Dataset Information

A survey of physician receptivity to molecular diagnostic testing and readiness to act on results for early-stage colon cancer patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We sought to assess physician interest in molecular prognosic testing for patients with early stage colon cancer, and identify factors associated with the likelihood of test adoption.

Methods

We identified physicians who care for patients with early-stage (pN0) colon cancer patients, mailed them a survey, and analyzed survey responses to assess clinician receptivity to the use of a new molecular test (GUCY2C) that identifies patients at risk for recurrence, and clinician readiness to act on abnormal test results.

Results

Of 104 eligible potential respondents, 41 completed and returned the survey. Among responding physicians, 56 % were receptive to using the new prognostic test. Multivariable analyses showed that physicians in academic medical centers were significantly more receptive to molecular test use than those in non-academic settings. Forty-one percent of respondents were ready to act on abnormal molecular test results. Physicians who viewed current staging methods as inaccurate and were confident in their capacity to incorporate molecular testing in practice were more likely to say they would act on abnormal test results.

Conclusions

Physician receptivity to molecular diagnostic testing for early-stage colon cancer patients is likely to be influenced by practice setting and perceptions related to delivering quality care to patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01972737.

SUBMITTER: Myers RE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5048478 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A survey of physician receptivity to molecular diagnostic testing and readiness to act on results for early-stage colon cancer patients.

Myers Ronald E RE Wolf Thomas T Shwae Phillip P Hegarty Sarah S Peiper Stephen C SC Waldman Scott A SA

BMC cancer 20161003 1

<h4>Background</h4>We sought to assess physician interest in molecular prognosic testing for patients with early stage colon cancer, and identify factors associated with the likelihood of test adoption.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified physicians who care for patients with early-stage (pN0) colon cancer patients, mailed them a survey, and analyzed survey responses to assess clinician receptivity to the use of a new molecular test (GUCY2C) that identifies patients at risk for recurrence, and clinicia ...[more]

PMID: 27716119

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn Europe, treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with panitumumab requires prior confirmation of RAS wild-type mutation status. Two studies - a physician survey and a medical records review (MRR) - were conducted to evaluate the use of panitumumab and awareness among prescribing oncologists of the associated RAS testing requirements in clinical practice.MethodsBoth studies enrolled participants from nine European countries and were carried out in three consecutive rounds. Rounds 1 and 2 (2012-2013) examined KRAS (exon 2) testing only; the results have been published in full previously. Round 3 (2014-2015) examined full RAS testing (exons 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS) and was initiated following a change in prescribing guidelines, from requiring KRAS alone to requiring full RAS testing. For the physician survey, telephone interviews were conducted with oncologists who had prescribed panitumumab to patients with mCRC in the previous 6 months. For the MRR, oncologists were asked to provide anonymised clinical information, extracted from their patients' records.ResultsIn Round 3, 152 oncologists and 131 patients' records were included in the physician survey and MRR, respectively. In Round 3 of the physician survey, 95.4% (n = 145) of participants correctly identified that panitumumab should only be prescribed in RAS wild-type mCRC compared with 99.0% (n = 298) of 301 participants in Rounds 1 and 2, responding to the same question about KRAS testing. In Round 3 of the MRR, 100% (n = 131) of patients included in the study had confirmed KRAS or RAS wild-type status prior to initiation of panitumumab compared with 97.7% (n = 299) of 306 patients in Rounds 1 and 2 (KRAS only). Of those patients in Round 3, 83.2% (n = 109) had been tested for RAS status and 16.8% (n = 22) had been tested for KRAS status only.ConclusionsPhysicians' adherence to prescribing guidelines has remained high over time in Europe, despite the change in indication for panitumumab treatment, from KRAS to RAS wild-type mCRC. Additionally, this study demonstrates the uptake of full RAS testing among the majority of oncologists and pathologists.

