Dataset Information

Concordance Between Watson for Oncology and Multidisciplinary Teams in Colorectal Cancer: Prognostic Implications and Predicting Concordance

ABSTRACT:

Background

Watson for Oncology (WFO) is a cognitive computing system that provides clinical decision support. This study examined the concordance between the treatment recommendations for colorectal cancer (CRC) proposed by WFO and those recommended by the multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), and evaluated the influence of concordance on the prognosis.

Methods

We retrospectively collected 175 patients with colorectal cancer who received treatment recommended by MDTs at a hospital in China, and evaluated them using WFO. Concordance between the two recommendations was analyzed. The overall survival was analyzed between concordant and non-concordant groups. Logistic regression analyses were performed and a concordance-predicting model was developed.

Results

Concordance between WFO’ and MDTs’ recommendations occurred in 66.9% (117/175) of cases. The overall survival (OS) was significantly better in concordant group and non-concordance was found to be an independent prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR)=2.784 (95% CI 1.264–6.315)]. Logistic regression analyses determined that tumor type [odds ratio (OR)= 2.195 for left colon cancer and OR=2.502 for rectum cancer], and TNM stage (OR=0.545 for stage II, OR=0.187 for stage III, OR=0.127 for stage IV) were independently related with concordance, which were used to develop a concordance-predictive-nomogram.

Conclusions

Treatment recommendations for patients with colorectal cancer determined by WFO and MDTs were mostly concordant. However, the survival was better among concordant patients and non-concordance was found to be an independent prognostic factor. This study presents a nomogram that can be conveniently used for predicting individualized concordance. However, our findings should be prospectively validated in multi-center trials.

SUBMITTER: Mao C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7786244 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:With the increasing number of cancer treatments, the emergence of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) provides patients with personalized treatment options. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has developed rapidly in the medical field. There has been a gradual tendency to replace traditional diagnosis and treatment with AI. IBM Watson for Oncology (WFO) has been proven to be useful for decision-making in breast cancer and lung cancer, but to date, research on gastric cancer is limited. OBJECTIVE:This study compared the concordance of WFO with MDT and investigated the impact on patient prognosis. METHODS:This study retrospectively analyzed eligible patients (N=235) with gastric cancer who were evaluated by an MDT, received corresponding recommended treatment, and underwent follow-up. Thereafter, physicians inputted the information of all patients into WFO manually, and the results were compared with the treatment programs recommended by the MDT. If the MDT treatment program was classified as "recommended" or "considered" by WFO, we considered the results concordant. All patients were divided into a concordant group and a nonconcordant group according to whether the WFO and MDT treatment programs were concordant. The prognoses of the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS:The overall concordance of WFO and the MDT was 54.5% (128/235) in this study. The subgroup analysis found that concordance was less likely in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive tumors than in patients with HER2-negative tumors (P=.02). Age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, differentiation type, and clinical stage were not found to affect concordance. Among all patients, the survival time was significantly better in concordant patients than in nonconcordant patients (P<.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that concordance was an independent prognostic factor of overall survival in patients with gastric cancer (hazard ratio 0.312 [95% CI 0.187-0.521]). CONCLUSIONS:The treatment recommendations made by WFO and the MDT were mostly concordant in gastric cancer patients. If the WFO options are updated to include local treatment programs, the concordance will greatly improve. The HER2 status of patients with gastric cancer had a strong effect on the likelihood of concordance. Generally, survival was better in concordant patients than in nonconcordant patients.

Project description:BackgroundIBM Watson for Oncology (WFO), which can use natural language processing to evaluate data in structured and unstructured formats, has begun to be used in China. It provides physicians with evidence-based treatment options and ranks them in three categories for treatment decision support. This study was designed to examine the concordance between the treatment recommendation proposed by WFO and actual clinical decisions by oncologists in our cancer center, which would reflect the differences of cancer treatment between China and the U.S.Patients and methodsRetrospective data from 362 patients with cancer were ingested into WFO from April 2017 to October 2017. WFO recommendations were provided in three categories: recommended, for consideration, and not recommended. Concordance was analyzed by comparing the treatment decisions proposed by WFO with those of the multidisciplinary tumor board. Concordance was achieved when the oncologists' treatment decisions were in the recommended or for consideration categories in WFO.ResultsOvarian cancer showed the highest concordance, which was 96%. Lung cancer and breast cancer obtained a concordance of slightly above 80%. The concordance of rectal cancer was 74%, whereas colon cancer and cervical cancer showed the same concordance of 64%. In particular, the concordance of gastric cancer was very low, only 12%, and 88% of cases were under physicians choice.ConclusionDifferent cancer types showed different concordances, and only gastric cancers were significantly less likely to be concordant. Incidence and pharmaceuticals may be the major cause of discordance. To be comprehensively and rapidly applied in China, WFO needs to accelerate localization. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03400514.Implications for practiceIBM Watson for Oncology (WFO) has begun to be used in China. In this study, concordance was examined between the treatment recommendation proposed by WFO and clinical decisions for 362 patients in our cancer center, which could reflect the differences of cancer treatment between China and the U.S. Different cancer types showed different concordances, and only gastric cancers were significantly less likely to be concordant. Incidence and pharmaceuticals may be the major causes of discordance. To be comprehensively and rapidly applied in China, WFO needs to accelerate localization. This study may have a significant effect on application of artificial intelligence systems in China.

Project description:IntroductionVarious forms of videoconferenced collaborations exist in oncology care. In regional oncology networks, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are essential in coordinating care in their region. There is no recent overview of the benefits and drawbacks of videoconferenced collaborations in oncology care networks. This scoping review presents an overview of videoconferencing (VC) in oncology care and summarises its benefits and drawbacks regarding decision-making and care coordination.DesignWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (nursing and allied health) and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020 for studies that included VC use in discussing treatment plans and coordinating care in oncology networks between teams at different sites. Two reviewers performed data extraction and thematic analyses.ResultsFifty studies were included. Six types of collaboration between teams using VC in oncology care were distinguished, ranging from MDTs collaborating with similar teams or with national or international experts to interactions between palliative care nurses and experts in that field. Patient benefits were less travel for diagnosis, better coordination of care, better access to scarce facilities and treatment in their own community. Benefits for healthcare professionals were optimised treatment plans through multidisciplinary discussion of complex cases, an ability to inform all healthcare professionals simultaneously, enhanced care coordination, less travel and continued medical education. VC added to the regular workload in preparing for discussions and increased administrative preparation.DiscussionBenefits and drawbacks for collaborating teams were tied to general VC use. VC enabled better use of staff time and reduced the time spent travelling. VC equipment costs and lack of reimbursement were implementation barriers.ConclusionVC is highly useful for various types of collaboration in oncology networks and improves decision-making over treatment plans and care coordination, with substantial benefits for patients and specialists. Drawbacks are additional time related to administrative preparation.