Physician Treatment Recommendations Research Articles

Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations.

Physician treatment preference may influence how risks are communicated in prostate cancer consultations. We identified persuasive language used when describing cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects in relation to a physician's recommendation for aggressive (surgery/radiation) or nonaggressive (active surveillance/watchful waiting) treatment. A qualitative analysis was performed on transcribed treatment consultations of 40 men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer across 10 multidisciplinary providers. Quotes pertaining to cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects were randomized. Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations from isolated blinded quotes. Testing characteristics of consensus predictions against the physician's treatment recommendation were reported. Coders then identified persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment for each quote. Frequencies of persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment were reported. Logistic regression quantified associations between persuasive strategies and physician treatment recommendations. A total of 496 quotes about cancer prognosis (n = 127), life expectancy (n = 51), and side effects (n = 318) were identified. The accuracy of predicting treatment recommendation based on individual quotes containing persuasive language (n = 256/496, 52%) was 91%. When favoring aggressive treatment, persuasive language downplayed side effect risks and amplified cancer risk (recurrence, progression, or mortality). Significant predictors (P < 0.05) of aggressive treatment recommendation included favorable side effect interpretation, downplaying side effects, and long time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity. When favoring nonaggressive treatment, persuasive language amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. Significant predictors of nonaggressive treatment recommendation included unfavorable side effect interpretation, favorable interpretation of cancer risk, and short time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity. Physicians use persuasive language favoring their preferred treatment, regardless of whether their recommendation is appropriate. Clinicians should quantify risk so patients can judge potential harm without solely relying on persuasive language. Physicians use persuasive language favoring their treatment recommendation when communicating risks of prostate cancer treatment, which may influence a patient's treatment choice.Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations based on isolated, randomized quotes about cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects with 91% accuracy.Qualitative analysis revealed that when favoring nonaggressive treatment, physicians used persuasive language that amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. When favoring aggressive treatment, physicians did the opposite.Providers should be cognizant of using persuasive strategies and aim to provide quantified assessments of risk that are jointly interpreted with the patient so that patients can make evidence-based conclusions regarding risks without solely relying on persuasive language.

Glaucoma Treatment Patterns in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Physicians were most likely to recommend primary medical therapy upon diagnosis of glaucoma. Laser therapy was underutilized where they were available. Physicians were more likely to recommend surgery in severe glaucoma, laser therapy in mild glaucoma, while recommendation of medical therapy did not depend on glaucoma severity. To characterize treatment patterns for newly diagnosed glaucoma in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This was a multicenter cross-sectional study of adults newly diagnosed with glaucoma at 27 eye care centers in 10 African countries. In addition to demographic and clinical data, physician treatment recommendations (medication, laser, surgery, or no treatment) were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA version 14.0. Data from 1201 patients were analyzed. Physicians were most likely to recommend primary medical therapy upon diagnosis of glaucoma (69.4%), with laser (13.2%), surgery (14.9%), and no treatment (2.5%) recommended to the remaining patients. All sites had medical therapy available and most (25/27, 92.6%) could provide surgical treatment; only 16/27 (59.3%) sites offered laser, and at these sites, 30.8% of eyes were recommended to undergo primary laser procedures. As glaucoma severity increased, the laser was recommended less, surgery more, and medications unchanged. Patient acceptance of medical therapy was 99.1%, laser 88.3%, and surgery 69.3%. Medical therapy for first-line glaucoma management is preferred by most physicians in SSA (69%). Laser therapy may be underutilized at centers where it is available. These findings underscore the need for comparative studies of glaucoma treatments in SSA to inform the development of evidence-based treatment guidelines and of programs to reduce glaucoma blindness in SSA. Strategic approaches to glaucoma therapy in SSA must address the question of whether medical therapy is the most optimal first-line approach in this setting.

Abstract P6-01-39: The impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score® assay upon physician treatment recommendations in the neoadjuvant setting in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients in a multicenter prospective study in Quebec

