Examining the potential relationship between multidisciplinary cancer care and patient survival: an international literature review

Interdisciplinary management of skin cancer

The interdisciplinary treatment of skin cancer in the head and neck area requires close collaboration between different specialist disciplines. The most common non-melanoma skin cancer tumor entities are cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma as well as their precursor lesions. One of the less common tumors is Merkel cell carcinoma, which also occurs primarily in light-exposed areas and, in contrast to squamous and basal cell carcinoma, is more likely to metastasize. Due to the low tendency of basal cell carcinoma as well as cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma to metastasize, a cure can often be achieved by surgery. If the tumor growth exceeds certain levels it may require collaboration between dermatology and otorhinolaryngology. The primary goal of this interdisciplinary collaboration is to achieve a functional, cosmetically and aesthetically acceptable result in addition to adequate tumor treatment. Depending on the stage of the tumor and the clinical course, a case may be discussed in an interdisciplinary tumor board in order to determine a personalised, appropriate and adequate treatment concept for each patient, including prevention, therapy and follow-up.

Beauty Therapy to Support Psychosocial Recovery from Oncological Care: A Qualitative Research on the Lived Experience of Women with Breast Cancer Treated with Chemotherapy

During the oncological care path, breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy suffer from a number of psycho-physical changes, and appearance-related side effects are among the primary determinants of psychosocial impairment. Appropriate interventions are needed due to the fact that treatment-induced transformations have been associated with a decline in overall quality of life, interpersonal and sexual difficulties, and adverse effects on therapeutic adherence. In the framework of integrative oncology, beauty therapy is an affordable and straightforward intervention that could be used in the clinical management of breast cancer side effects. This study aims to comprehend the emotional and lived experiences of women undergoing chemotherapy after a brief beauty therapy intervention with licensed beauticians. The Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used as a methodological guideline. Sixteen women were purposefully recruited in a day hospital of a cancer unit, where the beauty therapy was implemented. At the end of the intervention, data were gathered using a semi-structured interview with open-ended questions. A thematic analysis was performed on verbatim transcriptions. Findings support the proposal of beauty therapy for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Assuming a relational viewpoint, beauty therapy could improve patients' feelings about themselves and the way they feel about others, even if they do not declare a specific interest in their outward appearance.

Drawing as a Way of Knowing: How a Mapping Model Assists Preoperative Evaluation of Patients with Thyroid Carcinoma

Background: Effective pre-surgical planning is crucial for achieving successful outcomes in endocrine surgery: it is essential to provide patients with a personalized plan to minimize operative and postoperative risks. Methods: Preoperative lymph node (LN) mapping is a structured high-resolution ultrasonography examination performed in the presence of two endocrinologists and the operating surgeon before intervention to produce a reliable "anatomical guide". Our aim was to propose a preoperative complete model that is non-invasive, avoids overdiagnosis of thyroid microcarcinomas, and reduces medical expenses. Results: The use of 'preoperative echography mapping' has been shown to be successful, particularly in patients with suspected or confirmed neoplastic malignancy. Regarding prognosis, positive outcomes have been observed both post-surgery and in terms of recurrence rates. We collected data on parameters such as biological sex, age, BMI, and results from cytologic tests performed with needle aspiration, and examined whether these parameters predict tumor malignancy or aggressiveness, calculated using a multivariate analysis (MVA). Conclusions: A standard multidisciplinary approach for evaluating neck lymph nodes pre-operation has proven to be an improved diagnostic and preoperative tool.

Multidisciplinary team meetings in Hematology: a national mixed-methods study

Multidisciplinary team meetings are a current international practice in cancer care, but to date, few data exist on the specificity of its practice in hematology.In this manuscript, we present the result of the first national study, realized with quantitative and qualitative methods in France, which brings new insights in order to improve the collegial decision-making process.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects, and a specific focus on hematological particularities is warranted to truly improve process.Background Understanding the Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) process in different medical specialties facilitates the identification of core factors supporting effective MDTM work. Our mixed-methods study explores the participants' perceptions of hematology MDTMs.Design Online questionnaires collected data concerning the decision-making process, benefits and inconveniences of MDTMs for both patients and professionals. Semi-directive phone interviews were conducted and analyzed, thereby supplying qualitative data.Results A total of 205 professionals responded to the questionnaire and 22 participated in the qualitative interviews. The data indicate the unique characteristics of hematology, including a specific definition of collegiality, the frequent solicitation of expert advice and the anticipation of treatment even prior to the occurrence of MDTMs. Additional information concerning patients' wishes and psychosocial conditions are also needed. Participants emphasize the subjective aspects and the impact of the climate of MDTMs on medical decisions.Conclusion Although MDTMs are recognized to be a valuable tool, organizational and relational issues may interfere with their efficiency.To improve the effectiveness of MDTMs, the needs to focus on complex cases, to enhance patient centeredness and teamwork are relevant aspects. A specific focus on hematological particularities might be warranted to truly improve the collegial decision-making process in the context of hematology.

Hospital practice variation in the proportion of patients with esophagogastric cancer discussed during an expert multidisciplinary team meeting

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) and especially MDTMs in which expert centres are involved (expert MDTMs) are a key element in adequate cancer care. However, variation among hospitals in the proportion of patients presented during an expert MDTM has been described. This study aims to investigate national practice variation in the proportion of patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer being discussed during an expert MDTM.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with oesophageal or gastric cancer in 2018-2019 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 6,921). Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to analyse the association between patient, and tumour characteristics, and the probability to be discussed in an expert MDTM. Variation was analysed according to the hospital and region of diagnosis for: all patients, patients with a potentially curable (cT1-4A cTX, any cN, cM0) or incurable tumour stage (cT4b and/or cM1).

RESULTS

In total, 79% of patients were discussed during an expert MDTM, of whom 84% (n = 3,424) and 71% (n = 2,018) with potentially curable, or incurable oesophageal or gastric cancer, respectively. The proportion of patients discussed during an expert MDTM ranged from 54% to 98%, and 17% to 100% between hospitals for potentially curable and incurable patients, respectively (all p < 0.0001). Adjusted analyses showed significant hospital (all p < 0.0001), but no regional variation regarding the patients discussed during an expert MDTM.

CONCLUSION

For patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer the probability of being discussed during an expert MDTM varies considerably according to the hospital of diagnosis.

Importance of interdisciplinarity in modern oncology: results of a national intergroup survey of the Young Oncologists United (YOU)

PURPOSE

Modern, personalized treatment concepts in oncology require an interdisciplinary and multiprofessional collaboration. In addition to its relevance in patient care, interdisciplinary collaboration is also becoming increasingly important in clinical research as well as medical education and resident training in oncology.

METHODS

Between November 2021 and March 2022, an online survey was conducted among German early career research groups, represented by Young Oncologists United (YOU). The aim was to identify the status and need for interdisciplinarity at clinic, educational, and research levels.

RESULTS

A total of 294 participants completed the questionnaire in full. 90.7% of the respondents fully or predominantly agreed with the statement that interdisciplinary work plays a major role in their daily clinical work. 78.9% wished for more interdisciplinary collaboration. Of the 49.7% of participants who have never participated in an interdisciplinary research project, 80.1% said they would like to participate in such a study project in the future. Lack of time resources, too much organizational effort, and possible political conflicts between institutions were identified as factors that make practical implementation difficult. 74.1% declared their willingness to become active in an oncology early career research group.

CONCLUSION

Interdisciplinary collaboration has become increasingly important in oncology. Networks that span different disciplines could help to promote interdisciplinary research projects among young scientists and improve exchange in professional practice and education with the implication of improved patient care.

Impact of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings on Decision Making in Vascular Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

This cohort study aimed to prospectively determine the impact of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs) on treatment plans in vascular patients.

