A qualitative study of teleconsultation practices among French oncologists in a post-COVID-19 period.

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic has prompted healthcare professionals to adapt and implement new tools to ensure continuity of patient care. Teleconsultation became the only option for some practitioners who had never used it previously and boosted its use for others who already used it. Several studies have reviewed the use of teleconsultation in oncology during the epidemic, but few have addressed its continued use and how practitioners view it in a post-epidemic period. The aim of this survey was to conduct a qualitative exploration of how oncologists use teleconsultation in their daily practice in a post-COVID 19 period. Materials and Methods: For this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with oncologists in France who utilized teleconsultation in the field of oncology during the COVID-19 period. The interview guide included questions on the interests and limitations of using teleconsultation in oncology, on reluctance to use it among oncologists, and invited participants to formulate proposals for more optimal use. Results: Fourteen oncologists participated in the survey. Currently, 12% of the consultations of the surveyed practitioners are conducted via teleconsultation. Seven themes were identified in the analysis of the interviews: (a) The oncologist and teleconsultation; (b) Clinical motivations for using teleconsultation; (c) Comparison between teleconsultation and in-person consultation; (d) Advantages and disadvantages of teleconsultation; (e) Technical modalities of teleconsultation; (f) Role of Covid and confinement in the use of teleconsultation; (h) Epistemic judgments about teleconsultation. Optimal teleconsultation occurs when seamlessly incorporated into patient care, offering reduced patient inconvenience, and providing economic and environmental benefits. Although there's a lack of unified agreement in research literature regarding time efficiency, teleconsultation facilitates more customized patient monitoring and addresses the challenge of "medical deserts" nationally. Considering patient preferences is crucial when contemplating the use of teleconsultation. Predominantly, technical issues stand as the principal barriers to teleconsultation implementation. Conclusion: Even after the end of the health crisis, teleconsultation is still used in clinical practice. Recommendations for effective use are suggested.

[Survey on the practice of medical teleconsultation in oncology in Auvergne Rhône Alpes]. / Enquête sur la pratique de la téléconsultation médicale en oncologie en Auvergne Rhône Alpes.

RATIONAL: Teleconsultation (TLC) practice, which suddenly arrived in the cancer patients care, has experienced an undeniable quantitative boom given the health context. A quantitative and qualitative assessment of this practice now seems necessary. This study aims to describe the use of TLC by oncologists in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region during the pandemic in order to assess its advantages and limits, and to estimate the barriers encountered and the possible levers for its promotion in oncology. METHOD: The use of TLC in daily medical practice was evaluated using a descriptive observational survey from October to December 2021. Health's professionals were invited to answer an online survey composed of around thirty questions. RESULTS: Of the 200 oncologists contacted, 72 took part in the survey. Among them, 64 have already made at least one TLC. TLCs represented 25 % of consultations during the confinement period. New cancer patients, the fact of not seeing the patient physically and the absence of the possibility of carrying out a physical examination are the 3 main obstacles to TLC. The mastery of computer tools is one of the main levers. All cancer patients appear eligible for TLC ; the professionals surveyed prefer this solution for certain socio-demographic and medical characteristics of the patients (the fact of living far from the cancer centre, of having a stable clinical situation, of being under surveillance or being treated with oral anti-cancer drugs…). Despite a median level of satisfaction of 63 % estimated by doctors, less than 10 % of medical consultations are currently kept in TLC. CONCLUSION: TLC is now an integrated practice in oncology but seems more relevant for a specific patient profile and clinical situation. In addition, technical and training constraints still limit its use in clinical practice today.

High-MET status in non-small cell lung tumors correlates with receptor phosphorylation but not with the serum level of soluble form.

OBJECTIVES: The receptor tyrosine kinase MET is essential to embryonic development and organ regeneration. Its deregulation is associated with tumorigenesis. While MET gene amplification and mutations leading to MET self-activation concern only a few patients, a high MET level has been found in about half of the non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) tested. How this affects MET activation in tumors is unclear. Also uncertain is the prognostic value, in cancer, of a phenomenon well described in cell models: MET shedding, i.e. its cleavage by membrane proteases leading to release of a soluble fragment into the medium. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of 39 NSCLC patients was constituted at diagnosis or soon after. Normal tissues, tumor tissues, and blood samples were obtained. This allowed, for the same patient, synchronous determination of (i) the MET level in the tumor, (ii) receptor phosphorylation, and (iii) the concentration of soluble MET fragment (sMET) in the serum. RESULTS: After confirming the adequacy of an ELISA for measuring the serum level of sMET, we found no correlation between this level and the concentration of MET in tumors, as evaluated by immunohistochemistry and western blotting. Nevertheless, all but one tumor displaying a high MET level also displayed receptor phosphorylation, restricted to a small number of tumor cells. CONCLUSION: Our results thus demonstrate that the serum level of sMET is not indicative of the amount of MET present in the tumor cells and cannot be used as a biomarker for therapeutic purposes. However, MET scoring of tumor biopsies could be a first step prior to determination of MET receptor activation in high-MET tumors.