Comparison of treatment plans feasible through AI enabled multidisciplinary online tumor board solution versus NCCN-based clinical decision support system (CDSS).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 816-816
Author(s):  
Bhawna Sirohi ◽  
Sushil Beriwal ◽  
C. S. Pramesh ◽  
Supriya Chopra ◽  
Mahesh Goel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Treatment Plans

816 Background: Multidisciplinary tumor boards at Academic Medical Centers (AMC) maximize cancer outcomes. Guidelines based CDSS are alternatives to determine care pathways. Since 2015, 300 AMC cancer experts in USA and India use an AI enabled online tumor board solution, “NAVYA,” to scale low cost access to multidisciplinary expertise, on 1-2 minutes of expert time per decision (ASCO 2017). Methods: GI patients who used NAVYA between 5/1/15-8/31/19 were analyzed. Actionable treatment plans generated by NAVYA were compared to NCCN. Actionable treatment plans include chemotherapy protocols (doses, frequencies), radiation protocols (sites, fractions), etc. Inactionable specialty level decisions (CT-RT vs. surgery) lack specificity. Results: 1302 patients (4638 treatment decisions) were analyzed: 61% (794) male, 80% between age 45 to 75, mostly with Colon, Pancreas, Gallbladder, Rectum, or Stomach cancer; 49.7% non-metastatic. Cohort was comparable to GLOBOCAN estimates. In 82.2% (3812/4638) decisions, NAVYA added value beyond NCCN. First, in 4.5% (212/4638), NAVYA recommended a patient-specific treatment plan that was not part of NCCN. Second, in 3.2% (148/4638), NAVYA recommended treatments plan for clinical scenarios not covered by NCCN, (for eg. 3rd line therapies). Third, in 74.5% (3452/4638), NAVYA used patient specific criteria including resource constraints and patient preference to choose a treatment plan amongst the multiple pathways provided by NCCN and added actionable treatment details. Conclusions: Guideline based CDSS are insufficient to make the vast majority of actionable treatment decisions. Scaling rapid access to multidisciplinary experts is critical. Leapfrogging existing guidelines based CDSS, NAVYA online tumor board makes actionable expert treatment plans possible at a large scale.

scholarly journals Bayesian Framework to Augment Tumor Board Decision Making

2021 ◽  
pp. 508-517
Author(s):  
Stefano Pasetto ◽  
Robert A. Gatenby ◽  
Heiko Enderling
Keyword(s):  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Specific Response ◽  
Mathematical Framework ◽  
Mathematical Tool ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Board Decision Making

PURPOSE Ideally, specific treatment for a cancer patient is decided by a multidisciplinary tumor board, integrating prior clinical experience, published data, and patient-specific factors to develop a consensus on an optimal therapeutic strategy. However, many oncologists lack access to a tumor board, and many patients have incomplete data descriptions so that tumor boards must act on imprecise criteria. We propose these limitations to be addressed through a flexible but rigorous mathematical tool that can define the probability of success of given therapies and be made readily available to the oncology community. METHODS We present a Bayesian approach to tumor forecasting using a multimodel framework to predict patient-specific response to different targeted therapies even when historical data are incomplete. RESULTS We demonstrate that the Bayesian decision theory's integrative power permits the simultaneous assessment of a range of therapeutic options. CONCLUSION This methodology proposed, built upon a robust and well-established mathematical framework, can play a crucial role in supporting patient-specific clinical decisions by individual oncologists and multispecialty tumor boards.

