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

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.

Not just a BLiP: early experience with a novel multidisciplinary case conference for benign hepatopancreatobiliary disease at a tertiary Canadian healthcare center

BACKGROUND

Benign Liver and Pancreas (BLiPs) rounds, implemented in 2022 at our Canadian tertiary care center, are a novel concept of a multidisciplinary case conference (MCC) for discussion of benign hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) disease. BLiPs Rounds are a monthly virtual meeting of surgeons, gastroenterologists, and interventional radiologists experienced in biliary and pancreatic disease.

METHODS

This case series was completed to review the patient cases discussed over the first year of BLiPs rounds, and to evaluate the effect of the multidisciplinary discussion on patient management plans. Meeting minutes were reviewed for BLiPs rounds between May 2022 and July 2023. Data were collected retrospectively on all discussed patients by review of the electronic medical record, and analyzed using frequencies and means with standard deviations.

RESULTS

Between May 2022 and July 2023, 56 cases were discussed at 12 case conferences. 68% of cases concerned pancreatic pathology, 25% concerned biliary pathology, the remainder liver or duodenal pathology. 49 cases (88%) were presented to discuss therapeutic options, and 7 presented as diagnostic challenges. Cases were usually presented once, but 7 patients were discussed at multiple conferences due to complex issues or ongoing symptomatology. 40 patients (71%) had undergone previous endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical interventions prior to discussion. Endoscopic intervention was recommended in 32% of cases, percutaneous interventional approach in 13%, a combined endoscopic and percutaneous approach in 9%, and surgery in 18%. Repeat imaging or observation was recommended in 29% of cases. Discussion at rounds led to a change or adjustment in the proposed management in 46 cases (82%). The plan recommended by the MCC was carried out in 71% of cases.

CONCLUSION

BLiPs case conference provides a valuable venue to discuss cases, encourage interdisciplinary collaboration, and refine treatment approaches, leading to a change in proposed management plan in over three-quarters of cases presented.

Analysis of three primary prostatic sarcoma cases and literature review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical presentations, diagnostic approaches, and treatment modalities for primary prostate sarcoma postradical prostatectomy, aiming to enhance its diagnosis and management.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of three male patients diagnosed with primary prostate sarcoma at Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, affiliated with Capital Medical University, from February 2014 to February 2024. All patients underwent transrectal prostate biopsies, which informed the decision to proceed with laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. After surgery, one patient received a combination of epirubicin and ifosfamide as immunotherapy, along with external beam radiotherapy. After comprehensive discussions regarding potential benefits and risks, the remaining two patients decided against undergoing radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Based on the pathological examination results, two patients were diagnosed with stromal sarcoma and one with spindle cell sarcoma, all classified as high-grade sarcomas. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that all three cases were positive for VIMENTIN, but other results did not show significant specificity. During the follow-up period, one patient died within 12 months, and two patients were lost to follow-up after 6 months. However, there were no evident signs of recurrence observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary prostate sarcoma is extremely rare and typically has a poor prognosis once diagnosed. Early diagnosis should be based on pathological and immunohistochemical testing results, followed by prompt surgical treatment and adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Despite these measures, recurrence is common, underscoring the need for a detailed and appropriate treatment plan and systematic therapy for affected patients.

A Grounded Theory of Interdisciplinary Communication and Collaboration in the Outpatient Setting of the Hospital for Patients with Multiple Long-Term Conditions

Interdisciplinary communication and collaboration are crucial in the care of people with multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) yet are often experienced as insufficient. Through the lens of complexity science, this study aims to explain how healthcare professionals (HCPs) adapt to emerging situations in the care of patients with MLTC by examining interdisciplinary communication and collaboration in the outpatient hospital setting. We used the constant comparative method to analyze transcribed data from seven focus groups with twenty-one HCPs to generate a constructivist grounded theory of 'interdisciplinary communication and collaboration in the outpatient setting of the hospital for patients with multiple long-term conditions'. Our theory elucidates the various pathways of communication and collaboration. Why, when, and how team members choose to collaborate influences if and to what degree tailored care is achieved. There is great variability and unpredictability to this process due to internalized rules, such as beliefs on the appropriateness to deviate from guidelines, and the presence of an interprofessional identity. We identified organizational structures that influence the dynamics of the care team such as the availability of time and financial compensation for collaboration. As we strive for tailored care for patients with MLTC, our theory provides promising avenues for future endeavors.

