Potential barriers to implementation of next-generation sequencing in cancer management: a U.S. Physician-based survey.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Future oncology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1080/14796694.2024.2430725
Arif Hussain, Elizabeth Szamreta, Ning Ning, Allysen Kaminski, Ruchit Shah, Jyoti Aggarwal, Gboyega Adeboyeje
{"title":"Potential barriers to implementation of next-generation sequencing in cancer management: a U.S. Physician-based survey.","authors":"Arif Hussain, Elizabeth Szamreta, Ning Ning, Allysen Kaminski, Ruchit Shah, Jyoti Aggarwal, Gboyega Adeboyeje","doi":"10.1080/14796694.2024.2430725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to identify barriers to physicians' NGS use and preferred strategies to alleviate these barriers.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional online survey link was sent to a sample of US oncologists/hematologists, surgeons, and pathologists identified through a panel. The survey collected data, from October-December 2020, on barriers to NGS testing and potential strategies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred physicians participated (mean age: 46.2 years; 65% male; 80% White, mean years in clinical practice: 13.7). Despite the use of NGS testing by all physicians, 99.5% reported concerns/barriers. Reimbursement challenges were the most cited reason (87.5%), followed by lack of knowledge of NGS testing methodologies (81.0%), and lack of clinical utility evidence (80.0%). The most common reimbursement challenge was prior authorizations for NGS testing (72.0%), followed by knowledge of new fee codes for reimbursement or corresponding therapy (68.0%), and paperwork/administrative duties (67.5%). Surgeons were more likely to encounter challenges in using NGS testing than other physicians.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results highlight the barriers reported by oncologists/hematologists, pathologists, and surgeons, which may impact the evolving role of NGS in the context of the overall management of cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12672,"journal":{"name":"Future oncology","volume":" ","pages":"231-239"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11792822/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14796694.2024.2430725","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to identify barriers to physicians' NGS use and preferred strategies to alleviate these barriers.

Research design and methods: A cross-sectional online survey link was sent to a sample of US oncologists/hematologists, surgeons, and pathologists identified through a panel. The survey collected data, from October-December 2020, on barriers to NGS testing and potential strategies.

Results: Two hundred physicians participated (mean age: 46.2 years; 65% male; 80% White, mean years in clinical practice: 13.7). Despite the use of NGS testing by all physicians, 99.5% reported concerns/barriers. Reimbursement challenges were the most cited reason (87.5%), followed by lack of knowledge of NGS testing methodologies (81.0%), and lack of clinical utility evidence (80.0%). The most common reimbursement challenge was prior authorizations for NGS testing (72.0%), followed by knowledge of new fee codes for reimbursement or corresponding therapy (68.0%), and paperwork/administrative duties (67.5%). Surgeons were more likely to encounter challenges in using NGS testing than other physicians.

Conclusions: The results highlight the barriers reported by oncologists/hematologists, pathologists, and surgeons, which may impact the evolving role of NGS in the context of the overall management of cancer patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在癌症管理中实施下一代测序的潜在障碍:一项基于美国医生的调查。
背景:本研究的目的是确定医生使用 NGS 的障碍以及缓解这些障碍的首选策略:研究设计和方法:向通过专家小组确定的美国肿瘤学家/血液学家、外科医生和病理学家样本发送了横断面在线调查链接。调查收集了 2020 年 10 月至 12 月期间有关 NGS 检测障碍和潜在策略的数据:200 名医生参与了调查(平均年龄:46.2 岁;65% 为男性;80% 为白人;平均临床执业年限:13.7 年)。尽管所有医生都在使用 NGS 测试,但 99.5% 的医生表示存在顾虑/障碍。报销难题是最常见的原因(87.5%),其次是缺乏 NGS 检测方法知识(81.0%)和缺乏临床实用性证据(80.0%)。最常见的报销难题是 NGS 检测的事先授权(72.0%),其次是了解新的报销费用代码或相应疗法(68.0%),以及文书工作/行政职责(67.5%)。与其他医生相比,外科医生更有可能在使用 NGS 检测时遇到挑战:研究结果凸显了肿瘤学家/血液学家、病理学家和外科医生报告的障碍,这些障碍可能会影响 NGS 在癌症患者整体管理中不断发展的作用。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Future oncology
Future oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.00%
发文量
335
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Future Oncology (ISSN 1479-6694) provides a forum for a new era of cancer care. The journal focuses on the most important advances and highlights their relevance in the clinical setting. Furthermore, Future Oncology delivers essential information in concise, at-a-glance article formats - vital in delivering information to an increasingly time-constrained community. The journal takes a forward-looking stance toward the scientific and clinical issues, together with the economic and policy issues that confront us in this new era of cancer care. The journal includes literature awareness such as the latest developments in radiotherapy and immunotherapy, concise commentary and analysis, and full review articles all of which provide key findings, translational to the clinical setting.
期刊最新文献
REZILIENT3: randomized phase III study of first-line zipalertinib plus chemotherapy in patients with EGFR exon 20 insertion-mutated NSCLC. Oncologists' and urologists' preferences for adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma: a discrete-choice experiment. A plain language summary of NALIRIFOX compared with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (NAPOLI 3). An update on cancer stem cell survival pathways involved in chemoresistance in triple-negative breast cancer. Asciminib in the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1