Multilevel Influences on Patient-Oncologist Communication about Genomic Test Results: Oncologist Perspectives.

Thousands of women with early-stage breast cancer receive gene-expression profile (GEP) tests to guide chemotherapy decisions. However, many patients report a poor understanding of how their test results inform treatment decision-making. We applied models of patient-centered communication and informed decision-making to assess which variables oncologists' perceive as most influential to effective communication with their patients about GEP results and intervention modalities and approaches that could support more effective conversations about treatment decisions in routine clinical care. Medical oncologists who were part of a practice group in the mid-Atlantic US completed an online, cross-sectional survey in 2016. These data were merged with de-identified electronic patient and practice data. Of the 83 oncologists contacted, 29 completed the survey (35% response rate, representing 52% of the test-eligible patients in the practice network). There were no significant differences between survey responders and nonresponders. Oncologists reported patient-related variables as most influential, including performance status (65.5%), pretesting preferences for chemotherapy (55.2%), and comprehension of complex test results (55.2%). Oncologists endorsed their experience with testing (58.6%) and their own confidence in using the test results (48.3%) as influential as well. They indicated that a clinical decision support tool incorporating patient comorbidities, age, and potential benefits from chemotherapy would support their own practice and that they could share these results and other means of communication support using print materials (79.3%) with their patients in clinic (72.4%). These preferred intervention characteristics could be integrated into routine care, ultimately facilitating more effective communication about genomic testing (such as GEP) and its role in treatment selection.

Differential impact of cognitive computing augmented by real world evidence on novice and expert oncologists.

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive computing point-of-care decision support tools which ingest patient attributes from electronic health records and display treatment options based on expert training and medical literature, supplemented by real world evidence (RWE), might prove useful to expert and novice oncologists. The concordance of augmented intelligence systems with best medical practices and potential influences on physician behavior remain unknown. METHODS: Electronic health records from 88 breast cancer patients evaluated at a USA tertiary care center were presented to subspecialist experts and oncologists focusing on other disease states with and without reviewing the IBM Watson for Oncology with Cota RWE platform. RESULTS: The cognitive computing "recommended" option was concordant with selection by breast cancer experts in 78.5% and "for consideration" option was selected in 9.4%, yielding agreements in 87.9%. Fifty-nine percent of non-concordant responses were generated from 8% of cases. In the Cota observational database 69.3% of matched controls were treated with "recommended," 11.4% "for consideration", and 19.3% "not recommended." Without guidance from Watson for Oncology (WfO)/Cota RWE, novice oncologists chose 75.5% recommended/for consideration treatments which improved to 95.3% with WfO/Cota RWE. The novices were more likely than experts to choose a non-recommended option (P < .01) without WfO/Cota RWE and changed decisions in 39% cases. CONCLUSIONS: Watson for Oncology with Cota RWE options were largely concordant with disease expert judged best oncology practices, and was able to improve treatment decisions among breast cancer novices. The observation that nearly a fifth of patients with similar disease characteristics received non-recommended options in a real world database highlights a need for decision support.

Dose dense cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil is feasible at 14-day intervals: a pilot study of every-14-day dosing as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/fluorouracil (CMF) is a proven adjuvant option for patients with early-stage breast cancer. Randomized trials with other regimens demonstrate that dose-dense (DD) scheduling can offer greater efficacy. We investigated the feasibility of administering CMF using a DD schedule. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with early-stage breast cancer were accrued from March 2008 through June 2008. They were treated every 14 days with C 600, M 40, F 600 (all mg/m2) with PEG-filgrastim (Neulasta®) support on day 2 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was tolerability using a Simon's 2-stage optimal design. The design would effectively discriminate between true tolerability (as protocol-defined) rates of ≤ 60% and ≥ 80%. RESULTS: The median age was 52-years-old (range, 38-78 years of age). Twenty-nine of the 38 patients completed 8 cycles of CMF at 14-day intervals. CONCLUSION: Dose-dense adjuvant CMF is tolerable and feasible at 14-day intervals with PEG-filgrastim support.