INNV-16. CNS-TAP TOOL RECOMMENDATIONS OF TARGETED ANTI-CANCER AGENTS COMPARED TO THOSE SELECTED BY A MULTIDISCIPLINARY TUMOR BOARD IN A MOLECULARLY-DRIVEN DIPG CLINICAL TRIAL (PNOC003)

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi108-vi108
Author(s):  
Holly Roberts ◽  
Karthik Ravi ◽  
Allison Schepers ◽  
Bernard Marini ◽  
Cassie Kline ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anticancer Agents ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Study Participant ◽  
Targeted Treatment ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Genomic Profiling ◽  
Genetic Sequencing ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

Abstract Genetic sequencing of diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPG) has revealed genomic heterogeneity, sparking an interest in individualized and targeted treatment options for this particularly devastating disease. A feasibility study, PNOC003: Molecular Profiling for Individualized Treatment Plan for DIPG (NCT02274987), was completed within the Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium. In this study, a multidisciplinary tumor board reviewed detailed molecular and genomic profiling of each participant’s tumor and made molecularly-targeted treatment recommendations. Separately, our team developed the Central Nervous System Targeted Agent Prediction (CNS-TAP) tool, which combines pre-clinical, clinical, and CNS penetration data with patient-specific genomic information to derive numeric scores for targeted anticancer agents, aimed to objectively evaluate these therapies for use in patients with CNS tumors. We hypothesized that highly-scored agents within CNS-TAP would overlap with the agents recommended by the tumor board in PNOC003. For each study participant, we used the genomic profiling report to identify actionable alterations and incorporated these data into CNS-TAP to identify the highest-scoring agents. We compared high-scoring agents within CNS-TAP with recommendations from the tumor board for each of the enrolled 28 participants. Overall, 93% of patients (26/28) had at least one agent recommended by both the tumor board and CNS-TAP. Additionally, 38% of all agents (36/95) recommended by the tumor board were also selected by CNS-TAP. We identified factors that likely contributed to the differences in therapy recommendations between these two methods: CNS-TAP requires additional clinician input to account for drug-drug interactions, includes only classically-defined anticancer agents, and cannot easily be updated in real-time as new data emerge. However, CNS-TAP provides an objective evaluation of targeted therapies, whereas tumor boards are inherently subjective. A prospective study incorporating both CNS-TAP and a molecular tumor board for targeted therapy selection in high-grade glioma is currently ongoing to further compare and objectively evaluate these methods.

scholarly journals EPCT-02. COMPARISON OF TARGETED AGENTS RECOMMENDED BY THE CNS-TAP TOOL TO THOSE SELECTED BY A TUMOR BOARD IN A MOLECULARLY-DRIVEN DIPG CLINICAL TRIAL

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i46-i46
Author(s):  
Holly Roberts ◽  
Karthik Ravi ◽  
Bernard Marini ◽  
Cassie Kline ◽  
Sabine Mueller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anticancer Agents ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Evaluation ◽  
Molecular Profiling ◽  
Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Tumor Boards

Abstract Recently, sequencing of diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) biopsy specimens has revealed genomic heterogeneity of these tumors, fueling an interest in individualized, targeted treatment options. The Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium recently completed enrollment onto a feasibility study PNOC003: Molecular Profiling for Individualized Treatment Plan for DIPG (NCT02274987), in which a multidisciplinary tumor board recommended molecularly-targeted agents based on genomic and molecular profiling of each patient’s tumor. Separately, our group developed the Central Nervous System Targeted Agent Prediction (CNS-TAP) tool, which combines pre-clinical, clinical, and CNS penetration data with patient-specific genomic information to allow for numeric scoring of targeted anticancer agents to objectively evaluate these therapies for use in patients with CNS tumors. We hypothesized that highly-scored agents within CNS-TAP would overlap with the agents recommended by the tumor board in this study. For each PNOC003 participant, we utilized the genomic report to identify actionable alterations and input patient-specific data into CNS-TAP to identify the highest scoring agents. We compared high-scoring agents within CNS-TAP with recommendations from the PNOC003 tumor board for each of the enrolled 28 subjects. Overall, 93% (26/28) of patients had at least one agent recommended by both the tumor board and CNS-TAP. Additionally, 38% (37/95) of all agents recommended by the tumor board were also selected by CNS-TAP. Furthermore, we identified factors that likely contributed to the discordance between these two methods. Without clinician input, CNS-TAP is unable to account for drug-drug interactions, includes only designated anticancer agents, and cannot easily be updated in real time. However, CNS-TAP provides an objective evaluation of targeted therapies, whereas tumor boards are inherently subjective. Given the discordance identified between these methods and the strengths of each, a prospective study incorporating both CNS-TAP and a molecular tumor board for targeted therapy selection in DIPG patients is warranted.

