YouTube as a reliable source of information on antibody drug conjugates: A qualitative analysis.
Authors: Susan H. Karass, Rutvi Chahal, Navpreet Singh, Nikhil Kutheala, Mahnoor Sukaina, Suhana Preet Kaur, Nithya Krishnakumaran, Rahul Mishra, Atulya Aman Khosla, Rohit Singh, Tulika Garg, Shahid Sattar Ahmed, Karan Jatwani
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2024)

9050 Background: YouTube is an open-access source of information which can serve a platform for health information and misinformation. Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADC) are a novel therapy that utilizes monoclonal antibodies to target antigens expressed on cancer cells, thus delivering cytotoxic agents specifically to malignant cells and minimizing toxic effects on healthy cells. Our study sought to assess the quality and engagement parameters of the 100 most viewed videos on YouTube regarding ADCs. Methods: A YouTube search was conducted with the keywords “Antibody Drug Conjugate” and “cancer”. The videos were sorted by the highest number of views. Duplicates and videos not in the English language were excluded. A total of 100 videos were included in the final analysis. They were organized into three categories: academic, commercial, and media. Next, they were assessed for quality using two validated quality instruments, the DISCERN and PEMAT scoring systems. The number of views, comments, and likes were also evaluated. A Pearson correlation and descriptive statistics using R Studio v2002.12.0-353 was then used to generate data. Results: The total number of views on the videos on YouTube regarding ADC was 95,969 with a (median number of views of 723.5). The videos were categorized into 71% from academic sources, 28% from commercial, and 1% from media sources. The mean DISCERN sum was 41.13. The number of YouTube videos that were rated as poor or very poor were 44%, followed by 33% that was rated as fair, and only 23% were rated as good or excellent. 21% videos discussed risks and benefits, while only 6 % of the videos provided support in shared decision making. 63% of the videos stated the aims clearly. Based on the PEMAT score, 87% of videos made their purpose evident, 34% summarized the videos, and 31% explained how to use the medication. There was a significant positive correlation in number of likes on videos and DISCERN score (r 0.253, 95% CI 0.06-0.428, p 0.011), PEMAT understandability score (r 0.197, 95% CI 0.00063-0.379, p 0.0494), and PEMAT accountability (r 0.2, 95% CI 0.00368-0.381, p 0.0461). There was also a positive correlation between length of video and DISCERN score (r 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.49, p&lt;0.001), PEMAT understandability score (r 0.23, 95% CI 0.04-0.41, p 0.01), and PEMAT actionability score (r 0.4, 95% CI 0.31-0.62, p &lt;0.001). Conclusions: Our analysis revealed that the overall quality of videos was suboptimal, with the majority categorized as poor or fair. Important aspects such as risks, benefits and shared decision-making were inadequately addressed, indicating a potential gap in patient education and informed decision-making. Although longer videos have positive correlation, it would be impactful to keep the duration of the video shorter. Efforts to promote high-quality, patient-centered educational content on ADCs are needed to ensure access to reliable information to support treatment decisions.