Preoperative tumour staging with multidisciplinary team assessment improves the outcome in locally advanced primary rectal cancer

The impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on overall survival: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary cancer conferences consist of regular meetings between diverse specialists working together to share clinical decision making in cancer care. The aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effect of multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on the overall survival of patients with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for studies published up to July 2023. Studies reporting on the impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on patient overall survival were included. A standard random-effects model with the inverse variance-weighted approach was used to estimate the pooled hazard ratio of mortality (multidisciplinary cancer conference vs non-multidisciplinary cancer conference) across studies, and the heterogeneity was assessed by I2. Publication bias was examined using funnel plots and the Egger test.

RESULTS

A total of 134 287 patients with cancer from 59 studies were included in our analysis, with 48 467 managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences and 85 820 in the control arm. Across all cancer types, patients managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences had an increased overall survival compared with control patients (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% confidence interval = 0.62 to 0.71, I2 = 84%). Median survival time was 30.2 months in the multidisciplinary cancer conference group and 19.0 months in the control group. In subgroup analysis, a positive effect of the multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on overall survival was found in breast, colorectal, esophageal, hematologic, hepatocellular, lung, pancreatic, and head and neck cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our meta-analysis found a significant positive effect of multidisciplinary cancer conferences compared with controls. Further studies are needed to establish nuanced guidelines when optimizing multidisciplinary cancer conference integration for treating diverse patient populations.

Attitudes of physicians and patients toward immediate and intraoperative chemotherapy treatment in colon cancer

INTRODUCTION

We have shown in a Phase I trial that immediate adjuvant chemotherapy (IAC) during surgical resection and immediately postoperative is safe and feasible in patients with colon cancer (CC). IAC avoids delays in adjuvant treatment and has the potential to improve survival and quality of life. We aim to determine patients and providers attitudes toward this novel multidisciplinary treatment approach.

METHODS

Two web-based surveys were administered to newly diagnosed CC patients, survivors, surgeons and oncologists. Surveys assessed treatment preferences and perceived barriers to IAC. Chi-square tests were conducted to compare differences between patients' and providers' responses.

RESULTS

Responses were collected from 35 patients and 40 providers. Patients were more willing to: (1) proceed with IAC to finish treatment earlier thus possibly improving quality of life (p = 0.001); (2) proceed with IAC despite potential side effects (p < 0.001); and (3) proceed with a dose of intraoperative chemotherapy even if on final pathology, may not have been needed (p = 0.002). Patients were more likely to indicate no barriers to collaborative care (p = 0.001) while providers were more likely to cite that it is time consuming, thus a barrier to participation (p = 0.001), has scheduling challenges (p = 0.001), and physicians are not available to participate (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a discordance between what providers and patients value in perioperative and adjuvant CC treatment. Patients are willing to accept IAC despite potential side effects and without survival benefit, highlighting the importance of understanding patient preference.

Impact of positron-emission tomography on the surgical treatment of locoregionally recurrent colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The effect of positron emission tomography (PET) on the surgical treatment of locoregionally recurrent colorectal cancer (LRRCRC) remains unclear and warrants further investigation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 193 patients with LRRCRC were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database, of whom 134 LRRCRCs were deemed resectable and underwent resection with curative intent, whereas the remaining 59 LRRCRCs were unresectable. Patients with resectable LRRCRC were further classified according to whether recurrence was detected solely by PET (n = 35, PET-only group) or by a combination of computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and PET (n = 99, CT/MRI/PET group). Clinicopathologic features, operative morbidity/mortality, and overall survival were compared between the patient groups based on long-term follow-up for at least 5 years.

RESULTS

Patients in the PET-only group tended to have less extensive organ resection (p = 0.0074), less blood loss (p < 0.0001), and shorter operation time and hospitalization (p < 0.0001), but surgical complication and readmission rates were not significantly different (p > 0.05) compared with the CT/MRI/PET group. Although the PET-only group had significantly higher R0 resection rate (80 % vs. 54.55 %, p = 0.0079), they also had a higher risk (17.14 % vs. 2.02 %, p = 0.0011) of sham operation. The estimated 5-year and 10-year survival rates significantly decreased in order (p < 0.0001) from PET-only (85.71 % and 57.98 %) and CT/MRI/PET (41.41 % and 15.93 %) to unresectable group of patients (16.95 % and 1.88 %). Subset analysis of the CT/MRI/PET group indicated that PET improved surgical decision-making because 24 (24.2 %) LRRCRCs that manifested on CT/MRI as equivocal lesions were later confirmed by PET as resectable recurrences, while 18 (19.4 %) LRRCRCs that manifested on CT/MRI as resectable lesions were later diagnosed by PET as more disseminated unresectable recurrences and precluded futile surgery.

CONCLUSION

PET alone can identify a subset (20.9 %) of LRRCRCs with less tumor burden for timely surgery; PET in combination with CT/MRI can better define the resectability of LRRCRCs. The positive impacts of PET can translate into better surgical outcomes, with enhanced safety and patient survival.

Multidisciplinary discussion and management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases: A single center study in China

BACKGROUND

The multidisciplinary team (MDT) has been carried out in many large hospitals now. However, given the costs of time and money and with little strong evidence of MDT effectiveness being reported, critiques of MDTs persist.

AIM

To evaluate the effects of MDTs on patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases and share our opinion on management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS

In this study we collected clinical data of patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases from February 2014 to February 2017 in the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital and subsequently divided them into an MDT+ group and an MDT- group. In total, 93 patients in MDT+ group and 169 patients in MDT- group were included totally.

RESULTS

Statistical increases in the rate of chest computed tomography examination (P = 0.001), abdomen magnetic resonance imaging examination (P = 0.000), and preoperative image staging (P = 0.0000) were observed in patients in MDT+ group. Additionally, the proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy (P = 0.019) and curative resection (P = 0.042) was also higher in MDT+ group. Multivariable analysis showed that the population of patients assessed by MDT meetings had higher 1-year [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.608, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.398-0.931, P = 0.022] and 5-year (HR = 0.694, 95%CI: 0.515-0.937, P = 0.017) overall survival.

CONCLUSION

These results proved that MDT management did bring patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases more opportunities for comprehensive examination and treatment, resulting in better outcomes.

Update on The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC): the radiologist's role

The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC) was established by the American College of Surgeons with the goal of standardizing care of rectal cancer patients in order to improve outcomes. NAPRC accreditation requires compliance with an established set of standards, many of which are directly related to radiology participation in multidisciplinary conference, rectal MR image acquisition, interpretation and reporting, and radiologist education. This paper outlines the pertinent standards/requirements for radiologists as part of the Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Team in the NAPRC guidelines, with proposed methods and tips for implementation of these standards from the perspective of the radiologist.

