Is there a Benefit of Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings for Patients with Gastrointestinal Malignancies?

Biliary drainage in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of an Italian consensus conference

BACKGROUND

Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction (MBDO) is a common event occurring along the natural history of both pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Epidemiological and biological features make MBDO one of the key elements of the clinical management of patients suffering for of pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma. The development of dedicated biliary lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is changing the clinical work up of patients with MBDO. i-EUS is an Italian network of clinicians and scientists with a special interest in biliopancreatic endoscopy, EUS in particular.

METHODS

The scientific methodology was chosen in line with international guidance and in a fashion similar to those applied by broader scientific associations. PICO questions were elaborated and subsequently voted by a broad panel of experts within a simplified Delphi process.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The manuscripts describes the results of a consensus conference organized by i-EUS with the aim of providing an evidence based-guidance for the appropriate use of the techniques in patients with MBDO.

The clinical utility of multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with complex benign upper gastrointestinal conditions

Patients with benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) conditions such as achalasia, gastroparesis and refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease often suffer from debilitating symptoms. These conditions can be complex and challenging to diagnose and treat, making them well suited for discussion within a multidisciplinary meeting (MDM). There is, however, a paucity of data describing the value of a benign UGI MDM. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of our unit's benign UGI MDM service and its outcomes. This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for all consecutive patients reviewed in the monthly benign UGI MDM between July 2021 and February 2024. The primary outcome was the incidence that MDM review changed clinical treatment. Secondary outcomes included change in diagnosis, additional investigations and referrals to subspecialists. A total of 104 patients met inclusion criteria. A total of 73 (70.2%) patients had a change in their overall management following MDM review; 25 (24.0%), 31 (29.8%) and 48 (46.2%) patients had changes in pharmacological, endoscopic and surgical interventions respectively. Most changes in pharmacological and endoscopic intervention involved treatment escalation, whereas most changes in surgical intervention involved treatment de-escalation. A total of 84 (80.8%) patients had a documented diagnosis post-MDM with 44 (42.3%) having a change in their pre-MDM diagnosis. 50 (48.1%) patients had additional investigation/s requested and 49 (47.1%) had additional referral pathway/s recommended. Over two thirds of patients had at least one aspect of their management plan changed following MDM review. These changes occurred across pharmacological, endoscopic, and surgical interventions.

Recommendations for the implementation and conduct of multidisciplinary team meetings for those providing endometriosis and adenomyosis care - a Delphi consensus of the European Endometriosis League (EEL)

Background

The treatment of endometriosis and adenomyosis requires a complex, multidisciplinary approach. Some centres have established multidisciplinary teams (MDT) and regular meetings. There are currently no international data or recommendations.

Objectives

To examine existing MDT meetings and define consensus recommendations to support implementation and conduct.

Materials and Methods

Online questionnaires were sent through the European Endometriosis League (EEL) based on a Delphi protocol. After a literature review and assessment of existing MDT meetings, essential aspects for consensus statements were identified. The consensus statements were evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale with the possibility to modify them. Results were analysed between rounds and reported to the respondents. Consensus, defined as ≥70% agreement, concluded the Delphi process when achieved in the majority of statements.

Main outcome measures

Prevalence and type of existing MDT meetings and recommendations.

Results

In round 1, 69 respondents participated, with 49.3% (34) having an MDT meeting at their institutions, of which 97% are multidisciplinary. 50 % meet once a month and 64.7% indicated that less than 25% of their patients are discussed. Throughout the three rounds, 47 respondents from 21 countries participated. During the process, 82 statements were defined, with an agreement of 92.7% on the statements.

Conclusions

This study assessed existing MDT meetings for endometriosis and adenomyosis and developed recommendations for their implementation and conduct. The consensus group supports the strengths of MDT meetings, highlighting their role in offering guideline-based, multidisciplinary, and personalised care.

What is new?

This study presents the first international data and recommendations on MDT meetings for endometriosis and adenomyosis.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence on Tumor Boards: Perspectives from Surgeons, Medical Oncologists and Radiation Oncologists

The integration of multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is fundamental in delivering state-of-the-art cancer treatment, facilitating collaborative diagnosis and management by a diverse team of specialists. Despite the clear benefits in personalized patient care and improved outcomes, the increasing burden on MTBs due to rising cancer incidence and financial constraints necessitates innovative solutions. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical field offers a promising avenue to support clinical decision-making. This review explores the perspectives of clinicians dedicated to the care of cancer patients-surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists-on the application of AI within MTBs. Additionally, it examines the role of AI across various clinical specialties involved in cancer diagnosis and treatment. By analyzing both the potential and the challenges, this study underscores how AI can enhance multidisciplinary discussions and optimize treatment plans. The findings highlight the transformative role that AI may play in refining oncology care and sustaining the efficacy of MTBs amidst growing clinical demands.

The role of the multidisciplinary tumor board after endoscopic resection of malignant tumors: is it worth it?

OBJECTIVES

The value of multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) in the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer patients is well known. Most of the current evidence focuses on advanced cancer cases, whereas little is known about the effect of MTBs on early tumors, especially after endoscopic resection. The aim of our study is to evaluate the value of the MTB after endoscopic resection of malignant tumors of the gastrointestinal tract.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all endoscopically resected malignant tumors in our department between 2011 and 2019, focusing on the existence of an MDT recommendation after endoscopic resection, the MDT adherence to the current guidelines, and the implementation of the recommendation by the patients.