METHODS

The weekly MDT at the institution consisted of a structured discussion of vascular cases in the presence of at least one representative of each specialty from vascular surgery, angiology, and interventional radiology. Participants were asked to examine the cases entered on the digital MDT platform and to fill in forms with a detailed open text treatment recommendation for each patient. Individual recommendations were compared with the final MDT decision, which was based on a shared decision after discussion of clinical and radiological data. The primary endpoint was the agreement rate. The rate of decision implementation was determined to verify the adherence to MDT recommendations.

RESULTS

Four hundred consecutive case discussions in 367 patients between November 2019 and March 2021 were included, excluding patients needing urgent treatment, yielding MDT discussion in 88.5% of carotid artery cases, 83% of aorto-iliac cases, and 51.7% of peripheral arterial cases, which included 56.9% of the chronic limb threatening ischaemia cases. The overall average agreement rate was 71% ± 41%. Analysis according to the specialty of the attending physician showed agreement rates of 82% ± 30% for senior vascular surgeons, 62% ± 44% for junior vascular surgeons, 71% ± 43% for interventional radiologists, 58% ± 50% for angiologists (p < .001), and 75% ± 38% considering only senior practitioners. The inter-rater agreement, resulted in kappa coefficients of 0.60 - 0.68 for senior vascular surgeons, 0.29 - 0.31 for junior vascular surgeons, 0.39 - 0.52 for interventional radiologists, and 0.25 for angiologists. The MDT treatment decision was implemented in 353 (96.2%) cases.

CONCLUSION

The impact of MDT discussion on treatment recommendations and the adherence to MDT recommendations were significant and in line with results reported from other specialties.

The Impact of the Pathologist in Multidisciplinary Cancer Conferences on Patient Care

OBJECTIVES

Multidisciplinary cancer conferences (MCCs) are important tools in the treatment of patients with complex health issues, helping clinicians achieve optimal outcomes in oncological practice. To explore the role of pathologists at MCCs, we conducted a review of prior research on this topic.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for English-language qualitative, quantitative, or multiple/mixed methods studies on the role and impact of pathologists on MCCs. We used Microsoft Excel to extract data.

RESULTS

Of 76 research results, we included only 3 studies that involved review of cancer cases by pathologists for MCCs. All 3 studies showed that expert pathology review improved the accuracy of diagnosis and refined disease staging, leading to changes in the management of melanoma, breast cancer, and gynecologic cancer. No studies explored the barriers to pathologists participating in MCCs or the strategies or interventions employed to promote or support pathologist involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a paucity of studies on the role of pathologists in MCCs. Given the positive impact of MCCs involving pathologists on the accuracy of diagnosis and optimization of treatment, future research is warranted to further establish the role and impact of pathologists in MCCs and how to promote or support pathologists' involvement.

Impact of Merging Into a Comprehensive Cancer Center on Health Care Teams and Subsequent Team-Member and Patient Experiences

PURPOSE

Comprehensive health care centers are increasingly popular as they offer inclusive health care services under one roof. Often, these centers are formed by merging previously separate clinics. However, there is a lack of systematic guidance on the interprofessional, and interteam and intrateam dynamics that may develop during such an organizational change process. Using team process literature, we identify a possible model to explain how merging into a comprehensive cancer center (CCC) might influence health care teams and their subsequent outcomes, including patient experience.

METHODS

We used a mixed-method research design. Qualitative data were collected via semistructured interviews from 20 health care professionals employed at a recently merged CCC. During the time frame the interviews were collected, quantitative data were collected from 50 patients receiving treatment at the cancer center through anonymous paper-pencil surveys. Qualitative interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis, on the basis of the input-process-output team dynamics framework. Descriptive statistics were calculated for patient experience data. Trends between data collections were identified.

RESULTS

On the basis of our qualitative analysis, we provide an input-process-output framework that documents positive and negative aspects of interteam and intrateam dynamics associated with the merger process. Additionally, a number of connections were found between health care professional perceptions and quality patient experiences (eg, merger impacts on interteam and patient communication).

CONCLUSION

Our findings and model may assist in future merging efforts. Future CCCs may use the proposed framework to better understand and visualize their postmerger progress, in particular from the aspects of interprofessional, and interteam and intrateam dynamics.

Multidisciplinary Tumor Board in the Management of Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Single-Center Review of 847 Patients

There is still debate over how reviewing oncological histories and addressing appropriate therapies in multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions may affect patients’ overall survival (OS). The aim of this study was to describe MDT outcomes for a single cancer center’s patients affected by colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). From 2010 to 2020, a total of 847 patients with CRLMs were discussed at our weekly MDT meeting. Patients’ characteristics and MDT decisions were analyzed in two groups: patients receiving systemic therapy (ST) versus patients receiving locoregional treatment (LRT). Propensity-score matching (PSM) was run to reduce the risk of selection bias. The median time from MDT indication to treatment was 27 (IQR 13−51) days. The median OS was 30 (95%CI = 27−34) months. After PSM, OS for patients undergoing LRT was 51 (95%CI = 36−64) months compared with 15 (95%CI = 13−20) months for ST patients (p < 0.0001). In this large retrospective study, the MDT discussions were useful in providing the patients with all available locoregional options.

The Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival in Patients with Advanced Adrenocortical Cancer Is Increased after the Multidisciplinary Team Evaluation

We aimed to evaluate the role of adrenal multidisciplinary team evaluation (MTE) in affecting the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). We included in a retrospective monocentric study 47 patients with ACC. We divided our cohort into group 1 (without adrenal-MTE discussion, ACC diagnosis from 2004 to 2012, n = 14) and group 2 (diagnosis and beginning of treatments after 2013, all discussed in the adrenal MTE, n = 33). OS was defined by the survival between the first and the last visit, while PFS as the time from the first visit to the progression of the disease. Kaplan−Meier curves were used to compare OS and PFS between Group 1 and Group 2. Group 1stages III−IV (n = 10) presented a shorter median OS than Group 2stages III−IV (25 patients, 4 vs. 31 months, p = 0.023). Likewise, the median PFS was lower in Group 1 as compared to Group 2 (2.9 vs. 17.2 months, p < 0.001). The gain in PFS (6 months) was also confirmed in stage III-IV patients (2.9 vs. 8.7 months, respectively, for Group 1 and Group 2, p = 0.02). Group 1 presented a median PFS of 4 months, while the median PFS of Group 2 was 14.7 months (p = 0.128). In conclusion, we found a significant gain in terms of survival in patients after the MTE discussion in 2013. Therefore, ACC patients should be referred to a tertiary center, ideally from the time of diagnosis, to promptly apply all available treatments, according to the single patient’s clinical history and based on multidisciplinary management.

Virtual Tumor Board Increases Provider Attendance and Case Presentations

PURPOSE:

Many cancer centers engage in multidisciplinary tumor board meetings to determine the optimal approach to complex cancer care. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many institutions changed the format of these meetings from in-person to virtual. The aim of this study was to determine if the change to a virtual meeting format had an impact on attendance and cases presented.

METHODS:

Tumor board records were analyzed to obtain attendance and case presentation information at a National Cancer Institute–designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Twelve-month in-person tumor board data were compared with 12-month virtual tumor board data to assess for difference in attendance and case presentation patterns.

RESULTS:

Seven separate weekly tumor board meetings at the beginning of the study (breast, GI, gynecology, liver, lung, melanoma, and urology) were expanded to nine meetings on the virtual platform (+endocrine and pancreas). Overall attendance increased by 46% on the virtual platform compared with in-person meetings (4,030 virtual attendances v 2,753 in-person, P < .001). Increased attendance was present across all specialties on the virtual platform. In addition, the number of patient cases discussed increased from 2,127 in in-person meeting to 2,656 on the virtual platform (a 20% increase, P < .001).

CONCLUSION:

A significant increase was observed in overall tumor board attendance and in case presentations per meeting, requiring the expansion of additional weekly meetings. Furthermore, in a major cancer center with multiple community affiliates, virtual tumor boards may encourage increased participation from remote sites with the benefit of obtaining expert specialist advice as compared with geographically challenging in-person meetings.

Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: impact of logistical challenges on communication and decision-making

Background

Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are widely used in cancer care. Recent research points to logistical challenges impeding MDT decision-making and dissatisfaction among members. This study sought to identify different types of logistical issues and how they impacted team processes.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional observational study. Three cancer MDTs (breast, colorectal, and gynaecological) were recruited from UK hospitals. Validated observational instruments were used to measure decision-making (Metrics of Observational Decision-making, MDT-MODe), communication (Bales' Interaction Process Analysis, Bales' IPA), and case complexity (Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC), including logistical challenges (Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC), across 822 case discussions from 30 videoed meetings. Descriptive analysis and paired samples t tests were used to identify and compare frequency of different types of logistical challenges, along with partial correlations, controlling for clinical complexity of cases, to understand how such issues related to the MDT decision-making and communication.

Results

A significantly higher frequency of administrative and process issues (affecting 30 per cent of cases) was seen compared with the frequency of equipment issues (affecting 5 per cent of cases; P < 0.001) and the frequency of the attendance issues (affecting 16 per cent of cases; P < 0.001). The frequency of the attendance issues was significantly higher than the frequency of equipment issues (P < 0.001). Partial correlation analysis revealed that administrative and process issues, including attendance, were negatively correlated with quality of information (r = −0.15, P < 0.001; r = −0.11, P < 0.001), and equipment issues with the quality of contribution to meeting discussion (r = −0.14, P < 0.001). More questioning and answering by MDT members was evident with the administrative and process issues (r = 0.21, P < 0.001; r = 0.19, P < 0.001). Some differences were observed in teams' socioemotional reactions to the administrative and process issues with the gynaecological MDT showing positive correlation with positive socioemotional reactions (r = 0.20, P < 0.001), and the breast cancer MDT with negative socioemotional reactions (r = 0.17, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Administrative and process issues were the most frequent logistical challenges for the studied teams. Where diagnostic results were unavailable, and inadequate patient details provided, the quality of decision-making was reduced.

Quality and efficacy of Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) quality assessment tools and discussion checklists: a systematic review

Background

MDT discussion is the gold standard for cancer care in the UK. With the incidence of cancer on the rise, demand for MDT discussion is increasing. The need for efficiency, whilst maintaining high standards, is therefore clear. Paper-based MDT quality assessment tools and discussion checklists may represent a practical method of monitoring and improving MDT practice. This reviews aims to describe and appraise these tools, as well as consider their value to quality improvement.

Methods

Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo were searched using pre-defined terms. The PRISMA model was followed throughout. Studies were included if they described the development of a relevant tool, or if an element of the methodology further informed tool quality assessment. To investigate efficacy, studies using a tool as a method of quality improvement in MDT practice were also included. Study quality was appraised using the COSMIN risk of bias checklist or the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, depending on study type.

Results

The search returned 7930 results. 18 studies were included. In total 7 tools were identified. Overall, methodological quality in tool development was adequate to very good for assessed aspects of validity and reliability. Clinician feedback was positive. In one study, the introduction of a discussion checklist improved MDT ability to reach a decision from 82.2 to 92.7%. Improvement was also noted in the quality of information presented and the quality of teamwork.

Conclusions

Several tools for assessment and guidance of MDTs are available. Although limited, current evidence indicates sufficient rigour in their development and their potential for quality improvement.

Trial registration

PROSPERO ID: CRD42021234326.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09369-8.

A Web-Based Self-assessment Model for Evaluating Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams in Spain: Development and Validation Pilot Study

Background

Tumor boards constitute the main consensus and clinical decision–making body of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in cancer care. With the increasing clinical complexity of treatment options (eg, targeted therapies, multimodal treatments) and the progressive incorporation of new areas of intervention (eg, survivorship care), tumor boards are now required to play a central role in all cancer processes. However, although frameworks are in place to evaluate MDT quality, only few web-based tools are available for this purpose; indeed, no web-based MDT evaluation tools have been developed for or adapted to the Spanish National Health System.

Objective

The first aim of this study was to develop a web-based self-assessment model (Autoevaluación de Equipos Multidisciplinares de Atención al Cáncer [AEMAC]) for evaluating multidisciplinary cancer teams in Spain and the second aim was to validate this tool by testing its metric properties, acceptability, and usability.

Methods

We designed and validated the AEMAC program in 3 stages. In the first stage (research), we reviewed the available scientific evidence and performed a qualitative case study of good practice in multidisciplinary care within the Spanish National Health System (n=4 centers and 28 health care professionals). The results were used to define the thematic areas and quality criteria for the self-evaluation model, which were then discussed and validated by a group of experts. The second stage (development) involved the technological development of a web app that would be accessible from any mobile device. In the third stage (piloting and validation), we conducted 4 pilot tests (n=15 tumor boards, 243 professionals) and used the results to analyze the acceptability and usefulness of the tool.

Results

We designed a self-assessment model based on 5 thematic areas encompassing a total of 25 quality components, which users rated on a 3-option development scale. The evaluation process, which was managed entirely from the web app, consisted of individual self-assessment, group prioritization, and creation of an improvement plan. Cronbach alpha (.86), McDonald’s omega (0.88), and various fit indices (comparative fit index between 0.95 and 1 and goodness-of-fit index between 0.97 and 0.99 for all 5 aspects) confirmed internal consistency. The mean rating for overall satisfaction with the tool and for consistency between the content of the tool and the reality of tumor boards was 7.6 out of 10.

Conclusions

The results obtained during the period of research and piloting of the AEMAC program showed that it has an appropriate structure and metric properties and could therefore be implemented in a real context and generalized to other hospitals. As a virtual tool, it helps to measure the key aspects of MDT quality, such as effectiveness of collaboration and communication, leadership, and the organizational environment.

Optimising the quality of multidisciplinary team meetings: A narrative review

Background

Understanding of factors that contribute to implementation of effective cancer multidisciplinary team meetings (MDMs) is still limited. Published literature on the effect of teamwork function, leadership roles, decision‐making processes and structural components on the quality of MDMs was reviewed and synthesised.

Methods

In this paper, a MEDLINE review (September 2020) was performed to assess clinical decision‐making in the context of MDM discussions.

Results

Twenty‐nine eligible studies were included. Six studies addressed the infrastructural aspects of MDMs. Nine studies used either qualitative or mixed method approach to develop and validate observational tools to assess the quality of MDMs. Seven studies used qualitative approaches to explore the opinions of MDM members on factors that impact on the effectiveness of MDMs. Five studies used validated observational tools to observe and assess the effectiveness of MDMs. One prospective study explored the relationship between quality of information presented at MDMs and ability of MDM members to make clinical decisions. The final study prospectively tested the ability of a multicomponent intervention to improve decision‐making processes within MDMs.

Conclusions

A broad range of factors including teamwork, leadership, case complexity, decision‐making processes and availability of patient information were identified to impact the quality of MDMs. Evidence currently available largely focuses on the development of tools to identify factors in need of improvement to optimise MDMs. Robust research is required to identify the factors that are demonstrated to enhance MDM quality which can then aid the standardisation of how MDMs are conducted.

Current Surgical Management Strategies for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancer diagnoses in the world. At least half of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will develop metastatic disease, with most being identified in the liver. Surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is potentially curative. Surgical resection of CRLM, however, remains underutilized despite the continued expansion of operative strategies available. This is likely due to differing views on resectability. Resectability is a surgical assessment, and the classification of CRLM as unresectable should only be made by an experienced hepatobiliary surgeon. Obtaining a surgical evaluation at the time of liver metastasis discovery may help mitigate the challenge of assessing resectability and the determination of potential operative time windows within current multimodal management strategies. The aim of this review is to help facilitate discussions surrounding resectability as well as the timing and sequencing of both surgical and non-surgical therapies.

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer diagnosis in the world, and the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths. Despite significant progress in management strategies for colorectal cancer over the last several decades, metastatic disease remains difficult to treat and is often considered incurable. However, for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), surgical resection offers the best opportunity for survival, can be curative, and remains the gold standard. Unfortunately, surgical treatment options are underutilized. Misperceptions regarding resectable and unresectable CRLM likely play a role in this. The assessment of factors that impact resectability status like medical fitness, technical considerations, and disease biology can be difficult, necessitating careful multidisciplinary input and discussion. The identification of ideal operative time windows that align with the multimodal management of these patients can also be perplexing. For all patients with CRLM it may therefore be advantageous to obtain surgical evaluation at the time of discovering liver metastases to mitigate these challenges and minimize the risk of undertreatment. In this review we summarize current surgical management strategies for CRLM and discuss factors to be considered when determining resectability.

The complexities, coordination, culture and capacities that characterise the delivery of oncology services in the common areas of ambulatory settings

Background

Relatively little is understood about real-world provision of oncology care in ambulatory outpatient clinics (OPCs). This study aimed to: 1) develop an understanding of behaviours and practices inherent in the delivery of cancer services in OPC common areas by characterising the organisation and implementation of this care; and 2) identify barriers to, and facilitators of, the delivery of this care in OPC common areas.

Methods

A purpose-designed ethnographic study was employed in four public hospital OPCs. Informal field scoping activities were followed by in-situ observations, key informant interviews and document review. A view of OPCs as complex adaptive systems was used as a scaffold for the data collection and interpretation, with the intent of understanding ‘work as done’. Data were analysed using an adapted “Qualitative Rapid Appraisal, Rigorous Analysis” approach.

Results

Field observations were conducted over 135 h, interviews over 6.5 h and documents were reviewed. Analysis found six themes. Staff working in OPCs see themselves as part of small local teams and as part of a broader multidisciplinary care team. Professional role boundaries could be unclear in practice, as duties expanded to meet demand or to stop patients “falling through the cracks.” Formal care processes in OPCs were supported by relationships, social capital and informal, but invaluable, institutional expertise. Features of the clinic layout, such as the proximity of departments, affected professional interactions. Staff were aware of inter- and intra-service communication difficulties and employed strategies to minimise negative impacts on patients. We found that complexity, coordination, culture and capacity underpin the themes that characterise this care provision.

Conclusions

The study advances understanding of how multidisciplinary care is delivered in ambulatory settings and the factors which promote or inhibit effective care practice. Time pressures, communication challenges and competing priorities can pose barriers to care delivery. OPC care is facilitated by: self-organisation of participants; professional acumen; institutional knowledge; social ties and relationships between and within professional groups; and commitment to patient-centred care. An understanding of the realities of ‘work-as-done’ may help OPCs to sustain high-quality care in the face of escalating service demand.

The Effects of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings on Clinical Practice for Colorectal, Lung, Prostate and Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

Multidisciplinary team meetings have increasingly been implemented in cancer care worldwide to ensure timely, accurate and evidence-based diagnosis, and treatment plans. Nowadays, multidisciplinary team meetings are generally considered indispensable. However, they are considered time-consuming and expensive, while the effects of multidisciplinary team meetings are not yet fully understood. The aim of this systematic review is to update and summarize the literature and create an overview of the existing knowledge. Cancer types such as colorectal, lung, prostate and breast cancer with rapidly increasing incidence rates will inevitably impact the workload of clinicians. Understanding the effects of the widely implemented multidisciplinary team meetings in oncology care is fundamental in order to optimize care pathways and allocate resources in the rapidly diversifying landscape of cancer therapies.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our systematic review is to identify the effects of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) for lung, breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. Methods: Our systematic review, performed following PRISMA guidelines, included studies examining the impact of MDTMs on treatment decisions, patient and process outcomes. Electronic databases PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for articles published between 2000 and 2020. Risk of bias and level of evidence were assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and GRADE scale. Results: 41 of 13,246 articles were selected, evaluating colorectal (21), lung (10), prostate (6) and breast (4) cancer. Results showed that management plans were changed in 1.6–58% of cases after MDTMs. Studies reported a significant impact of MDTMs on surgery type, and a reduction of overall performed surgery after MDTM. Results also suggest that CT and MRI imaging significantly increased after MDTM implementation. Survival rate increased significantly with MDTM discussions according to twelve studies, yet three studies did not show significant differences. Conclusions: Despite heterogeneous data, MDTMs showed a significant impact on management plans, process outcomes and patient outcomes. To further explore the impact of MDTMs on the quality of healthcare, high-quality research is needed.

The impact of incomplete registration on survival rate of children with very rare tumors

Pediatric very rare tumors (VRTs) represent a heterogeneous subset of childhood cancers, with reliable survival estimates depending dramatically on each (un)registered case. The current study aimed to evaluate the number of VRTs among Lithuanian children, to assess the impact of the registration status on survival rates and to track changes in treatment outcomes over the 16-year study period. We performed a population-based retrospective study across children below 18 years old diagnosed with VRTs in Lithuania between the years 2000 and 2015. The identified cases were cross-checked with the Lithuanian Cancer Registry—a population-based epidemiology cancer registry—for the fact of registration and survival status. The overall survival was calculated in relation to the registration status and treatment period. Thirty-seven children with VRTs were identified within the defined time frame. Six of them (16.2%) were not reported to the Lithuanian Cancer Registry at diagnosis. The probability of overall survival at 5 years (OS_5y) differed significantly between the registered (n = 31) and unregistered (n = 6) cohorts: 51.6% versus 100%, respectively (p = 0.049). A 5-year survival estimate for children diagnosed with a VRT at the age of 0–14 years differed by 10 percentage points according to the registration completeness: 52.1% calculated for the entire cohort versus 42.1% for registered patients only. The OS_5y has not improved over the analyzed period: 61.1% in 2000–2007 versus 57.9% in 2008–2015 (p = 0.805). The survival continued to decline beyond 5 years post-diagnosis due to late cancer-related adverse events: 59.5% of patients were alive at 5 years as compared to 44.3% at 10 years. The OS_5y of children affected by VRT was lower than in more common childhood cancers. The survival rate of the unregistered patients may lead to misinterpretation of treatment outcomes. Meticulous registration of VRTs is crucial for correct evaluation of treatment outcomes, especially across small countries with few cases.

A multidisciplinary approach to the management of adrenal incidentaloma

An adrenal incidentaloma (AI) is an adrenal neoplasm incidentally discovered during an imaging unrelated to suspected adrenal disease. The aim of the present review is to offer practical guidance on the multidisciplinary approach of AIs.Areas covered:The prevalence of AI is high in the aging population (up to 5-8%); however, hormonally active or malignant conditions are rare. After the discovery of an AI, it is suggested to assess in parallel if the mass is potentially malignant and functionally active. The answer to the former question is mainly based on medical history (extra-adrenal malignancies, new-onset of signs or symptoms) and imaging (conventional radiology and/or nuclear medicine). The answer to the latter question is a complete endocrine evaluation of both cortical (glucocorticoids, mineralocorticoids) and medullary (catecholamines) secretion.Expert opinion:A multidisciplinary discussion is suggested for patients with adrenal disease, after the exclusion of nonfunctioning benign cortical adenoma, in order to plan a close and tailored follow-up for the suspected malignant or functioning forms. Surgery is advised for patients with malignant disease (adrenocortical cancer) or with clinically relevant secreting neoplasm (primary aldosteronism, Cushing's syndrome, and pheochromocytoma).