The Impact of a Multidisciplinary Tumor Board (MTB) on Treatment Decision Making for Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC): 5-Year Data Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To describe the impact of a multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients in a locoregional renal cancer network by evaluating shared decision making (SDM) and adherence to MTB recommendations.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This prospective cohort study included all cases from a Dutch renal cancer network with suspicion of or histologically confirmed RCC discussed in MTBs between 2017-2022. Main endpoints were distribution of cases presented, proportion of recommendations with multiple treatment options enabling shared decision making (SDM), definite treatment after SDM and adherence to MTB recommendations. Further endpoints were definite treatment per tumor stage stratified by age and inclusion in clinical trials. Outcomes were displayed as means and proportions (%). Pearson's Chi-Squared test was used to analyze the effect of age on definite treatment advice.

RESULTS

Overall, 2651 cases were discussed, of which 1900 (72%) were new referrals and 751 (28%) rediscussions. Majority of cases were cT1a-b tumors (46%) and 22% were local recurrences or metachronous metastatic. Adherence to MTB recommendation was 96% and in 30% multiple treatment options were recommended, allowing for SDM. In 45% of cases with cT1a tumors multiple treatment options were recommended by the MTB, resulting in (cryo)ablation (32%) and AS (30%) as most frequent definite treatments after SDM. Among patients with cT3-4 tumors the inclusion rate in clinical trials was 47%.

CONCLUSIONS

A network MTB creates opportunity to discuss multiple treatment options and clinical trials in SDM with patients at a high rate of adherence to MTB recommendation.

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.

Regional Collaboration and Trends in Clinical Management of Thyroid Cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the trends in the management of thyroid cancer and clinical outcomes in the Southwestern region of The Netherlands from 2010 to 2021, where a regional collaborative network has been implemented in January 2016.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study encompasses all patients diagnosed with thyroid cancer of any subtype between January 2010 and June 2021 in 10 collaborating hospitals in the Southwestern region of The Netherlands.

METHODS

The primary outcome of this study was the occurrence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were trends in surgical management, centralization, and waiting times of patients with thyroid cancer.

RESULTS

This study included 1186 patients with thyroid cancer. Median follow-up was 58 [interquartile range: 24-95] months. Surgery was performed in 1027 (86.6%) patients. No differences in postoperative complications, such as long-term hypoparathyroidism, permanent recurrent nerve paresis, or reoperation due to bleeding were seen over time. The percentage of patients with low-risk papillary thyroid carcinoma referred to the academic hospital decreased from 85% (n = 120/142) in 2010 to 2013 to 70% (n = 120/171) in 2014 to 2017 and 62% (n = 100/162) in 2018 to 2021 (P < .01). The percentage of patients undergoing a hemithyroidectomy alone was 9% (n = 28/323) in 2010 to 2013 and increased to 20% (n = 63/317; P < .01) in 2018 to 2021.

CONCLUSION

The establishment of a regional oncological network coincided with a de-escalation of thyroid cancer treatment and centralization of complex patients and interventions. However, no differences in postoperative complications over time were observed. Determining the impact of regional oncological networks on quality of care is challenging in the absence of uniform quality indicators.

Adherence to interdisciplinary tumor board recommendations as an expression of quality-assured patient care: results of a bicentric German analysis

PURPOSE

Interdisciplinary tumor boards (ITBs) represent a central part of standard cancer care defining a guidelines-guided treatment plan adapted to the patient's capabilities, comorbidities and wishes in a multi-professional team. The implementation rate of ITB recommendations can be monitored by structured adherence analyses. But (inter)national definitions how to measure the level of implementation are missing. Here, we present results of 4 years of ITB adherence analyses in a bicentric German Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC).

METHODS

Between 2018 and 2021, for at least 1 month, the implementation rate of recommendations of 8 different ITBs of 2 CCC sites was evaluated manually according to harmonized criteria between both sites regarding the degree of implementation of ITB's recommendations.