RESULTS

We identified 198 patients fulfilling our inclusion criteria, of whom 168 (85%) were discussed in the MDT after endoscopic resection. In total, 155 of the recommendations (92%) were in accordance with the current guidelines, and 147 (88%) of them were implemented by the patients. The MDT discussion itself did not influence the overall survival, whereas the implementation of the MTB recommendation was associated with a significantly better prognosis. Deviations of the MDT recommendation from the guidelines had no effect on the overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The discussion of endoscopically resected malignant tumors in the MTB is crucial for the treatment of patients with this type of cancer, since the implementation of the MTB recommendation, even if it deviates from the current guidelines, improves the prognosis.

Immunotherapy for colorectal cancer: Rational strategies and novel therapeutic progress

There are increasing incidences and mortality rates for colorectal cancer in the world. It is common for chemotherapy and radiation given to patients with colorectal cancer to cause toxicities that limit their effectiveness and cause cancer cells to become resistant to these treatments. Additional targeted treatments are needed to improve patient's quality of life and outcomes. Immunotherapy has rapidly emerged as an incredibly exciting and promising avenue for cancer treatment in recent years. This innovative approach provides novel options for tackling solid tumors, effectively establishing itself as a new cornerstone in cancer treatment. Specifically, in the realm of colorectal cancer (CRC), there is great promise in developing new drugs that target immune checkpoints, offering a hopeful and potentially transformative solution. While immunotherapy of CRC has made significant advances, there are still obstacles and limitations. CRC patients have a poor response to treatment because of the immune-suppressing function of their tumor microenvironment (TME). In addition to blocking inhibitory immune checkpoints, checkpoint-blocking antibodies may also boost immune responses against tumors. The review summarizes recent advances in immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for CRC, including CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, LAG-3, and TIM-3.

Improving Outcomes in the Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: The Role of the Multidisciplinary Team Discussion Intervention

Objectives: There is disagreement over the prognostic value of multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). This study examined how an MDT affected patients with advanced GISTs in terms of their overall survival (OS) and whether it may enhance their performance status (PS). Methods: A retrospective data analysis was conducted on patients with advanced GISTs between 2000 and 2022. Depending on whether they had received the MDT discussion intervention, the patients were split into two groups. The OS between the two groups was compared using the Kaplan–Meier method. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to analyze the prognostic variables for advanced GIST. Fisher’s test was used to investigate the relationship between an MDT and PS. Results: There were 122 patients with an MDT and 117 patients without an MDT in this study. In comparison to the non-MDT group, the MDT group showed a higher survival rate (5-year OS, 42.62% vs. 28.21%, p < 0.05). MDT was an independent prognostic factor for OS in univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses (p < 0.05). Fisher’s test revealed that there were variations in PS between the two groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The effectiveness of an MDT in the treatment of advanced GIST was examined for the first time in this study. MDT discussion intervention is an effective measure for improving the outcomes of patients with advanced GISTs.

Multidisciplinary Treatment of Fracture-Related Infection Has a Positive Impact on Clinical Outcome-A Retrospective Case Control Study at a Tertiary Referral Center

OBJECTIVES

Fracture-related infection (FRI) is a major complication in orthopedic and trauma surgery. The management and choice of treatment can be difficult depending on multiple factors. Therefore, we implemented a weekly multidisciplinary team discussion to determine diagnostic and treatment strategies in FRI patients and aimed to analyze its effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Clinical outcomes of FRI patients treated before and after implementation of a structured multidisciplinary treatment (MDT) approach with a weekly case discussion were compared at a follow-up of 12 months.

RESULTS

In total, n = 117 were eligible for enrolment, whereby n = 58 patients (72.4% male, mean age 56.7 ± 16.8 years) constituted the MDT group and n = 59 patients (72.9% male, mean age 55.0 ± 16.5 years) the control group. In the MDT group more cases were treated with local antibiotics (67.2% vs. 27.1%, p < 0.001) and significant less amputations (3.4% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.014), as well as less revision surgeries (1.5 ± 1.2 (0-5) vs. 2.2 ± 1.2 (0-7), p = 0.048) were performed. A trend towards less debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedures, lower rates of recurrence of infection and less treatment failures in the MDT group was observable, even though not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

An MDT approach providing a patient tailored treatment concept in the treatment of FRI patients appears to be beneficial for the affected patients. Quality and efficacy of implemented MDT meetings should further be evaluated to provide sufficient evidence to further implement this valuable tool in clinical practice and decision making.

Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

The role of the multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) in the assessment of pancreatic cancer diagnosis and resectability: A tertiary referral center experience

Background

The introduction of multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) for the diagnostic and therapeutic pathway of several oncological disease significantly ameliorated patients' outcomes. However, only few evidences are currently present on the potential impact of the MDTB on pancreatic cancer (PC) management. Aim of this study is to report how MDTB may influence PC diagnosis and treatment, with particular focus on PC resectability assessment and the correspondence between MDTB definition of resectability and intraoperative findings.

Methods

All patients with a proven or suspected diagnosis of PC discussed at the MDTB between 2018 and 2020 were included in the study. An evaluation of diagnosis, tumor response to oncological/radiation therapy and resectability before and after the MDTB was conducted. Moreover, a comparison between the MDTB resectability assessment and the intraoperative findings was performed.

Results

A total of 487 cases were included in the analysis: 228 (46.8%) for diagnosis evaluation, 75 (15.4%) for tumor response assessment after/during medical treatment, 184 (37.8%) for PC resectability assessment. As a whole, MDTB led to a change in treatment management in 89 cases (18.3%): 31/228 (13.6%) in the diagnosis group, 13/75 (17.3%) in the assessment of treatment response cohort and 45/184 (24.4%) in the PC resectability evaluation group. As a whole, 129 patients were given indication to surgery. Surgical resection was accomplished in 121 patients (93.7%), with a concordance rate of resectability between MDTB discussion and intraoperative findings of 91.5%. Concordance rate was 99% for resectable lesions and 64.3% for borderline PCs.