Abstract Background: Although the role of the 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score® assay is well established to predict response to adjuvant chemotherapy in the setting of node-negative hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancers (BC), fewer studies have evaluated the assay in the neoadjuvant setting. Due to the correlation between a high Recurrence Score® (RS) result and pathological complete response (pCR), the Breast Recurrence Score assay has been used to aid in selecting between chemotherapy (CT) or endocrine therapy. We wanted to further understand the impact of the assay upon physician treatment recommendations and the use of chemotherapy in this patient cohort. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study in patients with clinically node-negative HR-positive, HER2-negative BC with T2-T3 disease being considered for neoadjuvant therapy. Physicians were required to complete two questionnaires indicating treatment choice, including CT, endocrine therapy, or surgery, prior to and post availability of RS result. Patients were followed up for 6 months after commencement of neoadjuvant therapy. The primary objective was to evaluate the change in the physician’s recommendation for neoadjuvant CT prior to and post assay results. As a secondary objective, we also evaluated the impact of the RS result on physician’s expressed level of confidence. Results: A total of 70 patients were enrolled between April 2018 and November 2021 at five hospital centers, as part of the McPeak Sirois Group of Quebec. The median age of the cohort was 60 years (range, 30 to 79 years). 24.3 % (n=17) of the cohort consisted of patients aged &amp;lt; 50 years, and 75.7% (n=53) were ≥ to 50 years. 29.0% (n=20) of the patients had a RS &amp;lt; 16, 39.1% (n=27) had a RS between 16-25, and 31.9% (n=22) had a RS &amp;gt; 25. For the entire cohort, the RS result led to a net reduction in chemotherapy recommendation by 33.3% (OR (odds of having CT post-RS recommendation versus pre-RS recommendation) = 0.23 [95% CI: 0.12-0.44]; P&amp;lt; 0.0001), and 39.2% net reduction in the use of chemotherapy at 6-month follow-up (OR = 0.18 [95% CI: 0.09-0.35]; P&amp;lt; 0.0001). Furthermore, the RS result led to a 35.3% net reduction in physician recommendation of CT for patients &amp;lt; 50 years (OR = 0.19 [95% CI: 0.04-0.83]; P=0.027) and a 32.7% net reduction for patients ≥ 50 years (OR = 0.24 [95% CI: 0.11-0.50]; P=0.0001). For patients with a RS &amp;lt; 16, there was a reduction in CT recommendation by 75.0%, and by 44.4% for patients with a RS between 16 - 25 (OR = 0.15 [95% CI: 0.06-0.38]; P&amp;lt; 0.0001). Moreover, RS results led to an increase in confidence in physician treatment decisions for 59.4% of patients (OR = 12.53 [95% CI: 5.46-28.78]; P&amp;lt; 0.0001). Conclusion: We determined that the 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score assay altered neoadjuvant treatment decisions, leading to a reduction in the use of chemotherapy by about one-third, regardless of age. Additionally, the assay increased physician confidence in their treatment recommendation for about 60% of patients. This demonstrates the potential clinical utility of the assay to decrease the use of CT in the neoadjuvant setting amongst HR-positive, node-negative BC patients in Quebec. Citation Format: Mariya Yordanova, Lucas Sideris, Pierre Dubé, Jean-Francois Boileau, Julie Lemieux, Catalin Mihalcioiu, Sylvie Levesque, Marie-Claude Guertin, Erica Patocskai, Rami Younan, André Robidoux, Saima Hassan. The impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score® assay upon physician treatment recommendations in the neoadjuvant setting in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients in a multicenter prospective study in Quebec [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-01-39.

Abstract P4-03-15: Does age affect outcome? Data from a large cohort from British Columbia, 2005-2014