RESULTS

In total, 1104 cases were analyzed (65% male, 35% female). Mean distance from patient's home to the CCC was 57 km (range 0.8-560.6 km). For 949 cases (86%) with known follow-up, the adherence rate was 91.9% (95% CI 0.9; 0.935). In 8.1%, ITB decisions were not implemented due to medical reasons (45.4%), patient's wish (35.1%) and unknown reasons (19.5%). Logistic regression revealed neither age (OR = 0.998, p = 0.90), nor gender (OR = 0.98, p = 0.92) or the distance from patient's home to the CCC (OR = 1.001, p = 0.54) were significantly associated with ITB adherence.

CONCLUSION

ITB adherences analyses can serve as a quality management tool to monitor the implementation rate of ITB recommendations and to stay in contact with practitioners, other hospitals and state cancer registries to share data and resources in accordance with data protection requirements for continuously improvement of quality management and patient care.

Multidisciplinary Team Meeting in the Core of Nasopharyngeal Cancer Management Improved Quality of Care and Survival of Patients

Nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) cases are often diagnosed in advanced stages. The complexity of clinical management for advanced-stage NPC requires thorough communication and shared decisions between medical professionals and allied teams. Incorporating a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) for newly diagnosed NPC patients was chosen to facilitate collaboration and communication between physicians. This retrospective study aimed to compare the quality of care, clinical responses and survival between NPC patients treated with and without MDTM. Data on clinical responses, assessment visits, date of progression and death with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and hazard ratio (HR) were collected and analyzed with 95% confidence interval (CI) and significance set as P < .05. There were 87 of 178 NPC patients treated with MDTM. Revisions of diagnosis and stage occurred in 5.7% and 52.9% of cases during the MDTM. More clinical responses were achieved by patients treated with MDTM (69.0%vs 32.0%, P < .00). NPC patients who received MDTM treatment recommendation had a lower risk for progression (median PFS 59.89 months vs 12.68 months; HR 0.267, 95% CI: 0.17-0.40, P < .00) and mortality (median OS was not reached vs 13.44 months; HR 0.134, 95% CI: 0.08-0.24, P < .00) compared to patients without MDTM. Incorporating the MDTM approach into NPC management improves patients' clinical responses and survival.

Is a preoperative multidisciplinary team meeting (cost)effective to improve outcome for high-risk adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: the PREPARATION study-a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

As a result of increased life expectancy and improved care for patients suffering from chronic disease, the number of patients with multimorbidity requiring surgical intervention is increasing. For complex surgical patients, it is essential to balance the potential benefits of surgical treatment against the risk of permanent loss of functional capacity and quality of life due to complications. European and US guidelines on perioperative care recommend preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients. However, the evidence underlying benefits from preoperative MDT meetings with all relevant perioperative specialties present is limited. The current study aims to investigate the effect of implementation of preoperative MDT discussions for high-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery on serious adverse events.

METHODS/DESIGN

PREPARATION is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 14 Dutch hospitals without currently established preoperative MDT meeting. The intervention, preoperative MDT meetings, will be implemented sequentially with seven blocks of 2 hospitals switching from control (preoperative screening as usual) to the intervention every 3 months. Each hospital will be randomized to one of seven blocks. We aim to include 1200 patients. The primary outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include (cost)effectiveness, functional outcome, and quality of life for up to 12 months.

DISCUSSION

PREPARATION is the first study to assess the effectiveness of a preoperative MDT meeting for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients in the presence of an anesthesiologist. If the results suggest that preoperative MDT discussions for high-risk patients are (cost)-effective, the current study facilitates implementation of preoperative MDT meetings in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05703230. Registered on 11/09/2022.

What is the Value of Radiology Input During a Multidisciplinary Orthopaedic Oncology Conference?

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences are important in developing the treatment plan for patients with suspected orthopaedic bone and soft tissue tumors, involving physicians from several services. Past studies have shown the clinical value of these conferences; however, the impact of radiology input on the management plan and time cost for radiology to staff these conferences has not been fully studied.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does radiology input at multidisciplinary conference help guide clinical management and improve clinician confidence? (2) What is the time cost of radiology input for a multidisciplinary conference?

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted from October 2020 to March 2022 at a tertiary academic center with a sarcoma center. A single data questionnaire for each patient was sent to one of three treating orthopaedic oncologists with 41, 19, and 5 years of experience after radiology discussion at a weekly multidisciplinary conference. A data questionnaire was completed by the treating orthopaedic oncologist for 48% (322 of 672) of patients, which refers to the proportion of those three oncologists' patients for which survey data were captured. A musculoskeletal radiology fellow and musculoskeletal fellowship-trained radiology attending physician provided radiology input at each multidisciplinary conference. The clinical plan (leave alone, follow-up imaging, follow-up clinically, recommend different imaging test, core needle biopsy, surgical excision or biopsy or fixation, or other) and change in clinical confidence before and after radiology input were documented. A second weekly data questionnaire was sent to the radiology fellow to estimate the time cost of radiology input for the multidisciplinary conference.

RESULTS

In 29% (93 of 322) of patients, there was a change in the clinical plan after radiology input. Biopsy was canceled in 30% (24 of 80) of patients for whom biopsy was initially planned, and surgical excision was canceled in 24% (17 of 72) of patients in whom surgical excision was initially planned. In 21% (68 of 322) of patients, there were unreported imaging findings that affected clinical management; 13% (43 of 322) of patients had a missed finding, and 8% (25 of 322) of patients had imaging findings that were interpreted incorrectly. For confidence in the final treatment plan, 78% (251 of 322) of patients had an increase in clinical confidence by their treating orthopaedic oncologist after the multidisciplinary conference. Radiology fellows and attendings spent a mean of 4.2 and 1.5 hours, respectively, reviewing and presenting at a multidisciplinary conference each week. The annual combined prorated time cost for the radiology attending and fellow was estimated at USD 24,310 based on national median salary data for attendings and internal salary data for fellows.

CONCLUSION

In a study taken at one tertiary-care oncology program, input from radiology attendings and fellows in the setting of a multidisciplinary conference helped to guide the final treatment plan, reduce procedures, and improve clinician confidence in the final treatment plan, at an annual time cost of USD 24,310.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Multidisciplinary orthopaedic oncology conferences can lead to changes in management plans, and the time cost to the radiologists should be budgeted for by the radiology department or parent institution.

Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers

Even though there have been remarkable advances in systemic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies over the last few decades, in the vast majority of instances, surgery remains the sole therapeutic approach offering a chance for a definite cure [...].

Learning from Adaptations to the COVID-19 Pandemic: How Teleconsultation Supported Cancer Care Pathways at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in Northern Italy

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are recognized as the gold standard for care management of cancer patients, and during the COVID-19 pandemic they were considered a priority to be maintained. Due to pandemic-related restrictions, MDT meetings were forcibly converted from in-person to telematic format. This retrospective study evaluated the annual performance of four MDT meeting indicators (MDT members' attendance, number of discussed cases, frequency of MDT meetings, and duration) between 2019 and 2022 to report on the implementation of teleconsultation in MDT meetings related to 10 cancer care pathways (CCPs). Over the study period, MDT member participation and the number of discussed cases improved or did not change in 90% (9/10) and 80% (8/10) of the CCPs, respectively. We did not observe significant differences in any of the CCPs included in the study regarding the annual frequency and duration of MDT meeting. Considering the rapidity, extent, and intensity with which telematic tools were adopted due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the results of this study showed that MDT teleconsultation supported the CCPs, and consequently, the delivery of cancer care in COVID-19 times, helping to understand the effects of telematic tools on health care performance and the parties involved.

Determining Contemporary Barriers to Effective Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in Neurological Surgery: A Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE

The integration of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) for neurosurgical care has been accepted worldwide. Our objective was to review the literature for the limiting factors to MDTMs that may introduce bias to patient care.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis was used to perform a literature review of MDTMs for neuro-oncology, pituitary oncology, cerebrovascular surgery, and spine surgery and spine oncology. Limiting factors to productive MDTMs and factors that introduce bias were identified, as well as determining whether MDTMs led to improved patient outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 1264 manuscripts from a PubMed and Ovid Medline search, of which 27 of 500 neuro-oncology, 4 of 279 pituitary, and 11 of 260 spine surgery articles met our inclusion criteria. Of 224 cerebrovascular manuscripts, none met the criteria. Factors for productive MDTMs included quaternary/tertiary referral centers, nonhierarchical environment, regularly scheduled meetings, concise inclusion of nonmedical factors at the same level of importance as patient clinical information, inclusion of nonclinical participants, and use of clinical guidelines and institutional protocols to provide recommendations. Our review did not identify literature that described the use of artificial intelligence to reduce bias and guide clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

The continued implementation of MDTMs in neurosurgery should be recommended but cautioned by limiting bias.

Interprofessional communication in the hospital setting : a systematic review of the qualitative literature

Communication plays a key role in the provision of safe patient care, and miscommunication in healthcare can lead to avoidable patient harm or mortality. Interprofessional communication (IPCom) can be challenging due to differences in training, education and roles between healthcare professions. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the qualitative evidence regarding healthcare providers' perceptions of interprofessional communication in the hospital setting. Four databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase) were searched for studies that met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen studies were identified as suitable for inclusion in the review and were examined using thematic synthesis. Thematic synthesis led to the development of five descriptive themes: 1) 'Hierarchy", 2) "Interprofessional Ethos," 3) "Healthcare Environment," 4) "Personal Factors" and 5) "Methods of Communication," and two overarching analytical themes: "Barriers to Communication" and "Facilitators to Communication." Personal factors, such as strong interprofessional relationships, were found to be important facilitators to IPCom, while organizational factors, such as challenging and hierarchical working environments, were found to pose barriers to IPCom.

The Rate of Avoidable Pancreatic Resections at a High-Volume Center: An Internal Quality Control and Critical Review

BACKGROUND

The incidence of benign diseases among pancreatic resections for suspected malignancy still represents a relevant issue in the surgical practice. This study aims to identify the preoperative pitfalls that led to unnecessary surgeries at a single Austrian center over a twenty-year period.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery for suspected pancreatic/periampullary malignancy between 2000 and 2019 at the Linz Elisabethinen Hospital were included. The rate of "mismatches" between clinical suspicion and histology was considered as primary outcome. All cases that, despite that, fulfilled the indication criteria for surgery were defined as minor mismatches (MIN-M). Conversely, the true avoidable surgeries were identified as major mismatches (MAJ-M).

RESULTS

Among the 320 included patients, 13 (4%) presented with benign lesions at definitive pathology. The rate of MAJ-M was 2.8% (n = 9), and the most frequent causes of misdiagnoses were autoimmune pancreatitis (n = 4) and intrapancreatic accessory spleen (n = 2). In all MAJ-M cases, various mistakes within the preoperative workup were detected: lack of multidisciplinary discussion (n = 7, 77.8%); inappropriate imaging (n = 4, 44.4%); lack of specific blood markers (n = 7, 77.8%). The morbidity and mortality rates for mismatches were 46.7% and 0.

CONCLUSION

All avoidable surgeries were the result of an incomplete pre-operative workup. The adequate identification of the underlying pitfalls could lead to minimize and, potentially, overcome this phenomenon with a concrete optimization of the surgical-care process.

Establishing a Multicenter Network for Patients With Thyroid Nodules and Cancer: Effects on Referral Patterns

OBJECTIVE

To perform a qualitative evaluation of the Thyroid Network, with a quantitative analysis of second opinion referrals for patients in the southwestern part of the Netherlands who have thyroid nodules and cancer.

METHODS

This prospective observational study registered all patients with thyroid nodules and cancer who were referred to the academic hospital from 2 years before and 4 years after the foundation of the Thyroid Network. We implemented biweekly regional multidisciplinary tumor boards using video conference and a regional patient care pathway for patients with thyroid nodules and cancer. For qualitative evaluation, interviews were conducted with a broad selection of stakeholders via maximum variation sampling. The primary outcome was the change in second opinions after the foundation of the Thyroid Network.

RESULTS

Second opinions from Thyroid Network hospitals to the academic hospital decreased from 10 (30%) to 2 (7%) two years after the start of the Thyroid Network (P = .001), while patient referrals remained stable (n = 108 to 106). Qualitative evaluation indicated that the uniform care pathway and the regional multidisciplinary tumor board were valued high.

DISCUSSION

Establishing a regional network, including multidisciplinary tumor boards and a care pathway for patients with thyroid nodules and cancer, resulted in a decrease in second opinions of in-network hospitals and high satisfaction of participating specialists.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The concept of the Thyroid Network could spread to other regions as well as to other specialties in health care. Future steps would be to assess the effect of regional collaboration on quality of care and patient satisfaction.

Leveraging the Multidisciplinary Tumor Board for Dissemination of Evidence-Based Recommendations on the Staging and Treatment of Gastric Cancer: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Compliance with evidence-based treatment guidelines for gastric cancer across the United States is poor. This pilot study aimed to create and evaluate a change package for disseminating information on the staging and treatment of gastric cancer during multidisciplinary tumor boards and for identifying barriers to implementation.

METHODS

The change package included a 10-min video, a brief knowledge assessment, and a discussion guide. Commission on Cancer-accredited sites that perform gastrectomy were invited to participate. Participants completed the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) scale (range, 12-60) and scales to measure the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness (score range, 4-20). Semi-structured interviews were conducted to further define inner and outer setting barriers.

RESULTS

Seven centers participated in the study. A total of 74 participants completed the pre-video knowledge assessment, and 55 participants completed the post-video assessment. The recommendations found to be most controversial were separate staging laparoscopy and modified D2 lymphadenectomy. Sum scores were calculated for acceptability (mean, 17.43 ± 2.51) appropriateness (mean, 16.86 ± 3.24), and feasibility (mean, 16.14 ± 3.07) of the change package. The ORIC scores (mean, 46.57 ± 8.22) correlated with responses to the open-ended questions. The key barriers identified were patient volume, skills in the procedures, and attitudes and beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

The change package was moderately to highly feasible, appropriate, and acceptable. The activity identified specific recommendations for gastric cancer care that are considered controversial and local barriers to implementation. Future efforts could focus on building skills and knowledge as well as the more difficult issue of attitudes and beliefs.

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 Impact of Tumor Boards on Breast Cancer Care: Evidence from a Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women, with a complex clinical path that involves several professionals and that requires a multidisciplinary approach. However, the effectiveness of breast cancer multidisciplinary care and the processes that contribute to its effectiveness have not yet been firmly determined. This study aims to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary tumor boards on breast cancer care outcomes. A systematic literature review was carried out through Scopus, Web of Science and Pubmed databases. The search was restricted to articles assessing the impact of MTB implementation on breast cancer care. Fourteen studies were included in the review. The most analyzed outcomes were diagnosis, therapy and survival. Four out of four studies showed that, with implementation of an MTB, there was a change in diagnosis, and all reported changes in the treatment plan after MTB implementation. A pooled analysis of three studies reporting results on the outcome "mortality" showed a statistically significant 14% reduction in mortality relative risk for patients enrolled versus not enrolled in an MTB. This study shows that MTB implementation is a valuable approach to deliver appropriate and effective care to patients affected by breast cancer and to improve their outcomes.

Mapping continuous learning using social network research: a social network study of Australian Genomics as a Learning Health System

OBJECTIVES

To explore a macrolevel Learning Health System (LHS) and examine if an intentionally designed network can foster a collaborative learning community over time. The secondary aim was to demonstrate the application of social network research to the field of LHS.

DESIGN

Two longitudinal online questionnaires of the Australian Genomics learning community considering relationships between network members at three time points: 2016, 2018, 2019. The questionnaire included closed Likert response questions on collaborative learning patterns and open-response questions to capture general perceptions of the community. Social network data were analysed and visually constructed using Gephi V.0.9.2 software, Likert questions were analysed using SPSS, and open responses were analysed thematically using NVivo.

SETTING

Australian Genomic Health Alliance.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinicians, scientists, researchers and community representatives.

RESULTS

Australian Genomics members highlighted the collaborative benefits of the network as a learning community to foster continuous learning in the ever-evolving field of clinical genomics. The learning community grew from 186 members (2016), to 384 (2018), to 439 (2019). Network density increased (2016=0.023, 2018=0.043), then decreased (2019=0.036). Key players remained consistent with potential for new members to achieve focal positions in the network. Informal learning was identified as the most influential learning method for genomic practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that intentionally building a network provides a platform for continuous learning-a fundamental component for establishing an LHS. The Australian Genomics learning community shows evidence of maturity and sustainability in supporting the continuous learning culture of clinical genomics. The network provides a practical means to spread new knowledge and best practice across the entire field. We show that intentionally designed networks provide the opportunity and means for interdisciplinary learning between diverse agents over time and demonstrate the application of social network research to the LHS field.

Real-world staging computed tomography scanning technique and important reporting discrepancies in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography (CT) is the first-line staging imaging modality for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) which determines resectability and treatment pathways.

METHODS

Between January 2016 and December 2019, prospectively collated data from two Australian cancer centres was extracted from the PURPLE Pancreatic Cancer registry. Real-world staging CTs and corresponding reports were blindly reviewed by a sub-specialist radiologist and compared to initial reports.

RESULTS

Of 131 patients assessed, 117 (89.3%) presented with symptoms, 74 (56.5%) CTs included slices ≤3 mm thickness and CT pancreas protocol was applied in 69 (52.7%) patients. Initial reports lacked synoptic reporting in 131 (100%), tumour identification in 2 (1.6%) and tumour measurement in 13 (9.9%) cases. Tumour-vascular relationship reporting was missing in 69-109 (52.7-83.2%) for regarding the key arterial and venous structures that is required to assess resectability. Initial reports had no comment on venous thrombus or venous collaterals in 80 (61.1%) and 109 (83.2%) and lacked locoregional lymphadenopathy interpretation in 13 (9.9%) cases. Complete initial staging report was present in 72 (55.0%) patients. Sub-specialist radiological review resulted in down-staging in 16 (22.2%) and up-staging in 1 (1.4%) patient. Staging discrepancies were mainly regarding metastatic disease (12, 70.6%) and tumour-vascular relationship (5, 29.4%).

CONCLUSION

Real-world staging imaging in PDAC patients show low proportion of dedicated CT pancreas protocol, high proportion of incomplete staging reports and no synoptic reporting. The most common discrepancy between initial and sub-specialist reporting was regarding metastases and tumour-vascular relationship assessment resulting in sub-specialist down-staging in almost every fifth case.

Survival trends in patients diagnosed with colon and rectal cancer in the nordic countries 1990-2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

BACKGROUND

Survival of patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in all Nordic countries during the past decades. The aim of this study was to further assess survival trends in patients with colon and rectal cancer in the Nordic countries by age at diagnosis and to present additional survival measures.

METHODS

Data on colon and rectal cancer cases diagnosed in the Nordic countries between 1990 and 2016 were obtained from the NORDCAN database. Relative survival was estimated using flexible parametric models. Both age-standardized and age-specific measures for women and men were estimated from the models, as well as reference-adjusted crude probabilities of death and life-years lost.

RESULTS

The five-year age-standardized relative survival of colon and rectal cancer patients continued to improve for women and men in all Nordic countries, from around 50% in 1990 to about 70% at the end of the study period. In general, survival was similar across age and sex. The largest improvement was seen for Danish men and women with rectal cancer, from 41% to 69% and from 43% to 71%, respectively. The age-standardized and reference-adjusted five-year crude probability of death in colon cancer ranged from 30% to 36% across countries, and for rectal cancer from 20% to 33%. The average number of age-standardized and reference-adjusted life-years lost ranged between six and nine years.

CONCLUSION

There were substantial improvements in colon and rectal cancer survival in all Nordic countries 1990-2016. Of special note is that the previously observed survival disadvantage in Denmark is no longer present.

Thyroid surgery outcomes at a children's hospital: The value of a multidisciplinary team approach

BACKGROUND

Our purpose is to describe the structure, function and outcomes of our multidisciplinary pediatric thyroid program and to evaluate our experience in comparison to other high-volume centers.

METHODS

We reviewed all thyroid operations performed 10/2012 through 09/2019, and examined number of cases per year, patient demographics, procedures, final diagnoses and results. Primary outcomes were hypoparathyroidism and recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury at 12 months. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and univariate analyses.

RESULTS

We performed 294 thyroid operations on 279 patients. Seventy-nine percent were female. Median age was 15 years (IQR: 12-17). Operations included total thyroidectomy (65%), lobectomy (30%) and completion thyroidectomy (5%). Most common diagnoses were Graves' disease (35%), malignancy (29%), and benign nodule (20%). We developed an evidence-based clinical pathway and conducted weekly multidisciplinary meetings. A clinical data specialist reviewed process and outcome measures routinely. Overall, 6 patients (2.0%) had hypoparathyroidism and 2 (0.7%) had unilateral RLN injury at 12 months. Two of the patients with clinical suspicion of permanent hypoparathyroidism were ultimately weaned off calcium. Both patients with RLN injury had extensive locally advanced malignant disease involving the nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multidisciplinary team achieved excellent long-term outcomes for pediatric thyroid surgery comparable to other high-volume pediatric and adult centers.