Conclusions

MDTB discussion consistently influences PC management, with significant variations in terms of diagnosis, tumor response assessment and resectability. In this last regard, MDTB discussion plays a key role, as demonstrated by the high concordance rate between MDTB resectability definition and intraoperative findings.

Factors influencing the quality and functioning of oncological multidisciplinary team meetings: results of a systematic review

Background

Discussing patients with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) is customary in cancer care worldwide and requires a significant investment in terms of funding and time. Efficient collaboration and communication between healthcare providers in all the specialisms involved is therefore crucial. However, evidence-based criteria that can guarantee high-quality functioning on the part of MDTMs are lacking. In this systematic review, we examine the factors influencing the MDTMs’ efficiency, functioning and quality, and offer recommendations for improvement.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases (01–01-1990 to 09–11-2021), using different descriptions of ‘MDTM’ and ‘neoplasm’ as search terms. Inclusion criteria were: quality of MDTM, functioning of MDTM, framework and execution of MDTM, decision-making process, education, patient advocacy, patient involvement and evaluation tools. Full text assessment was performed by two individual authors and checked by a third author.

Results

Seventy-four articles met the inclusion criteria and five themes were identified: 1) MDTM characteristics and logistics, 2) team culture, 3) decision making, 4) education, and 5) evaluation and data collection. The quality of MDTMs improves when the meeting is scheduled, structured, prepared and attended by all core members, guided by a qualified chairperson and supported by an administrator. An appropriate amount of time per case needs to be established and streamlining of cases (i.e. discussing a predefined selection of cases rather than discussing every case) might be a way to achieve this. Patient centeredness contributes to correct diagnosis and decision making. While physicians are cautious about patients participating in their own MDTM, the majority of patients report feeling better informed without experiencing increased anxiety. Attendance at MDTMs results in closer working relationships between physicians and provides some medico-legal protection. To ensure well-functioning MDTMs in the future, junior physicians should play a prominent role in the decision-making process. Several evaluation tools have been developed to assess the functioning of MDTMs.

Conclusions

MDTMs would benefit from a more structured meeting, attendance of core members and especially the attending physician, streamlining of cases and structured evaluation. Patient centeredness, personal competences of MDTM participants and education are not given sufficient attention.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08112-0.

The Prognostic Effect of Multidisciplinary Team Intervention in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer

Background: The effect of multidisciplinary team intervention (MDT) on the prognosis of advanced gastric cancer (GC) is still controversial. This study aims to analyze the effect of MDTs on the overall survival time of advanced gastric cancer patients. Methods: Patients with advanced GC who underwent surgical treatment between 2007 and 2014 were included in the study. They were divided into two groups; the MDT group received MDT treatment and the non-MDT group received conventional treatment. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the overall survival (OS) of the two groups. The prognostic factors of advanced GC were evaluated by multivariate Cox regression analysis. Results: 394 patients were included in our study. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the prognosis of advanced GC patients with who underwent MDT intervention was better than those without (3-year OS of 55.6% vs. 46.1%, p = 0.005), Multivariate analysis indicated that MDT intervention could reduce mortality (HR = 0.493, p < 0.001). Conclusions: MDT intervention is an effective measure that improves the survival of patients with advanced GC.

Multidisciplinary Care of Neurosurgical Patients with Genetic Syndromes

Neurosurgical patients with genetic syndromes often receive care from multidisciplinary teams. Successful models range from multiple providers in one clinic space seeing a patient together to specialists located at different institutions working together. Collaboration and bidirectional communication are key. Multidisciplinary care improves outcomes and patient satisfaction. Choosing the goal of the clinic, using ancillary staff, and obtaining institutional buy-in are important initial first steps to establishing a multidisciplinary team clinic. Multidisciplinary teams can leverage technology to expand care via telehealth in multidisciplinary clinics and more vitally communication between providers on the team.

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.

Virtual Clinical and Precision Medicine Tumor Boards, a Cloud-based Platform-mediated Implementation of Multidisciplinary Reviews among Oncology Centers in the Covid-19 Era: an Observational Study Protocol

Background

Multidisciplinary tumor boards play a pivotal role in the patient-centered clinical management and in the decision-making process to provide best evidence-based, diagnostic, and therapeutic care to patients with cancer. Among the barriers to achieve an efficient multidisciplinary tumor board, lack of time and geographical distance play a major role. Therefore, the elaboration of an efficient virtual multidisciplinary tumor board (VMTB) is a key point to successfully obtain an oncology team and implement a network among health professionals and institutions. This need is stronger than ever during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective

This paper presents a research protocol for an observational study focused on exploring the structuring process and the implementation of a multi-institutional VMTB in Sicily, Italy. Other endpoints include analysis of cooperation between participants, adherence to guidelines, patients’ outcomes, and patient satisfaction.

Methods

This protocol encompasses a pragmatic, observational, multicenter, noninterventional, prospective trial. The study’s programmed duration is 5 years, with a half-yearly analysis of the primary and secondary objectives’ measurements. Oncology care health professionals from various oncology subspecialties at oncology departments in multiple hospitals (academic and general hospitals as well as tertiary centers and community hospitals) are involved in a nonhierarchic manner. VMTB employs an innovative, virtual, cloud-based platform to share anonymized medical data that are discussed via a videoconferencing system both satisfying security criteria and compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Results

The protocol is part of a larger research project on communication and multidisciplinary collaboration in oncology units and departments spread in the Sicily region. The results of this study will particularly focus on the organization of VMTBs, involving oncology units present in different hospitals spread in the area, and creating a network to allow best patient care pathways and a hub-and-spoke relationship. The present results will also include data concerning organization skills and pitfalls, barriers, efficiency, number, and types with respect to clinical cases and customer satisfaction.

Conclusions

VMTB represents a unique opportunity to optimize patient management through a patient-centered approach. An efficient virtualization and data-banking system is potentially time-saving, a source for outcome data, and a detector of possible holes in the hull of clinical pathways. The observations and results from this VMTB study may hopefully be useful to design nonclinical and organizational interventions that enhance multidisciplinary decision-making in oncology.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/26220

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC): Pancreatic Cancer

European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give patients, health professionals, managers and policymakers a guide to essential care throughout the patient journey. Pancreatic cancer is an increasing cause of cancer mortality and has wide variation in treatment and care in Europe. It is a major healthcare burden and has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges. Care must be carried out only in pancreatic cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals detailed here. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

Beyond the Guidelines: The Grey Zones of the Management of Gastric Cancer. Consensus Statements from the Gastric Cancer Italian Network (GAIN)

BACKGROUND

Management of gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains challenging, because of the heterogeneity in tumor biology within the upper gastrointestinal tract. Daily clinical practice is full of grey areas regarding the complexity of diagnostic, staging, and therapeutic procedures. The aim of this paper is to provide a guide for clinicians facing challenging situations in routine practice, taking a multidisciplinary consensus approach based on available literature.

METHODS

The GAIN (GAstric cancer Italian Network) group was established with the aims of reviewing literature evidence, discussing key issues in prevention, diagnosis, and management of gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma, and offering a summary of statements. A Delphi consensus method was used to obtain opinions from the expert panel of specialists.

RESULTS

Forty-nine clinical questions were identified in six areas of interest: role of multidisciplinary team; risk factors; diagnosis; management of early gastric cancer and multimodal approach to localized gastric cancer; treatment of elderly patients with locally advanced resectable disease; and treatment of locally advanced and metastatic cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The statements presented may guide clinicians in practical management of this disease.

The impact of the multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) on the management of pancreatic diseases in a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

The implementation of multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) meetings significantly ameliorated the management of oncological diseases. However, few evidences are currently present on their impact on pancreatic cancer (PC) management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the MDTB on PC diagnosis, resectability and tumor response to oncological treatment compared with indications before discussion.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with a suspected or proven diagnosis of PC presented at the MDTB from 2017 to 2019 were included in the study. Changes of diagnosis, resectability and tumor response to oncological/radiation treatment between pre- and post-MDTB discussion were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 438 cases were included in the study: 249 (56.8%) were presented as new diagnoses, 148 (33.8%) for resectability assessment and 41 (9.4%) for tumor response evaluation to oncological treatment. MDTB discussion led to a change in diagnosis in 54/249 cases (21.7%), with a consequent treatment strategy variation in 36 cases (14.5%). Change in resectability was documented in 44/148 cases (29.7%), with the highest discrepancy for borderline lesions. The treatment strategy was thus modified in 27 patients (18.2%). The MDTB brought a modification in the tumor response assessment in 6/41 cases (14.6%), with a consequent protocol modification in four (9.8%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

MDTB discussion significantly impacts on PC management, especially in high-volume centers, with consistent variations in terms of diagnosis, resectability and tumor response assessment compared with indications before discussion.

Oncologic Benefit of Adjuvant Chemoradiation after D2 Gastrectomy: A Stepwise Hierarchical Pooled Analysis and Systematic Review

Our study aimed to evaluate the benefits of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after D2 gastrectomy, as compared to adjuvant chemotherapy, alone. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. We applied stepwise analyses that enabled the evaluation of data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), balanced studies, and all studies separately and in a hierarchical manner. Thirteen controlled studies, including six RCTs involving 2603 patients, were included. Overall pooled analysis revealed a disease-free survival benefit of CRT (odds ratio (OR): 1.264, p = 0.053), which was more evident in the subgroup analysis of RCTs (OR: 1.440, p = 0.006) and balanced studies (OR: 1.417, p < 0.001). Overall survival was insignificantly different in the overall pooled analysis (OR: 1.124, p = 0.347). However, the difference was marginally significant in the subgroup analysis of balanced studies (OR: 1.279, p = 0.055) and significant in the subgroup analysis of studies involving stage ≥III patients only (OR: 1.663, p = 0.005). Locoregional recurrence (LRR) reduction was noted in the overall pooled analysis (OR: 0.559, p = 0.012; pooled rate: 11.3% vs. 18.1%) and was more robust in the subgroup analyses. Grade ≥3 leukopenia was higher in the CRT arm (OR: 1.387, p = 0.004; pooled rate: 26.4% vs. 15.7%). CRT after D2 gastrectomy should be applied for patients with high risk of LRR (e.g., stage ≥ III), along with efforts to reduce leukopenia.

Medicolegal Considerations in Multidisciplinary Cancer Care

Health professionals participating in multidisciplinary team (MDT) cancer meetings may not be aware of their medicolegal obligations. This commentary aims to identify medicolegal issues concerning multidisciplinary cancer care and provides recommendations for future implementation. Predominant medicolegal issues related to MDT care were identified in the literature; these include patient consent and privacy at MDT meetings, professional liability, formal expression of dissenting views, and duty of care. Analysis of the literature prioritizes several recommendations for managing these issues. With limited precedent on which to base recommendations, this article identifies the formative evidence that may guide the management of these issues in future MDT practice.

Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life Before and After Treatment of Pancreatic and Periampullary Cancer: A Prospective Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

This study sought to assess patient satisfaction and quality of life (QoL) before and after treatment of pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective multicenter study of patients treated for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. General patient satisfaction was measured using the EORTC satisfaction with care questionnaire (IN-PATSAT32) at baseline and 3 months after treatment initiation, with a 10-point change on the Likert scale considered clinically meaningful. QoL was measured using the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). The influence of treatment (curative and palliative) on patient satisfaction and QoL was determined.