Physician compliance with multidisciplinary tumor board recommendations for managing gynecological cancers

Aims: Evaluation of compliance with gynecological multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) recommendations and its impact. Patients & methods: All patient records discussed in our MTB from 2018 to 2020 were analyzed. Results: We analyzed 437 MTB recommendations concerning 166 patients. Each patient was discussed an average of 2.6 (1.0-4.2) times. Of the 789 decisions, the decision was not followed 102 times (12.9%), corresponding to 85 MTB meetings (19.5%). Of these, 72 recommendations concerned therapeutic changes (70.5%), and 30 concerned non-therapeutic changes (29.5%). Of these 85 MTB decisions, 60 (71%) led to a new MTB submission. Noncompliance with MTB decisions decreased the overall survival (46 vs 138 months; p = 0.003). Conclusion: Improving compliance with MTB decisions is crucial to enhance patient outcomes.

Guideline adherence and implementation of tumor board therapy recommendations for patients with gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE

Although participation in multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is an obligatory quality criterion for certification, there is scarce evidence, whether MTB recommendations are consistent with consensus guidelines and whether they are followed in clinical practice. Reasons of guideline and tumor board deviations are poorly understood so far.

METHODS

MTB's recommendations from the weekly MTB for gastrointestinal cancers at the University Cancer Center Leipzig/Germany (UCCL) in 2020 were analyzed for their adherence to therapy recommendations as stated in National German guidelines and implementation within an observation period of 3 months. To assess adherence, an objective classification system was developed assigning a degree of guideline and tumor board adherence to each MTB case. For cases with deviations, underlying causes and influencing factors were investigated and categorized.

RESULTS

76% of MTBs were fully adherent to guidelines, with 16% showing deviations, mainly due to study inclusions and patient comorbidities. Guideline adherence in 8% of case discussions could not be determined, especially because there was no underlying guideline recommendation for the specific topic. Full implementation of the MTBs treatment recommendation occurred in 64% of all cases, while 21% showed deviations with primarily reasons of comorbidities and differing patient wishes. Significantly lower guideline and tumor board adherences were demonstrated in patients with reduced performance status (ECOG-PS ≥ 2) and for palliative intended therapy (p = 0.002/0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of guideline deviations and adherence to MTB decisions by a systematic and objective quality assessment tool could become a meaningful quality criterion for cancer centers in Germany.

Assessment of Attitudes Toward Initiation of Immediate Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Early initiation of chemotherapy after surgery for colon cancer has survival benefits. Immediate adjuvant chemotherapy (IAC) involves giving chemotherapy during surgical resection and immediately postoperatively. This novel approach has been shown to be safe, eliminating delays in adjuvant treatment that could increase the risk of micro-metastatic spread. The aim of this study was to assess the willingness of the general public to accept IAC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March and April 2021, 800 telephone interviews were conducted with a sample of adult New York State residents. The Survey Research Institute of Cornell University conducted all surveys. Kruskal-Wallis, chi-squared, and Fisher's tests were conducted using R 4.0.2.

RESULTS

Three scenarios were presented: (1) receiving IAC resulting in improved survival and quality of life, (2) finishing chemotherapy earlier without survival impact, and (3) finishing chemotherapy earlier but with possible side effects. Respondents with higher education were more likely to accept (1) & (2), males were more likely to accept (2) & (3), higher income respondents were more likely to accept (1) & (3), and those with more work hours were more likely to accept (2). Lastly, 16% responded they would be very or extremely likely, and 52% respondents would be somewhat likely or likely to accept intraoperative chemotherapy, even if it may not be necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents were likely to accept IAC if offered. Given the known risk of delayed adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in colon cancer, further research is warranted to determine the survival and quality of life (QOL) benefits of IAC.

A prospective study of diagnostic accuracy of multidisciplinary team and radiology reporting of preoperative colorectal cancer local staging

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to correlate and assess diagnostic accuracy of preoperative staging at multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT) against the original radiology reports and pathological staging in colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted at two institutions. Patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer and available preoperative imaging were included. Preoperative tumor and nodal staging (cT and cN) as determined by the MDT and the radiology report (computed tomography [CT] and/or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) were recorded. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between MDT and the radiology report for cN staging in colon cancer, cT and cN in rectal cancer, and tumor regression grade (TRG) in patients with rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy. Pathological report after surgery served as the reference standard for local staging, and AUROC curves were constructed to compare diagnostic accuracy of the MDT and radiology report.

RESULTS

A total of 481 patients were included. Agreement between MDT and radiology report for cN stage was good in colon cancer (k = .756, Confidence Interval (CI) 95% .686-.826). Agreement for cT and cN and in rectal cancer was very good (kw = .825, CI 95% .758-.892) and good (kw = .792, CI 95% .709-.875), respectively. In the rectal cancer group that received neoadjuvant therapy, agreement on TRG was very good (kw = .919, CI 95% .846-.993). AUROC curves using pathological staging indicated no difference in diagnostic accuracy between MDT and radiology reports for either colon or rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative colorectal cancer local staging was consistent between specialist MDT review and original radiology reports, with no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy identified.

The impact of hospital volume on survival in patients with locally advanced colonic cancer

BACKGROUND

High hospital volume has been shown associated with improved survival in patients with several cancers. The aim of this nationwide cohort study was to investigate whether hospital volume affects survival in patients with locally advanced colonic cancer.

METHODS

All patients with non-metastatic locally advanced colonic cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2017 in Sweden were included. Tertiles of annual hospital volume of locally advanced colonic cancer were analysed and 5-year overall and colonic cancer-specific survival were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. HRs comparing all-cause and colonic cancer-specific mortality rates were estimated using Cox models adjusted for potential confounders (age, sex, year of diagnosis, co-morbidity, elective/emergency resection, and university hospital) and mediators (preoperative multidisciplinary team assessment, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radical resection, and surgical experience).

RESULTS

A total of 5241 patients were included with a mean follow-up of 2.7-2.8 years for low- and high-volume hospitals. The number of patients older than 79 years were 569 (32.3 per cent), 495 (29.9 per cent), and 482 (26.4 per cent) for low-, medium- and high-volume hospitals respectively. The 3-year overall survival was 68 per cent, 60 per cent and 58 per cent for high-, medium- and low-volume hospitals, respectively (P < 0.001 from log rank test). High volume hospitals were associated with reduced all-cause and colon cancer-specific mortality after adjustments for potential confounders (HR 0.76, 95 per cent CI 0.62 to 0.93 and HR 0.73, 95 per cent CI 0.59 to 0.91, respectively). The effect remained after inclusion of potential mediators.

CONCLUSIONS

High hospital volume is associated with reduced mortality in patients with locally advanced colonic cancer.

Developing prediction models for short-term mortality after surgery for colorectal cancer using a Danish national quality assurance database

PURPOSE

The majority of colorectal cancer surgeries are performed electively, and treatment is often decided at the multidisciplinary team conference. Although the average 30-day mortality rate is low, there is substantial population heterogeneity from young, healthy patients to frail, elderly patients. The individual risk of surgery can vary widely, and tailoring treatment for colorectal cancer may lead to better outcomes. This requires prediction of risk that is accurate and available prior to surgery.

METHODS

Data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database was transformed into the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model. Models were developed to predict the risk of mortality within 30, 90, and 180 days after colorectal cancer surgery using only covariates decided at the multidisciplinary team conference. Several machine-learning models were trained, but due to superior performance, a Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator logistic regression was used for the final model. Performance was assessed with discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curve) and calibration measures (calibration in large, intercept, slope, and Brier score).

RESULTS

The cohort contained 65,612 patients operated for colorectal cancer in the period from 2001 to 2019 in Denmark. The Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic for 30-, 90-, and 180-day mortality after colorectal cancer surgery of 0.871 (95% CI: 0.86-0.882), 0.874 (95% CI: 0.864-0.882), and 0.876 (95% CI: 0.867-0.883) and calibration in large of 1.01, 0.98, and 1.01, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The postoperative short-term mortality prediction model showed excellent discrimination and calibration using only preoperatively known predictors.

Effect of digital-enabled multidisciplinary therapy conferences on efficiency and quality of the decision making in prostate cancer care

Objectives

To investigate the impact on efficiency and quality of preprostatectomy multidisciplinary therapy conferences (MDT) at Karolinska University Hospital related to the use of a digital solution compared with standard of care. Further, to explore whether gains in MDT efficiency and quality impact oncological or functional patient outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, observational study of preoperative prostate cancer MDT at Karolinska between February 2017 and March 2021, including 1329 patients. We compared efficiency and quality of the standard MDT and the MDT using the digital solution IntelliSpace Precision Medicine Multidisciplinary Team Orchestrator (ISPM) based on the previously used MDT-MODe approach. Clinical and patient-reported functional outcomes were derived from the medical records and the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Register.

Results

While ISPM was used during the MDT meeting, the time spent per patient was reduced by 24% (p<0.001) and most of the MDT-MODe items were scored significantly higher. There was a reduction in pelvic lymph-node dissection procedures in the ISPM cohort (p=0.001) and an increased proportion of unilateral nerve-sparing procedures (p=0.005), while all other outcome-related measures were not significantly different between the two patient groups.

Discussion and conclusion

To increase the value of the MDT, all data relevant for treatment decision need to be purposefully presented and compiled, which also enables secondary use of the data.

The use of a digital solution during preoperative MDTs for prostate cancer decision making at Karolinska University Hospital improved the efficiency and quality of this multidisciplinary team meeting without impacting patient outcomes.

From "Cure" to "Care": The Role of the MultiDisciplinary Team on Colorectal Cancer Patients' Satisfaction and Oncological Outcomes

Background

MultiDisciplinary Team (MDT) are held to undertake decisions regarding the whole aspect of oncological diseases. Over the years, they acquired a collaborative approach where clinical decisions are shared by all members. Different guidelines recommend the implementation of MDT, in order to improve the outcomes of these patients. Our aim is to evaluate how the implementation of MDT affects the patients' satisfaction and adherence to treatment.

Methods

A survey was submitted to every patient affected by colorectal cancer treated by the MDT of Sant'Andrea Hospital (Rome, IT). The investigation period was January 2017-March 2020. Data from patients inside the MDT were compared with patients outside the MDT to evaluate a reduction in waiting times.

Results

A total of 591 patients were collected. A total of 355 patients with colorectal neoplasia were included in our analysis. Cumulative overall survival was 79%. The average waiting time for computed tomography or colonoscopy was 14.9 days for patients in the MDT versus 24.5. A total of 201 patients were eligible for our satisfaction survey. An 89.5% of patients felt followed in their treatment. A 93.5% of patients expressed a high grade of satisfaction for the MDT design.

Conclusion

Our study confirms the importance of a well-structured MDT. Dedicated slots shorten the waiting time, leading to better satisfaction and faster diagnosis. Patients' satisfaction should be considered as an index of good practice when it comes to oncological patients' treatment.

Impacts of lung cancer multidisciplinary meeting presentation: Drivers and outcomes from a population registry retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Multidisciplinary Meetings (MDM) are recommended in routine lung cancer care, however its broader impacts demand further evaluation. We assessed the drivers and impacts of MDM presentation in the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry (VLCR).

METHODS

We examined the effect of MDM presentation on receipt of treatment and survival in VLCR patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2020. We compared patient characteristics, drivers of MDM discussion and survival between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of 9,628 patients, 5,900 (61.3%) were discussed at MDM, 3,728 (38.7%) were not. In the non-MDM group, a lower proportion received surgery (22.1% vs. 31.2%), radiotherapy (34.2% vs. 44.4%) and chemotherapy (44.7% vs. 49.0%). Patients were less likely to be discussed if ≥80 years (OR 0.73, p < 0.001), of ECOG performance status (PS) 4 (OR 0.23, p < 0.001), clinical stage IV (OR 0.34, p < 0.001) or referred from regional (OR 0.52, p < 0.001) or private hospital (OR 0.18, p < 0.001). MDM-presented patients had better median survival (1.70 vs 0.75 years, p < 0.001) and lower adjusted mortality risk (HR 0.75; 0.71-0.80, p < 0.001), a protective effect consistent across all hospital types. Undocumented PS, histopathology and clinical stage were associated with lower likelihood of MDM discussion and worse mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In the VLCR, being male, ≥80 years, of poorer PS, advanced clinical stage and poor clinical characterisation significantly disadvantaged patients in relation to MDM discussion. MDM-discussed patients were more likely to undergo treatment and had a 25% lower risk of mortality. This study supports the use of MDMs in lung cancer and identifies areas of inequity to be addressed.

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.

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.

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.

Preoperative multidisciplinary team assessment is associated with improved survival in patients with locally advanced colon cancer; a nationwide cohort study in 3157 patients

INTRODUCTION

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) assessment is associated with improved survival in locally advanced rectal cancer, but the effect of an MDT assessment on survival in locally advanced colon cancer has not been reported. The aim of this national population-based cohort study was to establish if preoperative MDT assessment affects prognosis in patients with primary locally advanced colon cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients in Sweden with locally advanced colon cancer, without metastatic disease, who underwent an elective colon resection between 2010 and 2017 were identified through the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR), and the cohort was linked to national registers. Data on patient characteristics, preoperative staging, surgical procedures, recurrence and survival were collected from SCRCR. The association between MDT assessment and colon cancer-specific survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards models. The multivariable analysis was adjusted for sex, age, ASA grade, CCI, time period, pN, region and preoperative MDT.

RESULTS

MDT assessment was performed in 2663 patients (84.4%) of 3157 eligible patients. The 3-year colon cancer-specific survival was higher following MDT, compared with no MDT assessment (80% versus 68%). MDT assessment was independently associated with reduced colon cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.70, 0.57-0.84 95% CI).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative MDT assessment is associated with an improved long-term survival in patients with locally advanced colon cancer and should be mandatory in patients with suspected locally advanced colon cancer.