Effect of multidisciplinary team care on survival of oesophageal cancer patients: a retrospective nationwide cohort study

Oesophageal cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. This nationwide study analyses the survival results of oesophageal cancer under multidisciplinary team (MDT) care. We enrolled oesophageal cancer patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with follow-up for at least 1 year. This study performed propensity score matching with a ratio of 1:1 between MDT participants and non-MDT participants. We performed conditional Cox proportional hazards model to research relative risk of survival and associated factors of survival. The adjusted survival curves were plotted. 8184 newly diagnosed oesophageal cancer patients were included. The favourable survival factors include participant status of MDT, gender, monthly salary, urbanization level, other catastrophic illness, stage of cancer, treatment methods, and service volume of physicians (P < 0.05). MDT participants showed lower risk of death (HR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.67–0.79). Further stratification analysis revealed that the incorporation of an MDT reduced the death risk of patients with stages 2, 3, and 4 cancer, with the greatest reduction observed in patients with stage 3 cancer (HR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.67–0.79). The risk of death was lower for oesophageal cancer patients who enrolled in MDT care.

A systematic review of colorectal multidisciplinary team meetings: an international comparison

Background

Colorectal multidisciplinary teams (CR MDTs) were introduced to enhance the cancer care pathway and allow for early investigation and treatment of cancer. However, there are no ‘gold standards’ set for this process. The aim of this study was to review the literature systematically and provide a qualitative analysis on the principles, organization, structure and output of CR MDTs internationally.

Methods

Literature on the role of CR MDTs published between January 1999 and March 2020 in the UK, USA and continental Europe was evaluated. Historical background, structure, core members, education, frequency, patient-selection criteria, quality assurance, clinical output and outcomes were extracted from data from the UK, USA and continental Europe.

Results

Forty-eight studies were identified that specifically met the inclusion criteria. The majority of hospitals held CR MDTs at least fortnightly in the UK and Europe by 2002 and 2005 respectively. In the USA, monthly MDTs became a mandatory element of cancer programmes by 2013. In the UK, USA and in several European countries, the lead of the MDT meeting is a surgeon and core members include the oncologist, specialist nurse, histopathologist, radiologist and gastroenterologist. There were differences observed in patient-selection criteria, in the use of information technology, MDT databases and quality assurance internationally.

Conclusion

CR MDTs are essential in improving the patient care pathway and should express clear recommendations for each patient. However, a form of quality assurance should be implemented across all MDTs.

Thyroid Cancer Patients' View of Clinician Professionalism and Multidisciplinary Approach to Their Management

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to query thyroid cancer patients about 1) both the characteristics of the healthcare facilities where they were treated and the healthcare professionals that provided that treatment, as well as 2) the multidisciplinary approach used in the treatment process.

METHODS

Using a web-based survey, patients were asked to give their opinion of the healthcare centers, the professionalism of their team of specialists, and the thyroid cancer multidisciplinary teams (MDT).

RESULTS

For the 485 patients that responded, the most highly rated aspect of healthcare centers was the reduced waiting time between diagnosis and surgical intervention, an opinion expressed by 62.7% of patients. The most appreciated aspect of professionalism was the kindness shown toward patients by healthcare staff (66.6%). About 44.3% of patients were aware of the existence of thyroid cancer MDT. Most of respondents (82.7%) agreed that patients' opinions should be considered by their physicians when making treatment decisions.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that most patients with thyroid cancer appreciate therapeutic efficacy and kindness, and almost all are clearly in favor of using a multidisciplinary approach to their disease. Since such patients often demand to participate in the decision-making process, multidisciplinary teams should make every effort to share information with, and to integrate the opinion of, patients in the management of their thyroid disease.

Implementation of a regional video multidisciplinary team meeting is associated with an improved prognosis for patients with oesophageal cancer A mixed methods approach

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) improve diagnostic work-up and treatment-decisions. This study aims to evaluate the influence of implementing a regional-video-Upper-GI-MDTM (uMDTM) for oesophageal cancer (OC) on the number of patients discussed, treatment-decisions, perspectives of involved clinicians and overall survival (OS) in the Eindhoven Upper-GI Network consisting of 1 resection hospital and 5 referring hospitals.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2018, patients diagnosed with OC within this region, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry(n = 1119). From 2014, an uMDTM was gradually implemented and a mixed-method quantitative and qualitative design was used to analyse changes. Quantitative outcomes were described before and after implementation of the uMDTM. Clinicians were interviewed to assess their perspectives regarding the uMDTM.

RESULTS

After participation in the uMDTM more patients were discussed in an MDTM (80%-89%,p < 0.0001) and involvement of a resection centre during the uMDTM increased (43%-82%,p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients diagnosed with potentially curable OC (cT1-4a-x, any cN, cM0) remained stable (59%-61%, p = 0.452). Endoscopic or surgical resections were performed more often (28%-34%,p = 0.034) and the use of best supportive care decreased (21%-15%,p = 0.018). In the qualitative part an improved knowledge, collaboration and discussion was perceived due to implementation of the uMDTM. Three-year OS for all OC patients increased after the implementation of the uMDTM (24%-30%,p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a regional Upper-GI MDTM was associated with an increase in patients discussed with a resection centre, more curative resections and a better OS. It remains to be elucidated which factors in the clinical pathway explain this observed improved survival.

The Growth of Integrated Care Models in Urology

With heightened awareness of health care outcomes and efficiencies and reimbursement-based metrics, it is ever more important that urologists consider the effects of integrated care models on physicians/staff/clinics fulfillment and patient outcomes, and whether and how to optimally implement these models within their unique practice settings. Despite growing evidence that integrating care improves outcomes, uncertainty persists regarding which approach is most efficient and achievable in terms of specialty considerations and financial resources. In this article, we discuss strategies for integrating urologic care and its impact on current and future health care delivery.

Outcomes following major resection for colorectal cancer in patients aged 65+ years: a population-based study in Queensland, Australia

BACKGROUND

The risk of developing colorectal cancer (CRC) increases with increasing age. As surgery is the primary treatment for CRC, our aim was to examine outcomes following major resection for CRC in a cohort of individuals aged ≥65 years.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective study included 18 339 patients aged ≥65 years diagnosed with CRC from 2007 to 2016. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with the likelihood of having major resection, 30-day mortality and laparoscopic surgical procedure. Cox proportional hazards was used to examine factors associated with risk of death at 2 years post-surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, 77.8% (n = 14 274) of patients had a major resection. Males and patients ≥75 years were significantly less likely to have a major resection (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Thirty-day mortality was 3.1% and 2-year overall survival was 78.7%. After adjustment, factors such as increasing age (≥75 years), ≥2 comorbidities, emergency admission, open surgical procedure and treatment in a public hospital were all independently and significantly associated with poorer outcomes. The likelihood a patient had a laparoscopic procedure was significantly lower for those from a disadvantaged area (P < 0.001), emergency admission (P < 0.001) as well as for those treated in a public versus private hospital (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-operative mortality increased, and 2-year survival decreased after age 75 years. The finding of significantly lower rates of laparoscopic surgery for patients from disadvantaged areas and those treated in a public hospital requires further investigation.

Do Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Discussions Correlate With Increase in 5-Year Survival? A Meta-Analysis Study

Introduction

Due to the complex nature of cancer cases, it is imperative that the involved healthcare providers coordinate the patients care plan in union to reach the best possible outcome in the smoothest and fastest manner. This is what multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) meetings strive to achieve. Conducting regular MTB meetings requires significant investment of time and finances. It is thus vital to assess the empirical benefits of such practice.

Methods

A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of MTB meetings on patient 5-year survival. Relevant studies were identified by searching Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases from January 1995 to July 2019. Studies were included if they assessed 5-year survival in cases discussed in MTB meetings and used a comparison group and/or a pretest and posttest design.