RESULTS

Of 100 patients, 71 completed follow-up questionnaires. General satisfaction with care decreased from 74.3 before treatment to 61.9 after treatment (P<.001), whereas global QoL increased from 68.4 to 71.4 (P=.39). Clinically meaningful reductions were also observed for the reported interpersonal skills of doctors (from 73.4 to 63.3) and exchange of information within the care team (from 63.5 to 52.5). Satisfaction scores were lower for patients treated with curative intent than for those treated with palliative intent regarding interpersonal skills of doctors (P=.01), information provision by doctors (P=.004), information provision by nurses (P=.02), availability of nurses (P=.004), exchange of information within the care team (P=.01), and hospital access (P=.02). In multivariable analysis, clinicopathologic or QoL factors were not independently associated with general patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction with care, but not QoL, decreased after pancreatic cancer treatment. Improvements in communication and interpersonal skills are needed to maintain patient satisfaction after treatment.

How Effective Is the Multidisciplinary Team Approach in Bariatric Surgery?

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are widely recommended in the management of bariatric surgery patients; however, there is limited evidence for their effectiveness. The aims of this study were to evaluate the decision-making process of a single-day bariatric MDT clinic and secondly to evaluate whether these MDT decisions were implemented.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study analysing MDT treatment decisions from February 2012 to June 2013 using an MDT proforma. The decision-making process of the MDT meeting was investigated by assessing the alterations in management plan between the surgeon and the rest of the MDT. Adherence to MDT decisions was also assessed.

RESULTS

Decisions regarding 200 consecutive patients were analyzed. There was MDT agreement for 55%, and patients were listed for surgery on the day of the MDT. There was MDT disagreement regarding 45%, with conflicting opinions expressed by surgeons in 33/200 (17%), anaesthetists in 60/200 (30%) and dieticians in 65/200 (33%). The MDT plan was instigated in 78% and the most common reason for failure was patients failing to attend for further assessment. By the end of the study, 85% of patients underwent bariatric surgery, 11.5% declined further input, 2.5% chose further weight loss and 1% were removed from waiting list.

CONCLUSION

Use of a single-day MDT clinic format resulted in a change in plan for a significant number of patients. This can be interpreted as improved quality of care for these patients, and we conclude the MDT approach is valuable.

Value of multidisciplinary collaboration in acute and chronic pancreatitis

Multidisciplinary collaboration (MDC) has been widely adopted in healthcare to optimize patient care. MDC brings several specialized healthcare providers to the table using several methods, including multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs), multidisciplinary clinics, teleconferences, and online multidisciplinary expert panels, to reach the goal of achieving the best diagnosis and treatment plan for complex diseases. Diagnosis and management of acute/chronic pancreatitis is complex which necessitates the development and utilization of MDC. The key members of pancreatitis MDM include gastroenterologists, radiologists, pathologists, hepatobiliary surgeons, chairperson, and a coordinator. After selection of admitted or referred patients, the availability of required information is reviewed, and then each case is discussed. The final diagnosis and treatment plan is confirmed by consensus, especially for complex cases that require endoscopic intervention or pancreatectomy and patients with the possibility of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. It has been shown that MDMs have improved the clinical outcome of patients with acute/chronic pancreatitis. In addition to MDM, the feasibility of multidisciplinary clinics, teleconferences, and online multidisciplinary expert panels for the management of pancreatic disorders has been investigated. Understanding structure, potential advantages, and limitations of MDC will help clinicians and healthcare systems in developing an optimized MDC to improve the management of acute/chronic pancreatitis. This narrative review summarized prior recommendations and explored the impact of MDC on clinical outcomes of patients with pancreatitis. Our recommendations offer a generalizable method that can be utilized by healthcare systems.

The results of pancreatic operations after the implementation of multidisciplinary team conference (MDT): A quality improvement study

BACKGROUND

Centralization has improved the outcome of complex operations including cancer surgery. Moreover, the implementation of multidisciplinary team conferences (MDT) has ameliorated the decision making, but the impact on patient outcome is controversial. The aim of the study was to investigate the outcome of pancreatic surgery in the setting of centralization and upfront multidisciplinary decision making.

METHOD

The decisions of MDT from 2010 to 2016 and the outcome of operations were compared with operations from 2003 to 2009 before centralization of pancreatic surgery and implementation of MDT. Data were drawn from the department's database and from hospital's electronic patient files.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2016, 7.015 patients were evaluated at the MDT. In 72.6% of patients a treatment plan followed the first evaluation, the referral diagnosis was changed in 12.4% of cases. Of 3.362 solid neoplasms, 1.680 (50.0%) were evaluated as resectable and 1.080 (32.1%) patients were operated. The annual resection rate of operated patients was78.3%-88.5% (median 80.0%) compared to 21.4% to 80.% (median 68.6%, p = 0.0001) from 2003 to 2009 with 279 operated patients. The post-operative 30 - and 90-days mortality from 2003 to 2009 and 2010 to 2016 was 3.4% vs. 1.8% (NS) and 5.0% vs 3.6% (NS). In the same periods explorative laparotomies and palliative resections decreased from 18.3% to 3.6% (p = 0.0001) and 18.6%-10.2% (p = 0.0002). The median survival of radically resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) from 2003 to 2009 and from 2010 to 2016 was 20.2 and 21.9 months, respectively (p = 0.687).

CONCLUSION

The MDT increased patient flow, improved quality of decision-making and offered more patients surgical treatment without increasing morbidity or mortality. But an impact on the long-term survival of patients with PAC was not found.

