Virtual Library

Start Your Search

Kayla Haskins



Author of

  • +

    P1.02 - Advocacy (Not CME Accredited Session) (ID 934)

    • Event: WCLC 2018
    • Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • Moderators:
    • Coordinates: 9/24/2018, 16:45 - 18:00, Exhibit Hall
    • +

      P1.02-09 - Identifying Gaps in Messaging for Biomarker Testing in the Lung Cancer Community: Need for Consistent and Actionable Messaging (ID 14089)

      16:45 - 18:00  |  Author(s): Kayla Haskins

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background

      Since 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved more than fifteen lung cancer treatment approaches, the majority of which are biomarker-driven. However, not all eligible patients benefit from these treatments, partly due to lack of tumor testing. To help assess whether inconsistent messaging could be a contributor to the suboptimal biomarker testing rates, we conducted a messaging audit to determine the messages being conveyed to lung cancer patients and healthcare providers (HCP).

      a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method

      We analyzed marketing and education materials from 7 lung cancer patient advocacy groups (PAGs), 2 professional associations, 10 pharmaceutical companies, and 5 diagnostic companies that provide genomic testing to lung cancer patients. The materials included were those used by PAGs geared toward patients and those used by industry and testing companies for both patients and HCPs (oncologists). Privately used marketing materials were solicited from pharmaceutical companies. All materials were de-identified, and the rubric of analysis involved assessing whether materials answered six key questions: What is biomarker testing? Why is it important? Who (which patients) should get tested? When (at what point in the treatment journey)? How and where is testing done?

      Materials were audited by two independent reviewers and checked for inter-reviewer reliability. The audit was presented to a stakeholder group (organizations included in the audit) to elicit feedback, discuss gaps, and identify solutions.

      4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result

      When analyzing patient-facing materials, PAGs were successful in answering Why, Who, and What, whereas pharmaceutical industry-developed campaigns were adept at answering the Why, How, and What. Deeper analysis revealed that patients were receiving mixed messages from PAGs and industry developed-campaigns. PAGs analyzed did not produce HCP-facing materials. However, industry-generated HCP-facing materials’ strength was their responses to Why patients should be tested and their gap was their responses to When patients should be tested. A qualitative trend noted was that most HCP-facing materials did not focus on the benefit to a patient that testing provides. All materials audited lacked a consistent “call-to-action” to patients.

      8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion

      Our audit identified gaps in education materials, and highlights the importance of consistent and actionable messages for lung cancer patients and HCPs so that the importance of biomarker testing is appropriately conveyed. When presented to the stakeholder group, meeting participants agreed that all materials should at least answer the Why, Who, and When. Furthermore, they suggested that educational materials should include the importance to patients of tissue–based biopsies and tissue acquisition for biomarker testing.

      6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.

  • +

    P3.15 - Treatment in the Real World - Support, Survivorship, Systems Research (Not CME Accredited Session) (ID 981)

    • Event: WCLC 2018
    • Type: Poster Viewing in the Exhibit Hall
    • Track:
    • Presentations: 1
    • Moderators:
    • Coordinates: 9/26/2018, 12:00 - 13:30, Exhibit Hall
    • +

      P3.15-09 - Are Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Education Materials? The Healthcare Provider Perspective on Distribution Gaps and Possible Solutions (ID 14049)

      12:00 - 13:30  |  Author(s): Kayla Haskins

      • Abstract
      • Slides

      Background

      While new treatments for lung cancer bring new hope, they can also make understanding a lung cancer diagnosis and making treatment decisions a challenge for both patients and caregivers. Education is imperative to understanding the diagnosis and making informed treatment decisions. However, many patients and their caregivers report that they do not receive materials from their doctors. We fielded a study of healthcare providers (HCP) to understand their attitudes and practices on disseminating patient education for lung cancer.

      a9ded1e5ce5d75814730bb4caaf49419 Method

      We conducted an IRB-approved sequential mixed-method study of 216 HCPs (130 oncologists, 52 pulmonologists, and 34 nurse navigators/clinic or hospital administrators) from academic research centers, community cancer centers, and private practice to get a full and broad picture of education for lung cancer patients based on the specific role each HCP group plays in the treatment journey. The quantitative survey was followed by a qualitative interview of five HCPs to contextualize the survey findings. Questions of the study delved into perception, usage, distribution, and development of education materials.

      4c3880bb027f159e801041b1021e88e8 Result

      Of the HCPs surveyed, surprisingly only 75% report that lung cancer educational materials are distributed. Nurse navigators/clinic administrators were more likely to distribute patient education materials than oncologists and pulmonologists (p<0.05). Notably, there is a discrepancy in who actually does the distributing: nurse navigators and community cancer center administrators say oncologists most often distribute them (80%), while oncologists and pulmonologist claim they only distribute some of the time (56%). Information format also was reported as a factor in distribution; HCPs are interested in information that can be both electronic and printable (79% of HCPs report that they distribute information via printed resources, and 59% of them still prefer printed materials, given the choice). Overall, community cancer centers report a higher rate of distribution than private practices and hospitals (p<0.05). However, there is typically not a point person for material review in any of these settings, and most HCPs report using information from multiple sources, such as self-created materials and materials created by other organizations.

      8eea62084ca7e541d918e823422bd82e Conclusion

      Distribution practices for educational materials are not standard and tend to be subject to the HCP’s own discretion, leading to inconsistent delivery of materials. In-depth interviews with HCPs suggest possible solutions, including customization to patient/caregivers’ unique type of lung cancer, availability of multiple formats of education materials for distribution, and white-labeling of materials to allow re-branding to an HCP’s unique practice setting.

      6f8b794f3246b0c1e1780bb4d4d5dc53

      Only Active 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 or select "Add to Cart" and proceed to checkout.