Multidisciplinary care in the oncology setting: historical perspective and data from lung and gynecology multidisciplinary clinics

Physician cooperation in outpatient cancer care. An amplified secondary analysis of qualitative interview data

The importance of outpatient cancer care services is increasing due to the growing number of patients having or having had cancer. However, little is known about cooperation among physicians in outpatient settings. To understand what inter- and multidisciplinary care means in community settings, we conducted an amplified secondary analysis that combined qualitative interview data with 42 general practitioners (GPs), 21 oncologists and 21 urologists that mainly worked in medical practices in Germany. We compared their perspectives on cooperation relationships in cancer care. Our results indicate that all participants regarded cooperation as a prerequisite for good cancer care. Oncologists and urologists mainly reported cooperating for tumour-specific treatment tasks, while GPs' reasoning for cooperation was more patient-centred. While oncologists and urologists reported experiencing reciprocal communication with other physicians, GPs had to gather the information they needed. GPs seldom reported engaging in formal cooperation structures, while for specialists, participation in formal spaces of cooperation, such as tumour boards, facilitated a more frequent and informal discussion of patients, for instance on the phone. Further research should focus on ways to foster GPs' integration in cancer care and evaluate if this can be reached by incorporating GPs in formal cooperation structures such as tumour boards.

Multidisciplinary Gynecologic Oncology Clinic in Botswana: A Model for Multidisciplinary Oncology Care in Low- and Middle-Income Settings

Purpose

Cervical cancer is a major cause of mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and the most common cancer diagnosed in women in Botswana. Most women present with locally advanced disease, requiring chemotherapy and radiation. Care co-ordination requires input from a multidisciplinary team (MDT) to deliver appropriate, timely treatment. However, there are limited published examples of MDT implementation in LMICs.

Methods

In May 2015, a weekly MDT clinic for gynecologic cancer care was initiated at Botswana’s national referral facility. The MDT clinic served as a forum for discussion and coordination of patients with gynecologic cancer and consisted of a gynecologist, pathologist, medical oncologist, radiation oncologist, palliative care specialist, and nurse coordinator.

Results

Between May 2015 and December 2015, 135 patients were seen in the MDT clinic. The mean age of the patients was 49 years. Most (60%) of the patients were HIV positive. The most common diagnosis was cervical cancer (60%), followed by high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplastic lesions (12%) and vulvar cancer (11%). Only data up to September 2015 were assessed for treatment delays. It was found that only 38% of patients needed more than one visit for care coordination before treatment initiation. Among patients with cervical cancer, the median delay from date of biopsy to start of radiation treatment was 39 days (interquartile range, 34 to 57 days) for patients treated after MDT initiation, compared with 108 days (interquartile range, 71 to 147 days) for patients treated before MDT initiation (P < .001).

Conclusion

Implementation of MDT clinics in LMICs is feasible and can help reduce delays in treatment initiation, as demonstrated by a gynecologic MDT clinic in Botswana. Streamlining care through MDT clinics can enhance care coordination and improve clinical outcomes. This model can apply to cancer care in other LMICs.

Effectiveness of a thoracic multidisciplinary clinic in the treatment of stage III non-small-cell lung cancer

Introduction

The Institute of Medicine, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the European Society of Medical Oncology promote a multidisciplinary approach for the treatment of cancer. Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents a heterogeneous group of diseases necessitating coordination of care among medical, radiation, and surgical oncology. The optimal care of stage III NSCLC underscores the need for a multidisciplinary approach.

Methods

From tumor registry data, we identified all cases of stage III NSCLC seen at Lehigh Valley Health Network between March 2010 and March 2013. The care received by patients when seen in the thoracic multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) was compared with the care received when not seen in the thoracic MDC.

Results

All patients seen in the MDC, compared to <50% of patients seen outside the MDC, were evaluated by more than one physician prior to beginning the treatment. Time to initiate treatment was shorter in MDC patients than in non-MDC patients. Patients seen in the MDC had a greater concordance with clinical pathways. A greater percentage of patients seen in the thoracic MDC had pathologic staging of their mediastinum. Patients seen in the MDC were more likely to receive all of their care at Lehigh Valley Health Network.

Conclusion

Multidisciplinary care is essential in the treatment of patients with stage III NSCLC. Greater utilization of MDCs for this complex group of patients will result in more efficient coordination of care, pretreatment evaluation, and therapy, which in turn should translate to improve patients’ outcomes.