Structured Data Acquisition in Oncology

BACKGROUND

Demographic changes and improvement in therapy have shifted the focus of treatment towards chronic diseases and multiple health conditions. This has caused a tremendous increase in data per patient that needs to be integrated longitudinally and across departmental silos. The general increase in the volume of data per diagnostic examination and the number of diagnostic procedures per diagnostic pathway additionally accentuate this data integration challenge.

SUMMARY

Subspecialization in medicine has led to largely autonomously organized departments with in-dependent IT ecosystems. This patchwork of IT infrastructure is not prepared to meet the data integration challenge. The resulting lack of integrated information makes the treatment of chronically ill patients increasingly difficult and error prone. Key Message: A sustainable method for data ac-quisition is needed to aid multimodal treatment and improve efficiency in healthcare.

Tailored Web-Based Information for Younger and Older Patients with Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial of a Preparatory Educational Intervention on Patient Outcomes

Background

Many patients with cancer, including older patients (aged ≥65 years), consult the Web to prepare for their doctor’s visit. In particular, older patients have varying needs regarding the mode in which information is presented (eg, via textual, visual, or audiovisual modes) owing to age-related sensory (eg, impaired vision and hearing) and cognitive decline (eg, reduced processing speed). Therefore, Web-based information targeted at older patient populations is likely to be used and processed more effectively, and evaluated more positively, when tailored to age-related capabilities and preferences. This, in turn, may benefit patient outcomes.

Objective

This randomized controlled trial tested the effects of a Web-based tailored educational intervention among newly diagnosed younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients with cancer. We compared the intervention group who viewed a mode-tailored website (ie, enabling patients to tailor information using textual, visual, and audiovisual modes) with 3 control groups view a nontailored website (ie, text only, text with images, and text with videos). We examined website experience outcomes (ie, website satisfaction, website involvement, knowledge, anxiety, and communication self-efficacy) and consultation experience outcomes (ie, question asking during consultation, anxiety, and information recall).

Methods

Patients from a multidisciplinary outpatient clinic (N=232) viewed a mode-tailored or nontailored website as preparation before their hospital consultations to discuss diagnosis and treatment. Data were collected before (T1), during (T2), and after (T3) visitation. Website experience outcomes were assessed with questionnaires (T1). Patients’ question asking was coded from videotaped consultations, and anxiety was assessed through a questionnaire (T2). Telephone interviews were conducted to assess knowledge acquired from the website before (T1) and after consultation (T3), and information recall from the consultation (T3).

Results

The preparatory website was well used across all conditions (mean 34 min). Younger patients viewing the mode-tailored website were more satisfied before consultation (P=.02) and reported lower anxiety after consultation (P=.046; vs text only). This pattern was not found in older patients. Mode tailoring yielded no other significant differences in patient outcomes. Regression analyses showed that website involvement (beta=.15; P=.03) and, to a lesser extent, website satisfaction (beta=.15; P=.05) positively associated with knowledge before consultation (T1). In turn, higher knowledge before consultation (beta=.39; P<.001), together with time on the website (beta=.21; P=.002; T1), predicted information recall from consultations (T3). Patients with higher knowledge before consultation (T1) also reported higher knowledge from the website afterward (T3; beta=.22; P=.003).

Conclusions

Offering preparatory online information before consultations benefits information processing and patient outcomes of both younger and older newly diagnosed patients with cancer. Younger patients benefit even more when information is offered in a mode-tailored manner. We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and practical implications for patient-provider communication research in an electronic health era.

Clinical Trial

Netherlands Trial Register NTR5904; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5750

Regional oncology network between pancreatic centers safeguards waiting times for pancreatoduodenectomy

Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is increasingly performed in high-volume centers, which may compromise waiting times. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient flow and outcome of PD within a regional oncology network of two high-volume centers. A post hoc analysis of a partially retrospective and prospective database was performed of all patients who underwent PD for pancreatic or periampullary neoplasms in both centers of the Gastrointestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam, a collaboration between an academic center and affiliated general teaching hospital, from 2010 to 2014. Outcomes included waiting time to surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality. A total of 525 PDs were performed, 329 in the academic center (annual volume 66) and 196 in the teaching hospital (annual volume 39). Neoadjuvant treatment was more often used in the academic center, other baseline characteristics were similar. Overall time to surgery was 26 days, which was significantly less in the teaching hospital. The major postoperative morbidity rate was 38.3% (n = 201), and the 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.3% and 3.6%. A regional oncology network between an academic center and a general teaching hospital for PD can be an attractive option to safeguard waiting times in selected patients, without compromising outcome.

Radiation Oncology Quality Assessment Tool: A proposal for a new audit tool in modern radiation oncology

INTRODUCTION

As a consequence of the development of improved treatment techniques and utilisation of digital records in radiation oncology, the RANZCR Peer Review Audit Tool has become outdated. The aim of this internal audit was to objectively evaluate the practice of our radiation oncology department to ensure that patients are being treated according to evidence-based national guidelines through the use of a new self-audit algorithm, the Radiation Oncology Quality Assessment Tool (ROQAT).

METHODS

Using ROQAT, a retrospective audit was conducted of patients who received definitive treatment within the first six months (June 2017-November 2017) of opening a new radiation oncology department at the Sunshine Coast University Hospital. Data were collected from MOSAIQ^® and electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Two hundred and six patients were included. The median age was 65 years. Most commonly treated tumour streams included: breast (n = 62), skin (n = 31), colorectal (n = 25), genitourinary (n = 21) and head and neck (n = 21). Documentation was complete for all patients. Seventy-four per cent of patients were discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting. Fifty-five per cent of patients were treated with inverse planning techniques. Treatment with radiation therapy was indicated in 97% of patients. Dose and fractionation were concordant with protocols in 83% of cases. Thirty-nine per cent received concurrent chemotherapy, and of these, 93% were in accordance with protocols. More than 50% were treated according to published delineation protocols.

