IPI+PD1) and PD1 monotherapy.
Presenter: Kazi Nahar
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5005 - Real-world outcomes of ipilimumab plus nivolumab for advanced melanoma in the Netherlands
Presenter: Michiel van Zeijl
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5524 - Utilization of Real-World Data to Assess the Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) in Elderly Patients with Metastatic Melanoma
Presenter: D Scott Ernst
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5884 - Tumor mutational burden and response to PD-1 inhibitors: an analysis of 89 cases of metastatic melanoma.
Presenter: Léa Dousset
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3120 - Increase in S100B and LDH as early outcome predictors for non-responsiveness to anti-PD-1 monotherapy in advanced melanoma.
Presenter: Elisa Rozeman
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2157 - Immune status defined by molecular information layers predicts response to pembrolizumab treatment in advanced melanoma
Presenter: Guillermo Prado-Vázquez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2553 - Interim analysis of a phase Ib study of cobimetinib plus atezolizumab in patients with advanced BRAFV600 wild type melanoma progressing on prior anti-PD-L1 therapy
Presenter: Shahneen Sandhu
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract