91 Background: Although advance care planning and the completion of advance directives (ADs) are important methods to prevent unwanted aggressive care once patients have lost their decision-making capacity, only a minority of patients have ADs at the time of cancer diagnosis. Methods: We established a new multidisciplinary outpatient clinic to provide comprehensive care to patients with newly diagnosed cancer at the Inova Dwight and Martha Schar Cancer Institute in Northern Virginia. Improvement in advance care planning was chosen as one of the first quality improvement initiatives for 2015. We started the first PDSA cycle after creating the team, establishing the problem and goal statement, and reviewing the process map. We had three measures including: 1. Inquiring whether the patient has advance directives or not at the time of scheduling their first appointment, 2. Provide written information about advance directives at the patient’s first visit, 3. Obtain advance directives by the third office visit. The goal for each measure was 90%, 90%, and 50% by the end of 2015. Results: Between May-June 2015, 65 patients were evaluable. Baseline rates were 26%, 2%, and 12%, respectively for measures 1, 2, and 3. In July 2015, we convened a staff meeting to review each staff’s role in the process of advance care planning. The new patient schedulers had training and created a telephone script to effectively communicate advance directives information with patients. The front desk staff included written information about advance care planning in the new patient information folders. Clinical staff were asked to address any questions or concerns that patients have and to encourage patients to complete the ADs by next visit. After this intervention, the rates increased to 100%, 44%, and 33%, respectively for measures 1, 2, and 3 in August and September, 2015 (n = 45). Conclusions: Early discussion about the ADs for newly diagnosed cancer patients at our outpatient clinic showed improvement in the rate of completed ADs by a third office visit.

No abstract

483 Background: Inova Schar Cancer Institute formed a molecular tumor board in early 2016 to identify treatment options for patients with gastrointestinal malignances based on molecular testing and to track outcomes. Methods: From March 2016 to June 2017, 78 patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies were presented at our molecular tumor board. The most common mutations, the percentage of patients who received targeted therapies, responded to targeted therapies, died or went on hospice prior to receiving a recommended therapy, and had an available Association of Molecular Pathology Tier 1 or Tier 2 recommendation available were reviewed retrospectively. We also compared the overall survival of patients who received a new treatment after MTB compared to those who did not. N-of-One, Inc. provided curation of molecular testing and participated in the MTB. Results: 78 patients with gastrointestinal cancers were presented between March 2016 and June 2017. Thirteen (19%) patients received targeted therapy and 31% had partial response, 15% had Stable Disease, and 54% had progression of disease. 12 patients (15%) died or went on hospice before recommendations could start and 11 patients (14%) are waiting to start recommended therapy. 38 (49%) patients did not have a mutation that prompted a MTB recommendation. Median OS of the 33 patients who started a new therapy (including chemotherapy or unrelated clinical trials) after MTB was 15.3 months vs. 11.5 months in 40 patients who continued current therapy (P = 0.016 Wilcoxon). The three most common mutations detected were TP53, KRAS, and APC. The majority of cases had more than one variant. 18% of cases had a variant classified as Tier 1; 74% of cases had a variant with the highest AMP classification of Tier 2. Conclusions: The majority of patients with Gastrointestinal malignancies presented to the Inova MTB had a finding that supported a molecularly-guided therapy, with a small but meaningful number of partial responses. Barriers to the use of molecular guided therapy included molecular testing and presentation at a late disease stage, and alternative chemotherapeutic options.

e18001 Background: Patient engagement in medical decision-making improves patient related outcomes through compliance and patient satisfaction. The Inova Schar Cancer Institute (ISCI) has a weekly molecular tumor board (MTB) to match comprehensive genomic sequencing results with targeted therapies for patients. The ISCI MTB invites patients to attend and engage in the MTB discussion. We performed a pilot study to investigate the feasibility and satisfaction in patients who attended MTB. Methods: During the time of this study, August 2017 through October 2018, 139 patients were presented and all 20 who were able to attend MTB completed pre-and post- MTB surveys. Patients who did not attend were either not invited by their primary oncologist, unable to attend, or chose not to attend. The survey included six questions related to comprehension, engagement, and satisfaction with the treatment team. Results: There was a statistically significant change for the question “I am satisfied with how well informed I am about targeted therapy” with p = 0.016. All 20 patients answered positively that it was beneficial for them to attend. Many patients expressed concerns about their difficulty understanding the technical aspects of the meeting. Conclusions: Patients who attended MTB reported a higher level of satisfaction after MTB attendance as compared to before MTB. This may reflect a sense of engagement in shared decision making rather than comprehension of genomic information. A more holistic method of studying this practice would include sampling a larger patient population and a formal evaluation of the physicians’ experience with patients attending. Supported by philanthropic funds from the Inova Schar Cancer Institute.