Utilizing the multidisciplinary team for planning and monitoring care and quality improvement

The impact of oncological package implementation on the treatment of rectal cancer in years 2013-2019 in Poland - multicenter study

<b><br>Introduction:</b> In 2015, in Poland, the oncological package (OP) was established. This law constituted a fast track of oncological diagnosis and treatment and obligatory multidisciplinary team meetings (MDT).</br> <b><br>Aim:</b> The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of OP on rectal cancer treatment.</br> <b><br>Methods:</b> The study was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of data collected from five centers. It included clinical data of patients operated on due to rectal cancer between 2013 and 2019. For most analyses, patients were categorized into three groups: 2013-2014 - before OP (A), 2015-2016 - early development of OP (B), 2017-2019 - further OP functioning (C).</br> <b><br>Results:</b> A total of 1418 patients were included. In all time intervals, the majority of operations performed were anterior resections. There was a significantly lower local tumor stage (T) observed in subsequent time intervals, while there were no significant differences for N and M. In period C, the median of resected nodes was significantly higher than in previous periods. Four of the centers showed an increasing tendency in the use of preoperative radiotherapy. The study indicated a significant increase in the use of short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and a decrease in the number of patients who did not receive any form of preoperative therapy in subsequent periods. In the group that should receive radiotherapy (T3/4 or N+ and M0), the use of SCRT was also significantly increasing.</br> <b><br>Conclusions:</b> In the whole cohort, there was a significant increase in the use of preoperative radiotherapy and a decrease in the T stage, changing with the development of OP. Nevertheless, this relation is indirect and more data should be gathered for further conclusions.</br>.

Quality indicator selection for the Canadian Partnership against Cancer rectal cancer project: A modified Delphi study

AIM

It is well established that (i) magnetic resonance imaging, (ii) multidisciplinary cancer conference (MCCs), (iii) preoperative radiotherapy, (iv) total mesorectal excision surgery and (v) pathological assessment as described by Quirke are key processes necessary for high quality, rectal cancer care. The objective was to select a set of multidisciplinary quality indicators to measure the uptake of these clinical processes in clinical practice.

METHOD

A multidisciplinary panel was convened and a modified two-phase Delphi method was used to select a set of quality indicators. Phase 1 included a literature review with written feedback from the panel. Phase 2 included an in-person workshop with anonymous voting. The selection criteria for the indicators were strength of evidence, ease of capture and usability. Indicators for which ≥90% of the panel members voted 'to keep' were selected as the final set of indicators.

RESULTS

During phase 1, 68 potential indicators were generated from the literature and an additional four indicators were recommended by the panel. During phase 2, these 72 indicators were discussed; 48 indicators met the 90% inclusion threshold and included eight pathology, five radiology, 11 surgical, six radiation oncology and 18 MCC indicators.

CONCLUSION

A modified Delphi method was used to select 48 multidisciplinary quality indicators to specifically measure the uptake of key processes necessary for high quality care of patients with rectal cancer. These quality indicators will be used in future work to identify and address gaps in care in the uptake of these clinical processes.

The multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved during the past 40 years with the use of a standardized surgical technique for tumour resection: total mesorectal excision. A dramatic reduction in local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes have been achieved as consequences of a better understanding of the surgical oncology of rectal cancer, and the advent of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery have paved the way for a multidisciplinary approach to disease management. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumour regression, extramural venous invasion and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information. Modern treatment strategies are underpinned by accurate high-resolution imaging guiding both neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery, followed by meticulous pathological scrutiny identifying the important prognostic factors for adjuvant chemotherapy. Included in these strategies are organ-sparing approaches and watch-and-wait strategies in selected patients. These pathways rely on the close working of interlinked disciplines within a multidisciplinary team. Such multidisciplinary forums are becoming standard in the treatment of rectal cancer across the UK, Europe and, more recently, the USA. This Review examines the essential components of modern-day management of rectal cancer through a multidisciplinary team approach, providing information that is essential for any practising colorectal surgeon to guide the best patient care.

Referral rates to multidisciplinary team meetings: Is there disparity between tumour streams?

INTRODUCTION

The multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) approach is accepted as standard of care to optimise treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer. This retrospective audit reviews the proportion of patients whose care is being discussed at cancer MDTMs within the Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service (SCHHS).

METHODS

Patients included were those diagnosed with cancer within the SCHHS between 2010 and 2015, and subsequently referred to a public MDTM for discussion. Data were extracted from the Queensland Cancer Control Analysis Team (QCCAT) database regarding the incidence of breast, lung, upper gastrointestinal (GI), colorectal, genitourinary and malignant haematological cancers and the number of patients referred to the corresponding MDTM.

RESULTS

Data from 2015 show referral rates to MDTMs as follows: lung 100%, upper gastrointestinal 100%, colorectal 64%, breast 60%, malignant haematology 40% and genitourinary 28%. Of the genitourinary presentations, 70% were prostate cases and 14% bladder cases. Review of genitourinary MDTM outcomes found that, of the patients with prostate cancer discussed, 30% were metastatic, 19% were poor surgical candidates and 15% had biochemical recurrence.

CONCLUSION

This audit demonstrates variable utilisation of MDTMs between tumour streams. Our study shows a high and increasing referral rate to all tumour stream MDTMs except for genitourinary. This suggests a possible underutilisation of genitourinary MDTMs to discuss treatment options for patients with genitourinary cancer. Collaborative research is warranted to further investigate whether this is a local or widespread issue.

Survey on gynecological cancer treatment by Piedmont, Liguria, and Valle d'Aosta group of AIRO (Italian Association of Radiation Oncology)

Purpose

We focused the attention on radiation therapy practices about the gynecological malignancies in Piedmont, Liguria, and Valle d'Aosta to know the current treatment practice and to improve the quality of care.

Material and methods

We proposed a cognitive survey to evaluate the standard practice patterns for gynecological cancer management, adopted from 2012 to 2014 by radiotherapy (RT) centers with a large amount of gynecological cancer cases. There were three topics: 1. Taking care and multidisciplinary approach, 2. Radiotherapy treatment and brachytherapy, 3. Follow-up.

Results

Nineteen centers treated gynecological malignancies and 12 of these had a multidisciplinary dedicated team. Radiotherapy option has been used in all clinical setting: definitive, adjuvant, and palliative. In general, 1978 patients were treated. There were 834 brachytherapy (BRT) treatments. The fusion between diagnostic imaging (magnetic resonance imaging – MRI, positron emission tomography – PET) and computed tomography (CT) simulation was used for contouring in all centers. Conformal RT and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were the most frequent techniques. The image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) was used in 10/19 centers. There were 8 active BRT centers. Brachytherapy was performed both with radical intent and as boost, mostly by HDR (6/8 centers). The doses for exclusive BRT were between 20 to 30 Gy. The doses for BRT boost were between 10 and 20 Gy. Four centers used CT-MRI compatible applicators but only one used MRI for planning. The BRT plans on vaginal cuff were still performed on traditional radiographies in 2 centers. The plan sum was evaluated in only 1 center. Only 1 center performed in vivo dosimetry.

Conclusions

In the last three years, multidisciplinary approach, contouring, treatment techniques, doses, and control systems were similar in Liguria-Piedmont and Valle d'Aosta. However, the technology implementation didn't translate in a real treatment innovation so far.