Beyond transanal total mesorectal excision: short-term outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision in locally advanced rectal cancer requiring resection beyond total mesorectal excision

AIM

The aim of this work was to define the role of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) requiring resection beyond the mesorectal plane.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective review of the outcomes of a case series of patients undergoing taTME for rectal cancer with mesorectal fascia or adjacent organ involvement.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (six men) underwent taTME for LARC requiring resection beyond total mesorectal excision (TME). All had a restorative procedure. The transabdominal approach was open in five and minimally invasive in six cases. All patients required the resection of at least one adjacent structure, including presacral fascia, internal iliac vessels, nerve roots, uterus, vagina or seminal vesicles. Four patients required a pelvic side-wall lymph node dissection and four had intraoperative radiotherapy. In all cases, the transanal approach was useful to disconnect the rectum distally, resect adjacent organs or control the R1 risk-point. Three patients had a complication of Clavien-Dindo grade III or above (one mechanical bowel obstruction, one pelvic collection and one urine sepsis). There were no anastomotic complications. Ten patients had an R0 resection. During a median follow-up of 11 (8.6-16) months there were no local recurrences, but two patients had distant metastases. During the study period, eight patients underwent closure of their stoma whilst the remaining three have had normal anastomotic assessments and will be closed in the future.

CONCLUSION

This early series shows that implementation of taTME for resections beyond TME may be feasible and safe in a highly selected setting.

Association of certification, improved quality and better oncological outcomes for rectal cancer in a specialized colorectal unit

PURPOSE

Centralization of cancer care is expected to yield superior results. In Germany, the national strategy is based on a voluntary certification process. The effect of centre certification is difficult to prove because quality data are rarely available prior to certification. This observational study aims to assess outcomes for rectal cancer patients before and after implementation of a certified cancer centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients treated for rectal cancer in our certified centre from 2009 to 2017 were retrieved from a prospective database. The dataset was analyzed according to a predefined set of 19 quality indicators comprising 36 quality goals. The results were compared to an identical cohort of patients, treated from 2000 to 2008 just before centre implementation.

RESULTS

In total, 1059 patients were included, 481 in the 2009-2017 interval and 578 in the 2000-2008 interval. From 2009 to 2017, 25 of 36 quality goals were achieved (vs. 19/36). The proportion of anastomotic leaks in low anastomoses was improved (13.5% vs. 22.1%, p = 0.018), as was the local 5-year recurrence rate for stage (y)pIII rectal cancers (7.7% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.085), and quality of mesorectal excision (0.3% incomplete resections vs. 5.5%, p = 0.002). Furthermore, a decrease of abdominoperineal excisions was noted (47.1% vs. 60.0%, p = 0.037). For the 2009-2017 interval, local 5-year recurrence rate in stages (y)p0-III was 4.6% and 5-year overall survival was 80.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Certification as specialized centre and regular audits were associated with an improvement of various quality parameters. The formal certification process has the potential to enhance quality of care for rectal cancer patients.

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.

Patterns of Multidisciplinary Care of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Medicare Patients

Importance

Multidisciplinary care (MDC) yields proven benefits for patients with cancer, although it may be underused in the complex management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

Objective

To characterize the patterns of MDC in the treatment of HNSCC among elderly patients in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data from January 1, 1991, to December 31, 2011, to identify patients 66 years or older diagnosed with head and neck cancer and determine the dates of diagnosis, oncology consultations, treatment initiation, and speech therapy evaluation in addition to MDC completion. Multidisciplinary care was defined in a stage-dependent manner: localized disease necessitated consultations with radiation and surgical oncologists, and advanced-stage disease also included a medical oncology consultation, all before definitive treatment. Data were analyzed between December 2016 and September 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rates of MDC across all subsites of head and neck cancer as measured by the presence of an evaluation for each oncologist on the MDC team and its effect on treatment initiation.

Results

This cohort study assessed 28 293 patients with HNSCC (mean [SD] age, 75.1 [6.6] years; 67% male; 87% White) from the SEER-Medicare linked database. The HNSCC subsites included larynx (40%), oral cavity (30%), oropharynx (21%), hypopharynx (7%), and nasopharynx (2%). Overall, the practice of MDC significantly increased over time, from 24% in 1991 to 52% in 2011 (P < .001). For patients with localized (stage 0-II) tumors, 60% received care in the multidisciplinary setting, whereas 28% of those with advanced-stage disease did. A total of 18 181 patients (64%) were treated with initial definitive nonsurgical therapy across all stages. Regardless of stage and subsite, few patients (2%) underwent evaluation by a speech-language pathologist before definitive therapy. Multidisciplinary care prolonged the time to initiation of definitive treatment by 11 days for localized disease and 10 days for advanced disease.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that most elderly patients with localized HNSCC received MDC, whereas few patients with advanced-stage disease received such care, although a significant proportion received adjuvant therapy. Multidisciplinary care may prolong time to initiation of definitive treatment with an uncertain impact. Consultation with a speech-language pathologist before definitive therapy was rare.

Adherence to neoadjuvant therapy guidelines for locally advanced rectal cancers in a region with sociodemographic disparities

BACKGROUND

Practice guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCR) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We examined guideline adherence in a healthcare system serving a region with socioeconomic disparities and poor cancer outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of factors associated with guideline adherence.

RESULTS

63.1% of stage II/III LARC patients received NCR. Factors associated with adherence included white race (OR = 2.15, p = 0.024), private insurance (OR = 2.70, p = 0.005), employed status (OR = 2.30, p = 0.031), age at diagnosis (OR = 0.74, p = 0.032), appropriate local staging (OR = 9.17, p < 0.0001), and diagnosis later in the study period (OR per 1 year = 1.20, p = 0.006). By multivariate analysis, private insurance (OR = 2.51, p = 0.023), younger age (OR per 10 years = 0.72, p = 0.048) and appropriate local staging (OR = 6.67, p < 0.0001) were associated with adherence.

CONCLUSION

Guideline adherence for LARC in our system is low and is impacted by employment, race and insurance status. Standard of care compliance remains an important target for improvement efforts in this underserved region of the nation's Mid-South.

Barriers and enablers to the implementation of multidisciplinary team meetings: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Background

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines recommend discussion by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) to review and plan the management of patients for a variety of cancers. However, not all patients diagnosed with cancer are presented at an MDT.

Objectives

(1) To identify the factors (barriers and enablers) influencing presentation of all patients to, and the perceived value of, MDT meetings in the management of patients with pancreatic cancer and; (2) to identify potential interventions that could overcome modifiable barriers and enhance enablers using the theoretical domains framework (TDF).

Methods

Semistructured interviews were conducted with radiologists, surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, gastroenterologists, palliative care specialists and nurse specialists based in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Interviews were conducted either in person or via videoconferencing. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, deidentified and data were thematically coded according to the 12 domains explored within the TDF. Common belief statements were generated to compare the variation between participant responses.

Results

In total, 29 specialists were interviewed over a 4-month period. Twenty-two themes and 40 belief statements relevant to all the TDF domains were generated. Key enablers influencing MDT practices included a strong organisational focus (social/professional role and identity), beliefs about the benefits of an MDT discussion (beliefs about consequences), the use of technology, for example, videoconferencing (environmental context and resources), the motivation to provide good quality care (motivation and goals) and collegiality (social influences). Barriers included: absence of palliative care representation (skills), the number of MDT meetings (environmental context and resources), the cumulative cost of staff time (beliefs about consequences), the lack of capacity to discuss all patients within the allotted time (beliefs about capabilities) and reduced confidence to participate in discussions (social influences).

Conclusions

The internal and external organisational structures surrounding MDT meetings ideally need to be strengthened with the development of agreed evidence-based protocols and referral pathways, a focus on resource allocation and capabilities, and a culture that fosters widespread collaboration for all stages of pancreatic cancer.

Analysis and impact of a multidisciplinary lymphoma virtual tumor board

The aim is to prospectively evaluate the impact of a multidisciplinary lymphoma virtual tumor board. The utility of multi-site interactive lymphoma-specific tumor boards has not been reported. The Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board is a component of the International Mayo Clinic Care Network (MCCN). The format includes the clinical case presentation, presentation of radiology and hematopathology findings by the appropriate subspecialist, proposed treatment options, review of the literature pertinent to the case, pharmacy contributions, and discussion followed by recommendations. Three hundred and nine consecutive highly selected real-time cases with a diagnosis of lymphoma were presented at the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board from January 2014 to June 2018 and decisions were prospectively tracked to assess its impact on the treatment decisions. A total of 309 cases were prospectively evaluated. One hundred and forty (45.3%) cases had some changes made or recommended. The total changes suggested were 179, as some cases had more than one recommendation. There were 93 (30%) clinical management recommendations, 45 (14.6%) additional testing recommendations, 29 (9.4%) pathology changes, and 6 (1.9%) radiology changes. In an electronic evaluation process, 93% of the responders reported an improvement in knowledge and competence, and 100% recommended no change in format of the board. A multidisciplinary lymphoma tumor board approach was found to have a meaningful impact on lymphoma patients while enhancing interdisciplinary interactions and education for multiple levels of the clinical care team.

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.

Use of the KT-MCC strategy to improve the quality of decision making for multidisciplinary cancer conferences: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary Cancer Conferences (MCCs) are increasingly used to guide treatment decisions for patients with cancer, though numerous barriers to optimal MCC decision-making quality have been identified. We aimed to improve the quality of MCC decision making through the use of an implementation bundle titled the KT-MCC Strategy. The Strategy included use of discussion tools (standard case intake tool and a synoptic discussion tool), workshops, MCC team and chair training, and audit and feedback. Implementation strategies were selected using a theoretically-rooted and integrated KT approach, meaning members of the target population (MCC participants) assisted with the design and implementation of the intervention and strategies. We evaluated implementation quality of the KT-MCC Strategy and initial signals of impact on decision making quality.

METHODS

This was a before-and-after study design among 4 MCC teams. Baseline data (before-phase) were collected for a period of 2 months to assess the quality of MCC decision making. Study teams selected the intervention strategies they wished to engage with. Post-intervention data (after-phase) were collected for 4 months. Implementation quality outcomes included reach, adherence/fidelity and adaptation. We also evaluated feasibility of data management. Decision making quality was evaluated on a per-case and per-round level using the MTB-MODe and MDT-OARS tools, respectively.

RESULTS

There were a total of 149 cases and 23 MCCs observed in the before phase and 260 cases and 35 MCCs observed in the after phase. Teams implemented 3/5 strategies; adherence to selected strategies varied by MCC team. The per-round quality of MCCs improved by 11% (41.0 to 47.3, p = < 0.0001). The quality of per-case decision-making did not improve significantly (32.3 to 32.6, p = 0.781).

CONCLUSION

While per round MCC decision making quality improved significantly, per-case decision-making quality did not. We posit that the limited improvements on decision making quality may be attributed to implementation quality gaps, including a lack of uptake of and adherence to theoretically-identified implementation strategies. Our findings highlight the importance of evaluating implementation quality and processes, iterative testing, and engagement of key gatekeepers in the implementation process.

Using taTME to maintain restorative options in locally advanced rectal cancer: A technical note

BACKGROUND

The safe adoption of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has occurred in Australasia as previously reported by the current authors. Planes beyond TME can be utilised in more advanced cases to achieve negative margins during transanal dissection.

METHODS

In this article we describe how taTME is used to perform an en-bloc partial vaginectomy and aid restore intestinal and vaginal continuity in a young female with a locally advanced rectal cancer and posterior vaginal wall involvement in the pre-treatment magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

The transanal technique allowed the surgeons to remove a disc of vagina, ensure organ preservation and control the main R1 risk point. An R0 resection was achieved.

CONCLUSION

This technical note highlights that in experienced hands, taTME may be safely implemented to maintain restorative options in locally advanced rectal cancer requiring resection beyond the total mesorectal excision plane.

Higher number of multidisciplinary tumor board meetings per case leads to improved clinical outcome

BACKGROUND

This analysis aims at evaluating the impact of multidisciplinary tumor boards on clinical outcome of multiple tumor entities, the effect of the specific number of multidisciplinary tumor boards and potential differences between the tumor entities.

METHODS

By a matched-pair analysis we compared the response to treatment, overall survival, relapse or disease free survival and progression free survival of patients whose cases were discussed in a tumor board meeting with patients whose cases were not. It was performed with patients registered in the cancer registry of the University of Bonn and diagnosed between 2010 and 2016. After the matching process with a pool of 7262 patients a total of 454 patients with 66 different tumor types were included in this study.

RESULTS

First, patients with three or more multidisciplinary tumor board meetings in their history show a significantly better overall survival than patients with no tumor board meeting. Second, response to treatment, relapse free survival and time to progression were not found to be significantly different. Third, there was no significant difference for a specific tumor entity.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a positive impact of a higher number of multidisciplinary tumor boards on the clinical outcome. Also, our analysis hints towards a positive effect of multidisciplinary tumor boards on overall survival.

Early experience with Watson for Oncology: a clinical decision-support system for prostate cancer treatment recommendations

PURPOSE

Urological oncologists have difficulty providing optimal personalized care due to rapid alterations in scientific research results, medical advancements, and treatment guidelines. IBM's Watson for Oncology (WFO) is an artificial intelligence clinical decision-support system that assists oncologists with evidence-based treatment recommendations. In the present study, we examined the level of concordance between the treatment recommendations for prostate cancer according to WFO and the actual treatments that the patients received in the department of urology.

METHODS

We enrolled 201 patients who received prostate cancer treatment between January 2018 and June 2018. WFO provided treatment recommendations using clinical data in three categories: recommended, for consideration, and not recommended. These were compared with the actual treatments received by patients. Prostate cancer treatments were considered concordant if the received treatments were included in the "recommended" or "for consideration" categories by WFO.