Quantifying the utility of a multidisciplinary neuro-oncology tumor board

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Adham M. Khalafallah ◽  
Adrian E. Jimenez ◽  
Carlos G. Romo ◽  
David Olayinka Kamson ◽  
Lawrence Kleinberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nervous System ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Image Interpretation ◽  
Multidisciplinary Care ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVEThere has been limited research on the efficacy of multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) in improving the treatment of patients with tumors affecting the nervous system. The objective of the present study was to quantify the utility of MDTBs in providing alternative diagnostic interpretations and treatment plans for this patient population.METHODSThe authors performed a prospective study of patients in 4 hospitals whose cases were discussed at MDTBs between July and November 2019. Patient demographic data, diagnoses, treatment plans, and eligibility for clinical trials were recorded, among other variables.RESULTSA total of 176 cases met eligibility criteria for study inclusion. The majority (53%) of patients were male, and the mean patient age was 52 years. The most frequent diagnosis was glioblastoma (32.4%). Among the evaluable cases, MDTBs led to 38 (21.6%) changes in image interpretation and 103 (58.2%) changes in patient management. Additionally, patients whose cases were discussed at MDTBs had significantly shorter referral times than patients whose cases were not discussed (p = 0.024).CONCLUSIONSMDTB discussions led to significant numbers of diagnostic and treatment plan changes as well as shortened referral times, highlighting the potential clinical impact of multidisciplinary care for patients with nervous system tumors.

scholarly journals NCOG-67. QUANTIFYING THE UTILITY OF A MULTIDISCIPLINARY NEURO-ONCOLOGY TUMOR BOARD

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii144-ii144
Author(s):  
Adham Khalafallah ◽  
Adrian Jimenez ◽  
Carlos Romo ◽  
David Kamson ◽  
Lawrence Kleinberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nervous System ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Image Interpretation ◽  
Multidisciplinary Care ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
A Prospective Study

Abstract BACKGROUND There is limited research attempting to measure the efficacy of tumor boards (MDTBs) in the treatment of patients with tumors affecting the nervous system. OBJECTIVE The objective of the present study was to quantify the utility of a MDTB in providing alternative diagnostic interpretations and treatment plans for this patient population. METHODS A prospective study of patient cases discussed at four hospitals’ MDTBs between July and November 2019 was performed. Demographic data, diagnoses, treatment plans, and eligibility for clinical trials were recorded, among other variables. RESULTS A total of 176 patient cases met eligibility criteria. The majority of patients (53%) were male with a mean age of 52 years. The most frequent diagnosis was glioblastoma (32.4%). Among the evaluable cases, MDTBs led to 38 (21.6%) changes in image interpretation and 103 (58.2%) changes in patient management. Additionally, patients whose cases were discussed at MDTBs had significantly shorter referral times compared to patients whose cases were not discussed (p= 0.024). CONCLUSION MDTB discussions led to a significant number of diagnostic and treatment plan changes as well as shortened referral times, highlighting the potential clinical impact of multidisciplinary care for patients with nervous system tumors.