[Consensus statement for accreditation of multidisciplinary thyroid cancer units]

Thyroid cancer is the leading endocrine system tumor. Great advances have recently been made in understanding of the origin of these tumors and the molecular biology that makes them grow and proliferate, which have been associated to improvements in diagnostic procedures and increased availability of effective local and systemic treatments. All of the above makes thyroid cancer a paradigm of how different specialties should work together to achieve the greatest benefit for the patients. Coordination of all the procedures and patient flows should continue throughout diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up, and is essential for further optimization of resources and time. This manuscript was prepared at the request of the Working Group on Thyroid Cancer of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition, and is aimed to provide a consensus document on the definition, composition, requirements, structure, and operation of a multidisciplinary team for the comprehensive care of patients with thyroid cancer. For this purpose, we have included contributions by several professionals from different specialties with experience in thyroid cancer treatment at centers where multidisciplinary teams have been working for years, with the aim of developing a practical consensus applicable in clinical practice.

Improving access and timeliness of care for veterans with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A multidisciplinary team's approach

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

With the prevalence of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) nearly twice as high in veterans (6%) than general populations (3%), the noted problems of long waits and access to care in United States Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals across the country are pressing. We examined primary outcome measures of timeliness and access to care for our patients with HNSCC assessing a multidisciplinary team approach at our VA hospital.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

METHODS

Our patients newly diagnosed with HNSCC were identified from two 24-month periods: diagnosis before (group 1, 2005-2006) and after (group 2, 2008-2009) implementing our multidisciplinary team in 2007. No significant differences in age (P = .13) or disease stage (P = .18) occurred between groups. Primary and secondary outcomes (i.e., treatment modality, imaging, completion of treatment, survival) were compared.

RESULTS

Timeliness to care improved for all measures. Improvement was significant for times from consult placed to seen in clinic (27.5-16.5 days; P < 0.0001) and from positive biopsy reported to date of initiating definitive treatment (35-27 days; P = 0.04). Pretreatment consults to various services represented by the multidisciplinary team increased from one to four (P < 0.0001). Two-year mortality was approximately the same between group 1 (33%) and group 2 (36%) (P = 0.035). Five-year mortality was slightly better in group 2 (50%) versus group 1 (61%), although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Our veteran population with HNSCC had improved timeliness and access to care with our multidisciplinary approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 126:627-631, 2016.

Assessing the Development of Multidisciplinary Care: Experience of the National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program

PURPOSE

The National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) began in 2007 with a goal of expanding cancer research and delivering quality care in communities. The NCCCP Quality of Care (QoC) Subcommittee was charged with developing and improving the quality of multidisciplinary care. An assessment tool with nine key elements relevant to MDC structure and operations was developed.

METHODS

Fourteen NCCCP sites reported multidisciplinary care assessments for lung, breast, and colorectal cancer in June 2010, June 2011, and June 2012 using an online reporting tool. Each site evaluated their level of maturity (level 1 = no multidisciplinary care, level 5 = highly integrated multidisciplinary care) in nine elements integral to multidisciplinary care. Thematic analysis of open-ended qualitative responses was also conducted.

RESULTS

The proportion of sites that reported level 3 or greater on the assessment tool was tabulated at each time point. For all tumor types, sites that reached this level increased in six elements: case planning, clinical trials, integration of care coordination, physician engagement, quality improvement, and treatment team integration. Factors that enabled improvement included increasing organizational support, ensuring appropriate physician participation, increasing patient navigation, increasing participation in national quality initiatives, targeting genetics referrals, engaging primary care providers, and integrating clinical trial staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Maturation of multidisciplinary care reflected focused work of the NCCCP QoC Subcommittee. Working group efforts in patient navigation, genetics, and physician conditions of participation were evident in improved multidisciplinary care performance for three common malignancies. This work provides a blueprint for health systems that wish to incorporate prospective multidisciplinary care into their cancer programs.

Women seeking second opinion for symptomatic uterine leiomyoma: role of comprehensive fibroid center

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to describe our early experience with a comprehensive uterine fibroid center and report our results in women seeking a second opinion for management of symptomatic uterine leiomyoma.