RESULTS

The patients' mean age was 71.2 years. There were 60 (29.9%) and 114 (56.7%) patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score ≥ 1 and non-organ confined disease (stage III/IV), respectively. The overall prostate cancer treatment concordance rate was 73.6% ("recommended": 53.2%; "for consideration": 20.4%). An ECOG performance score ≥ 1 and older age (≥ 75 years) were significantly associated with discordance (p = 0.001 and p = 0.026, respectively) on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

In the present study, the treatment recommendations by WFO and the actual received treatments in the department of urology showed a relatively high concordance rate in prostate cancer patients.

Improvement of Care in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Influence of the Introduction of Standardized Structured Reporting for Pathology

PURPOSE

The use of standardized structured reporting (SSR) can improve communication between cancer specialists, which might improve clinical care; however, there are no reliable data on whether the introduction of SSR is associated with improvements in clinical outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands, including all patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) from 2009 to 2014. As a reference, cohorts of 2007 and 2008 were included. Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used and combined with data from the Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA) and the Dutch ColoRectal Audit. We tested the preformulated hypothesis that use of SSR improves the care of patients with CRC by improving the completeness of the pathology reports, the quality of the pathology evaluation, and patient outcomes with respect to treatment and survival.

RESULTS

We included 72,859 patients with CRC (23.8% reference, 32.9% SSR, and 43.3% narrative reports). Use of SSR increased over time, which resulted in more complete pathology reports (95.8% v 89.8%; P < .001). Risk assessment in stage II colon cancer was more adequate and resulted in an increased delivery of adjuvant therapy in patients with SSR (19.6% v 15.1%; P = .001). Risk of death for patients in the SSR group was significantly lowered (corrected hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI 0.90 to 0.97).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that use of SSR improved patient care in those with CRC by providing more complete reports of higher quality, which had significant effects on the delivery of adjuvant therapy and patient outcomes.

Assessing Concordance With Watson for Oncology, a Cognitive Computing Decision Support System for Colon Cancer Treatment in Korea

PURPOSE

IBM Watson for Oncology (WFO) is a clinical decision-support computing system that provides oncologists with evidence-based treatment recommendations for a variety of cancer diagnoses. The evidence-based supported treatment recommendations are presented in three categories: Recommended, representing the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) preferred approach; For Consideration, evidence-based alternative treatments; and Not Recommended, alternative therapies that may be unacceptable. We examined the absolute concordance of treatment options with that of the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team of oncologists from Gachon University, Gil Medical Centre, Incheon, South Korea.

METHODS

We enrolled 656 patients with stage II, III, and IV colon cancer between 2009 and 2016. Cases were processed using WFO and, using retrospective clinical data, outputs were compared with the actual treatment the patient received. Absolute concordance was defined as an alignment of recommendation in the Recommended MSKCC preferred-approach category. Treatment recommendations that were represented in the For Consideration category were not the focus of this study.

RESULTS

The absolute concordance between the WFO-derived MSKCC preferred approach and Gil Medical Centre treatment recommendations was 48.9%. The percentage of cases found to be acceptable was 65.8% (432 of 656) and the stage-specific concordance rate was 32.5% for patients with stage II disease who had risk factors and 58.8% for patients with stage III disease. Patients 70 years of age and older had a concordance rate of only 20.2%, whereas younger patients had a concordance rate of 63.8% ( P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

The main reasons attributed to the low concordance rate were age, reimbursement plan, omitting chemotherapy after liver resection, and not recommending biologic agents (ie, cetuximab and bevacizumab).

Identification of barriers and facilitators in nationwide implementation of standardized structured reporting in pathology: a mixed method study

Standardized structured reporting (SSR) enables high-quality pathology reporting, but implementing SSR is slow. The objective of this study is to identify both barriers and facilitators that pathologists encounter in SSR, in order to develop tailored implementation tools to increase SSR usage. We used a mixed method design: a focus group interview helped to identify barriers and facilitators in SSR. The findings were classified into the following domains: innovation, individual professional, social setting, organization, and economic and political context. We used a web-based survey among Dutch pathologists to quantify the findings. Ten pathologists participated in the focus group interview, and 97 pathologists completed the survey. The results of both showed that pathologists perceive barriers related to SSR itself. Particularly its incompatibility caused lack of nuance (73%, n = 97) in the standardized structured pathology report. Regarding the individual professional, knowledge about available SSR-templates was lacking (28%, n = 97), and only 44% (n = 94) of the respondents agreed that using SSR facilitates the most accurate diagnosis. Related to social setting, support from the multidisciplinary team members was lacking (45%, n = 94). At organization level, SSR leads to extra work (52%, n = 94) because of its incompatibility with other information systems (38%, n = 93). Main facilitators of SSR were incorporation of speech recognition (54%, n = 94) and improvement in communication during multidisciplinary team meetings (69%, n = 94). Both barriers and facilitators existed in various domains. These factors can be used to develop implementation tools to encourage SSR usage.

Effectiveness of the Multidisciplinary Team Model in Treating Colorectal Cancer

The multidisciplinary team (MDT) model involves multiple medical professionals providing integrated medical care. Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the highest prevalence of cancer in Taiwan. This study examines and evaluates the survival rates of CRC patients treated under the MDT model. In this retrospective and prospective study, 651 CRC patients were recruited. They were divided into 2 groups: the MDT group and the traditional care (TC) group. The MDT group comprised 326 patients who received care from a MDT. The TC group comprised 325 patients who received care from a TC. The outcome variables were survival rates, follow-up appointment compliance, and 14-day readmission rates. Adopting the MDT model for CRC care increased patient follow-up appointment compliance rates at the first week, first month, and third month (p = .032, p = .007, p = .001, respectively). The model also effectively reduced patients' 14-day readmission rates. The results indicated that the survival rates of the MDT care were superior to those of TC. The adoption of the MDT model to treat CRC effectively enhanced clinical treatment adherence, increased survival rates, and reduced the 14-day readmission rate.

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.

Determination of Tumor Location in Rectosigmoid Carcinomas: Difficulties in Preoperative Diagnostics

Differentiation between rectal and sigmoid carcinomas is a diagnostic challenge with important implications for further treatment. Depending on the tumor stage, treatment for rectal carcinoma consists of preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy and surgery. Sigmoid carcinomas are treated with surgery alone. We established the diagnostic accuracy of flexible endoscopy, MRI and/or CT scan, and both modalities combined as reflected by the conclusion of our multidisciplinary team (MDT). Furthermore, we assessed the treatment consequences of misdiagnosis. Consecutive patients were included who underwent surgery from January 2012 to January 2017 for colorectal carcinoma located ≤20 cm from the anal verge as determined by flexible colonoscopy. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI/CT, flexible endoscopy and the final MDT conclusion were analyzed as index test. The location of the tumor during surgery and the type of surgery was the reference standard. We included 293 patients. Flexible endoscopy had a diagnostic accuracy of 90% and for MRI/CT scanning this was 86–87%. Combination of both modalities improved diagnostic accuracy to 96%. Due to misdiagnosis during initial staging, three patients (1%) erroneously underwent neoadjuvant treatment and in two patients neoadjuvant treatment was potentially erroneously omitted. In conclusion, the combination of both flexible endoscopy and MRI/CT (the MDT conclusion) improves diagnostic accuracy. Erroneous clinical diagnosis can lead to under- and overtreatment.

Population-based study of surgical treatment with and without tumour resection in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Population-based studies of treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) are lacking. The aim was to investigate the surgical treatment of patients with LRRC at a national population-based level.

METHODS

All patients undergoing abdominal resection for primary rectal cancer between 1995 and 2002 in Sweden with LRRC as a first event were included. Detailed information about treatment, complications and outcomes was collected from the medical records. The patients were analysed in three groups: patients who had resection of the LRRC, those treated without tumour resection and patients who received best supportive care only.

RESULTS

In all, 426 patients were included in the study. Of these, 149 (35·0 per cent) underwent tumour resection, 193 (45·3 per cent) had treatment without tumour resection and 84 (19·7 per cent) received best supportive care. Abdominoperineal resection was the most frequent surgical procedure, performed in 65 patients (43·6 per cent of those who had tumour resection). Thirteen patients had total pelvic exenteration. In total, 63·8 per cent of those whose tumour was resected had potentially curative surgery. After tumour resection, 62 patients (41·6 per cent) had a complication within 30 days. Patients who received surgical treatment without tumour resection had a lower complication rate but a significantly higher 30-day mortality rate than those who underwent tumour resection (10 versus 1·3 per cent respectively; P = 0·002). Of all patients included in the study, 22·3 per cent had potentially curative treatment and the 3-year survival rate for these patients was 56 per cent.

CONCLUSION

LRRC is a serious condition with overall poor outcome. Patients undergoing curative surgery have an acceptable survival rate but substantial morbidity. There is room for improvement in the management of patients with LRRC.

Can the completeness of radiological cancer staging reports be improved using proforma reporting? A prospective multicentre non-blinded interventional study across 21 centres in the UK

OBJECTIVES

Following a diagnosis of cancer, the detailed assessment of prognostic stage by radiology is a crucial determinant of initial therapeutic strategy offered to patients. Pretherapeutic stage by imaging is known to be inconsistently documented. We tested whether the completeness of cancer staging radiology reports could be improved through a nationally introduced pilot of proforma-based reporting for a selection of six common cancers.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional study comparing the completeness of radiology cancer staging reports before and after the introduction of proforma reporting.

SETTING

Twenty-one UK National Health Service hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

1283 cancer staging radiology reports were submitted.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Radiology staging reports across the six cancers types were evaluated before and after the implementation of proforma-based reporting. Report completeness was assessed using scoring forms listing the presence or absence of predetermined key staging data. Qualitative data regarding proforma implementation and usefulness were collected from questionnaires provided to radiologists and end-users.

RESULTS

Electronic proforma-based reporting was successfully implemented in 15 of the 21 centres during the evaluation period. A total of 787 preproforma and 496 postproforma staging reports were evaluated. In the preproforma group, only 48.7% (5586/11 470) of key staging items were present compared with 87.3% (6043/6920) in the postproforma group. Thus, the introduction of proforma reporting produced a 78% improvement in staging completeness . This increase was seen across all cancer types and centres. The majority of participants found proforma reporting improved cancer reporting quality for their clinical practice .

CONCLUSION

The implementation of proforma reporting results in a significant improvement in the completeness of cancer staging reports. Proforma-based assessment of cancer stage enables objective comparisons of patient outcomes across centres. It should therefore become an auditable quality standard for cancer care.

Tertiary Care Multidisciplinary Teams Associated with Improved Survival in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Comparative Study

For stage II/III rectal cancer patients, comprehensive multidisciplinary care (MDC) affects outcomes. Randomized trials have shown the effectiveness of adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy in treatment of these patients. However, the effectiveness of collaboration within MDC is undetermined. It is possible that regional variation in survival outcomes may be tied to treatment facility. We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively collected database of patients with stage II/III rectal cancer who received MDC at any location and underwent oncologic colorectal resection at a tertiary care center (TCC) between 2005 and 2011. Of the 571 rectal cancer patients, 391 had a stage II/III rectal cancer and received surgery at a TCC. After exclusion criteria, we observed that 120 patients received neoadjuvant therapy and 119 patients received adjuvant therapy. For neoadjuvant patients, no difference in overall survival was observed between treatment received at a TCC versus an outside facility. However, a significant improvement in survival was observed in patients who received adjuvant therapy at a TCC ( P = 0.01). Thus, the location of postoperative adjuvant therapy shows improvement in 10-year survival at a TCC versus elsewhere. Thus, standardization of care can impact outcomes for invasive rectal cancer patients. The limitations of this study are its retrospective nature and relatively small sample size.

Patterns of complications following urinary tract reconstruction after multivisceral surgery in colorectal and anal cancer

BACKGROUND

Multi-visceral resection, including parts of the urinary tract, is sometimes warranted to achieve cancer clear resection margins and optimize survival in patients with locally advanced colorectal and anal cancer. The aim of this study was to assess morbidity after urinary tract reconstruction dictated by colorectal and anal malignancy and to identify potential predictors of urological complications.

METHODS

All patients undergoing surgery for colorectal or anal malignancy, including urinary tract resection and synchronous reconstruction, performed at the Karolinska University Hospital during 2004-2015 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Data was collected from medical records with follow-up until at least one year after the index surgery. Complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system of surgical complications.

RESULTS

The study included 189 patients; 121 underwent cystectomy and 68 partial ureter resection. The rate of high grade urological complications was 22%. The risk of major urological complications was significantly higher in patients subjected to ureter resection compared to after cystectomy (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.23-5.49). Also, preoperative radiotherapy and intestinal anastomotic dehiscence significantly increased the risk of high grade urological complications.

CONCLUSION

To achieve potentially curative resections with uninvolved margins in patients with locally advanced colorectal and anal cancer, multi-visceral resection including urinary tract reconstruction can be performed with reasonable morbidity.

Survival Outcomes Among Lung Cancer Patients Treated Using a Multidisciplinary Team Approach

BACKGROUND

Evidence favoring a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach in the treatment of lung cancer is scarce, especially in the United States. The purpose of the present investigation was to evaluate survival outcomes of lung cancer patients treated with an MDT compared with a traditional care model.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Stony Brook Cancer Center Registry was used to identify all lung cancer cases diagnosed between 2002 and 2016. We compared survival outcomes among 1956 lung cancer patients participating in our institution's Lung Cancer Evaluation Center's (LCEC) MDT program and 2315 lung cancer patients receiving traditional care. Log-ranks tests were used to evaluate differences in the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival outcomes between the 2 groups. To address inherent biases, Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the effects on survival outcomes and adjust for possible confounders. Propensity matching was also performed to account for the effects of selection bias.

