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
3252 - Genes involved in DNA replication, chromatin remodeling and cell cycle as potential biomarkers for therapy outcome to immune therapy in patients with metastatic cutaneous malignant melanoma
Presenter: Fernanda Costa Svedman
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5545 - Phase Ib/II Study (SENSITIZE) assessing safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and clinical outcome of domatinostat in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma refractory/non-responding to prior checkpoint inhibitor therapy
Presenter: Jessica Hassel
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5213 - Genomic landscape of primary malignant melanoma of esophagus
Presenter: Jie Dai
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2716 - A phase III, randomised, double-blind study of adjuvant cemiplimab versus placebo post-surgery and radiation in patients with high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC)
Presenter: Danny Rischin
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3550 - ILLUMINATE 301: A randomized phase 3 study of tilsotolimod in combination with ipilimumab compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma following progression on or after anti-PD-1 therapy
Presenter: Marcus Butler
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1645 - PRIME002 - Early phase II study of Azacitidine and Carboplatin priming for Avelumab in patients with advanced melanoma who are resistant to immunotherapy
Presenter: Andre Van Der Westhuizen
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4440 - Pembrolizumab (pembro) Plus Lenvatinib (len) for First-Line Treatment of patients (pts) With Advanced Melanoma: Phase 3 LEAP-003 Study
Presenter: Alexander Eggermont
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3454 - Proof of concept study with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat in patients with resistant BRAFV600 mutated advanced melanoma
Presenter: Sanne Huijberts
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1832 - A phase Ia/Ib clinical study to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary anti-tumor activity of FCN-159 in patients with advanced melanoma harboring NRAS-aberrant (Ia) and NRAS-mutation (Ib).
Presenter: Lu Si
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3996 - A Phase I Clinical Trial Investigating the Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine UV1 in Combination with Pembrolizumab as First-Line Treatment of Patients with Malignant Melanoma
Presenter: Sanjiv Agarwala
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract