Delivery Of Quality Cancer Care Research Articles

Assessing the Impact of Multidisciplinary Cancer Consultations on Cancer Quality Metrics

Objective: Multidisciplinary cancer consultations play a critical role in the delivery of quality cancer care by promoting treatment planning and collaborative decision-making. The objective of this study was to evaluate associations between multidisciplinary cancer consultations and receipt of guideline-recommended adjuvant treatments among breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer patients and assess these associations between and within racial and ethnic groups. Materials and Methods: This is a population-based retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER), Medicare-linked data (2006–2016) to identify Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer. Multidisciplinary cancer consultation was based on encounters with 2 or more oncology providers within 2 months of diagnosis. Cancer quality metrics assessed included receipt of guideline-recommended adjuvant cancer treatment for each cancer type. Results: Patients with multidisciplinary cancer consultations were more likely to receive adjuvant cancer treatment compared with patients without multidisciplinary cancer consultations within racial and ethnic groups. However, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic breast cancer patients with multidisciplinary cancer consultations were 24% and 41% less likely to receive hormone and radiation therapy, respectively, compared with NHWs with multidisciplinary cancer consultations. Conclusions: Patients with multidisciplinary cancer consultations were more likely to receive adjuvant cancer treatment, but racial and ethnic disparities in cancer care persist. Multidisciplinary cancer consultations are likely an important, but not fully sufficient, contributor to the receipt of adjuvant cancer treatment and may be a tool in the implementation of multipronged, team-based cancer care delivery models to reduce inequities in cancer-related outcomes.

Barriers to receipt of oncological care at the community level.

e13756 Background: Though the field of Oncology is advancing at a rapid pace, there exist several barriers to the receipt of care in cancer patients that are known to affect outcomes. This study aims to describe the social, logistical, and financial barriers to healthcare faced by a diverse group of cancer patients in the community setting. Methods: A total of 40 patients receiving various kinds of oncological care (chemotherapy infusions, radiation therapy, immunotherapy, outpatient follow-up appointments) at a community hospital from 12/2023 to 01/2024 were anonymously surveyed using a standardized questionnaire. Responses were compiled and analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups that missed appointments (Group 1) and did not miss appointments (Group 2) during the study period. Results: While there was no difference between ethnic groups, women were less likely to miss their appointments. Patients who were not married, who lived in single-income households with annual income less than $32,048, had less reliable access to transportation and were more likely to miss appointments. Distance from the hospital and having a social worker assigned did not seem to affect compliance with scheduled appointments. Conclusions: Socioeconomic disparities and lack of family support remain significant barriers in the delivery of quality cancer care. These are seen to affect patient compliance and hence treatment outcomes. Hence adequate resources should be allocated to address the holistic needs of our patients and alleviate the above-mentioned barriers. [Table: see text]

How a Canadian federal organization integrated synoptic reporting and quality improvement tools to drive a national learning health system in cancer surgery.

Accurate and complete surgical and pathology reports are the cornerstone of treatment decisions and cancer care excellence. Synoptic reporting is a process for reporting specific data elements in a specific format in surgical and pathology reports. Since 2007, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer has led the implementation of synoptic reporting mechanisms across multiple cancer disease sites and jurisdictions across Canada. While the implementation of synoptic reporting has been successful, its use to drive improvements in the quality of cancer care delivery has been lacking. Here we describe the 4-year, national multi-jurisdictional quality improvement initiative to catalyse the use synoptic data to drive cancer system improvements. Resources provided to the jurisdictions included operational funding, training in quality improvement methodology, national forums, expert coaches, and ad hoc monitoring and support. The program emphasized foundational concepts including data literacy, audit and feedback reports, communities of practice, and positive deviance methodology.

The emergence of telemedicine in a low-middle-income country: challenges and opportunities.

The quality of cancer care delivery varies across different regions of Ghana, highlighting the need for improved access to quality healthcare services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising solution to address this disparity, as it can reduce costs and improve access to healthcare services for cancer patients in remote areas. Despite the widely reported benefits of telemedicine, its adoption in low-resource settings has been slow due to several challenges. This study explores strategies for incorporating telemedicine into the current healthcare system in Ghana for the benefit of all patients especially those diagnosed with cancer. The study also highlights the current challenges and opportunities associated with the implementation and utilisation of telemedicine in Ghana. This research was a cross-sectional study conducted in Accra, Ghana that adopted a mixed-methods approach. Participants were selected through multi-stage probability sampling. Quantitative data were collected via a survey whereas qualitative data were obtained by means of in-depth interviews and focus group discussions among healthcare professionals, patients and key stakeholders in the telemedicine industry. The Statistical Program for the Social Sciences (version 21) was used to assemble, analyse and display the research data. The major challenges discussed centered on high initial investment costs, privacy and security concerns, poor internet connectivity, insufficient infrastructure and training of healthcare providers as well as the resistance to change among healthcare professionals. The study contributes to the understanding of telemedicine adoption in Ghana with findings underscoring the potential to address healthcare challenges while highlighting the need to overcome implementation obstacles. The study findings also provide valuable insights for policymakers, healthcare institutions and stakeholders to enhance telemedicine adoption in Ghana.

Experience of oncology nurses with cancer survivors during transition from acute oncology treatment to primary care.

Cancer care for Canadian cancer survivors remains fragmented. Little is known about the experience of Canadian oncology nurses providing cancer care for cancer survivors, as they transition from acute treatment to primary care. This study aimed to (1) explore the experience of oncology nurses dealing with fragmented cancer care for cancer survivors in transition to survivorship; (2) identify oncology nurses' perspectives about what promotes or inhibits their delivery of quality cancer care; and (3) obtain their suggestions to improve cancer care. This study used a phenomenological design to explore the experience of oncology nurses in caring for cancer survivors during transition to survivorship and examine how the nurse participants describe their experience. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data and an interpretative phenomenological analysis approach was used to develop themes from the data. Three oncology nurses participated in this study. The following five themes emerged: (1) Under personal transition: nursing assessment, symptoms management, patient education, resources offered, refusing label of cancer survivors, promoting adjustment to a new normal life, promoting return to work, and recognizing meaning of survivorship; (2) Under cancer survivor's care transition: promoting self-care management, communication, and maximal recovery of body functions; (3) Under nurse's positive experience promoting delivery of quality cancer care: caring for cancer survivors, experience and knowledge, and advocate for cancer survivors; (4) Under barriers that negatively affected delivery of cancer care: low socioeconomic status (especially low income), cultures and languages barriers, and limited time providing nursing care; and (5) Suggestions to improve cancer care: establishing a new position - primary nurse, increasing the number of healthcare professionals, and improving knowledge, skills, and experience. Oncology nurses' knowledge and experience provide a good foundation for quality cancer care and contribute to the health and wellbeing of cancer survivors.

Development, Feasibility, and Acceptability of an Oncologist Group Peer Support Program From ASCO's Clinician Well-Being Task Force.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had deleterious effects on oncologist professional and personal well-being, the optimal delivery of quality cancer care, and the future cancer care workforce, with many departing the field. Hence, the identification of evidence-based approaches to sustain oncologists is essential to promote well-being. We developed a brief, oncologist-centered, virtual group peer support program and tested its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact on well-being. Trained facilitators provided support to peers on the basis of burnout research in oncology with available resources to enhance oncologist resilience. Peers completed pre- and postsurvey assessment of well-being and satisfaction. From April to May 2022, 11 of 15 (73%) oncologists participated in its entirety: mean age 51.1 years (range, 33-70), 55% female, 81.8% Ca, 82% medical oncologists, 63.6% trained ≥15 years, average 30.3 patients/wk (range, 5-60), and 90.9% employed in hospital/health system practice. There was a statistically significant difference in pre- and postintervention well-being (7.0 ± 3.6 v 8.2 ± 3.0, P = .03) with high satisfaction with postgroup experience (9.1 ± 2.5). These quantitative improvements were affirmed by qualitative feedback. These themes included (1) an enhanced understanding of burnout in oncology, (2) shared experience in practice of oncology, and (3) fostering connections with diverse colleagues. Future recommendations proposed included (1) restructuring group format and (2) tailoring groups according to practice setting (academic v community). Preliminary results suggest that a brief, innovative oncologist-tailored group peer support program is feasible, acceptable, and beneficial for enhancing well-being dimensions including burnout, engagement, and satisfaction. Additional study is required to refine program components (optimal timing, format) to support oncologist well-being, now during the pandemic and well into recovery.

Oncologist and primary care provider attitudes towards shared care in patients with cancer with chronic medical comorbidities.

35 Background: Medical comorbidities pose challenges to the delivery of quality cancer care. Underserved cancer patients have the highest burden of chronic comorbidities, with increased risk for worse outcomes. Their health outcomes and care transitions might be improved by enhancing collaboration between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of oncologists and PCPs in a large public safety-net hospital system in Houston, TX. Providers completed electronic surveys assessing demographics, attitudes, and satisfaction regarding the shared care of cancer patients with chronic comorbidities. Results: Eighteen oncologists (39% minority, 72% female) and 25 PCPs (23% minority, 77% female) completed the surveys. Independent samples t-tests revealed both oncologists and PCPs reported moderate levels of interprofessional collaboration, felt that existing processes to facilitate coordination of care were inadequate, and expressed moderate levels of dissatisfaction with the management of cancer patients with comorbidities within HHS (all p-values = n.s.). However, their attitudes toward care coordination differed significantly depending on the nature and timing of the care being provided. With regard to side effect management during cancer-directed therapy, 81% of PCPs preferred to co-manage side effects with oncologists, but 100% of oncologists preferred to be responsible for this activity (χ2= 23.08, p <.001). With regard to management of late-effects of cancer treatment, 40% of oncologists were either interested in co-managing late effects with PCPs or having PCPs be solely responsible for this activity. Conversely, 86% of PCPs preferred to co-manage late effects with oncologists (χ2= 26.74, p <.001). For cancer surveillance, oncologists and PCPs expressed interest in sharing responsibility depending on the patient’s risk for recurrence (χ2= 1.62, p =.30). Conclusions: Oncologists and PCPs were similarly dissatisfied with comorbidity management in cancer patients, but differed in their attitudes towards care coordination. Oncologists were more resistant to sharing responsibilities of toxicities during and after treatment. They were more accepting of PCPs assuming follow-up care for lower-risk patients. Further investigation is needed to determine specific areas of care coordination, barriers to provider collaboration, and knowledge and processes for effective shared care.

Time to diagnosis and treatment initiation during the COVID-19 pandemic among rural patients with cancer.

132 Background: Time to diagnosis (TTD) and treatment initiation (TTI) are important measures of access and quality of cancer care, but little is known about TTD and TTI for rural cancer patients. Rural residents experience disproportionate burdens of cancer including higher incidence and mortality, and many rural patients face challenges in health care access. Further understanding of TTD and TTI in rural areas is essential to improving the quality of cancer care delivery and cancer outcomes in rural areas. In this study, we describe TTD and TTI among rural cancer patients in Hawaii during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Information about TTD and TTI was collected from 80 rural cancer patients enrolled on a care coordination study between Sept. 2020 and Dec. 2021. Participants were receiving active treatment for any cancer and residing in rural areas in Hawaii. We used descriptive statistics to describe TTD and TTI for the overall sample and specifically for those with breast and GI cancers, the two most common cancers in this study sample. Results: Participants were 56% female, with the mean age of 63 (SD = 12.1). 43% were White/Caucasian, 30% Native Hawaiian, and 25% two or more race. Reporting of symptoms to a healthcare provider led to diagnosis for 61.6% of the overall sample, whereas 38.4% received diagnosis following screening. For breast cancer, 36.8% indicated symptoms led to diagnosis, and 63.2% by screening. Among those with GI cancer, 76.5% reported symptoms led to diagnosis, and 23.5% by screening. Overall, 62.5% of participants reported TTD of within one month (< = 30 days) of screening or reporting symptoms to a healthcare provider (30-day TTD 62.5% for breast and 60.0% for GI). Median TTI for the overall sample was 60.6 days (IQR 30-62). For those with breast and GI cancers, median TTI was 61.0 (IQR 31-70) and 31.0 (IQR 0-61) days, respectively. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that although TTD in this rural sample was comparable to other studies, TTI overall, and particularly for those with breast cancer, was nearly twice the TTI reported in other population-based studies. Delays in cancer treatment initiation have been associated with worse survival for breast and other cancers, especially among underserved populations. Our findings indicate that during the COVID-19 pandemic, rural residents in Hawaii experienced substantial delays in cancer treatment initiation. This study highlights the importance of addressing timely healthcare system access to minimize delays in treatment initiation and to improve health outcomes for rural cancer patients.

Perceptions of cancer care coordination among rural patients in Hawaii.

e18553 Background: Rural residents experience disproportionate burdens of cancer including higher incidence and mortality than urban residents. Disparities in rural cancer health outcomes are partially attributed to limited access to specialty care and care coordination challenges in rural areas. To date, little is known about rural cancer patients’ perceptions of care coordination (CC). In this study, we examined rural patients’ perceptions of cancer CC and compared rural and urban patients’ perceptions of cancer CC using the Care Coordination Instrument (CCI), a validated patient-report measure of CC. Methods: 80 rural patients receiving active treatment for any cancer residing in rural areas of Hawaii (Hawaii Island, Kauai) completed the CCI from Sept. 2020 to Dec. 2021. These rural areas are on separate islands from Oahu (urban) where tertiary care hospitals in Hawaii are located. Data for the urban cohorts ( n = 220) were derived from our archival data. The CCI assesses overall patients’ perceptions of CC (Total) and includes subscales that evaluate CC across three domains (Communication, Navigation, Operational). We used descriptive statistics to describe rural patients’ CC details and linear regression models to compare CCI scores between rural and urban patients. Results: Among 300 patients, demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the rural and urban cohorts (mean age = 63.6, 56% female, most common cancer type: 28% breast and 25% GI). Patients were racially diverse, with 25% White/Caucasian, 24% Japanese, 16% Native Hawaiian, and 24% two or more race. Among rural patients, 43% indicated having traveled by air to another island (Oahu; urban) for cancer treatment (50% surgery). Of these patients, 38% indicated having paid out-of-pocket for cancer care-related travel costs. 65% of these patients reported travel costs as a burden, with 6% of patients having canceled or delayed treatment due to costs. Overall, there were no differences on the Total CCI scores between rural and urban patients ( p = 0.73). However, significant differences were found for Communication and Navigation ( p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively), with rural patients reporting lower scores on these domains. No differences were found for the Operational domain scores. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that that while rural patients’ overall perceptions of CC were similar to their urban cohorts, rural patients perceived greater CC challenges related to the communication and navigation aspects of CC. Off-island cancer care-related travel costs were reported as a significant burden for rural patients who must travel to another island for their cancer treatment. These findings highlight the need for interventions to address financial, communication and navigation challenges for rural patients in order to improve the quality of cancer care delivery in rural areas.

MA15.05 Rates of Guideline-Concordant Surgery and Adjuvant Chemotherapy Among Patients in The U.S. ALCHEMIST Study (Alliance)