Appropriateness of adjuvant systemic therapy for axillary node-negative breast cancer: a physician opinion survey.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1459-1469 ◽  
Author(s):  
C A Sawka ◽  
A M O'Connor ◽  
H A Llewellyn-Thomas ◽  
T To ◽  
S P Pinfold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Combination Chemotherapy ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Menopausal Status ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Node Negative ◽  
Node Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Scenarios

PURPOSE To examine variations in physicians' recommendations for systemic adjuvant therapy in the treatment of women with node-negative breast cancer (NNBC) and to determine factors used in making specific recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS A questionnaire was sent by mail to all 149 Ontario physicians who actively treated breast cancer in 1993. The questionnaire described 48 clinical scenarios of women with NNBC, which included all possible combinations of the following factors: menopausal status, tumor size, hormone receptor status, histologic and nuclear grade, and lymphatic and/or vascular invasion. Respondents rated the appropriateness of administering tamoxifen, combination chemotherapy, or both tamoxifen and combination chemotherapy on a nine-point scale from extremely inappropriate to extremely appropriate. Respondent agreement and disagreement were tabulated for each scenario, and factors associated with specific treatment ratings were analyzed by logistic regression. RESULTS The response rate was 87%. Agreement for the appropriateness of specific therapies was most evident where clinical trials have demonstrated efficacy, whereas disagreement was observed in scenarios in which support for a specific treatment is not available in the current literature. Relevant tumor- and patient-specific factors were used in decision-making; personal characteristics of the respondents had no statistically significant impact on appropriateness ratings. CONCLUSION The physicians surveyed had good knowledge of NNBC prognostic factors, but had a range of opinion on optimal therapy for many clinical scenarios, which reflects current knowledge of the benefits of adjuvant therapy for NNBC.

Utility of a multidisciplinary tumor board in the management of pancreatic diseases.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 319-319
Author(s):  
David G. Brauer ◽  
Matthew S. Strand ◽  
Dominic E. Sanford ◽  
Maria Majella Doyle ◽  
Faris Murad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Multidisciplinary Care ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Common Diagnosis ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Cancer Network ◽  
The Impact

319 Background: Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards (MTBs) are a requirement for comprehensive cancer centers and are routinely used to coordinate multidisciplinary care in oncology. Despite their widespread use, the impact of MTBs is not well characterized. We studied the outcomes of all patients presented at our pancreas MTB, with the goal of evaluating our current practices and resource utilization. Methods: Data were prospectively collected for all patients presented at a weekly pancreas-specific MTB over the 12-month period at a single-institution NCI-designated cancer center. The conference is attended by surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists, interventional gastroenterologists, pathologists, and radiologists (diagnostic and interventional). Retrospective chart review was performed at the end of the 12-month period under an IRB-approved protocol. Results: A total of 470 patient presentations were made over a 12-month period. Average age at time of presentation was 61.5 years (range 17 – 89) with 51% males. 61.7% of cases were presented by surgical oncologists and 26% by medical oncologists. 174 cases were the result of new diagnoses or referrals. 78 patients were presented more than once (average of 2.3 times). Pancreatic adenocarcinoma was the most common diagnosis (37%), followed by uncharacterized pancreatic mass (16%), and pancreatic cyst (7%). The treatment plan proposed by the presenting clinician was known or could be evaluated prior to conference in 402 cases. Presentation of a case at MTB changed the plan of management 25% (n = 100) of the time, including MTB recommendation against a planned resection in 46 cases. When the initial plan changed as a result of MTB discussion, the most common new plan was to obtain further diagnostic testing such as biopsy and/or endoscopy (n = 24). Conclusions: MTBs are required and resource-intensive but offer the opportunity to discuss a wide array of pathologies and influence management decisions in a sizable proportion of cases. Additional investigations evaluating adherence rates to MTB decisions and to published guidelines (i.e. National Comprehensive Cancer Network) will further enhance the assessment and utility of MTBs.

scholarly journals CLRM-06. COMPARISON OF INDIVIDUALIZED ANTI-CANCER THERAPY REGIMENS RECOMMENDED BY A MULTIDISCIPLINARY MOLECULARLY-DRIVEN TUMOR BOARD IN A PEDIATRIC DIPG CLINICAL TRIAL (PNOC003) VERSUS THOSE SELECTED BY THE CNS-TAP TOOL

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. iv2-iv2
Author(s):  
Holly Roberts ◽  
Karthik Ravi ◽  
Allison Schepers ◽  
Bernard Marini ◽  
Cassie Kline ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anticancer Agents ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Pilot Trial ◽  
Study Participant ◽  
Molecular Profiling ◽  
Individualized Treatment ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Treatment Recommendation ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Genomic Profiling

Abstract Genetic sequencing of diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPG) has revealed genomic heterogeneity, fueling an interest in individualized targeted therapies. A feasibility study, PNOC003: Molecular Profiling for Individualized Treatment Plan for DIPG (NCT02274987), was completed within the Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium in which a multidisciplinary tumor board reviewed molecular and genomic profiling of each participant’s tumor to make targeted therapy recommendations. Separately, our team developed the Central Nervous System Targeted Agent Prediction (CNS-TAP) tool, which combines pre-clinical, clinical, and CNS penetration data with patient-specific genomic information to derive numeric scores for anticancer agents to objectively evaluate these therapies for use in patients with CNS tumors. We hypothesized that agents highly-scored by CNS-TAP would overlap with agents recommended by the PNOC003 tumor board. For each study participant, we retrospectively utilized the genomic profiling report to identify actionable alterations and incorporated these data into CNS-TAP to find the highest-scoring agents. We compared these CNS-TAP-recommended agents with recommendations from the tumor board for each of the 28 PNOC003 participants. Overall, 93% of patients (26/28) had at least one agent recommended by both the tumor board and CNS-TAP. Additionally, 38% of all agents (36/95) chosen by the tumor board were also selected by CNS-TAP. When only molecularly targeted anticancer agents were included in a sub-analysis, 60% of agents (34/57) were recommended by both methods. At present, we are prospectively evaluating the CNS-TAP tool within PNOC008: A Pilot Trial Testing the Clinical Benefit of Using Molecular Profiling to Determine an Individualized Treatment Plan in Children and Young Adults with High-Grade Glioma (NCT03739372). The CNS-TAP tool recommendations are shared during the PNOC008 molecular tumor board meetings once a consensus treatment recommendation has been reached. Subsequent analyses will focus on any adjustments in therapy decisions within the tumor board that result from the CNS-TAP tool output.

scholarly journals Hitting the Right Spot: Advances in the Treatment of NSCLC With Uncommon EGFR Mutations

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (Suppl_2) ◽  
pp. S1-S11
Author(s):  
Joshua K. Sabari ◽  
John V. Heymach ◽  
Beth Sandy
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Egfr Mutations ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Development Of Resistance ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
The Right ◽  
Selection Of

An understanding of the biology of uncommon epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is evolving. These mutations are important for the selection of targeted therapy and the development of resistance. The advent of genomic profiling has led to guideline-recommended molecular testing to identify patients with NSCLC who carry uncommon EGFR mutations to aid in the selection of appropriate targeted therapy. This article discusses the efficacy and safety of current and emerging targeted therapies for the treatment of uncommon EGFR mutations in NSCLC to aid in developing patient-specific treatment plans.

Introduction to Perioperative Cardiac Urgencies and Emergencies

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason B. O’Neal ◽  
Andrew Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Specific Treatment ◽  
Perioperative Period ◽  
Major Life ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
Suitable Treatment

Cardiac arrest in the perioperative period is distinct from cardiac arrest in other scenarios, given that the event is typically witnessed and real-time vital signs are often being monitored. Additionally, having a mental framework by which to consider and refine the differential diagnosis is paramount, as this then guides the selection of a suitable treatment plan. However, in order to establish the correct diagnosis, one must have an adequate understanding of normal cardiac physiology, of cardiovascular pathology, and the ways in which this may adversely affect cardiac function. This chapter provides an overview of how to approach the patient with cardiovascular instability. Subsequent chapters in this section discuss specific treatment plans for the major life-threatening pathophysiologies one could encounter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document