CONCLUSION

The ROQAT is a proposal for a new audit tool that reflects modern radiation therapy practice, with emphasis on compliance with evidence-based guidelines.

A step-wise approach for establishing a multidisciplinary team for the management of tuberous sclerosis complex: a Delphi consensus report

Background

Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare autosomal dominant genetic disorder associated with mutations in TSC1 and TSC2 genes, upregulation of mammalian target of rapamycin signaling, and subsequent tumor formation in various organs. Due to the many manifestations of TSC and their potential complications, management requires the expertise of multiple medical disciplines. A multidisciplinary care approach is recommended by consensus guidelines. Use of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) has been shown to be beneficial in treating other complex diseases, such as cancer. In a lifelong disease such as TSC, an MDT may facilitate the transition from pediatric to adult care. However, little guidance exists in the literature regarding how to organize an MDT in TSC.

Methods

To discuss the best approach to assembling an MDT, this project was initiated in October 2017 with a meeting of 12 physicians from various specialties and various countries. Following this first meeting, the experts generated statements on the most important aspects to implement in establishing an MDT for TSC by 3 rounds of selection using a Delphi process via electronic correspondence. Finally, TSC patient advocates reviewed the findings and provided additional insights from a patient perspective.

Results

A 3-step roadmap was recommended, starting with identifying a single individual to begin organizing care (Step 1), then establishing a small core team (Step 2), and finally, establishing a larger multi-disciplinary team (Step 3). Because of the multisystemic nature of TSC, the MDT should include specialists such as a neurologist, a neurosurgeon, a nephrologist, a urologist, a pulmonologist, an ophthalmologist, a cardiologist, a dermatologist, a geneticist, and a psychiatrist/psychologist. The MDT should recommend a care plan for each patient based on the individual’s needs and in consultation with him/her or his/her family. Some of the most important aspects of an MDT that were agreed upon included identifying a case manager to help coordinate care, providing access to health care professionals of varying specialties, and including a lead physician who takes medical responsibility for patients’ overall care.

Conclusions

The results of our consensus provide guidance to support the initiation of an MDT in TSC.

Fear and forget: how anxiety impacts information recall in newly diagnosed cancer patients visiting a fast-track clinic

INTRODUCTION

One-day fast track programs for cancer diagnostics and treatment planning are increasingly being implemented in health care. Fast-track programs are highly effective at reducing waiting times, and thus well received by patients and healthcare providers. However, these programs may also burden patients, as patients generally receive a lot of information from multiple healthcare providers within a short time span. This might increase anxiety and negatively impact recall of medical information in newly diagnosed patients. This study examines whether anxiety influences information recall at the moment of diagnosis, and whether this relation differs for younger and older patients.

METHODS

Data were collected from 78 colorectal cancer patients visiting a one-day fast-track multidisciplinary outpatient clinic. All consultations that took place were recorded on a video. Anxiety was measured at baseline (T1) and immediately after consultations (T2) with the STAI-6. Information recall was assessed by telephone within 36-48 hours after patients' visit (T3) using open questions.

RESULTS

After consultations (T2), 32% of patients experienced clinical anxiety levels. Patients recalled ∼60% of medical information (T3). Information recall was negatively impacted by anxiety (β = -.28, p = .011), and negatively related to higher age (β = -.23, p = .031), and lower education level (β = .27, p = .013). Although older patients (M = 53.99) recalled 11% less information than younger patients (M = 64.84), age was not related to anxiety and did not moderate the anxiety-recall relationship.

CONCLUSION

High levels of anxiety after receiving a cancer diagnosis negatively influence how much information patients remember after visiting a one-day fast-track clinic. This calls for interventions that may reduce patients' anxiety as much as reasonably possible and support patients' information recall. Researchers, practitioners, and hospitals are encouraged to continue exploring ways to optimize information provision to cancer patients in current modern healthcare.

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.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastrointestinal lesions on an outpatient basis

Background

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is usually associated with hospital admission.

Objectives

To evaluate, prospectively, the feasibility, safety and efficacy of outpatient gastrointestinal ESD.

Methods

Patients with suitable lesions were invited to participate. Those that dwelt more than 1 hour from the hospital, lived alone, had severe co-morbidities, were <18 years old, had duodenal lesions, or that had ESD-related complications were admitted. The remaining patients were discharged if no complications were detected. A patients' inquiry was performed.

Results

Of the 164 ESD patients, 122 were outpatient-based, corresponding to 115 patients, 47% male and mean age 63 ± 12 years-old. Outpatients tended to be younger, female, to have gastric lesions, less advanced lesions, and shorter and less complicated ESDs (all p < 0.05). Outpatients' mean tumour size was 38 mm, en bloc and R0 resection rates were 88 and 78%, respectively. Seven ESD outpatients (5.7%) had complications: delayed bleeding (n = 4), pneumonitis (n = 2) or emphysema (n = 1), all managed conservatively. Colorectal location of the lesions was predictive of hospital admission (p = 0.03). In total, 97% of patients were satisfied with the outpatient strategy.

Conclusion

Risks of ambulatory ESD are low and complications can be successfully managed. This strategy has high patient satisfaction. More studies are needed to evaluate its implications on costs and patients' management.