The standard of care for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) includes anatomic surgical resection with adequate lymph node dissection and adjuvant chemotherapy for appropriate patients. Historically, many patients with early-stage NSCLC have not received such guideline-concordant therapy. Longstanding disparities have also existed in the delivery of quality cancer care by sociodemographic factors such as race and ethnicity. This could impact interpretation of adjuvant therapy trials. In this descriptive analysis, we examined rates of guideline-concordant treatment among patients enrolled in ALCHEMIST, a large U.S.-wide screening trial to facilitate enrollment to targeted adjuvant treatment trials for resectable NSCLC, enrolling at 754 sites. Patients who enrolled in ALCHEMIST (Alliance A151216) from August 18, 2014-April 1, 2019 who did not enroll in a therapeutic adjuvant therapy clinical trial were included; these patients had stage IB-IIIA disease (AJCC 7th edition), with tumors at least 4 cm in size and/or positive lymph nodes. Four outcomes are reported: whether patients (1) had adequate lymph node dissection per National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria (≥ one N1 nodal station plus ≥ three N2 nodal stations); (2) received any adjuvant chemotherapy; (3) received any cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy; and (4) received at least 4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. Associations between these binary outcomes and sociodemographic variables were explored using unadjusted modified Poisson regression models accounting for trial site-level correlation. 2,834 patients were analyzed; 53.4% had adequate lymph node dissection; 57.1% received any adjuvant chemotherapy; 34.1% received any cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy; and 43.7% received at least four cycles of adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. The distribution of treatment by key clinical and demographic characteristics is provided in Table 1; adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered more often to patients who were younger, had more advanced stage, had non-squamous NSCLC, and did not have EGFR-mutant tumors. Rates were similar across categories of race and ethnicity. Many patients with early-stage NSCLC did not receive adequate lymph node dissection or adjuvant chemotherapy despite indications for such treatment, even among patients who consented for testing to inform eligibility for an adjuvant therapy clinical trial. No substantial disparities in treatment were observed by race or ethnicity in this clinical trial cohort, contrary to historical patterns in population-based cohorts. Efforts are needed to optimize utilization of therapies with proven benefit for early-stage NSCLC. These results may inform the generalizability of clinical trials of novel therapies in the adjuvant setting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02194738

Proposal for development of a guideline in maintaining quality cancer care during and post-covid-19 in an upper middle-income country with universal health coverage

BackgroundDuring periods of high community transmission of COVID-19, the public hospitals in Malaysia, an upper middle-income country, have been forced to scale down elective surgeries, prioritize cancer treatments based on treatment benefits, and postpone non-emergency imaging procedures. These inevitably led to disruptions in cancer care delivery within the public health care system. This study aims to explore the facilitators and barriers faced by healthcare providers and cancer survivors in cancer care, and to co-design a guideline to maintain the delivery of cancer care amid the disaster situations. MethodIn-depth interviews (IDIs) will be conducted with Malaysian healthcare providers and cancer survivors and findings will be analysed thematically. The insights will be used in a subsequent phase to co-design a guideline to maintain the delivery of quality cancer care in Malaysia via a three-round modified Delphi survey with a broad range of cancer stakeholders. Expected resultsFindings derived from IDIs and existing literature will be included for rating across three rounds by the expert panel. Feedback provided will be refined until consensus on the best practises for cancer care continuity during crises is achieved. ConclusionThe output of the present study is not only expected to ensure the continuity of delivery of high-quality cancer care in Malaysia during the ongoing pandemic but also to be adapted during unforeseen crises in the near future. Policy summary statementCollaborative work between policy makers, public health physicians, members of the multidisciplinary oncology team as well as cancer survivors is vital in developing an evidenced- based contingency plan for maintaining access to cancer care.

Identifying options for oncology therapy regimen codification to improve standardization-combined results of an expert panel and a review.

What is known and objectiveChemotherapy drugs are often administered in combinations with predefined interdependent doses and cycle intervals. As yet, there is no global standardization system to describe these complex regimens in a universally comprehensive manner. The aim of this review is to identify which efforts for standardization have been undertaken and which recommendations for databases and nomenclature of chemotherapy regimens are available.MethodsA literature review was performed to identify all peer‐reviewed full‐text articles about oncology therapy regimen codification. In addition, the results of this search were evaluated and consensus recommendations from a European expert panel were subsequently added.ResultsThis review gives an overview of attempts to standardize chemotherapy nomenclature described in the literature, as well as of previously published identified gaps in regimen codification. In addition, we summarized the suggestions for improvement of chemotherapy codification found in the available literature, combining them with the expertise from a European expert panel of oncology pharmacists.What is new and conclusionsWe believe that one of the most important error‐prevention measures is standardization. However, there is a paucity of data how it may be achieved. Currently available data suggest that standardization has a positive impact on usability for data networks, prescription software, safety and the measurement of the quality of cancer care delivery. Standardization is also a strong pre‐requisite for all discussions including oncology pharmacists and oncologists when evaluating chemotherapy regimen in countries in Europe but also all over the world. The recommendations compiled in this review can help to support overdue standardization efforts in this important therapeutic area.