Results

Five articles met the study's inclusion criteria. Quality of studies was affected by selection bias and the use of historic cohorts. The results showed significantly improved 5-year survival in the MTB group compared with the non-MTB groups (odds ratio for 5-year death rate of 0.59, CI 0.45-0.78, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that cancer MTB meetings have a significant impact on patients' 5-year survival. This could be because of several reasons, such as less time to treatment initiation, better adherence to guidelines, higher numbers of investigational imaging, lesser surgical complications, and recurrence rates. Future prospective studies are needed to further delineate reasons for improvement of outcome to enhance the benefits of this approach.

Impact of Treatment Coordination on Overall Survival in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer treatment is often multimodal, comprising of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. However, the impact of coordination between these modalities is currently unknown. We aimed to assess whether delivery of nonsurgical therapy within same facility as surgery impacts survival in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

A patient cohort with rectal cancer stages II to IV who received multimodal treatment between 2004 and 2016 from National Cancer Database was retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into three groups: (A) surgery + chemotherapy + radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 2); (B) surgery + chemotherapy or radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 1); or (C) only surgery at reporting facility (chemotherapy + radiotherapy elsewhere; surgery + 0). The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional-hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 44,716 patients (16,985 [37.98%] surgery + 2, 12,317 [27.54%] surgery + 1, and 15,414 [34.47%] surgery + 0) were included. In univariate analysis, we observed that surgery+2 patients had significantly greater 5-year OS compared to surgery + 1 or surgery + 0 patients (5-year OS: 63.46% vs 62.50% vs 61.41%, respectively; P= .002). We observed similar results in multivariable Cox proportional-hazards analysis, with surgery + 0 group demonstrating increased hazard of mortality when compared to surgery + 2 group (HR: 1.09; P< .001). These results held true after stratification by stage for stage II (HR 1.10; P= .022) and stage III (HR 1.12; P< .001) but not for stage IV (P= .474).

CONCLUSION

Greater degree of care coordination within the same facility is associated with greater OS in patients with stage II to III rectal cancer. This finding illustrates the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in multimodal rectal cancer therapy.

Changes in hospital variation in the probability of receiving treatment with curative intent for esophageal and gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous studies describe a large variation in the proportion of patients undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophageal (EC) and gastric cancer (GC). Since centralization of surgical care was initiated and more awareness regarding hospital practice variation was potentially present, we hypothesized that hospital practice variation for potentially curable EC and GC patients changed over time.

METHODS

Patients with potentially curable EC (n = 10,115) or GC (n = 3988) diagnosed between 2012-2017 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the differences in the probability of treatment with curative intent between hospitals of diagnosis over time, comparing 2012-2014 with 2015-2017. Relative survival (RS) between hospitals with different probabilities of treatment with curative intent were compared.

RESULTS

The range of proportions of patients undergoing treatment with curative intent per hospital of diagnosis for EC was 45-95 % in 2012-2014 and 54-89 % in 2015-2017, and for GC 52-100 % and 45-100 %. The adjusted variation declined for EC with Odds Ratios ranging from 0.50 to 1.72 between centers in the first period to 0.70-1.44 in the second period (p < 0.001) and did not change for GC (Odds Ratios ranging from 0.78 to 1.23 to 0.82-1.23, (p = 1.00)). A higher probability of treatment with curative intent was associated with a better survival for both malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Although substantial variation between hospitals of diagnosis in the probability in receiving treatment with curative intent still exists for both malignancies, it has decreased for EC. A low probability of receiving curative treatment remained associated with worse survival.

Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences from the Providers' Perspective: Is It Feasible in Routine Cancer Care?

Objective

Recent studies from Germany show that a small amount of breast and gynecological cancer patients participate in multidisciplinary tumor conferences (MTCs) at some cancer centers. One reason for the variation by center might be the providers’ attitudes about and experiences with MTC patient participation (MTCpp), which has not been analyzed before. Therefore, it is the aim of this study to analyze the providers’ expected or experienced feasibility concerning MTCpp at breast and gynecological cancer centers in Germany.

Methods

This paper presents cross-sectional qualitative interview data from the PINTU study. From April to December 2018, n=30 health-care providers from n=6 breast and gynecological cancer centers in North-Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, were interviewed. One-half of the providers had no experience and the other half had experience with MTCpp. Inductive and deductive coding was performed in order to capture the feasibility aspects of participation.

Results

MTCpp seems not to be feasible in routine cancer care following providers’ expected barriers and negative experiences. However, MTCpp seems to be feasible for selected cancer patients following providers’ expected opportunities and positive experiences. Our results show that both provider groups report positive and negative experiences or expectations.

Conclusion

The mixed findings regarding expected or experienced feasibility of MTCpp provide first insights into differences concerning MTCpp between organizations. Our results suggest that the providers’ perceptions (expectations and experiences) influence the possibility for patients to participate in an MTC in a cancer center.

A multicentre cross-sectional observational study of cancer multidisciplinary teams: Analysis of team decision making

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary teams (MDT) formulate expert informed treatment recommendations for people with cancer. We set out to examine how the factors proposed by the functional perspective of group decision making (DM), that is, interaction process, internal factors (factors emanating from within the group such as group size), external circumstances (factors coming from the outside of the team), and case-complexity affect the quality of MDT decision making.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study. Three cancer MDTs were recruited with 44 members overall and 30 of their weekly meetings filmed. Validated observational instruments were used to measure quality of DM, interactions, and complexity of 822 case discussions.

RESULTS

The full regression model with the variables proposed by the functional perspective was significant, R2  = 0.52, F(20, 801) = 43.47, P < .001, adjusted R2  = 0.51. Positive predictors of DM quality were asking questions (P = .001), providing answers (P = .001), team size (P = .007), gender balance (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), while negative socioemotional reactions (P = .007), gender imbalance (P = .003), logistical issues (P = .001), time-workload pressures (P = .002), and time spent in the meeting (P = .001) were negative predictors. Second half of the meetings also saw significant decrease in the DM quality (P = .001), interactions (P = .001), group size (P = .003), and clinical complexity (P = .001), and an increase in negative socioemotional reactions (P = .001) and time-workload pressures (P = .001).

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to attempt to assess the factors proposed by the functional perspective in cancer MDTs. One novel finding is the effect of sociocognitive factors on team DM quality, while another is the cognitive-catch 22 effect: while the case discussions are significantly simpler in the second half of the meeting, there is significantly less time left to discuss the remaining cases, further adding to the cognitive taxation in teams who are now rapidly attempting to close their time-workload gap. Implications are discussed in relation to quality and safety.

Earlier multidisciplinary palliative care intervention for people with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lung cancer is the most common cancer and leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Lung cancer is associated with significant morbidity, with symptoms often being poorly managed, causing significant symptom burden for both patients and their family caregivers. In people with life-limiting illnesses including advanced cancer, palliative care has been effective in improving symptom control, physical and mental wellbeing, quality of life, and survivorship; with benefits extending to caregivers while in the role and subsequently. Earlier integration of palliative care within oncology may be associated with improved patient outcomes, and has been supported by two Lancet commissions and national guidelines. The evidence for its effectiveness, however, has been mixed across the cancer spectrum. The aim of this review was to evaluate the current evidence for the effectiveness of early integrated palliative care in improving outcomes for people with lung cancer and their caregivers. Meta-analyses were performed where studies used the same measure. Otherwise, synthesis used a narrative approach. Similar to other types of advanced cancer, this review reveals mixed evidence for the effectiveness of early referral to palliative care and for the effectiveness of individual palliative interventions for people with lung cancer and their caregivers. Evidence that on-demand palliative care is equally, if not more effective than palliative care that is routinely provided, raises the question whether initiation and provision of palliative care as part of multidisciplinary lung cancer care ought to be guided by an early referral or need-based referral. Better understanding of what constitutes palliative care when delivered to people with lung cancer and their caregivers will help delineate the correlation with reported outcomes for these populations.

