Teresita Muñoz-Antonia, Vani N Simmons, Steven K Sutton, Matthew B Schabath, Iffat Alam, Alberto Chiappori, Gwendolyn P Quinn
{"title":"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。","authors":"Teresita Muñoz-Antonia, Vani N Simmons, Steven K Sutton, Matthew B Schabath, Iffat Alam, Alberto Chiappori, 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":"{\"title\":\"Use of biomarker testing in lung cancer among Puerto Rico and Florida Physicians: Results of a comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Teresita Muñoz-Antonia, Vani N Simmons, Steven K Sutton, Matthew B Schabath, Iffat Alam, Alberto Chiappori, 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}","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}
Use of biomarker testing in lung cancer among Puerto Rico and Florida Physicians: Results of a comparative study.
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.