Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 54 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Frontiers in Oncology

Survey-based perspectives and reported barriers to DPYD testing among U.S. oncologists

  • Sara Tohme1
  • Ramzi G. Salloum1
  • Jacqueline De La Cruz1
  • Qing Lu2
  • Kejin Dong2
  • J. Kevin Hicks3
  • D. Max Smith4
  • David DeRemer5
  • Pawel Mroz6
  • Sony Tuteja7
  • Larisa H. Cavallari5
7 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida
  2. 2Department of Biostatistics, University of Florida
  3. 3Departments of Pathology and Translational Pathology, Moffitt Cancer Center
  4. 4MedStar Health
  5. 5Department of Pharmacotherapy and Translational Research and Center for Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine, University of Florida
  6. 6Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota
  7. 7Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Background: Patients with cancer with deleterious DPYD variants are at significantly increased risk for severe toxicity with standard fluoropyrimidine doses. Prior to recent guidelines recommending it, the uptake of pre-treatment DPYD testing in the United States has been low. We aimed to explore oncologists’ perceptions and barriers to DPYD testing adoption on a national level.

Materials and methods: Survey invitations were sent to U.S. oncologists listed in the American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile in April and May 2025. The surveys assessed physician knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of DPYD testing in clinics caring for patients with cancer in the United States. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate survey responses.

Results: Of 5,525 physicians invited to participate, 47 oncologists completed the survey (response rate: 0.85%). The majority (85%) indicated that DPYD testing could help them manage patients; however, only 34% reported routinely performing DPYD testing. Most physicians (77%) agreed that adequate resources were available to order DPYD testing. When directly asked, 36% indicated that limited laboratory access was a barrier. In open-ended responses, respondents identified insurance reimbursement concerns (21%) and prolonged turnaround time (19%) as additional barriers. Forty-three percent reported needing assistance interpreting results and applying them to drug selection and dosing. Webinars (25.5%) and self-paced online modules (21%) were the most preferred educational modalities.

Conclusion: Most respondents indicated that DPYD testing could help manage patients, yet concerns persist. While regulatory guidance is evolving, these preliminary findings from a small sample highlight the need for future research to characterize implementation barriers and inform policy development.

Implications for practice: Our findings highlight gaps in implementation that can inform targeted strategies to improve the integration of DPYD testing into oncology practice, with the potential to enhance patient safety and reduce fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity.

Related

  1. Self-reported practice patterns for cognitive preservation during whole-brain radiotherapy: a multinational cross-sectional survey of radiation oncologists in the Middle East and North Africa
    Renda AlHabib, Fahad AlRowais, Issa Mohamad +10
    Frontiers in OncologyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textOncologyCrossrefPMC
  2. Self-Reported Sanitation, Moisture Management, and Microbial Testing Practices Among Low-Moisture Food Safety Survey Respondents
    Grace Buechner, Calvin Slaughter, Abigail B. Snyder
    Journal of Food ProtectionPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textNutritionDOAJ
  3. Physicians’ perceptions, reported experience, and perceived structural barriers to shared decision-making in South Korea: a multispecialty survey
    Sang-Ho Yoo, Min Ji Kim
    Frontiers in Public HealthPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textEpidemiology & public healthCrossrefEurope PMCEurope PMCPMC
  4. Identifying barriers to immunotherapy access for triple-negative breast cancer: A qualitative analysis of interviews with medical oncologists
    Devika R. Jutagir, Adriana Espinosa, Melissa Lopez +6
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textImmunologyOncologyPLOS
  5. Knowledge, willingness, and reported prior prostate cancer testing among men in Palestine: a cross-sectional online survey
    Karam Salama, Islam Staiti, Moath Hammad +13
    Frontiers in OncologyPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textOncologyCrossrefEurope PMC

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{tohme2026surveybased,
  title = {{Survey-based perspectives and reported barriers to DPYD testing among U.S. oncologists}},
  author = {Sara Tohme and Ramzi G. Salloum and Jacqueline De La Cruz and Qing Lu and Kejin Dong and J. Kevin Hicks and D. Max Smith and David DeRemer and Pawel Mroz and Sony Tuteja and Larisa H. Cavallari},
  journal = {Frontiers in Oncology},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fonc.2026.1903512},
  url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.1903512/full},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Survey-based perspectives and reported barriers to DPYD testing among U.S. oncologists
AU  - Sara Tohme
AU  - Ramzi G. Salloum
AU  - Jacqueline De La Cruz
AU  - Qing Lu
AU  - Kejin Dong
AU  - J. Kevin Hicks
AU  - D. Max Smith
AU  - David DeRemer
AU  - Pawel Mroz
AU  - Sony Tuteja
AU  - Larisa H. Cavallari
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/13
JO  - Frontiers in Oncology
DO  - 10.3389/fonc.2026.1903512
UR  - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.1903512/full
AB  - Background: Patients with cancer with deleterious DPYD variants are at significantly increased risk for severe toxicity with standard fluoropyrimidine doses. Prior to recent guidelines recommending it, the uptake of pre-treatment DPYD testing in the United States has been low. We aimed to explore oncologists’ perceptions and barriers to DPYD testing adoption on a national level.  Materials and methods: Survey invitations were sent to U.S. oncologists listed in the American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile in April and May 2025. The surveys assessed physician knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of DPYD testing in clinics caring for patients with cancer in the United States. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate survey responses.  Results: Of 5,525 physicians invited to participate, 47 oncologists completed the survey (response rate: 0.85%). The majority (85%) indicated that DPYD testing could help them manage patients; however, only 34% reported routinely performing DPYD testing. Most physicians (77%) agreed that adequate resources were available to order DPYD testing. When directly asked, 36% indicated that limited laboratory access was a barrier. In open-ended responses, respondents identified insurance reimbursement concerns (21%) and prolonged turnaround time (19%) as additional barriers. Forty-three percent reported needing assistance interpreting results and applying them to drug selection and dosing. Webinars (25.5%) and self-paced online modules (21%) were the most preferred educational modalities.  Conclusion: Most respondents indicated that DPYD testing could help manage patients, yet concerns persist. While regulatory guidance is evolving, these preliminary findings from a small sample highlight the need for future research to characterize implementation barriers and inform policy development.  Implications for practice: Our findings highlight gaps in implementation that can inform targeted strategies to improve the integration of DPYD testing into oncology practice, with the potential to enhance patient safety and reduce fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity.
SN  - 2234-943X
ER  -