Aesthetic results following breast cancer surgery: A prospective study on 6515 cases from ten Italian Senonetwork breast centers

Breast cancer treatment has deeply changed in the last decades, since clinical and oncological cure cannot be achieved without patient's satisfaction in term of aesthetic outcomes. Several methods have been proposed to objectively assess these results. However, Italian breast centers have not yet agreed on measurable, reproducible and validated aesthetic outcome indicators to monitor their performance.

METHODS

The study was designed and conducted by Senonetwork, a not-for-profit association of Italian breast centers. Ten breast centers were selected based on specific eligibility criteria. This multicentre observational prospective study recruited 6515 patients with diagnosis of in situ or invasive breast cancer who underwent breast surgery in the years 2013-2016. Thirteen indicators of aesthetic results and of related quality of care were analyzed. Data collection and analysis were conducted using a common study database.

RESULTS

On average, seven out of ten centers were able to collect data on the proposed indicators with a proportion of missing values < 25%. By expert consensus based on study results, some seven indicators have been defined as "mandatory" while the remaining six have been defined as "recommended" because they require further refinement before they can be proposed for monitoring aesthetic outcomes or because there are doubts on the feasibility of data collection. The minimum standard is reached for 5 of 13 indicators. This finding and the wide range between centers reveal that there is ample room for improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

From the present study useful measurable aesthetic parameters have emerged, leading to the definition of target objectives that breast centers can use for benchmarking and improvement of quality of care.

The impact of multidisciplinary team management on outcome of hepatic resection in liver-limited colorectal metastases

Hepatic resection is the gold standard treatment for patients affected by liver-limited colorectal metastases. Reports addressing the impact of multidisciplinary team (MDT) evaluation on survival are controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefit of MDT management in these patients in our Institution experience. The objective of the analysis was to compare survivals of patients managed within our MDT (MDT cohort) to those of patients referred to surgery from other hospitals without MDT discussion (non-MDT cohort). Of the 523 patients, 229 were included in the MDT cohort and 294 in the non-MDT cohort. No difference between the two groups was found in terms of median overall survival (52.5 vs 53.6 months; HR 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88-1.45; p = 0.344). In the MDT cohort there was a higher number of metastases (4.5 vs 2.7; p < 0.0001). The median duration of chemotherapy was lower in MDT patients (8 vs 10 cycles; p < 0.001). Post-operative morbidity was lower in the MDT cohort (6.2 vs 21.5%; p < 0.001). One hundred and ninety-seven patients in each group were matched by propensity score and no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS and DFS. Our study does not demonstrate a survival benefit from MDT management, but it allows surgery to patients with a more advanced disease. MDT assessment reduces the median duration of chemotherapy and post-operative morbidities.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines compliance of a sarcoma service: A retrospective review

BACKGROUND

Clinical workup and treatment guidelines have been published by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) to ensure patients are treated uniformly and appropriately. This study sought to retrospectively review patients with a new diagnosis of sarcoma who were treated in a National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated center and determine compliance rates with guidelines for sarcoma.

AIM

To evaluate our compliance of NCCN sarcoma guidelines at a major NCI designated center and to report instances of deviation that could be used for future studies to improve patient care.

METHODS

Data was collected retrospectively as an internal review and quality assessment of 35 newly diagnosed and treated patients. Demographic data were recorded and information concerning whether patients had appropriate imaging, biopsy and management. Variables of interest were expressed as raw numbers and percentages.

RESULTS

Primary site imaging was obtained in 100% of cases. Chest and full-body imaging were obtained in 97% and 100% of indicated cases, respectively. Tissue was obtained preoperatively in 97% of cases. Imaging was reviewed at multidisciplinary Treatment Planning Conference (TPC) in 97% of cases. Pathology was reviewed in 94% of cases in TPC. Both tumor, node, metastasis staging and plan of care were reviewed in 100% of cases in TPC. Treatment guidelines were followed in 94% of cases reviewed.

CONCLUSION

This study evaluated the workup and treatment provided by a single NCI designated sarcoma service to a series of patients with pathologies defined with the NCCN sarcoma treatment guidelines. Although adherence to NCCN was reported to be very high future prospective studies are required to investigate whether NCCN guidelines impact patient outcomes.

Evidence for the urogynaecology multidisciplinary team meeting: evaluation from a secondary care perspective

INTRODUCTION

Urogynaecology multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings to discuss management plans prior to invasive treatments for urinary incontinence have been recommended by guidelines in the UK since 2013. Evidence for MDT discussion in urogynaecology is lacking, with only two published studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cases discussed at a secondary care urogynaecology MDT meeting, to establish types of clinical problems discussed, assess the outcomes of the MDT meeting and compare this with existing evidence for MDT meetings in urogynaecology.

METHODS

A retrospective review of meeting minutes and all case notes for patients discussed at 12 MDT meetings over 13 months was carried out. Data collected included attendance from different staff groups, reasons for referral, outcome of discussions, and changes to management plans.

RESULTS

A total of 123 cases were discussed over 12 meetings, 7 members of staff attended each meeting on average. 63% of cases were referred for discussion of a primary problem. The majority of patients were referred for discussion of management of urinary incontinence prior to invasive procedures (57%). The agreed MDT plan corresponded with proposed management in 67% of cases, with changes to management plan in 31% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Refinements to management plans in this study highlight the importance of MDT input in urogynaecology care and mirror the findings of two previous studies. Evidence for improved outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of MDTs is lacking and is an area for future research. Expanded national guidance for urogynaecology MDTs is likely to require local and regional restructuring of these in the UK.

Outcomes of trimodality bladder-sparing therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer

INTRODUCTION

Although radical cystectomy is considered the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), recent data has suggested comparable survival outcomes for bladder-sparing trimodality therapy (TMT). We conducted a retrospective, single-institution analysis of MIBC patients to evaluate the efficacy of TMT as an alternative, curative approach to surgical intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of MIBC patients assessed by a multidisciplinary team at the Juravinski Cancer Centre from 2010-2016. Patients underwent transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) followed by radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy. Patients could receive neoadjuvant treatment. Clinical data and response rates were summarized, and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Our analytic cohort included 115 patients, of whom 53 underwent TMT and 62 underwent radiotherapy alone following TURBT. Median age at diagnosis was 79 years and median followup was 21 months. Complete response rates in those receiving TMT and radiation without chemotherapy were 84.4% and 66.7%, respectively. For TMT patients, three-year OS and DFS were 68.5% and 49.6%, respectively. Patients who received TMT had reduction in risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.49; p=0.026) and disease recurrence (HR 0.55; p=0.017) compared to those who had radiation without chemotherapy. Overall, four patients had grade 3 or higher late toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-institution analysis, TMT appears to be a safe and effective approach in the short-term management of MIBC in appropriately selected patients. Extended followup and analysis are necessary to validate these results.

Multidisciplinary meetings at the emergency department: A conversation-analytic study of decision-making

Multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) have become an established part of many medical disciplines. Much research has been done to investigate the conditions under which they work best. This research, however, has been mostly retrospective and has had little consideration for the actual workings of MDMs. The aim of this study was to determine how Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) come to a shared decision and thus how they organize MDMs moment by moment. For this purpose we recorded twenty MDMs at the Department of Emergency Medicine (ED) of the Radboud University Medical Center in The Netherlands between November 2017 and June 2018. These meetings, contrary to those discussed in the literature, were scheduled ad-hoc as patients were seen at the ED and were conducted by small MDTs of between three and six participants, always involving a surgeon, a geriatrician, and an emergency physician. Using Conversation Analysis we found that despite the ad hoc nature of these meetings, teams collaboratively developed a structure that was grounded in everyday medical practice and reached a decision in on average slightly over 10 min. First they do a case presentation in which they share the patient's medical history and results of the physical examination and any medical tests. They subsequently agree on a differential diagnosis, and then develop a work plan. Finally, the decision is often formulated to invite confirmation and make it an interactionally shared decision. The benefit of having an MDM was evidenced by discussion of patients' frailty in particular: it was sometimes omitted during the case presentation, but then consistently requested by the geriatrician. And as we show, it was occasionally invoked as a definitive argument for deciding between surgical or conservative treatment. Our analysis suggests that MDMs can have added value in other disciplines where it is feasible to schedule meetings ad hoc.