RESULTS

The 5-year survival rates in the propensity-matched sample were one third greater among LCEC patients compared with those receiving a traditional care approach (33.6% vs. 23.0%; P < .001). After adjusting for potential confounders in the multivariable propensity-matched analyses, the LCEC model demonstrated a significant beneficial effect on 5-year survival outcomes compared with the standard treatment model (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.77).

CONCLUSION

The results of the present investigation suggest an improved survival benefit from usage of an MDT model versus a traditional care model in the treatment of lung cancer. Despite the use of sophisticated statistical methods to mitigate bias in a nonrandomized study, additional research is needed to determine the extent to which an MDT approach for lung cancer influences patient outcomes.

Population-based study of factors predicting treatment intention in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

Background

Local recurrence of rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with poor survival unless curative treatment is performed. The aim of this study was to investigate predictive factors for treatment with curative intent in patients with LRRC.

Methods

Population-based data for patients treated for primary rectal cancer between 1995 and 2002, and with LRRC reported as first event were collected from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and medical records. The associations between patient-, primary tumour- and LRRC-related factors and intention of the treatment for LRRC were determined. The impact of the identified predictive factors on prognosis after treatment with curative intent was also assessed.

Results

A total of 426 patients were included in the study, of whom 149 (35·0 per cent) received treatment with curative intent. Factors significantly associated with treatment of the LRRC with palliative intent were primary surgery with abdominoperineal resection (odds ratio (OR) 5·16, 95 per cent c.i. 2·97 to 8·97), age at diagnosis of LRRC at least 80 years (OR 4·82, 2·37 to 9·80), symptoms at diagnosis (OR 2·79, 1·56 to 5·01) and non-central location of the LRRC (OR 1·79, 1·15 to 2·79). The overall 5-year survival rate was 8·9 per cent for all patients and 23·1 per cent among those treated with curative intent. In patients treated with curative intent, factors associated with increased risk of death were age 80 years or more (hazard ratio (HR) 2·44, 95 per cent c.i. 1·55 to 3·86), presence of symptoms (HR 1·92, 1·20 to 3·05), non-central tumour location (HR 1·51, 1·01 to 2·26) and presence of hydronephrosis (HR 2·02, 1·18 to 3·44).

Conclusion

Non-central location of the LRRC, presence of symptoms and age at least 80 years at diagnosis of the LRRC were associated with treatment with palliative intent.

The impact of multidisciplinary team meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Conducting regular multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings requires significant investment of time and finances. It is thus important to assess the empirical benefits of such practice. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of MDT meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified by searching OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE databases from 1995 to April 2015, using the keywords: multidisciplinary team meeting* OR multidisciplinary discussion* OR multidisciplinary conference* OR case review meeting* OR multidisciplinary care forum* OR multidisciplinary tumour board* OR case conference* OR case discussion* AND oncology OR cancer. Studies were included if they assessed measurable outcomes, and used a comparison group and/or a pre- and post-test design.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles met inclusion criteria. There was limited evidence for improved survival outcomes of patients discussed at MDT meetings. Between 4% and 45% of patients discussed at MDT meetings experienced changes in diagnostic reports following the meeting. Patients discussed at MDT meetings were more likely to receive more accurate and complete pre-operative staging, and neo-adjuvant/adjuvant treatment. Quality of studies was affected by selection bias and the use of historical cohorts impacted study quality.

CONCLUSIONS

MDT meetings impact upon patient assessment and management practices. However, there was little evidence indicating that MDT meetings resulted in improvements in clinical outcomes. Future research should assess the impact of MDT meetings on patient satisfaction and quality of life, as well as, rates of cross-referral between disciplines.

The effect of multidisciplinary teams for rectal cancer on delivery of care and patient outcome: has the use of multidisciplinary teams for rectal cancer affected the utilization of available resources, proportion of patients meeting the standard of care, and does this translate into changes in patient outcome?

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that mandatory multidisciplinary team (MDT) participation improves process evaluation, outcomes, and technical aspects of surgery for rectal cancer in a stable practice of colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review of MDT data was conducted of all patients with colorectal cancer since 2010. Demographic, clinical stage, process evaluation, quality of surgery, and outcome data were collected. Total mesorectal excision and MDT required participation started 2013.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty patients were included in this study: 47 patients in 2014; 41 patients in 2013; and 42 patients pre-MDT. Improvements were seen in 12 of the 14 preoperative process variables, 6 significantly. Improvement in the completeness of total mesorectal excision (0% to 76%) was significant. Local recurrence occurred in 10% of the pre-MDT group, and follow-up is ongoing in the MDT groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MDT participation improves care of patients with rectal cancer. Preoperative clinical staging, multimodality treatment, pathologic staging, and technical aspects of surgery have improved.

Do Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) processes influence survival in patients with colorectal cancer? A population-based experience

Background

MDT (multidisciplinary team) meetings are considered an essential component of care for patients with cancer. However there is remarkably little direct evidence that such meetings improve outcomes. We assessed whether or not MDT (multidisciplinary team) processes influenced survival in a cohort of patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods

Observational study of a population-based cohort of 586 consecutive patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed in Tayside (Scotland) during 2006 and 2007.

Results

Recommendations from MDT meetings were implemented in 411/586 (70.1 %) of patients, the MDT+ group. The remaining175/586 (29.9 %) were either never discussed at an MDT, or recommendations were not implemented, MDT- group. The 5-year cause-specific survival (CSS) rates were 63.1 % (MDT+) and 48.2 % (MDT-), p < 0.0001. In analysis confined to patients who survived >6 weeks after diagnosis, the rates were 63.2 % (MDT+) and 57.7 % (MDT-), p = 0.064. The adjusted hazard rate (HR) for death from colorectal cancer was 0.73 (0.53 to 1.00, p = 0.047) in the MDT+ group compared to the MDT- group, in patients surviving >6 weeks the adjusted HR was 1.00 (0.70 to 1.42, p = 0.987). Any benefit from the MDT process was largely confined to patients with advanced disease: adjusted HR _(early) 1.32 (0.69 to 2.49, p = 0.401); adjusted HR_(advanced) 0.65 (0.45 to 0.96, p = 0.031).

Conclusions

Adequate MDT processes are associated with improved survival for patients with colorectal cancer. However, some of this effect may be more apparent than real – simply reflecting selection bias. The MDT process predominantly benefits the 40 % of patients who present with advanced disease and conveys little demonstrable advantage to patients with early tumours. These results call into question the current belief that all new patients with colorectal cancer should be discussed at an MDT meeting.

Current considerations in colorectal cancer surgery

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. The last decades improvement in survival in all stages of the disease has been achieved. Many factors contributes to this improvement; earlier diagnosis, better pre-operative staging, neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, better surgical method and approach, introduction of pre- and post-operative multidisciplinary team conferences and adjuvant chemotherapy. Currently, new modalities are developing; robotics and organ preserving through wait-and-watch will give colorectal surgeons even more treatment options. This article highlights important aspects of colorectal cancer management now and in the future.