Confidence in patient-provider consideration of immunotherapy in a congested landscape.

80 Background: With multiple immunotherapy options; guideline-directed selection and sequencing of immunotherapies has arisen as a challenge in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In an effort to translate pivotal NSCLC trial data and guidelines into personalized treatment plans for difficult-to-treat subgroups, Medlive planned sequential education programs to inform both patients and clinicians of new updates and how to better refine care. Methods: In 2023, a patient and clinician educational initiative was hosted by Medlive and followed up in 2024 to reinforce patient selection with clinician education on difficult-to-treat subgroups. Insights and outcomes from all learners were assessed via pre- and post-education questions, polling, and follow-up surveys. Results: Across these initiatives, 3,224 clinician learners and 791 patient/caregiver learners engaged in the education. Pre-activity, only 27% of oncologists were confident in testing PD-L1 status in their patients’ tumors with no consensus of cut point considerations to denote a high PD-L1 level. Post-activity, 63% of oncologists are likely to incorporate ICIs for patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC and 65% intend to change their current practice. Confidence in selecting frontline immunotherapy improved notably among MDs, suggesting strengthened decision-making around treatment personalization in difficult-to-treat subgroups. Increased understanding of subgroup specific outcomes/benefits of frontline immunotherapy (cemiplimab + chemotherapy in patients with squamous NSCLC). There was a 14% increased confidence in ability to select frontline immunotherapy options for patients in key NSCLC subgroups. Persistent gaps in knowledge related to toxicity recognition and treatment decision-making in complex cases highlight opportunities for future education to focus on AE management and real-world application of trial data. Only 33% of patients/caregivers reported a doctor has discussed PD-L1 levels with them, however 54% were confident after participation in discussing the role of PD-L1 levels in selecting immunotherapy with their healthcare team. Pre-activity, 44% of patients/caregivers were not familiar with immunotherapy as a treatment option for NSCLC. Following participation, 80% are likely to report new/changing symptoms within hours of presentation for better monitoring of adverse events. Conclusions: The outcomes data reflected a lack of awareness of the importance of testing and reveal an opportunity to better incorporate PD-L1 status in patient discussions regarding its relevance for appropriate treatment selection. These data suggest the role of education in empowering clinicians and patients with a deeper knowledge of appropriate application of immunotherapy and the importance of reporting adverse events in a timely manner.