Background: In recent years, abundant scientific evidence has been generated based on clinical trials (CT) in the field of oncology. The general objective of this paper is to find out the extent to which decision making is based on knowledge of the most recent CT. Its specific objectives are to pinpoint difficulties with decision making based on the CT performed and find out the motivations patients and clinicians have when taking part in a CT. Methodology: Combined, prospective study, based on the Delphi method. A lack of correspondence between the people who take part in CT and patients who come for consultation has been identified. A need for training in analysing and interpreting CT has also been identified and a lack of trust in the results of CT financed by the pharmaceutical industry itself has been perceived. Conclusions: There is a difficulty in selecting oncological treatment due to the lack of correspondence between the patients included in the CT and patients seen in consultation. In this process, real world data studies may be highly useful, as they may provide this group with greater training in interpreting CT and their results.

Background: In recent years, abundant scientific evidence has been generated based on clinical trials (CT) in the field of oncology. In spite of this, there are still major disagreements among the group when it comes to establishing a treatment and therapies for these kinds of patients. The general objective of this paper is to find out the extent to which decision-making is based on knowledge of the most recent CT. Its specific objectives are to pinpoint difficulties with decision-making based on the CT performed and find out the motivations patients and clinicians have when taking part in a CT.Methodology: Combined, prospective study, based on the Delphi method.Results: A lack of correspondence between the people who take part in CT and patients who come for consultation has been identified. Healthcare professionals' motivations for taking part in a CT include finding better treatment for the patient and boosting their research career. A need for training in analysing and interpreting CT has also been identified and a lack of trust in the results of CT financed by the pharmaceutical industry itself has been perceived. Conclusion: There is a difficulty in selecting oncological treatment due to the lack of correspondence between the patients included in the CT and patients seen in consultation. In this process, real world data studies may be highly useful, as may be providing this group with greater training in interpreting CT and their results. Aiding the professional progression of their research career is an incentive for clinicians to participate in a CT.

e14733 Background: Biliary tract tumours are rare and often poor prognosis cancers that comprise cholangiocarcinomas, ampullary tumours and gallbladder cancers. Methods: Medical Electronic Records for patients diagnosed between January 2008 and December 2010 and treated at a medical oncology unit were reviewed, and clinical and epidemiological data for patients were retrieved. Results: We have found 28 patients with a distribution with a clear majority of men (60%), with a median age of 66 years (range 45-80).Patients were mostly metastatic (85%) at diagnosis and the majority of patients had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (60%) as diagnosis and debuted with large intrahepatic masses and metastatic disease.Those with tumours arising outside the liver (40%) had obstructive jaundice (28%) or cholangitis (26%) at diagnosis and needed in most cases biliary stenting (33%).Six patients had PS2 at diagnosis and received gemcitabine monotherapy. Only one patient remaining progression free at 6 months and none of them received treatment at progression, the mean PFS was of 5.3 months and the OS was of 8.3 months.Of 22 patients with good performance status, 12 of them with a mean age of 60 years received polychemotherapy with GEMOX or CDDP-gem with PFS of 7. 3 months and OS of 12. 3 months.The other 10 patients (with a mean age of 65 years) received gemcitabine as monotherapy with a PFS of 7. 9 months and a OS of 11. 4 months.Eight patients were treated with second line therapy with no responses and a mean of PFS of 2 months, OS was not superior to patients who did not receive second line treatment. Conclusion: Our patients with biliary tract tumours had a mean progression free survival of 8.2 months and a mean overall survival of 12.3 months with 5 patients remaining progression free more than 20 months after beginning treatment. This survival data are compatible with those reported in recent clinical trials although we did not find improvements in survival with polychemotherapy and second line therapies. Conclusions: Taken as a whole our patients with biliary tract tumours had a mean progression free survival of 8.2 months and a mean overall survival of 12.3 months with 5 patients remaining progression free more than 20 months after beginning treatment.