NCCN TRENDS DEMOGRAPHICS. Results: November 2013 BASAL CELL CARCINOMA. Distribution of Respondent Types (n = 835) Page 1

Transcription

1 NCCN TRENDS Results: November 2013 NCCN Trends is an analytics tool from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN ) that surveys how clinicians across the U.S. and around the globe are delivering cancer care. This summary includes the results of the November 2013 NCCN Trends Survey, which focused on Basal Cell Carcinoma. This survey was sent to U.S. and International users of NCCN.org. DEMOGRAPHICS Distribution of Respondent Types (n = 835) Physician/Surgeon/Oncologist 11% Nurse/Oncology Nurse or Clinical Nurse Specialist Pharmacist 7 3% 6% Physician Assistant or Nurse Practitioner Other Clinician Note: Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding. Page 1

2 Q1. Do you treat patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC)? (n = 688) 54% Yes No 4 Q2. Have you used a hedgehog pathway inhibitor to treat locally advanced BCC? (n = 301) Yes 23% No 7 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Page 2

3 Q2. Have you used a hedgehog pathway inhibitor to treat locally advanced BCC? By Geography Yes No US Midwest (n=17) 41% 59% US Northeast (n=19) 16% 84% US South (n=28) 32% 68% US West (n=21) 33% 6 Europe (n=94) 23% 7 Latin America (n=31) 32% 68% Asia (n=62) 13% 8 Other Non-US (n=29) 93% Page 3

4 Q2. Have you used a hedgehog pathway inhibitor to treat locally advanced BCC? By Practice Size Yes No 1 to 3 (n=64) 23% 7 4 to 9 (n=67) 21% 79% 10 or more (n=170) 23% 7 Page 4

5 Q2. Have you used a hedgehog pathway inhibitor to treat locally advanced BCC? By Practice Setting Yes No Academic Setting (n=178) 21% 79% Community Setting (n=121) 26% 74% Page 5

6 Q2. Have you used a hedgehog pathway inhibitor to treat locally advanced BCC? By Specialty Yes No Medical Oncology (n=120) 31% 69% Radiation Oncology (n=67) 10% 90% Surgical Oncology (n=43) 93% Internal Medicine (n=8) 7 2 General Surgery (n=9) 100% Other (n=54) 28% 72% Page 6

7 Q3. What is your primary specialty? (n = 270) Mohs surgery Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Surgical oncology General surgery Dermatology Medical oncology Plastic surgery 3% 6% 8% 56% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 7

8 Q3. What is your primary specialty? By Geography Mohs surgery Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Surgical oncology General surgery Dermatology Medical oncology Plastic surgery US Midwest (n=14) 5 US Northeast (n=18) 11% 22% 6% 61% US South (n=23) 4% 4% 4% 4% 1 5 9% US West (n=20) 10% 10% 10% 1 4 Europe (n=84) 8% 19% 5 6% Latin America (n=31) 6% 3% 19% 6% 6 Asia (n=58) 3% 12% 5 2% Other Non-US (n=22) 9% 9% 5 18% Page 8

9 Q3. What is your primary specialty? By Practice Size Mohs surgery Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Surgical oncology General surgery Dermatology Medical oncology Plastic surgery 1 to 3 (n=58) 10% 12% 10% 9% 43% 9% 4 to 9 (n=63) 2% 16% 10% 8% 56% 10 or more (n=149) 3% 1 8% 61% 3% Page 9

10 Q3. What is your primary specialty? By Practice Setting Mohs surgery Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Surgical oncology General surgery Dermatology Medical oncology Plastic surgery Academic Setting (n=158) 2% 8% 16% 9% 54% 4% Community Setting (n=111) 13% 58% Page 10

11 Q3. What is your primary specialty? By Specialty Mohs surgery Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery Surgical oncology General surgery Dermatology Medical oncology Plastic surgery Medical Oncology (n=120) 2% 6% 2% 4% 86% 1% Radiation Oncology (n=38) 3% 8% 3% 8 Surgical Oncology (n=45) 4% 24% 51% 9% 2% 9% Internal Medicine (n=7) 29% 71% General Surgery (n=9) 11% 89% Other (n=51) 10% 8% 12% 4% 31% 20% 16% Page 11

12 Q4. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor before surgery for locally advanced BCC (neoadjuvant setting)? (n = 269) % >25-50% 18% >50-7 >75-100% 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Page 12

13 Q4. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor before surgery for locally advanced BCC (neoadjuvant setting)? By Geography % % US Midwest (n=13) 62% 38% US Northeast (n=13) 62% 38% US South (n=23) 8 13% US West (n=20) 70% 1 10% Europe (n=86) 74% 1 6% 2% Latin America (n=32) 72% 22% 6% Asia (n=56) 7 16% 4% Other Non-US (n=26) 81% 8% 12% Page 13