Palliative care education and research at US cancer centers: A national survey.

Palliative care (PC) education and research are essential to developing a skilled workforce and evidence base to support the delivery of quality cancer care. The current state of PC education and research at US cancer centers is unclear. In this national survey, the education and research programs of the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated and nondesignated cancer centers and the changes between 2009 and 2018 are compared. Between April and August 2018, PC program leaders at all NCI-designated cancer centers and a random sample of nondesignated centers were sent a survey to examine the structure, processes, and outcomes of their programs on the basis of questions from a 2009 national survey. This preplanned analysis focused on education and research. There were 52 of 61 (85%) NCI-designated and 27 of 38 (71%) nondesignated cancer centers that responded. NCI-designated centers were more likely than nondesignated centers to have a PC fellowship program (87% vs 30%; P < .001), training for advanced practice providers (71% vs 44%; P = .03), PC research program (58% vs 15%; P < .001), peer-reviewed funding (43% vs 11%; P = .005), and philanthropic grants (41% vs 7%; P = .002). There were few significant improvements in PC education or research between 2009 and 2018 for both groups, notable exceptions include an increase in PC fellowships (38% vs 87%; P < .001) and mandatory PC rotations for medical oncology fellows (29% vs 55%; P = .02) at NCI-designated cancer centers. PC education and research are more developed at NCI-designated cancer centers. Despite some progress over the past decade, it is relatively slow and suboptimal.

Managing the delivery of quality cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic in a small community cancer clinic.

45 Background: The global pandemic resulting from COVID-19 has resulted in over 400,000 deaths and nearly 7 million active cases at the time of writing this abstract (World Health Organization, 2020). This Public Health Emergency (PHE) represents an unprecedented challenge for oncologists and cancer patients alike. They are met with the challenge of providing uninterrupted care to cancer patients, a predicament that includes a balance between the use of immunosuppressive chemotherapy, it’s potential impact on contracting COVID-19 and the risk of cancer progression. Liang et al reported that cancer patients were not only at very high risk of contracting COVID -19, but also at a much higher risk of complications and death. Our medium sized oncology practice rapidly adapted to meet the challenge to continue to provide care. Methods: Employee and patient safety: Implement CDC recommendations in waiting room, infusion suites and supply of PPE. Categorize patients into priorities based on severity and need of treatment. Implement telehealth. Implement care in accordance to Cancer Patients Assessment and Treatment Priority Determination (top, intermediate and low priority)–Table. As a part of our initial strategy, we discussed the risk and balance of postponing chemotherapy or elective surgery for stable cancer patients during the first phase of closures. We also focused on more intensive surveillance in the older patient population or those with multiple high-risk comorbidities. For patients in complete remission on maintenance therapy, we balanced risk and benefit of stopping chemotherapy. In other patients, we considered the option of switching their chemotherapy regimen from IV to oral therapies, where clinically appropriate, to decrease the frequency of clinic visits and potential exposure. In cases where the option of non-immunosuppressive oral therapy is existed, we implemented the same. Results: Our clinic continues to provide uninterrupted care since the declaration of PHE. We saw a drop of 25% patient volume in March and 35% in April. However, with instant adaptation and implementation of CDC recommendations patient volume reached back to pre COVID 19 related emergency. None of our employees, their dependents nor any of our patients have contracted COVID-19 to date (according to DHEC feedback) at the time of writing. We had a total of 5082 patients visits (1261 chemo visits). Conclusions: By implementing the right steps and precautions, it is possible to provide continued care for and protect staff, physicians and patients. [Table: see text]

EHR innovations to optimize cancer care delivery in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic.