Factors Associated with Multidisciplinary Consultations in Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer

Purpose: Multidisciplinary care (MDC) encourages multiple specialists to formulate a unified treatment plan. We sought to determine the frequency and predictors of MDC and assess the association between MDC and nationally-recognized quality metrics in patients with breast cancer. Methods: We used the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-medicare dataset to evaluate patients diagnosed with stages I-III breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery between 2002 and 2011 with follow-up to 2012. We defined MDC as a visit claim from a surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist within 12 months of diagnosis. We used multivariable regression analysis to determine the association between demographic and clinical variables and MDC, and to assess the association between MDC and three nationally-recognized quality indicators (adjuvant hormone therapy for hormone receptor-positive tumors, chemotherapy for hormone receptor-negative cancer, and radiation after lumpectomy). Results: Of the 61,039 patients in our initial cohort, 53,849 (88.2%) saw a medical oncologist, 46,521 (76.2%) saw a radiation oncologist, and 43,280 (70.9%) were evaluated by all three providers the first year after diagnosis. MDC use was higher in patients with the highest socioeconomic status compared with the lowest [odds ratio (OR) 1.74, 95% CI 1.63-1.86], in patients diagnosed in later years, and those with stage III disease compared to stage I [OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.19-1.41]. Patients older in age (≥80 vs. 65-69 years, OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.31-0.34), patients with more comorbidities, those who lived in a rural setting compared to urban (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.57-0.64), and unmarried patients (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.82) were less likely to see all three providers. In a multivariable analysis, MDC use was associated with increased likelihood of meeting each quality metric. Conclusion: Early stage breast cancer patients were evaluated by a surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist less than 75% of the time. Enhanced coordination of care and navigation programs may improve the quality of care delivered.

Analysing Breast Cancer Multidisciplinary Patient Management: A Prospective Observational Evaluation of Team Clinical Decision-Making

Background

Multidisciplinary team (MDT)-driven cancer care is a mandatory UK national policy, widely used globally. However, few studies have examined how MDT members make decisions as a team. We report a single-centre prospective study on team working within breast cancer MDT.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study of 10 breast MDT meetings (MDM). Trained clinical observer scored quality of presented information and disciplinary contribution to case reviews in real time, using a validated tool, namely Metric for the Observation of Decision-Making. Data were analysed to evaluate quality of team working.

Results

Ten MDMs were observed (N = 346 patients). An average of 42 patients were discussed per MDM (range: 29–51) with an average 3 min 20 s (range: 31 s–9 min) dedicated to each patient. Management decision was made in 99% of cases. In terms of contribution to case reviews, breast care nurses scored significantly (p < 0.05) lower (M = 1.79, SD = 0.12) compared to other team members (e.g. surgeons, M = 4.65; oncologists, M = 3.07; pathologists, M = 4.51; radiologists, M = 3.21). Information on patient psychosocial aspects (M = 1.69, SD = 0.68), comorbidities (M = 1.36, SD = 0.39) and views on treatment options (M = 1.47, SD = 0.34) was also significantly (p < 0.05) less well represented compared to radiology (M = 3.62, SD = 0.77), pathology (M = 4.42, SD = 0.49) and patient history (M = 3.91, SD = 0.48).

Conclusion

MDT evaluation via direct observation in a meeting is feasible and reliable. We found consistent levels of quality of information coverage and contribution within the team, but certain aspects could be improved. Contribution to patient review resides predominantly with surgeons, while presented patient information is largely of biomedical nature. These findings can be fed to cancer MDTs to identify potential interventions for improvement.

Do multidisciplinary cancer care teams suffer decision-making fatigue: an observational, longitudinal team improvement study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine effectiveness of codesigned quality-improving interventions with a multidisciplinary team (MDT) with high workload and prolonged meetings to ascertain: (1) presence and impact of decision-making (DM) fatigue on team performance in the weekly MDT meeting and (2) impact of a short meeting break as a countermeasure of DM fatigue.

DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS

This is a longitudinal multiphase study with a codesigned intervention bundle assessed within team audit and feedback cycles. The interventions comprised short meeting breaks, as well as change of room layout and appointing a meeting chair.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A breast cancer MDT with 15 members was recruited between 2013 and 2015 from a teaching hospital of the London (UK) metropolitan area.

MEASURES

A validated observational tool (Metric for the Observation of Decision-making) was used by trained raters to assess quality of DM during 1335 patient reviews. The tool scores quality of information and team contributions to reviews by individual disciplines (Likert-based scores), which represent our two primary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Data were analysed using multivariate analysis of variance. DM fatigue was present in the MDT meetings: quality of information (M=16.36 to M=15.10) and contribution scores (M=27.67 to M=21.52) declined from first to second half of meetings at baseline. Of the improvement bundle, we found breaks reduced the effect of fatigue: following introduction of breaks (but not other interventions) information quality remained stable between first and second half of meetings (M=16.00 to M=15.94), and contributions to team DM improved overall (M=17.66 to M=19.85).

CONCLUSION

Quality of cancer team DM is affected by fatigue due to sequential case review over often prolonged periods of time. This detrimental effect can be reversed by introducing a break in the middle of the meeting. The study offers a methodology based on 'team audit and feedback' principle for codesigning interventions to improve teamwork in cancer care.

A web-based multidisciplinary team meeting visualisation system

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs) are the standard of care for safe, effective patient management in modern hospital-based clinical practice. Medical imaging data are often the central discussion points in many MDTs, and these data are typically visualised, by all participants, on a common large display. We propose a Web-based MDT visualisation system (WMDT-VS) to allow individual participants to view the data on their own personal computing devices with the potential to customise the imaging data, i.e. different view of the data to that of the common display, for their particular clinical perspective.

METHODS

We developed the WMDT-VS by leveraging the state-of-the-art Web technologies to support four MDT visualisation features: (1) 2D and 3D visualisations for multiple imaging modality data; (2) a variety of personal computing devices, e.g. smartphone, tablets, laptops and PCs, to access and navigate medical images individually and share the visualisations; (3) customised participant visualisations; and (4) the addition of extra local image data for visualisation and discussion.

RESULTS

We outlined these MDT visualisation features on two simulated MDT settings using different imaging data and usage scenarios. We measured compatibility and performances of various personal, consumer-level, computing devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Our WMDT-VS provides a more comprehensive visualisation experience for MDT participants.

Multidisciplinary teams for the proper management of patients with genitourinary tumors: When topics set scientific societies’ agenda

Introduction:

The multidisciplinary management of oncologic patients is identified as the bottom line element of quality in tumor care.

Methods:

In 2015, 7 Italian scientific societies representing the specialists involved in the diagnosis and treatment of genitourinary tumors joined efforts in the Italian uro-oncologic multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) project. The aims were to promote the reorganization of genitourinary cancer care, switching to a multidisciplinary approach, reach a consensus on the core elements for the setup of MDTs in genitourinary oncology, and support health policy makers and managers in remodeling of the assistance and care of uro-oncologic patients on a national level.

Results:

The first activity was the setup of 5 working groups, given the task of exploring selected topics: general principles, organization of MDTs, minimal requirements, economic evaluation, and relations with authorities. The groups participated in the writing of a document that was approved by the scientific societies and published on their web sites. Moreover, a few items summarizing the extensive document were approved in the first MDT Consensus Conference held in Milan in December 2015.

Conclusions:

The experience of this initial phase led to the opening of the team to other professionals and societies, in line with a correct management of patients with genitourinary tumors, which need a multidisciplinary as well as a multiprofessional approach with emerging techniques and procedures, and with a new project work package on genitourinary paths of care and indicators.