Sloan, Jeff

6533 Background: Although it can be rewarding, caring for patients with cancer is also demanding and stressful. Oncologists work long hours, supervise administration of highly toxic therapy, and continually observe death and suffering. While isolated studies have explored burnout in national samples of U.S. oncologists (last in 2003), little is known about the personal and professional characteristics related to burnout and career satisfaction. Methods: Between October 2012 - January 2013, ASCO conducted a national surveyof ~3000 U.S. oncologists evaluating burnout and career satisfaction. The survey sample was constructed from the member registry to include an equal number of men/women and an equal proportion of individuals from all career stages (<10 yrs, 10-19 yrs, >20 yrs). Validated tools were used to assess burnout and well-being. Results: As of January 2012, 1041 (35%) oncologists had returned surveys (median age 52 years; 50% women). Among responders, 355 (34%) were in academic practice (AP) and 447 (43%) in private practice (PP) with the remainder in other settings (e.g. military, veterans, industry). Oncologists worked an average of 51 hours/week and saw a mean of 51 outpatients/week. Although average hours worked for oncologists in PP and academic practice were similar (AP=54.6/wk; PP=54.2/wk), profound differences in other practice characteristics were observed with respect to sub-specialization (AP=81%; PP=17%), time devoted to clinical care, patients seen per week (AP=37; PP=74), time devoted to education, and method of compensation. Relative to 2011, 23% of oncologists reported a >10% decline in take home pay in 2012 (>10% decline AP=8%; PP=34%). Overall, 454 (45%) of oncologists had at least one symptom of burnout (e.g. emotional exhaustion, depersonalization) on the Maslach Burnout Inventory (AP=47%; PP=51%; p=0.19). While a majority were satisfied with their career (83%) and specialty (80%) choice, both measures of career satisfaction were lower for PP relative to AP (all p<0.005). Conclusions: Burnout is common among oncologists. Detailed multivariate analyses to identify personal and professional characteristics associated with burnout and career satisfaction are underway and will be presented.

Background: Prospective, randomized trials are needed to determine optimal treatment approaches for palliative care problems such as malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). Randomization poses unique issues for such studies, especially with divergent treatment approaches and varying levels of equipoise. We report our experience accruing randomized patients to the Prospective Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Malignant Bowel Obstruction (SWOG S1316) study, comparing surgical and nonsurgical management of MBO. Methods: Patients with MBO who were surgical candidates and had treatment equipoise were accrued and offered randomization to surgical or nonsurgical management. Patients choosing nonrandomization were offered prospective observation. Trial details are listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT #02270450). An accrual algorithm was developed to enhance enrollment. Results: Accrual is ongoing with 176 patients enrolled. Most (89%) patients chose nonrandomization, opting for nonsurgical management. Of 25 sites that have accrued to this study, 6 enrolled patients on the randomization arm. Approximately 59% (20/34) of the randomization accrual goal has been achieved. Patient-related factors and clinician bias have been the most prevalent reasons for lack of randomization. An algorithm was developed from clinician experience to aid randomization. Using principles in this tool, repeated physician conversations discussing treatment options and goals of care, and a supportive team–approach has helped increase accrual. Conclusions: Experience gained from the S1316 study can aid future palliative care trials. Although difficult, it is possible to randomize patients to palliative studies by giving clinicians clear recommendations utilizing an algorithm of conversation, allotment of necessary time to discuss the trial, and encouragement to overcome internal bias.

Background There is currently a lack of consensus on how health-related quality of life and other patient-reported outcome measures in cancer randomized clinical trials are analyzed and interpreted. This makes it difficult to compare results across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) synthesize scientific research, and use that evidence to inform product labeling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data for Cancer Clinical Trials (SISAQOL) Consortium aims to develop guidelines and recommendations to standardize analyses of patient-reported outcome data in cancer RCTs. Methods and Results Members from the SISAQOL Consortium met in January 2017 to discuss relevant issues. Data from systematic reviews of the current state of published research in patient-reported outcomes in cancer RCTs indicated a lack of clear reporting of research hypothesis and analytic strategies, and inconsistency in definitions of terms, including “missing data,”“health-related quality of life,” and “patient-reported outcome.” Based on the meeting proceedings, the Consortium will focus on three key priorities in the coming year: developing a taxonomy of research objectives, identifying appropriate statistical methods to analyze patient-reported outcome data, and determining best practices to evaluate and deal with missing data. Conclusion The quality of the Consortium guidelines and recommendations are informed and enhanced by the broad Consortium membership which includes regulators, patients, clinicians, and academics.

AbstractPaclitaxel‐induced peripheral neuropathy (PIPN) cannot be predicted from clinical parameters and might have a pharmacogenomic basis. Previous studies identified single nucleotide variants (SNV) associated with PIPN. However, only a subset of findings has been confirmed to date in more than one study, suggesting a need for further re‐testing and validation in additional clinical cohorts. Candidate PIPN‐associated SNVs were identified from the literature. SNVs were retested in 119 patients selected by extreme phenotyping from 269 in NCCTG N08C1 (Alliance) as previously reported. SNV genotyping was performed by a combination of short‐read sequencing analysis and Taqman PCR. These 22 candidate PIPN SNVs were genotyped. Two of these, rs7349683 in the EPHA5 and rs3213619 in ABCB1 were found to be significantly associated with PIPN with an Odds ratios OR = 2.07 (P = 0.02) and OR = 0.12 (P = 0.03), respectively. In addition, three SNVs showed a trend toward a risk‐ or protective effect that was consistent with previous reports. The rs10509681 and rs11572080 in the gene CYP2C8*3 showed risk effect with an OR = 1.49 and rs1056836 in CYP1B1 showed a protective effect with an OR = 0.66. None of the other results supported the previously reported associations, including some SNVs displaying an opposite direction of effect from previous reports, including rs1058930 in CYP2C8, rs17222723 and rs8187710 in ABCC2, rs10771973 in FGD4, rs16916932 in CACNB2 and rs16948748 in PITPNA. Alliance N08C1 validated or supported a minority of previously reported SNV‐PIPN associations. Associations previously reported by multiple studies appeared to have a higher likelihood to be validated by Alliance N08C1.

Purpose To evaluate the personal and professional characteristics associated with career satisfaction and burnout among US oncologists. Methods Between October 2012 and March 2013, the American Society of Clinical Oncology conducted a survey of US oncologists evaluating burnout and career satisfaction. The survey sample included equal numbers of men and women and represented all career stages. Results Of 2,998 oncologists contacted, 1,490 (49.7%) returned surveys (median age of respondents, 52 years; 49.6% women). Among the 1,117 oncologists (37.3% of overall sample) who completed full-length surveys, 377 (33.8%) were in academic practice (AP) and 482 (43.2%) in private practice (PP), with the remainder in other settings. Oncologists worked an average of 57.6 hours per week (AP, 58.6 hours per week; PP, 62.9 hours per week) and saw a mean of 52 outpatients per week. Overall, 484 oncologists (44.7%) were burned out on the emotional exhaustion and/or depersonalization domain of Maslach Burnout Inventory (AP, 45.9%; PP, 50.5%; P = .18). Hours per week devoted to direct patient care was the dominant professional predictor of burnout for both PP and AP oncologists on univariable and multivariable analyses. Although a majority of oncologists were satisfied with their career (82.5%) and specialty (80.4%) choices, both measures of career satisfaction were lower for those in PP relative to AP (all P < .006). Conclusion Overall career satisfaction is high among US oncologists, albeit lower for those in PP relative to AP. Burnout rates among oncologists seem similar to those described in recent studies of US physicians in general. Those oncologists who devote the greatest amount of their professional time to patient care seem to be at greatest risk for burnout.