Small hepatocellular carcinoma suppressed by chemotherapy for synchronous gastric carcinoma after laparoscopy-assisted radical distal gastrectomy: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Synchronous gastric carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is rare. It is hard to distinguish synchronous HCC from metastatic liver cancer in this condition. The treatment and prognosis is quite different for synchronous HCC of gastric carcinoma and liver metastasis of gastric carcinoma.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 68-year-old man with a chief complaint of epigastric pain for 1 year, accompanied by reflux and belching. The patient was diagnosed with gastric carcinoma (cT4NxM0) and laparoscopy-assisted radical distal gastrectomy was performed. This was followed by chemotherapy of FOLFOX regimen. However, a liver nodule growth was observed after postoperative systemic treatment.

DIAGNOSIS

The initial diagnosis was liver metastasis of gastric carcinoma. However after hepatectomy of segment VI and VII as well as thrombectomy of right hepatic vein, histology revealed intermediate to poor differentiated HCC. Hence this case was diagnosed as synchronous gastric carcinoma and HCC.

INTERVENTIONS

A preventive transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) was conducted at 4 weeks after hepatectomy. Another FOLFOX regimen was suggested, but was refused by the patient.

OUTCOMES

The patient survived without tumor recurrence for 9 months after the second surgery.

LESSONS

Synchronous HCC should be routinely distinguished from gastric carcinoma liver metastasis, especially for patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The FOLFOX4 regimen for treating gastric carcinoma liver metastasis may have inhibited the progression of primary HCC in this case. This patient with HCC benefited from liver resection, inspite of hepatic vein tumor thrombosis.

The efficiency of electronic list-based multidisciplinary team meetings in management of gastrointestinal malignancy: a single-center experience in Southern China

Background

The multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion has earned increasing popularity for the delivery of cancer care. However, MDT meeting (MDTM) is time and resource intensive, and some efforts to optimize discussion processes are required. This study aims to investigate the efficiency of electronic list-based MDTM in treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancy.

Methods

Between January 2015 and December 2016, patients with GI cancers were retrospectively reviewed. Patients permitting an MDTM with our novel technique (eMDT group) were compared with those undergoing a traditional discussion (cMDT group). The efficiency of MDT working, including time cost per meeting or case and overall number of reviewed cases, was checked, with accuracy of clinical staging and other outcomes explored meanwhile.

Results

Three thousand six hundred seventy-four patients were included, with 2156 (58.7%) and 1518 (41.3%) cases for eMDT and cMDT groups, respectively. Comparisons in age (P = 0.529), gender (P = 0.844), cancer type (P = 0.218), treatment plan (P = 0.737), and pathological stage (P = 0.098) were not significant between groups. However, the average time cost in both each meeting (149.4 vs. 205.1 min; P < 0.001) and each case (3.1 vs. 6.2 min; P < 0.001) was markedly reduced. Besides, this novel technique was associated with improved accuracy of clinical staging (P = 0.070) and reduced hospital stay (P < 0.001) compared with the traditional approach, with similar incidence of complications observed (P = 0.243).

Conclusions

The MDT working based on an intelligent checklist could save considerable time while not affecting treatment of GI malignancies. The improved efficiency also earns an increased capacity of hospital admission and in-patient care.

Anxiety during cancer diagnosis: Examining the influence of monitoring coping style and treatment plan

OBJECTIVE

Studies on anxiety within oncology show a high prevalence of anxiety both during and after the course of the disease. However, little is known about factors that influence the level of anxiety in the diagnostic phase. This study examines the presence of anxiety during diagnosis and treatment planning and explores how a monitoring (ie, information seeking) coping style and the suggested treatment plan (ie, with or without chemotherapy) interact with anxiety.

METHODS

Anxiety scores (6-item State-Trait Anxiety Inventory) were collected from 81 colorectal cancer patients before and after their visit to the outpatient Gastrointestinal Oncological Center Amsterdam. A cut-off score (>44) was used to indicate highly anxious patients.

RESULTS

More than half (59%) of the patients were classified as highly anxious before consultation. Although anxiety scores significantly decreased after consultation (t = 3.149, P = .002), 37% of the patients remained highly anxious. Reductions in anxiety were specifically observed for patients with a higher monitoring coping style and patients for whom a treatment plan without chemotherapy was proposed. Interestingly, high monitors for whom treatment without chemotherapy was proposed showed a major decrease in anxiety, whereas low monitors for whom treatment starting with chemotherapy was proposed showed a great increase in anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic phase is associated with high levels of anxiety. Distinct patterns of anxiety were identified, depending on patients' coping style and the suggested treatment plan. Remarkably, patients with a lower monitoring coping style became particularly anxious when they were advised to start treatment with chemotherapy.

The Value of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings for Patients with Gastrointestinal Malignancies: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is rising and most patients with GI malignancies are discussed by a multidisciplinary team (MDT). We performed a systematic review to assess whether MDTs for patients with GI malignancies can correctly change diagnosis, tumor stage and subsequent treatment plan, and whether the treatment plan was implemented.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We conducted a search of the PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases, and included studies relating to adults with a GI malignancy discussed by an MDT prior to the start of treatment which described a change of initial diagnosis, stage or treatment plan. Two researchers independently evaluated all retrieved titles and abstracts from the abovementioned databases.

RESULTS

Overall, 16 studies were included; the study quality was rated as fair. Four studies reported that MDTs changed the diagnoses formulated by individual physicians in 18.4-26.9% of evaluated cases; two studies reported that MDTs formulated an accurate diagnosis in 89 and 93.5% of evaluated cases, respectively; nine studies described that the treatment plan was altered in 23.0-41.7% of evaluated cases; and four studies found that MDT decisions were implemented in 90-100% of evaluated cases. The reasons for altering a treatment plan included the patient's wishes, and comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

MDT meetings for patients with a GI malignancy are responsible for changes in diagnoses and management in a significant number of patients. Treatment plans formulated by MDTs are implemented in 90-100% of discussed patients. All patients with a GI malignancy should be discussed by an MDT.