Dataset Information

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: a nation-wide survey.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is increasingly used to guide cancer therapy. This study aimed to characterise oncologists' experiences and needs when utilising genomic results.

Materials and methods

An electronic survey distributed nation-wide to practising medical oncologists in Australia explored oncologists' experiences with consenting, interpreting and communicating CGP results to patients.

Results

The survey was completed by 108 of 333 oncologists (32%) and most respondents (n = 97, 90%) had referred patients for CGP. Using a 100-point visual analogue scale score [VAS], where higher values indicate greater confidence, most oncologists were confident consenting patients for referral [median 75 (Interquartile range, IQR: 53-85), discussing CGP results (median VAS: 70, IQR: 51-80), but significantly less confident discussing secondary germline findings (median VAS: 56, IQR 30-70, p < 0.001). Confidence with pursuing therapies based on CGP results increased with clinical experience (mean VAS increases by 4.8 per 5 years of experience, p < 0.001). Most oncologists (N = 68, 63%) reported wanting assistance with interpretation of CGP and patient-centric resources to aid communication with patients.

Conclusions

Oncologists are integrating genomics into clinical care, but only display moderate confidence in communication and changing management accordingly. The development of patient- and clinician- targeted resources may assist with routine utilisation of CGP results in cancer care.

SUBMITTER: Thavaneswaran S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8522847 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: a nation-wide survey.

Thavaneswaran Subotheni S Ballinger Mandy M Butow Phyllis P Meiser Bettina B Goldstein David D Lin Frank F Napier Christine C Thomas David D Best Megan M

Oncotarget 20211012 21

<h4>Purpose</h4>Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is increasingly used to guide cancer therapy. This study aimed to characterise oncologists' experiences and needs when utilising genomic results.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>An electronic survey distributed nation-wide to practising medical oncologists in Australia explored oncologists' experiences with consenting, interpreting and communicating CGP results to patients.<h4>Results</h4>The survey was completed by 108 of 333 oncologists (32%) ...[more]

PMID: 34676049

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAdvances in comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs) led to personalized treatment for patients. This study evaluated medical oncologists' attitudes toward CGP in a scenario where sponsored funding for CGP was available.MethodsWe designed an online survey assessing CGP use and treating physicians' confidence, composed of three self-confidence domains, which are as follows: confidence in interpreting CGP results, confidence in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and confidence in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. The survey was distributed to medical oncologists who treat lung cancer in Brazil. Comparisons between groups were performed using the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Univariable and multivariable (adjusted OR) analyses were performed.ResultsAmong 104 respondents who treat patients with lung cancer, 55% were from the Southeast region, 28% had high lung cancer clinical load, and 33% had in-house molecular testing. More than half (51%) of the participants request CGP systematically to stage IV LUAD. As for provider confidence, 67% stated being confident in all three domains: 76% confident in interpreting CGP, 84% confident in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and 81% in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. Providers' confidence was associated with systematically requesting CGP to stage IV LUAD (p = 0.013). After controlling for the variables of interest, systematic requesting CGP for stage IV LUAD revealed a significant association with the provider's confidence (adjusted OR = 0.35, p = 0.028, 95% CI: 0.14-0.84). The major challenge for properly requesting CGP was the long turnaround time and the fear of treatment delays.ConclusionsEven though CGP for stage IV LUAD in Brazil is fully sponsored, only half of the oncologists in our survey systematically request it.. Requesting CGP was associated with providers' confidence. Improving access and promoting providers' awareness of CGP utility is necessary to increase CGP use and better inform treatment decisions.