Abstract Background Prior data has been conflicting about how age at diagnosis impacts patient outcomes and survival. Some studies suggest that younger age at diagnosis may negatively affect survival, independent of other disease characteristics. Accurate predictions of outcomes and patterns of relapse provide invaluable information to patients and help inform physician treatment recommendations, such as the role of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy. Purpose To determine the relapse free survival and overall survival data for all patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and treated at BC Cancer from 2005 to 2014. Methods Using the BC Cancer Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit (BCOU) database, we identified all patients referred with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer at any stage between 2005 and 2014. For descriptive statistics, we analyzed clinical and pathological features at diagnosis and treatment specific variables compared across the following age cohorts: &amp;lt; 35, 35-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, and 80 years of age or more. To model the non-linear relationship of age at diagnosis as a continuous variable with the risk of relapse and death, we used an additive Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for subtype, LVI status, use of RT, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and nodal status. We employed the fitted model to extract estimates for specific values of age while fixing other covariates at different values to create high and low risk cohorts. For subtypes Luminal B, HER2 positive and triple negative breast cancer, high-risk subgroups were defined as node-positive plus treatment with chemotherapy. Low risk was defined as Luminal A and node-negative. The extracted estimates were used to investigate the patterns of relapse among different ages via the means of adjusted cumulative incidence curves and to report the 10 year adjusted relapse free survival and overall survival estimates. Results We identified 24,469 patients who met the inclusion criteria with a median follow-up of 11.5 years. Patients &amp;lt; 35 and between 35-39 years of age were more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer that was ductal histology, grade 3, LVI positive, HER2 positive, triple negative, and more advanced TNM stage at diagnosis. These younger patients were also more likely to undergo mastectomy, neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy compared to older age cohorts. Additive Cox proportional hazards revealed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction in 10-year relapse free survival amongst patients with early-stage disease aged 30 and 35 as well as those aged 80, compared to patients aged 50 when adjusted for stage and treatment exposure. This was consistent across all high- and low-risk subgroups (Table 1). 10-year overall survival was significantly and meaningfully reduced in patients aged 30 and 80 compared to age 50 only amongst the high-risk patient populations. Conclusion Both younger and elderly age at breast cancer diagnosis were independent risk factors for poorer prognosis. To our knowledge, this is the largest patient cohort detailing such outcomes differences. Furthermore, this represents a more contemporary clinical context, compared to earlier publications. This work will help clinicians more accurately estimate disease trajectory, and may influence treatments recommendations. Other parameters for the entire cohort will be presented, including a more detailed identification and assessment of patient risk categories and its impact on outcomes. Table 1: 10 year estimates of relapse-free survival and overall survival age estimates by additive Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for subtype, LVI status, use of RT, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and nodal status. Citation Format: Emily B. Jackson, Lovedeep Gondara, Caroline H. Speers, Karen Gelmon. Does age affect outcome? Data from a large cohort from British Columbia, 2005-2014 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-03-15.

Shared decision making in recurrent ovarian cancer: Implementation of patient decision aids across three departments of oncology in Denmark.

Patients with relapsed ovarian cancer are offered multiple treatment options. To match treatment with the individual patient's life situation and preferences, healthcare professionals can apply shared decision making (SDM) including patient decision aids (PtDAs).This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of two different PtDAs in consultations with patients suffering from relapsed ovarian cancer. We analyzed the following data before and after implementation of the PtDAs: 1) observed SDM using the OPTION instrument, 2) physician treatment recommendations, and 3) patients' and physicians' evaluations of SDM in consultations using the CollaboRATE, SDM-Q-9, and SDM-Q-Doc. Significant improvement in observed SDM was found after the implementation (p = 0.002). Improvement of SDM was detected in consultations conducted by physicians reporting more than two hours of SDM-training (p < 0.001), but not when physicians reported less than two hours of SDM-training.No before/after differences in treatment recommendations and in patients' and physicians' evaluations were found. Implementation of PtDAs improved the level of observed SDM. Training of physicians in SDM is necessary for improved SDM practice. Discussing oncological treatment options with the use of PtDAs is not standard practice in Denmark. The present study is one of the first Danish studies focusing on how to implement SDM and PtDAs in oncological consultations.

Changing Parental Knowledge and Treatment Acceptance for ADHD: A Pilot Study.

This pilot study assessed the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a single-session workshop in modifying parental beliefs/knowledge about attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and impact on treatment acceptance/utilization. Concerns raised by school professionals about lack of treatment follow-through after ADHD diagnosis and parental misinformation about medication usage catalyzed this project. A single-group pre-post quasi-experimental design was used. Sixty-eight parents completed ADHD knowledge/belief scales and stress inventories, and pre-ADHD and post-ADHD information workshop. Follow-up calls were made after the workshop to assess treatment utilization. Parents/caregivers experienced significant knowledge and belief changes regarding medication efficacy, willingness to accept physician treatment recommendations, and rejection of non-empirically based treatments. Follow-up data showed that 41% of contacted participants met with physicians to discuss medication utilization and behavioral treatments. Brief, one-session psycho-educational workshops were feasible and impacted parental beliefs and behaviors regarding scientifically supported interventions for ADHD.

Patient-Reported Physician Treatment Recommendations and Compliance Among U.S. Adults with Low Back Pain.

Objectives: Numerous recently published clinical care guidelines, including the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) Guideline for Low Back Pain (LBP), call for nonpharmacological approaches to pain management. However, little data exist regarding the extent to which these guidelines have been adopted by patients and medical doctors. The study objective was to determine patient-reported treatment recommendations by medical doctors for LBP and patient compliance with those recommendations.Design: This study used a cross-sectional web and mail survey.Settings/Location: The study was conducted among Gallup Panel members across the United States.Subjects: Survey participants included 5377 U.S. adults randomly selected among Gallup Panel members. Of those, 545 reported a visit to a medical doctor within the past year for low back pain and were asked a series of follow-up questions regarding treatment recommendations.Interventions: Participants were asked about medical doctor recommendations for both drug (acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, benzodiazepines, Gabapentin, Neurontin, and cortisone injections) and nondrug (self-care treatments, massage, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and physical therapy) treatments.Outcome Measures: Participants were asked to indicate if their medical doctor recommended each drug and nondrug therapy for their LBP and if they had followed each of those treatment recommendations.Results: Ninety-six percent of patients who visited a medical doctor for LBP received a recommendation for one or more pain treatments, with 81% reporting that their medical doctor recommended both drug and nondrug therapies. Seventy-six percent of respondents were recommended acetaminophen or NSAIDs, 79% were recommended self-care treatments, 37% were recommended massage, acupuncture, or spinal manipulation, and 60% were recommended physical therapy. Nearly two-thirds of our sample reported that their doctor had recommended prescription medications, including opioids, benzodiazepines, Gabapentin, Neurontin, or cortisone injections. Reported adherence to treatment recommendations ranged from 68% for acupuncture to 94% for NSAIDs.Conclusions: One year after publication of the ACP's Guideline on LBP, patients report that medical doctors recommended both pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment approaches to patients with LBP. In the majority of cases, a combination of prescription medications and self-care were recommended, illustrating the need for additional research on the effectiveness of multi-modal treatment strategies. Patients reported that they were largely compliant with medical doctor recommendations, underscoring the influence that medical doctors have in directing patient care for LBP. These findings indicate that further work is also needed to explore the impact of personal experience, training, clinical evidence, sociocultural factors, and health plans on medical doctors therapeutic recommendations in the context of back pain.

What Do Men with Metastatic Prostate Cancer Consider When Making Treatment Decisions? A Mixed-methods Study.

ObjectiveMetastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) patients often make complicated treatment decisions, yet decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making for mPCa are uncommon. To inform the development of patient-centered mPCa decision aids, we examined what mPCa survivors considered most important when making treatment decisions.MethodsUsing an exploratory sequential approach, we conducted three focus groups with 14 advanced prostate cancer survivors (n=5, n=3, n=6 in each group) to identify considerations for making treatment decisions. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed, and we identified qualitative themes. We then developed a quantitative survey to assess the importance of each theme and administered the survey to mPCa survivors (N=100). We used relative frequencies to determine the most strongly endorsed items and chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests to assess associations with participant characteristics.ResultsFocus groups yielded 11 themes, and the resulting survey included 20 items. The most strongly endorsed mPCa treatment considerations were: relying on physician’s treatment recommendations (79% strongly agree); wanting to feel well enough to spend quality time with loved ones (72% strongly agree); the importance of dying in a manner consistent with one’s wishes (70% strongly agree); hoping to eliminate cancer completely (68% strongly agree); and optimizing treatment efficacy (65% strongly agree). Age, race, marital status, employment status, and self-reported health were related to how strongly men endorsed various considerations for mPCa treatment decision-making.ConclusionWe identified multiple considerations that mPCa survivors appraised when making treatment decisions. These data may inform the development of patient-centered decision aids for mPCa.

Primary Care Physician and Cardiologist Cascade Screening Behaviors and Treatment Recommendations for Patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia

Primary Care Physician and Cardiologist Cascade Screening Behaviors and Treatment Recommendations for Patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia

Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Research: A Scoping Review

Rapid increases in technology and data motivate the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to primary care, but no comprehensive review exists to guide these efforts. Our objective was to assess the nature and extent of the body of research on AI for primary care. We performed a scoping review, searching 11 published or gray literature databases with terms pertaining to AI (eg, machine learning, bayes* network) and primary care (eg, general pract*, nurse). We performed title and abstract and then full-text screening using Covidence. Studies had to involve research, include both AI and primary care, and be published in Eng-lish. We extracted data and summarized studies by 7 attributes: purpose(s); author appointment(s); primary care function(s); intended end user(s); health condition(s); geographic location of data source; and AI subfield(s). Of 5,515 unique documents, 405 met eligibility criteria. The body of research focused on developing or modifying AI methods (66.7%) to support physician diagnostic or treatment recommendations (36.5% and 13.8%), for chronic conditions, using data from higher-income countries. Few studies (14.1%) had even a single author with a primary care appointment. The predominant AI subfields were supervised machine learning (40.0%) and expert systems (22.2%). Research on AI for primary care is at an early stage of maturity. For the field to progress, more interdisciplinary research teams with end-user engagement and evaluation studies are needed.

