Loading...
Divergent results between Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) panelist (P) and global non-panelist (NP) survey respondents
Ryan, C. J. Prizment, A. Oyenuga, M. Sacco, K. Carithers, G. Omlin, A. G. Gillessen, Silke
Ryan, C. J.
Prizment, A.
Oyenuga, M.
Sacco, K.
Carithers, G.
Omlin, A. G.
Gillessen, Silke
Citations
Altmetric:
Abstract
Background: The 2019 APCCC consensus statements reflect opinions of global clinical
experts who treat a high volume of prostate cancer patients, engage in research and
education.We hypothesized that NonPanelist’s (NP) consensus will differ from expert
panelist clinician (P) consensus across a variety of domains. The current study compares
P to NP consensus from 225 clinicians globally who were presented a choice of
APCCC questions.
Methods: 20 representative questions posed at APCCC2019 were posted on Urotoday.
com, a global urologic oncology education site from 9/8/2019 until 18/1/20 (prior
to dissemination of APCCC results) with email solicitations going out to several national
societies and groups. NP was defined as clinicians treating >10 but <100
unique prostate cancer annually. The questionnaire was reviewed by the Investigational
Review Board at the University of Minnesota. The primary endpoint is
concordance of the most frequently chosen answers (either A-E, or Y/N) among P vs
NP.
Results: Region for P/NP was Europe, North America or Other for 35/21, 42/33 and
23/46% (p¼0.003). NP respondents were Urologists (35%), Medical Oncologists
(46%), Clinical Oncologists (3%), Radiation Oncologists (7%) and 9% other (including
nurses and trainees). For 12/20 analyzed APCCC guideline questions, there was little
disagreement. In 8/20, disparate responses between NP and P (adjusted p<0.05)
were observed. Questions with the greatest divergence between P and NP dealt with
recommendation for germline testing in M1 castration sensitive disease ( 84% vs 34%
of P and NP do so in a majority of pts, respectively, p¼0.0007); Use of anti-PD1
therapy in MSI high disease ( 96% of P use outside of clinical trial vs 69% of NP,
p¼0.0007) and treatment of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic disease
(98% of P recommend in low volume only vs 77% of NP, p<0.0008).
Conclusions: While agreement was noted on a majority of questions, the survey
identified knowledge and practice gaps that may be useful for further educational and
training efforts. Most gaps reflected relatively recent and sometimes controversial
data (e.g. use of immune checkpoint inhibitors).
Description
Date
2020
Publisher
Collections
Files
Loading...
From UNPAYWALL
Adobe PDF, 84.98 KB
Keywords
Type
Meetings and Proceedings
Citation
Ryan CJ, Prizment A, Oyenuga M, Sacco K, Carithers G, Omlin AG, et al. 656P Divergent results between Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) panelist (P) and global non-panelist (NP) survey respondents. Annals of Oncology. 2020;31:S532-S.