Project description:BackgroundThirty years after the origin of the field of psycho-oncology, limited data exist about the work practices of professionals providing psychosocial care to children with cancer and their families.MethodA survey was designed to assess training, work environment, theoretical orientation, services provided, subspecialty areas or areas of special interest, satisfactions, challenges, and continuing education needs of pediatric psycho-oncologists. Members of national and international psycho-oncology organizations were invited to participate in the web-based survey.ResultsSeven hundred eighty-six professionals from 63 countries responded. The sample consisted mostly of psychologists (41%), physicians (20%), and social workers (14%). Approximately half of the participants worked in a designated psycho-oncology unit. Psychologists and social workers provided the majority of psychosocial services. Individual sessions with parents were most common (42%), followed by sessions with children (41%), survivors (36%), families (31%), and siblings (25%). Therapies provided include cognitive behavioral therapy (50%), relaxation (43%), psychodynamic psychotherapy (27%), play therapy (26%), and imagery (23%). Two-thirds reported having appropriate supervision, 37% were conducting research, and only half felt their salary was appropriate. Differences in therapeutic modalities were found by country. Clinicians desire training on clinical interventions, improving communication with medical staff, research, and ethics.ConclusionsAn international cohort of clinicians providing pediatric psycho-oncology services perform a wide variety of tasks, use a range of therapeutic approaches, and report considerable work satisfaction. Problem areas include professional inter-relations, inadequate supervision, and need for additional specialized training. Opportunity exists for global collaboration in pediatric psycho-oncology research and practices to enhance clinical effectiveness and reduce professional isolation.

Project description:PurposeRadiation oncology is often overlooked in US medical school curricula, with few opportunities for most students to learn about the specialty or the value of radiation therapy in cancer care. Tumor boards represent a potential avenue not only to increase students' exposure to radiation oncologists but also to provide a fundamental understanding of the multidisciplinary nature of cancer care and effective collaboration in clinical practice.Methods and materialsIn this study, we evaluated a novel radiation oncologist-driven tumor board shadowing experience at 3 medical schools in the United States and Canada. A total of 323 first- and second-year medical students participated, of whom 77.4% completed a follow-up survey assessing the effectiveness of the program as a learning tool.ResultsCompared with traditional clinical shadowing, students were more likely to believe that tumor board shadowing provided a similar or better experience in terms of educational content (85%), exposure to a new field (96%), and overall experience (89%). Forty-eight percent of students perceived a greater amount of multidisciplinary collaboration in oncologic care than they thought existed prior to attending. Forty-eight percent of students also felt more competent interacting with oncologists after participating, whereas 21% felt more competent interacting with patients with cancer. Students' perception of increased competence was correlated with the amount of time their assigned physician mentor spent answering their questions after the tumor board (P < .01). Second-year medical students also had a more favorable overall experience than first-year medical students did (P = .04).ConclusionsMultidisciplinary tumor boards can be used effectively as a unique immersive learning opportunity that can be feasibly implemented to improve knowledge of clinical oncology and multidisciplinary care in medical schools and expose students to physicians in smaller fields such as radiation oncology.

Project description:BackgroundResearch engagement plays an integral role in developing clinicians that practice effective, evidence-based medicine. Research participation by clinicians, however, is declining. Given the link between research during medical school and future research output, promotion of medical student research is one avenue by which this shortage can be addressed. Student research attitudes and participation in Australia are not well-documented in the literature. This study therefore aims to investigate research practices, motivators, and barriers amongst Australian medical students in order to determine whether there is a need for further integration of research within Australian medical school curriculums.MethodsA cross-sectional study design was used to explore research experience and attitudes, as well as the enablers and barriers to research amongst students enrolled in all years of the five-year medical course at Monash University. A questionnaire was created by combining questions from several surveys on medical student research and comprised Likert scales, multiple choice options and free-text responses assessing research experience, attitudes, motivators, and barriers.ResultsSeven hundred and four respondents (69.4% female; survey response rate 36.7%) reported variable research experience and interest. Less than half of the cohort (n = 296; 44.9%) had contributed to a research project. Increasing employability for specialty training programs was the primary motivating factor (n = 345; 51.9%) for pursuing research, with only 20.5% (n = 136) citing an interest in academia as a motivator. Time constraints (n = 460; 65.3%) and uncertainty surrounding how to find research opportunities (n = 449; 63.8%) were the most common barriers to research.ConclusionsMedical students at Monash University are interested in but have limited experience with research. Students are, however, primarily motivated by the prospect of increasing employability for specialist training; medical schools should therefore focus on encouraging intrinsic motivation for pursuing research. Greater integration of research education and opportunities within medical school curricula may also be required to provide students with the skills necessary to both pursue research and practice evidence-based medicine.