Project description:IntroductionClimate change is a paramount global health threat with multifaceted implications. Societal change is required to mitigate the negative effects of climate change, as well as help people adapt to the associated health risks. This requires situation-specific, large-scale data to help scientists and policymakers understand public perceptions and behaviours and identify the levers to increase public readiness to act against climate change and protect health. The Planetary Health Action Survey (PACE) assesses this readiness to act as a regular monitoring of representative samples in Germany. The ongoing monitoring seeks to develop and refine an integrated conceptual model of the trait-like readiness to act, comprising policy acceptance, political participation and individual behaviours as indicators of the trait. It also proposes as set of determinants to explain different levels of readiness to act. This study protocol provides newly developed valid measurement instruments and the methodological details of the monitoring.Method and analysisPACE assesses indicators of the readiness to act and a set of sociocognitive factors predicting the readiness to act in continuous cross-sectional data collections. The latter comprise climate change knowledge, trust in institutions, perceived health risks, self-efficacy, social norms and perceived effectiveness of policy measures. The online questionnaire is updated regularly. Data collection involves non-probabilistic quota samples from Germany (n≈1000 at each collection).Ethics and disseminationThe project adheres to the ethical guidelines of the University of Erfurt and the German Research Foundation. Ethical clearance was granted by the University's Institutional Review Board (No #20220525/No #2024-01). Participants are guaranteed confidentiality and anonymity, and informed consent is obtained before participation. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Additionally, we aim to inform and empower the public and support stakeholders (media, policymakers, climate protection organisations) in preparing climate communication and assisting policymakers through the project website including an interactive tool, detailed reports and short summaries for practitioners.

Project description:BackgroundNorovirus is a leading cause of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) across the age spectrum; candidate vaccines are in clinical trials. While norovirus diagnostic testing is increasingly available, stool testing may not be performed routinely, which can hamper surveillance and burden of disease estimates. Additionally, lack of knowledge of the burden of disease may inhibit provider vaccine recommendations, which could affect coverage rates and ultimately the impact of the vaccine. Our objectives were to understand physicians' stool testing practices in outpatients with AGE, and physician knowledge of norovirus, in order to improve surveillance and prepare for vaccine introduction.MethodsInternet and mail survey on AGE, norovirus, and future norovirus vaccines conducted January to March 2018 among national networks of primary care pediatricians, family practice and general internal medicine physicians.ResultsThe response rate was 59% (820/1383). During peak AGE season, physicians estimated they ordered stool tests for a median of 15% (interquartile range: 5-33%) of their outpatients with AGE. Stool tests were reported as more often available for ova and parasites, Clostridioides difficile, and bacterial culture (>95% for all specialties) than for norovirus (6-33% across specialties); even when available, norovirus-specific tests were infrequently ordered. Most providers were unaware that norovirus is a leading cause of AGE across all age groups (Pediatricians 80%, Family Practice 86%, General Internal Medicine 89%) or that alcohol-based hand sanitizers are ineffective against norovirus (Pediatricians 51%, Family Practice 66%, General Internal Medicine 62%). Concerns cited as major barriers to implementing a future norovirus vaccine included if the vaccine is not covered by insurance (General Internal Medicine 64%, Pediatricians 67%, Family Practice 74%) and lack of adequate reimbursement for vaccination (Pediatricians 43%, General Internal Medicine 46%, Family Practice 50%). Factors that providers believed were 'not at all a barrier' or 'minor barrier' to new vaccine introduction included the belief that "my patients won't need this vaccine" (General Internal Medicine 78%, Family Practice 86%, Pediatricians 90%) and "my patients already get too many vaccines" (Family Practice 89%, General Internal Medicine 92%, Pediatricians 95%).ConclusionsPrimary care physicians had few concerns regarding future norovirus vaccine introduction, but have knowledge gaps on norovirus prevalence and hand hygiene for prevention. Also, physicians infrequently order stool tests for outpatients with AGE, which limits surveillance estimates that rely on physician-ordered stool diagnostics. Closing physician knowledge gaps on norovirus burden and transmission can help support norovirus vaccine introduction.

Dataset Information

A survey of physician receptivity to molecular diagnostic testing and readiness to act on results for early-stage colon cancer patients.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

A survey of physician receptivity to molecular diagnostic testing and readiness to act on results for early-stage colon cancer patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets