Virtual Library
Start Your Search
Tara Perloff
Author of
-
+
MA07 - Towards Survivorship: The Landscape, Supports and Barriers (ID 904)
- Event: WCLC 2018
- Type: Mini Oral Abstract Session
- Track: Advocacy
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 9/24/2018, 13:30 - 15:00, Room 205 AC
-
+
MA07.10 - Utilizing a Personalized Navigation Program to Identify Barriers and Increase Clinical Trial Participation Among Lung Cancer Patients (ID 13482)
14:35 - 14:40 | Author(s): Tara Perloff
- Abstract
- Presentation
Background
Only about 5% of cancer patients participate in clinical trials. We previously conducted a survey of U.S. lung cancer patients and found that only 22% reported discussing clinical trials with their oncologist at the time of making treatment decisions. We hypothesized that a personalized navigation program could both increase rates of trial discussion and identify barriers to participation among lung cancer patients.
a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method
We asked callers to Lung Cancer Alliance's 1-800 support line if they had considered clinical trial participation and referred willing callers to a navigator for further discussion. Navigators provided basic clinical trial education and a personalized list of trial matches. Patients were encouraged to discuss these trials with their treating oncologist. Navigators then regularly followed up with participants, via email or phone, at two to four-week intervals, to offer further support and collect outcomes information.
4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result
We referred sixty callers to a navigator. Only 43% of callers reported a prior clinical trials conversation with their provider. Patients who had not started treatment or were on first-line treatment reported lower discussion rates (30%) than those on later treatment lines (60%). Among patients with follow up, 13 of 20 patients who had not discussed trials with their provider reported doing so after navigation. Ten of eleven patients that had a previous trial conversation initiated an additional one. Primary reasons given for not talking discussing after navigation were having stable disease on a current treatment or waiting for a clinical result. Ten patients reported contacting a trial. Primary reasons for not contacting a trial after discussion were disease progression, choosing a standard of care alternative, or waiting for a clinical result. Four patients have enrolled on a trial. Two patients were determined ineligible for a trial they approached for not meeting listed eligibility criteria and two for reasons not appearing in public trial information.
8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion
We identified barriers throughout the clinical trials consideration and enrollment process. One set of barriers was related to care coordination, as exemplified by low rates of trial discussion during early stages of treatment and patient reports of delayed trial consideration when currently receiving treatment or waiting on a clinical result. Communication of trial information was another area presenting barriers, as exemplified by exclusion of patients from trials for reasons not readily apparent from public trial information. Improving integration of trial discussion during care and ensuring availability of accurate, updated trial information may be essential to increase trial participation.
6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53Only Members that have purchased this event or have registered via an access code will be able to view this content. To view this presentation, please login, select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout. If you would like to become a member of IASLC, please click here.
-
+
P2.15 - Treatment in the Real World - Support, Survivorship, Systems Research (Not CME Accredited Session) (ID 964)
- Event: WCLC 2018
- Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
- Track:
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 9/25/2018, 16:45 - 18:00, Exhibit Hall
-
+
P2.15-20 - Educating The Multispecialty Team on Molecular Testing Related to Immunotherapy (ID 12785)
16:45 - 18:00 | Author(s): Tara Perloff
- Abstract
Background
Clinical guidelines for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) increasingly include molecular testing for actionable biomarkers related to immuno-oncology (IO) use in lung cancer patients. While precision therapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have the potential to improve patient response rates, there is ambiguity regarding optimal biomarker testing and care coordination for NSCLC patients. To address this disparity in health care delivery, an online education program on molecular testing related to immunotherapies was developed for multispecialty providers. Learner responses were evaluated to determine the educational impact.
a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method
A thoracic surgeon, medical oncologist and pathologist developed a curriculum to address the current diagnostic landscape in IO, the value of testing and patient response rates, and how to optimize care coordination and communication among multispecialty team members. In February 2018, a live-online 1-hour video panel discussion with slides, participant polling, and live questions was produced and made available on-demand. Survey responses (pre-test, post-test, 4 weeks post-activity), polling responses, and live questions were tracked to measure knowledge gaps, lessons learned, and educational needs. Demographic information was collected for generalizability.
4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result
Seventy-one learners participated in the live webinar; 64 learners on-demand (n=135). Learners were actively engaged for an average of 35.19 minutes (out of 52 minutes). Learners represented 11 unique disciplines and specialties. Most learners indicated specializing in oncology (55%), were practicing physicians (31%), and saw 1-10 new patients on an IO therapy each week (72%) in a hospital-based setting (35%). Seven audience questions were asked prior to, and during the live session. Thirty of 135 learners completed all pre/post/follow-up surveys, 96% of which reported they will actively utilize the knowledge gained into their clinical practice. Because of the education provided, learners reported improvements in their ability to: identify patients to test and treat with IO (75%), comprehend the current diagnostic landscape in IO (100%), and optimize communication and coordination of IO testing (100%). Learners also demonstrated improved comprehension via case study by identifying the optimal next step for a NSCLC clinical stage I patient referred by an oncologist for surgical resection who was found to have pleural disease intraoperatively.
8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion
The rapid expansion of cancer immunotherapy-based options for patients with lung cancer requires providers to stay abreast on guidelines related to molecular testing. Continued refinement of care coordination practices between multispecialty team members and education on the value of molecular testing is recommended to improve the diagnosis and appropriate treatment decisions for patients with lung cancer.
6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53