14 Q4. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor before surgery for locally advanced BCC (neoadjuvant setting)? By Practice Size % % 1 to 3 (n=56) 7 18% 4% 2% 4 to 9 (n=57) 61% 28% 4% 10 or more (n=156) 78% 1 2% Page 14

15 Q4. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor before surgery for locally advanced BCC (neoadjuvant setting)? By Practice Setting % % Academic Setting (n=163) 73% 20% 2% Community Setting (n=105) 76% 1 6% 3% Page 15

16 Q4. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor before surgery for locally advanced BCC (neoadjuvant setting)? By Specialty % % Medical Oncology (n=110) 68% 23% 4% Radiation Oncology (n=56) 79% 9% 11% 2% Surgical Oncology (n=44) 84% 2% Internal Medicine (n=7) 5 43% General Surgery (n=7) 86% Other (n=45) 76% 20% 4% Page 16

17 Q5. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor after surgery for locally advanced BCC (e.g. if surgical margins were not clear, perineural invasion, invades orbit, invades bone) (adjuvant setting)? (n = 269) % >25-50% 23% >50-7 >75-100% 13% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 17

18 Q5. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor after surgery for locally advanced BCC (e.g. if surgical margins were not clear, perineural invasion, invades orbit, invades bone) (adjuvant setting)? By Geography % % US Midwest (n=13) 1 62% 1 8% US Northeast (n=13) 38% 31% 1 1 US South (n=22) 41% 9% 18% 32% US West (n=19) 4 21% 11% 21% Europe (n=87) 56% 20% 16% 8% Latin America (n=33) 42% 39% 12% 6% Asia (n=56) 54% 18% 11% 18% Other Non-US (n=26) 6 12% 8% 1 Page 18

19 Q5. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor after surgery for locally advanced BCC (e.g. if surgical margins were not clear, perineural invasion, invades orbit, invades bone) (adjuvant setting)? By Practice Size % % 1 to 3 (n=57) 58% 21% 16% 4 to 9 (n=57) 42% 30% 10 or more (n=155) 50% 21% 16% 13% Page 19

20 Q5. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor after surgery for locally advanced BCC (e.g. if surgical margins were not clear, perineural invasion, invades orbit, invades bone) (adjuvant setting)? By Practice Setting % % Academic Setting (n=163) 52% 22% 13% 12% Community Setting (n=105) 48% 24% 13% 1 Page 20

21 Q5. What percent of your patients would you consider treating with a hedgehog pathway inhibitor after surgery for locally advanced BCC (e.g. if surgical margins were not clear, perineural invasion, invades orbit, invades bone) (adjuvant setting)? By Specialty % % Medical Oncology (n=110) 4 26% 1 Radiation Oncology (n=55) 64% 22% Surgical Oncology (n=44) 61% 16% 11% 11% Internal Medicine (n=7) 29% 43% General Surgery (n=8) % 38% Other (n=45) 44% 22% 13% 20% Page 21

22 NCCN TRENDS Results: November 2013 NCCN Trends is an analytics tool from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN ) that surveys how clinicians across the U.S. and around the globe are delivering cancer care. NCCN Trends surveys are designed to reach targeted populations that can include several thousand clinicians as a potential sample size. NCCN can also provide analytics on existing NCCN Trends and clinician demographic data sets, allowing for greater insight into oncology practice patterns. To commission an NCCN Trends survey, to discuss analytic and data services, or to request information on other NCCN programs and resources, please contact: Christine MacCracken, MSHEd, BSN Senior Director, Business Insights maccracken@nccn.org National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN ) The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN ), a not-for-profit alliance of 23 of the worldês leading cancer centers, is dedicated to improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of care provided to patients with cancer. Through the leadership and expertise of clinical professionals at NCCN Member Institutions, NCCN develops resources that present valuable information to the numerous stakeholders in the health care delivery system. As the arbiter of high-quality cancer care, NCCN promotes the importance of continuous quality improvement and recognizes the significance of creating clinical practice guidelines appropriate for use by patients, clinicians, and other health care decision-makers. The primary goal of all NCCN initiatives is to improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of oncology practice so patients can live better lives. 275 Commerce Drive Suite 300 Fort Washington, PA, Telephone: Fax: NCCN.org - For Clinicians NCCN.org/patients - For Patients * All NCCN Trends survey content and resulting data are owned by NCCN. Survey responses are made anonymous to protect the privacy of survey respondents. NCCN may license survey content, data, and analytic results to third parties, but retains the rights to use this data for other purposes, including the support of educational and research efforts or for other strategic or business purposes. Summary C-N Page 22