249 Background: The Mount Sinai Health System was in the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in NYC. We implemented dynamic testing, isolation and treatment policies in order to continue delivering necessary cancer treatments and ensure the safety of our patients and our staff. Here, we describe the rapid rollout of IT optimizations to enhance the delivery of quality cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We developed a cancer center incident command structure that involved integration of a health informaticist, IT analyst, and data analyst along with cancer center leadership to help create and optimize electronic health record (EHR)-based tools to support the clinical mission. Results: We developed and implemented EHR-based COVID-19 screening protocols, clinical decision support, reporting and analytics tools, and telehealth technology related to COVID-19 (Table). Conclusions: Dynamic EHR optimizations were essential to continue our cancer care delivery services during the pandemic. [Table: see text]

Patient and provider perspectives on delivery of oral cancer therapies

ObjectiveThe introduction of oral cancer therapies presents new challenges to delivery of quality cancer care. Little is known about how patients and providers address and overcome these challenges. We conducted a qualitative study exploring the range of patient and provider perspectives on oral cancer therapies. MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and providers at a tertiary referral center and county safety-net hospital in Dallas, TX. Interviews probed perspectives on differences between parenteral chemotherapy and oral therapies, adherence, communication, and cost/insurance. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using a deductively-driven coding scheme corresponding to the interview guide. ResultsWe conducted 22 patient (13 at tertiary referral center, 9 at safety-net hospital) and 10 provider (7 oncologists, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist) interviews. Key themes from interviews included: (1) differences in parenteral chemotherapy vs. oral therapy; (2) adherence and dosing; and (3) experiences related to cost and communication. ConclusionsNearly all providers described challenges engaging with and educating patients about oral cancer therapies. Despite our initial hypothesis, safety-net patients encountered few barriers accessing oral therapies compared to patients receiving care in the tertiary referral center. Practice implications: Our findings will guide future interventions to monitor and support cancer patients receiving oral therapies.

ASO Author Reflections: The National Cancer Database as a Tool to Advance the Quality of Cancer Care Delivery in the US.

ASO Author Reflections: The National Cancer Database as a Tool to Advance the Quality of Cancer Care Delivery in the US.

A Systematic Review of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Clinical Oncology Practice.

Electronic health records are central to cancer care delivery. Electronic clinical decision support (CDS) systems can potentially improve cancer care quality and safety. However, little is known regarding the use of CDS systems in clinical oncology and their impact on patient outcomes. A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies was performed to evaluate clinically relevant outcomes related to the use of CDS tools for the diagnosis, treatment, and supportive care of patients with cancer. Peer-reviewed studies published from 1995 through 2016 were included if they assessed clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), costs, or care delivery process measures. Electronic database searches yielded 2,439 potentially eligible papers, with 24 studies included after final review. Most studies used an uncontrolled, pre-post intervention design. A total of 23 studies reported improvement in key study outcomes with use of oncology CDS systems, and 12 studies assessing the systems for computerized chemotherapy order entry demonstrated reductions in prescribing error rates, medication-related safety events, and workflow interruptions. The remaining studies examined oncology clinical pathways, guideline adherence, systems for collection and communication of PROs, and prescriber alerts. There is a paucity of data evaluating clinically relevant outcomes of CDS system implementation in oncology care. Currently available data suggest that these systems can have a positive impact on the quality of cancer care delivery. However, there is a critical need to rigorously evaluate CDS systems in oncology to better understand how they can be implemented to improve patient outcomes.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Health Economic Decision-Making: A Changing Landscape in Oncology.

Cancer causes significant death and disability globally. However, costs of more personalized cancer care continue to climb, while access to basic cancer screening and treatment is not available to much of the world. This chapter provides an overview of the status of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in cancer clinical care and research. PROs are valuable for health care and health economic decision-making at institutional, regional, national, and international levels. PRO data should be considered along with cost and survival data when approving new therapies. PRO data can also be helpful when assessing existing treatment options for patients, particularly for drugs with minor outcome and toxicity differences. Finally, PROs can be useful in reimbursement algorithms to ensure delivery of quality cancer care in value-based financing environments. The authors advocate for reframing the concept of health value, aligning PRO measures with societal values, and broadening the definition of society to extend beyond national boundaries.

A comprehensive initiative to optimize accrual to neuro oncology clinical trials.

e18546Background: Access to cancer treatment clinical trials is a key measure for the delivery of quality cancer care. When available, cancer clinical trials should be offered up front and practice...