METHODS

We performed a HIPAA-complaint, IRB-approved retrospective study of women seeking second opinion for management of uterine fibroids at our multidisciplinary fibroid treatment center in a tertiary care facility from July 2008 to August 2011. After a review of patients' history, physical examination, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, treatment options were discussed which included conservative management, uterine-preserving options, and hysterectomy. We performed Fisher's exact test for categorical variables between the cohort that did or did not undergo a uterine-preserving treatment. Differences were considered significant at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 205 patient study cohort was 43.8 years (SD 7.5). One hundred sixty-two (79.0%) patients had no prior therapy. Based on MRI, one or more fibroids were detected in 178/205 (86.8%), adenomyosis in 8/205 (3.9%), and a combination of fibroid and nonfibroid condition (i.e., adenomyosis, endometrial polyp) in 18/205 (8.8%). In those who desired to transition their care to our institution (n = 109), 85 patients underwent 90 interventions: 39 MRgFUS (magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound surgery), 14 UAE (uterine artery embolization), 25 myomectomies, 8 hysterectomies, 3 polypectomies, and 1 endometrial ablation. Five patients had two procedures. Intramural and subserosal fibroids were most commonly treated with MRgFUS followed by myomectomy and then UAE; in contrast, pedunculated fibroids were frequently managed with myomectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary fibroid evaluation may facilitate the increase use of less invasive options over hysterectomy for symptomatic fibroid treatment.

Impact of a single-day multidisciplinary clinic on the management of patients with liver tumours

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary cancer clinics may improve patient care. We examined how a single-day multidisciplinary liver clinic (mdlc) affected care recommendations for patients compared with the recommendations provided before presentation to the mdlc.

METHODS

We analyzed the demographic and clinicopathologic data of 343 patients assessed in the Johns Hopkins Liver Tumor Center from 2009 to 2012, comparing imaging and pathology interpretation, diagnosis, and management plan between the outside provider (osp) and the mdlc.

RESULTS

Most patients were white (n = 259, 76%); median age was 60 years; and 146 were women (43%). Outside providers referred 182 patients (53%); the rest were self-referred. Patients travelled median of 83.4 miles (interquartile range: 42.7-247 miles). Most had already undergone imaging (n = 338, 99%) and biopsy (n = 194, 57%) at the osp, and a formal management plan had been formulated for about half (n = 168, 49%). Alterations in the interpretation of imaging occurred for 49 patients (18%) and of biopsy for 14 patients (10%). Referral to the mdlc resulted in a change of diagnosis in 26 patients (8%), of management plan in 70 patients (42%), and of tumour resectability in 7 patients (5%). Roughly half the patients (n = 174, 51%) returned for a follow-up, and 154 of the returnees (89%) received treatment, primarily intraarterial therapy (n = 88, 57%), systemic chemotherapy (n = 60, 39%), or liver resection (n = 32, 21%). Enrollment in a clinical trial was proposed to 34 patients (10%), and 21 of the 34 (62%) were accrued.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient assessment by our multidisciplinary liver clinic had a significant impact on management, resulting in alterations to imaging and pathology interpretation, diagnosis, and management plan. The mdlc is an effective and convenient means of delivering expert opinion about the diagnosis and management of liver tumours.

Students meeting with caregivers of cancer patient: results of an experience-based learning project

The communication between medical students and cancer caregivers, and the problems they have experienced as well as the outcomes for their professional development before starting clinical practice was assessed in the context of a student research project. Data were collected by questionnaires or by 20 to 40-min long interviews with cancer caregivers. Their communications with physicians, hearing the bad news, and health service satisfaction were questioned. Therefore, the caregivers trusted the professional approach of their physician. However, they expected more empathic communication in the process of diagnosis and therapy. Development of empathy and trust-based communication between patients and physicians and enhancement of the quality of devoted time to cancer patients and caregivers may have an effect on the course of disease. Interviewer students mentioned that they developed communication skills about difficult clinical tasks and in delivering bad news face to face to cancer caregivers before starting their clinical education.

A rationale for multidisciplinary care in treating neuroendocrine tumours

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Disease heterogeneity and multisystem complications represent challenges to the diagnosis and management of neuroendocrine tumours (NET), with the disease often remaining undiagnosed for years after initial presentation. The purpose of this review is to assess the limitations of traditional care models and review the potential benefits of the multidisciplinary team approach in cancer treatment and to explore the potential usefulness of the multidisciplinary team approach for patients with NET.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article outlines important considerations for the multidisciplinary management of NET, offers a model for team structure and function and identifies skill sets of members that may augment patient care. We believe a multidisciplinary team should include three to four clinicians with extensive NET experience. A coordinating physician plays a crucial role by facilitating team cohesiveness and maintaining constant patient contact throughout the course of treatment. Our model emphasizes collaboration between members of the core team and can be extended to include interactions with community healthcare professionals and others.

SUMMARY

A multidisciplinary approach offers the best prospect for improving clinical outcomes and understanding the natural history of NET.