New use of psychotropic medication after hospitalization among people with dementia.

Psychotropic medication is commonly used among people with dementia (PWD), but it shows modest efficacy and it has been associated with severe adverse events. Hospitalizations are an opportunity for medication management as well as treatment recommendations for outpatient physicians. The aim of this study was to asses factors associated with new use of psychotropic medication after hospitalization among PWD. We conducted a retrospective dynamic cohort study from 2004 to 2015 using claims data from a German health insurance company. PWD were identified by an algorithm that included ICD-10 diagnosis and diagnostic measures. The medication classes included were antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics or hypnotics/sedatives, and Alzheimer's medication. The assessment period was up to 30 days after discharge from the hospital across four hospitalizations. The main predictors for new use of psychotropic medication were similar across medication classes. Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and the need of care were associated with higher odds of new use of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anxiolytics or hypnotics/sedatives. A hospital stay due to dementia was an independent predictor for new use across medication classes as well. Delirium increased the odds for new use of antipsychotics and anxiolytics or hypnotics/sedatives. Factors associated with new use of psychotropic medication included delirium, NPS, and the need of care in PWD. The findings highlight the need for preventive interventions and non-medical treatment options in regards to delirium and NPS as well as for a more intensive use of screening tools for inappropriate medication use among PWD. Key points The percentage of new users was 1.8%, 7.1%, 2.1%, and 2.5% across hospitalizations for antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics or hypnotics/sedatives, and Alzheimer's medication, respectively. 83.0%, 61.9%, 56.9%, and 88.1% of new users received antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics or hypnotics/sedatives, and Alzheimer's medication for more than 6 weeks. Delirium and neuropsychiatric symptoms were associated with significantly increased odds of new psychotropic medication use. Hospital stays due to dementia and the need of care were predictors for new use of psychotropic medication.

Prospective Decision Analysis Study of Clinical Genomic Testing in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Impact on Outcomes and Patient Perceptions.

To evaluate the impact of targeted DNA sequencing on selection of cancer therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this prospective, single-center, single-arm trial, patients with MBC were enrolled within 10 weeks of starting a new therapy. At enrollment, tumor samples underwent next-generation sequencing for any of 315 cancer-related genes to high depth (> 500×) using FoundationOne CDx. Sequencing results were released to providers at the time of disease progression, and physician treatment recommendations were assessed via questionnaire. We evaluated three prespecified questions to assess patients' perceptions of genomic testing. In all, 100 patients underwent genomic testing, with a median of five mutations (range, 0 to 13 mutations) detected per patient. Genomic testing revealed one or more potential therapies in 98% of patients (98 of 100), and 60% of patients (60 of 100) had one or more recommended treatments with level I/II evidence for actionability. Among the 94 genomic text reports that were released, there was physician questionnaire data for 87 patients (response rate, 92.6%) and 31.0% of patients (27 of 87) had treatment change recommended by their physician. Of these, 37.0% (10 of 27) received the treatment supported by genomic testing. We did not detect a statistically significant difference in time-to-treatment failure (log-rank P = .87) or overall survival (P = .71) among patients who had treatment change supported by genomic testing versus those who had no treatment change. For patients who completed surveys before and after genomic testing, there was a significant decrease in confidence of treatment success, specifically among patients who did not have treatment change supported by genomic testing (McNemar's test of agreement P = .001). In this prospective study, genomic profiling of tumors in patients with MBC frequently identified potential treatments and resulted in treatment change in a minority of patients. Patients whose therapy was not changed on the basis of genomic testing seemed to have a decrease in confidence of treatment success.

Assessment of Health Care Utilization for Dizziness in Ambulatory Care Settings in the United States.