Project description:Providing patients with unrestricted access to their electronic medical records through patient portals has impacted patient-provider communication and patients' personal health knowledge. However, little is known about how patient portals are used in oncology.The aim of this study was to understand attitudes of the portal's adoption for oncology and to identify the advantages and disadvantages of using the portal to communicate and view medical information.In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 60 participants: 35 patients, 13 oncologists, and 12 medical informaticists. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed to identify critical incidents and general attitudes encountered by participants.Two primary themes were discovered: (1) implementation practices influence attitudes, in which the decision-making and execution process of introducing portals throughout the hospital did not include the input of oncologists. Lack of oncologists' involvement led to a lack of knowledge about portal functionality, such as not knowing the time period when test results would be disclosed to patients; (2) perceptions of portals as communication tools varies by user type, meaning that each participant group (patients, oncologists, and medical informaticists) had varied opinions about how the portal should be used to transmit and receive information. Oncologists and medical informaticists had difficulty understanding one another's culture and communication processes in their fields, while patients had preferences for how they would like to receive communication, but it largely depended upon the type of test being disclosed.The majority of patients (54%, 19/35) who participated in this study viewed lab results or scan reports via the portal before being contacted by a clinician. Most were relatively comfortable with this manner of disclosure but still preferred face-to-face or telephone communication. Findings from this study indicate that portal education is needed for both patients and oncologists, especially when portals are implemented across entire health systems since highly specialized areas of medicine may have unique needs and uses. Patient portals in oncology can potentially alter the way diagnoses are delivered and how patients and oncologists communicate. Therefore, communication about the portal should be established during initial consultations so patients can decide whether they want to be informed in such a manner.

Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to identify disparities in geographic access to medical oncologists at the time of diagnosis.Data sources/study setting2014-2016 Pennsylvania Cancer Registry (PCR), 2019 CMS Base Provider Enrollment File (BPEF), 2018 CMS Physician Compare, 2010 Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (RUCA), and 2015 Area Deprivation Index (ADI).Study designSpatial regressions were used to estimate associations between geographic access to medical oncologists, measured with an enhanced two-step floating catchment area measure, and demographic characteristics.Data collection/extraction methodsMedical oncologists were identified in the 2019 CMS BPEF and merged with the 2018 CMS Physician Compare. Provider addresses were converted to longitude-latitude using OpenCage Geocoder. Newly diagnosed cancer patients in each census tract were identified in the 2014-2016 PCR. Census tracts were classified based on rurality and socioeconomic status using the 2010 RUCA Codes and the 2015 ADI.Principal findingsLarge towns and rural areas were associated with spatial access ratios (SPARs) that were 6.29 lower (95% CI -16.14 to 3.57) and 14.76 lower (95% CI -25.14 to -4.37) respectively relative to urban areas. Being in the fourth ADI quartile (highest disadvantage) was associated with a 12.41 lower SPAR (95% CI -19.50 to -5.33) relative to the first quartile. The observed difference in a census tract's non-White population from the 25th (1.3%) to the 75th percentile (13.7%) was associated with a 13.64 higher SPAR (Coefficient = 1.10, 95% CI 11.89 to 15.29; p < 0.01), roughly equivalent to the disadvantage associated with living in the fourth ADI quartile, where non-White populations are concentrated.ConclusionsRurality and low socioeconomic status were associated with lower geographic access to oncologists. The negative association between area deprivation and geographic access is of similar magnitude to the positive association between larger non-White populations and access. Policies aimed at increasing geographic access to care should be cognizant of both rurality and socioeconomic status.

Dataset Information

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: a nation-wide survey.

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: a nation-wide survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets