Use of biomarker testing in lung cancer among Puerto Rico and Florida Physicians: Results of a comparative study.

Teresita Muñoz-Antonia, Vani N Simmons, Steven K Sutton, Matthew B Schabath, Iffat Alam, Alberto Chiappori, Gwendolyn P Quinn
{"title":"Use of biomarker testing in lung cancer among Puerto Rico and Florida Physicians: Results of a comparative study.","authors":"Teresita Muñoz-Antonia,&nbsp;Vani N Simmons,&nbsp;Steven K Sutton,&nbsp;Matthew B Schabath,&nbsp;Iffat Alam,&nbsp;Alberto Chiappori,&nbsp;Gwendolyn P Quinn","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung cancer biomarker-driven therapies are the gold standard of treatment and recent studies suggest a higher prevalence of specific targetable biomarkers among Hispanic/Latinos (H/L) than Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). The study aimed (1) to identify Florida (FL) and Puerto Rico (PR) physicians' knowledge and perceived value of newer genomic data regarding race/ethnicity in relation to optimal lung cancer treatment and survival; and (2) to identify modifiable practice barriers both across and within each location regarding biomarker testing in lung cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 25-item survey was administered to a stratified random sample of physicians in FL and PR (medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, and pathologists). Questions targeted domains of biomarker knowledge, attitudes toward testing, barriers, and practice behaviors regarding lung cancer biomarker testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 45%. Participants identified guiding treatment decisions (82%) and personalizing treatments for patients (78%) as key benefits to mutation testing. PR physicians were more likely (p=0.022) to believe H/L had an elevated incidence of targetable epidermal growth factor receptor (<i>EGFR</i>) mutations compared to NHW. They also perceived lack of appropriate testing resources as a primary barrier compared to FL physicians (43.6% vs. 20.6%, p<0.001), whereas FL physicians identified mutation tests not conducted routinely as part of patient diagnosis as a primary barrier (43.1% vs 24.2%, p= 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Practice behaviors differed by specialty and between locations, and differences were noted concerning physician's preferences for ordering mutation testing, indicating a clear need for education among physicians in both locations.</p><p><strong>Impact: </strong>Educating physicians regarding biomarker testing is imperative to improve patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":73670,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical pathways : the foundation of value-based care","volume":"5 8","pages":"33-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953751/pdf/nihms-1058738.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical pathways : the foundation of value-based care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lung cancer biomarker-driven therapies are the gold standard of treatment and recent studies suggest a higher prevalence of specific targetable biomarkers among Hispanic/Latinos (H/L) than Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). The study aimed (1) to identify Florida (FL) and Puerto Rico (PR) physicians' knowledge and perceived value of newer genomic data regarding race/ethnicity in relation to optimal lung cancer treatment and survival; and (2) to identify modifiable practice barriers both across and within each location regarding biomarker testing in lung cancer.

Methods: A 25-item survey was administered to a stratified random sample of physicians in FL and PR (medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, and pathologists). Questions targeted domains of biomarker knowledge, attitudes toward testing, barriers, and practice behaviors regarding lung cancer biomarker testing.

Results: The response rate was 45%. Participants identified guiding treatment decisions (82%) and personalizing treatments for patients (78%) as key benefits to mutation testing. PR physicians were more likely (p=0.022) to believe H/L had an elevated incidence of targetable epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations compared to NHW. They also perceived lack of appropriate testing resources as a primary barrier compared to FL physicians (43.6% vs. 20.6%, p<0.001), whereas FL physicians identified mutation tests not conducted routinely as part of patient diagnosis as a primary barrier (43.1% vs 24.2%, p= 0.008).

Conclusions: Practice behaviors differed by specialty and between locations, and differences were noted concerning physician's preferences for ordering mutation testing, indicating a clear need for education among physicians in both locations.

Impact: Educating physicians regarding biomarker testing is imperative to improve patient care.

波多黎各和佛罗里达医生在肺癌中使用生物标志物检测:一项比较研究的结果。
背景:肺癌生物标志物驱动疗法是治疗的金标准,最近的研究表明,在西班牙裔/拉丁裔(H/L)中,特异性靶向生物标志物的患病率高于非西班牙裔白人(NHW)。该研究旨在(1)确定佛罗里达州(FL)和波多黎各(PR)医生对与最佳肺癌治疗和生存相关的种族/民族新基因组数据的知识和感知价值;(2)在肺癌生物标志物检测方面,确定每个地点之间和内部可修改的实践障碍。方法:对FL和PR的医生(医学肿瘤学家、放射肿瘤学家、肺科医生和病理学家)进行25项分层随机抽样调查。问题的目标领域生物标志物的知识,对测试的态度,障碍和实践行为有关肺癌生物标志物测试。结果:有效率为45%。参与者认为指导治疗决策(82%)和患者个性化治疗(78%)是突变检测的主要好处。PR医生更有可能(p=0.022)相信与NHW相比,H/L有更高的靶向表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)突变发生率。与FL医生相比,他们还认为缺乏适当的检测资源是主要障碍(43.6%对20.6%)。结论:执业行为因专业和地区而异,并且注意到医生对进行突变检测的偏好存在差异,这表明两个地区的医生明显需要进行教育。影响:对医生进行有关生物标志物检测的教育是改善患者护理的必要条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信