Identifying knowledge-translation opportunities in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer.

Authors

null

Yanchini Rajmohan

BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Yanchini Rajmohan, Robyn Leonard, Sophie Hogeveen, Jalal Ebrahim, Dolly Han, Audrey Wong, Jean-Francois Boileau, Sonal Gandhi, Justin Lee, Robert Edward Dinniwell, Muriel Brackstone, Christine E. Simmons

Organizations

BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada, BC Cancer Agency, Toronto, ON, Canada, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, Jewish General Hospital Segal Cancer Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada, Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON, Canada

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Guidelines are usually developed using systematic literature reviews. Expert opinion plays a key role but can be difficult to incorporate. The objective of this study was to develop a national consensus of expert opinion on the management of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (LABC) and subsequently identify gaps in knowledge translation in current practice. Methods: 361 Canadian oncologists were subdivided into LABC experts (n = 83) and non-experts (n = 278). Experts were surveyed with a modified Delphi protocol to establish consensus. A systematic literature review was performed and compared to expert opinion. Non-experts were then surveyed with a 29-item questionnaire to determine current practice patterns. Z test was used to assess discordance. Results: Response rate for the expert survey was 61% (51/83). Consensus was achieved in all key aspects of care and was concordant to published literature in areas of: clinical assessment with caliper at each cycle, option of lumpectomy if good clinical response, radiotherapy to loco-regional lymph nodes, and no further adjuvant chemotherapy outside of clinical trial if residual disease found at time of surgery. Response rate for the non-expert survey was 50% (140/278). Areas of discordance are highlighted below. Conclusions: A national practice consensus guideline reflective of current evidence and expert opinion has been developed on the management of LABC. Differences in expert opinion and current practice have been identified as targets for knowledge translation interventions (KTIs) that may improve quality of care and resource utilization. Further exploration of KTIs to address identified gaps is warranted.

Question Expert response Nonexpert response Discordance level
Response to NAT should be assessed at each cycle 100% 76% 24% p = 0.0003
Response to NAT should be assessed by tape
measure/caliper
96% 69% 27% p = 0.0003
Radiographic re-assessment should be completed
after NAT in all patients
0% 23% 23% p = 0.0003
ER/PR should be tested on core and only repeated
on final path if initially negative/low positive
100% 28% 72% p = < 0.0001
HER2 should be tested on core and only repeated
on final path if initially negative/low positive
93% 27% 66% p = < 0.0001

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session A: Science of Quality

Track

Science of Quality,Health Reform: Implications for Costs and Quality ,Practice of Quality

Sub Track

Quality Improvement

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 31; abstr 47)

Abstract #

47

Poster Bd #

C4

Abstract Disclosures