Describe patient and physician characteristics, and physician recommendations for ambulatory care visits for dizziness in the US. Cross-sectional analysis of visits for dizziness from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (2013-2015). Ambulatory care clinics in the US. 20.6 million weighted adult visits [mean age 58.7 (1.0)] for dizziness, identified using ICD-9-CM codes (386.00-386.90, 780.40). Patient, clinical, and physician characteristics and physician diagnostic and treatment recommendations. Prevalence rates for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), unspecified dizziness, and other vestibular disorders were estimated, and descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients, physicians, and physicians' recommendations. The prevalence rate for dizziness visits was 8.8 per 1,000 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.5, 10.3). Most visits were for unspecified dizziness (75%), made by women (65%), whites (79%), and were insured by private insurance (50%). Visits for dizziness were to primary care physicians (51.9%), otolaryngologists (13.3%), and neurologists (9.6%). Imaging was ordered and medication prescription was provided in 5.5% and 20.1% of visits. Physical therapy (PT) was used for a higher percentage of BPPV visits (12.9%), than for other diagnoses (<1.0%). Physician treatment recommendations for vestibular diagnoses varied by physician specialty. A large percentage of visits had an unspecified diagnosis. A low number of visits for vestibular disorders were referred to PT. There are opportunities to improve care by using specific diagnoses and increasing the utilization of effective interventions for vestibular disorders.

Trust but Verify: Exploring the Role of Treatment-Related Information and Patient-Physician Trust in Shared Decision Making Among Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.

An ideal model for decision making in cancer is shared decision-making (SDM). Primary facilitators in this model are information-seeking about treatment options and patient-physician trust. Previous studies have investigated the role of each of these parameters individually. However, little is known about their convergent role in treatment decision-making. Therefore, we explored perspectives of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients and healthcare professionals about the influence of health information-seeking and physician trust in the SDM process. Qualitative interviews with 20 MBC patients and 6 community oncologists, as well as 3 separate focus groups involving lay navigators, nurses, and academic oncologists, were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Qualitative data analysis employed a content analysis approach, which included a constant comparative method to generate themes from the transcribed textual data. Five emergent themes were identified (1) physicians considered themselves as the patients' primary source of treatment information; (2) patients trusted their physician's treatment recommendations; (3) patients varied in their approach to seeking further health information regarding the discussed treatment options (e.g., internet websites, family and friends, support groups); (4) other healthcare professionals were cognizant of their fundamental role in facilitating further information-seeking; and (5) patient and physician discordant perspectives on shared decision making were present. Patient procurement of treatment information and the capacity to use it effectively in conjunction with patient trust in physicians play an important role in the shared decision-making process.

Treatment recommendations to cancer patients in the context of FDA guidance for next generation sequencing

BackgroundRegulatory approval of next generation sequencing (NGS) by the FDA is advancing the use of genomic-based precision medicine for the therapeutic management of cancer as standard care. Recent FDA guidance for the classification of genomic variants based on clinical evidence to aid clinicians in understanding the actionability of identified variants provided by comprehensive NGS panels has also been set forth. In this retrospective analysis, we interpreted and applied the FDA variant classification guidance to comprehensive NGS testing performed for advanced cancer patients and assessed oncologist agreement with NGS test treatment recommendations.MethodsNGS comprehensive genomic profiling was performed in a CLIA certified lab (657 completed tests for 646 patients treated at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center) between June 2016 and June 2017. Physician treatment recommendations made within 120 days post-test were gathered from tested patients’ medical records and classified as targeted therapy, precision medicine clinical trial, immunotherapy, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy/radiation, surgery, transplant, or non-therapeutic (hospice, surveillance, or palliative care). Agreement between NGS test report targeted therapy recommendations based on the FDA variant classification and physician targeted therapy treatment recommendations were evaluated.ResultsExcluding variants contraindicating targeted therapy (i.e., KRAS or NRAS mutations), at least one variant with FDA level 1 companion diagnostic supporting evidence as the most actionable was identified in 14% of tests, with physicians most frequently recommending targeted therapy (48%) for patients with these results. This stands in contrast to physicians recommending targeted therapy based on test results with FDA level 2 (practice guideline) or FDA level 3 (clinical trial or off label) evidence as the most actionable result (11 and 4%, respectively).ConclusionsWe found an appropriate “dose-response” relationship between the strength of clinical evidence supporting biomarker-directed targeted therapy based on application of FDA guidance for NGS test variant classification, and subsequent treatment recommendations made by treating physicians. In view of recent changes at FDA, it is paramount to define regulatory grounds and medical policy coverage for NGS testing based on this guidance.

Treatment Decisions for Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Patient and Physician Perspectives on Maintenance Therapy.

IntroductionAdvanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a severe disease with burdensome symptoms and traditionally poor outcomes. The treatment of advance disease is based on chemotherapy, with the recent addition of immunotherapy. Patients who respond to initial treatment can opt to receive maintenance therapy (MT). It is important to understand why patients with advanced NSCLC choose to accept or refuse therapy, and how physician recommendations play into this decision-making process. This study characterized patient and physician decision-making regarding treatment for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC in the USA using the example of MT.Methods and MaterialsThis study employed multiple approaches: patient interviews, a patient survey, and a physician survey. Qualitative interviews were conducted among patients who had been offered MT to identify factors influencing treatment decision-making. The patient survey explored the decision-making process and quantified challenges and motivators for receiving MT. The physician survey included a discrete choice experiment to understand the relationship between physician treatment recommendations and patient characteristics.ResultsInterviewed patients (n = 10) were motivated to receive MT in the hope of extending their lives and being proactive against their cancer, and they anticipated reduced adverse effects compared with first-line therapy. Surveyed patients (n = 77) described several deterrents to receiving therapy; the most prominent was severity of adverse effects, which was an influencing factor for 34% of patients. The major motivator for receiving therapy was the potential to extend life, which influenced 97% of patients. A total of 100 oncologists participated in the physician survey. Patients’ lack of treatment motivation/inconvenience, disease progression, presence of severe renal co-morbidities, and older age decreased the likelihood of physicians recommending the use of MT.ConclusionThis study identified challenges and motivators influencing advanced NSCLC patients’ decisions to accept or refuse therapy, as well as patient and disease characteristics associated with physician’s treatment recommendations for MT.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40271-018-0327-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Association Among Opioid Use, Treatment Preferences, and Perceptions of Physician Treatment Recommendations in Patients With Neck and Back Pain

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between self-reported use of opioids by patients with neck and back pain and their demographics, pain characteristics, treatment preferences, and recollections of their physicians’ opinions regarding treatment options. MethodsWe analyzed 2017 Gallup Poll survey data from 1680 US adults who had substantial spine pain in the past year and used logistic regression to explore the aforementioned relationships. ResultsOur multiple regression analysis indicated that adults with neck or back pain severe enough to have sought health care within the last year were more likely to have used opioids in the last year if they (in descending order of marginal impact) had pain that had lasted 1 year or less (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 34.35, 90% confidence interval [CI] 17.56-74.32); concurrently used benzodiazepines (OR = 6.02, 90% CI 2.95-12.33); had Medicaid as an insurance source (OR = 3.29, 90% CI 1.40-7.48); indicated that they preferred to use pain medications prescribed by a doctor to treat physical pain (OR = 3.24, 90% CI 1.88-5.60); or were not college educated (OR = 1.83, 90% CI 1.05-3.25). Compared with patients aged 65 years and older, those aged 18 to 34 years were less likely to have used opioids in the past year (OR = 0.09, 90% CI 0.01-0.40, 0.50 for 95% CI). Respondents’ perceptions of medical doctors’ positive or negative opinions regarding a variety of neck and back pain treatment options were not significantly associated with opioid use. ConclusionsPatients with neck and back pain who use opioids differ from those who do not use opioids in that they are more likely to have pain that is of shorter duration, to use benzodiazepines, to have Medicaid as an insurance source, and to prefer to use pain medications. Those characteristics should be considered when developing opioid use prevention strategies.

Disagreements in surgical decision making for advanced cancer patients secondary to deficiencies in palliative care education.

34 Background: Surgical decision making in advanced cancer patients requires careful thought and deliberation balancing the high risks with the potential palliative benefits. We sought to compare palliative care education and decision-making for palliative surgery among physicians who commonly treat advanced cancer patients. Methods: Practicing surgeons, medical oncologists, palliative care physicians and critical care intensivists from a large urban city and its surrounding areas were surveyed with a 32-item questionnaire consisting of a palliative care education survey and 4 clinical vignettes depicting patients with advanced cancer and symptomatic surgical conditions. Results: Of the 299 physicians surveyed, 102 responded with a response rate of 34.1%. Respondents reflected the demographics of the total cohort. Physicians reported minimal hours of palliative care education during residency (median 0, IQR 0-8), fellowship (median 0, IQR 0-20), and continuing medical education (CME, median 8, IQR 0-20). Surgeons reported the fewest hours of palliative care education during residency, fellowship, and CME combined (median 10, IQR 2-15) compared to medical oncologists (median 30, IQR 20-80) and intensivists (median 50, IQR 30-100), p &lt; 0.05. 19.6% of surgeons reported receiving no palliative care education compared to none of the medical oncologists and 7.7% of intensivists. Analysis of physician treatment recommendations for the 4 clinical vignettes showed disagreement among physicians regardless of specialty. Absence of palliative care training was associated with recommending major surgical intervention more frequently compared to physicians with ≥40 hours of palliative care training (0.7 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.8, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Deficiencies in palliative care education persist and adversely impact quality of care. Recent national society recommendations for palliative care services are well founded given these deficiencies. Additionally, our findings highlight a sustained failure of the current postgraduate medical education system and the need for greater efforts system-wide in palliative care education across medical and surgical specialties.

Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Positive Surgical Margins Following Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A National Patterns of Care Assessment

Bladder cancer patients with a positive surgical margin after radical cystectomy have a median recurrence free survival of less than one year. A recent survey of practicing radiation oncologists in the United States reports that almost half recommend adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for locally advanced bladder cancer with over 90% of this group supporting the use of adjuvant RT for positive surgical margins. We sought to determine whether these physician treatment recommendations are reflected in national practice patterns. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified patients diagnosed with non-metastatic urothelial cell or squamous cell bladder cancer from 2004 to 2014 who were treated with radical cystectomy. We studied patterns of care with regards to receipt of adjuvant RT in the overall cohort and in the positive surgical margin subgroup. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with receipt of adjuvant RT. 46,380 patients met inclusion criteria for the overall cohort of which only 488 (1.1%) received adjuvant RT. In the overall cohort, receipt of adjuvant RT was significantly associated with squamous cell carcinoma histology (OR=4.10, 95%CI 3.16-5.32; p<0.001), higher pathologic T stage (OR=13.6, 95%CI 1.89-97.76; p=0.01), and positive surgical margins (OR=3.76, 95%CI 2.95-4.81; p<0.001). Other variables significantly associated with receipt of adjuvant RT included treatment at non-academic facilities, receipt of chemotherapy, and earlier year of diagnosis. Notably, age, race, comorbidity, and pathologic N stage did not impact receipt of adjuvant RT. There were 2,766 patients in the positive surgical margin subgroup of which only 120 (4.3%) patients received adjuvant RT. The utilization of adjuvant radiation in positive margin patients did not vary substantially over the study period. In 2004, 14/160 (8.8%) patients received adjuvant RT while 14/289 (4.8%) patients received adjuvant RT in 2014. On multivariable analysis, receipt of adjuvant RT was significantly associated with treatment at non-academic facilities, squamous cell carcinoma histology, receipt of chemotherapy, and an earlier year of diagnosis. In this patterns of care study, less than 5% of patients with positive surgical margins following radical cystectomy received adjuvant radiation therapy from 2004 to 2014. There appears to be a large discrepancy between the inclinations of practicing radiation oncologists and the actual practice patterns for this patient subgroup despite poor overall outcomes. These findings suggest that further work is needed to understand the risks and benefits of adjuvant RT, and may reflect a lack of multi-disciplinary care in the management of locally advanced bladder cancer.

Impact of a multivariate serum-based proteomic test on physician treatment recommendations for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Objective: The VeriStrat1 (VS) test is intended to help guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without an EGFR-sensitizing mutation, classifying patients into two categories. Patients classified as VSGood have a favorable prognosis and significant clinical response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Patients classified as VSPoor have a less favorable prognosis and exhibit no significant response to EGFR-TKIs. The objective of this paper is to assess the real-world impact of VS test results on physicians’ treatment recommendations including referrals for best supportive care (BSC).Methods: Between 1 January 2012 and 1 November 2016, physician respondents were asked to complete standardized questionnaires before and after receiving VS results in patients meeting criteria for the intended use of the VS test. This study evaluated three endpoints: whether physicians followed VS test results in making treatment recommendations, the extent to which tests results changed these treatment recommendations, and the patterns of care subsequent to VS testing.Results: Of the tests ordered by 989 physicians, 2494 VS tests had completed treatment recommendation questionnaires both prior to and after testing. Prior to VS testing, physicians were considering treatment with EGFR-TKIs for 2250 patients (90%). The VS test classified 1950 patients as VSGood and 544 patients as VSPoor. For patients classified as VSPoor, physicians recommended BSC for 25% of patients and standard systemic treatments such as chemotherapies for 65% of patients. Consistent with previous publications, physicians recommended EGFR-TKI therapy for only 10% of VSPoor patients but for 89% of VSGood patients. Overall, physician’s treatment recommendations were consistent with test results in 98% of cases. Availability of test results decreased ineffective treatment recommendations by 89% for VSPoor patients.Conclusions: Among physicians ordering VS, the test significantly influenced treatment recommendations for patients with NSCLC, reducing ineffective and expensive treatment at the end of life.