Abstract 1581P
Background
Navya-AI is a clinically validated digital intervention that outputs patient-specific, evidence-based information; with 97% concordance between Navya-AI output and expert recommendations, and 80% adoption of recommendations by patients. Given high financial toxicity of suboptimal maintenance treatments in OC, use of AI to encourage optimal treatment has potential benefit. This study assesses the impact of Navya-AI in improving compliance to guidelines for genomic testing for women with OC in India; especially since generics for genomic testing and PARP inhibitors are cost effectively accessible in India.
Methods
Since March 2022, genomic testing for BRCA1/2 and HRD has been a recommended guideline for stage III & IV OC by NCCN, ESMO, and NCG India. From March 2022 to March 2024, all women with OC who received a Navya-AI enabled review of their treatment plan were prospectively analyzed for concordance on genomic testing and precision care. Intervention with Navya AI was used to close any identified care gaps.
Results
Of 260 OC patients who received a Navya-AI review, 80% [209/260] met guideline criteria for genomic testing. Stage I/II [47], and rare histologies [4] were excluded. Women were diverse with respect to age (years) [0-35: 6%, 35-50: 30%, 51-65: 49%, >65: 15%]; stage [III 42%, IV: 58%]; family history of cancer: 24%. Genomic testing and precision care was planned for only 30% [63/209] of the patients. In the remaining 70% [146/209], digital intervention by Navya-AI including information on the risks/benefits of genomic testing, potential use of PARP inhibitors, importance of cascade genetics, and patient navigation to their treating oncologists enabled guidelines compliance.
Conclusions
Guideline compliant care is a useful metric in tracking quality of care in gynecologic cancers, where wide care disparities exist. Positive findings on genomic testing in OC has a significant impact on progression-free survival and decreasing cancer burden. More than 60% of patients presenting to a nationally used digital health expert opinion service in India would have missed such critical testing. Through AI driven technologies, this disparity can be identified and closed, globally.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1553P - Access to EMA approved drugs in Europe, disparities across a border
Presenter: Orla Fitzpatrick
Session: Poster session 10
1554P - Co payments in cancer patients: Analysis and estimating OOP
Presenter: Krishnamani Kalpathi
Session: Poster session 10
1555P - Estimating the social value of immuno-oncology (IO) therapies in Japan
Presenter: Tomoya Ohno
Session: Poster session 10
1556P - Current landscape of drug approvals for genitourinary (GU) cancers in North America and Europe
Presenter: Jose Tapia
Session: Poster session 10
1557P - The use of patient experience in UK NICE decision making in oncology
Presenter: Noemi Muszbek
Session: Poster session 10
1558P - Independent validation of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model) for predicting breast cancer risk in Egyptian population
Presenter: Elaria Yacoub
Session: Poster session 10
1559P - Equity of access and clinical impact of genomic testing in patients with cancer in a UK early phase clinical trials unit
Presenter: Jonathan Poon
Session: Poster session 10
1560P - Optimal age versus real age in breast and gynaecological risk reducing surgery in BRCA1/2 carriers
Presenter: Alberta Ferrari
Session: Poster session 10
1561P - Targeted screening methodologies to select high risk individuals: LungFlag performance in Estonia Lung Cancer Screening Pilot
Presenter: Tanel Laisaar
Session: Poster session 10
1562P - The feasibility of polygenic risk score-based population screening for breast cancer: The experience from the BRIGHT study in Estonia
Presenter: Anni Lepland
Session: Poster session 10