MD Anderson is considered one of the world's most respected medical centers. Their duty is exclusive to cancer patient care, research, education, and prevention (Reynolds pg. 323). Their mission is to end cancer by finding specific treatments for cancer patients. Their core values are integrity, caring, and discovery. The center is empathetic to others by being sensitive to the concern of the patients, communicates with others by creating an environment of trust and helps others identify and solve problems to enhance learning (About MD Anderson 2019). The Oncology Expert Advisor (OEA) was a learning system implemented using the IBM Watson cognitive computing program.

The learning system was supposed to read and learn from MD Anderson's database of research data, literature, and treatment options. This information helped the center to make suggestions to improve patient care. Additionally, OEA wanted to match cancer patients to appropriate clinical trials to give them the opportunity to fight their cancer. (Reynolds pg. 323). The center invested $62 million in this project, but it did not achieve its desired results according to the 48-page audit record. It stated that the center did not reach the development phase in the project and they did not reach out to the hospital systems to integrate the OEA program (System Audit Office 2016)

First, the pilot project focused on leukemia but because they did not see results, OEA decided to refocus the project on lung cancer. After they wanted to implement Watson Paths, which is a visualization tool system that aids doctors to match clinical diagnosis by integrating questions to acquire information and draw possible alternatives (New Atlas 2013). This tool was too complex because of its extensive technology to explain how Watson Paths came up with the conclusion.

Consequently, the audit report says that the clinical trial and drug-protocol data were outdated because the project team used the center's old electronic records system for the lung cancer project without integrating the current patients' data. Also, the project was supposed to be available to partner hospitals, but it never happened. The audit found cybersecurity problems and a lack of involvement from partner hospitals. As a result, the center couldn't test the technology outside the hospitals (Reynolds pg.323)

Current Situation

After the University of Texas system audit performed by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the $62 million outflow led to the closing of the project. According to health reporter Mary Chris Jaklevic, the $62 million in expenses were supposed to be shouldered by a single donor who didn't come through with the promised funds (Jaklevic). Despite the expenses and struggles of the OEA at MD Anderson, the program is not over yet as the Cancer Center is reportedly looking for a company to take over IBM's roles and restart the project (Mulcahey 2).

After the OEA was halted at MD Anderson, The data system was moved to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, where it was being "trained" (Mulcahey 1). Since then, OEA was installed in a couple of Cancer Centers in India and the newest one was installed in Jupiter Medical Center, Florida (Mulcahey 1). With faith from other Medical professionals outside MD Anderson, the tech has a future in Cancer research. MD Anderson's project management is the main reason why it failed (Shah).

The question:

What key learning did MD Anderson gain from this effort that may influence future efforts?