Assessment of current practices among physicians and awareness and concern among patients for bone health in cancer.

e19617 Background: Little is known about physicians' (MDs) and cancer patients' (pts) levels of awareness or concern about bone health or how/when MDs discuss bone health with at-risk patients. An online survey was conducted to explore these issues and evaluate knowledge levels and attitudes about bone metastases and cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). METHODS: MDs from the AMA master list recruited for the survey included urologists (n=113), medical oncologists (med oncs; n=204) and hematologist-oncologists (hem oncs; n=150). Breast (BC, n=212) and prostate (PC, n=186) cancer pts were recruited from Harris' Chronic Illness Panel; myeloma (MM, n=831) pts were recruited from members of the International Myeloma Foundation. Surveys lasted on average 10 minutes; MD, BC pt, and PC pt surveys were weighted to be representative of the populations of interest. Descriptive statistical analyses were used. RESULTS: More nonmetastatic BC than PC pts are familiar with the term "bone metastases" (50% vs 35%) and concerned about CTIBL (39% vs 24%). Of those aware of CTIBL, 79% of BC pts and 55% of PC pts had discussed it with their MD. Both med oncs and urologists consider CTIBL a serious issue for PC pts (98% vs. 90%), but more med oncs believe that pts are concerned about CTIBL (71% vs 37%). For metastatic (M) PC, more med oncs than urologists believe they are responsible for pts' bone health (100% vs 75%), but 68% of MPC pts had not discussed bone mets treatment with their doctor; when discussed, 91% of discussions were initiated by the doctor, usually prior to initiating treatment. In MBC, 66% had not discussed bone mets treatment, and if discussed, initiated by the doctor in 88% of cases, again usually prior to treatment initiation. Most MM pts recognized common symptoms of bone disease, and most had experienced them (85%) and discussed treatment options with their MDs (77%). Among hem oncs, 98% discussed treatment of bone disease with MM pts. CONCLUSIONS: Hem oncs and MM pts are knowledgeable and concerned about bone health. Urologists and med oncs are also concerned about bone health but tend not to initiate discussion until an event occurs. Pt and MD awareness/concern and MD discussion are not always concordant in bone health.

Duke Scholars

Author Judd Wendell Moul Urology