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.

Lessons learned and keys to success: Provider experiences during the implementation of virtual oncology tumor boards in the era of COVID-19

Background and Objectives

The COVID‐19 pandemic required rapid adaptation of multidisciplinary tumor board conferences to a virtual setting; however, there are little data describing the benefits and challenges of using such a platform.

Methods

An anonymous quality improvement survey was sent to participants of tumor board meetings at a large academic institution. Participants answered questions pertaining to the relative strengths and weaknesses of in‐person and virtual settings.

Results

A total of 335 responses (23.3% response rate) were recorded, and 253 met inclusion criteria. Respondents represented 25 different tumor board meetings, with colorectal, breast, and liver (18.6%, 17.0%, and 13.0%, respectively) being the most commonly attended. Virtual tumor boards were equivalent to in‐person across 9 of 10 domains queried, while a virtual format was preferred for participation in off‐site tumor boards. The lack of networking opportunities was ranked by physicians to be a significant challenge of the virtual format. Consistent leadership and organization, engaged participation of all attendees, and upgrading technology infrastructure were considered critical for success of virtual meetings.

Conclusions

The implementation of virtual tumor board meetings has been associated with numerous challenges. However, improving several key aspects can improve participant satisfaction and ensure excellent patient care.

Technical efficiency evaluation of colorectal cancer care for older patients in Dutch hospitals

BACKGROUND

Preoperative colorectal cancer care pathways for older patients show considerable practice variation between Dutch hospitals due to differences in interpretation and implementation of guideline-based recommendations. This study aims to report this practice variation in preoperative care between Dutch hospitals in terms of technical efficiency and identifying associated factors.

METHODS

Data on preoperative involvement of geriatricians, physical therapists and dieticians and the clinicians' judgement on prehabilitation implementation were collected using quality indicators and questionnaires among colorectal cancer surgeons and specialized nurses. These data were combined with registry-based data on postoperative outcomes obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit for patients aged ≥75 years. A two-stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach was used to calculate bias-corrected DEA technical efficiency scores, reflecting the extent to which a hospital invests in multidisciplinary preoperative care (input) in relation to postoperative outcomes (output). In the second stage, hospital care characteristics were used in a bootstrap truncated regression to explain variations in measured efficiency scores.

RESULTS

Data of 25 Dutch hospitals were analyzed. There was relevant practice variation in bias-corrected technical efficiency scores (ranging from 0.416 to 0.968) regarding preoperative colorectal cancer surgery. The average efficiency score of hospitals was significantly different from the efficient frontier (p = <0.001). After case-mix correction, higher technical efficiency was associated with larger practice size (p = <0.001), surgery performed in a general hospital versus a university hospital (p = <0.001) and implementation of prehabilitation (p = <0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study showed considerable variation in technical efficiency of preoperative colorectal cancer care for older patients as provided by Dutch hospitals. In addition to higher technical efficiency in high-volume hospitals and general hospitals, offering a care pathway that includes prehabilitation was positively related to technical efficiency of hospitals offering colorectal cancer care.

Cancer patient management: role of multidisciplinary teams

OBJECTIVES

As a cancer model recommended by numerous governments and health care systems, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can improve clinical decision-making and overall patient care quality. This paper aims to discuss key elements and resources, as well as contingencies for effectiveness MDTs and their meetings.

METHODS

We derived elements, resources, and contingencies for effective MDTs by analyzing articles on the themes of MDTs and MDT meetings.

RESULTS

This paper identifies key elements comprising MDT characteristics, team governance, infrastructure for MDM, MDM organization, MDM logistics, and clinical decision-making in light of patient-centeredness. Resources that facilitate an MDM functioning consist of human resources and non-human resources. The paper further detects barriers to the sustainable performance of MDTs and provide suggestions for improving their functioning in light of patients' and healthcare providers' perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

MDTs are vital to cancer care through enabling healthcare professionals with diversity of clinical specialties to collaborate and formulate optimal treatment recommendations for patients with suspected or confirmed cancer.

Implementation of a Palliative Oncology Tumor Board

CONTEXT

The integration of palliative care into standard oncologic care has been shown to improve multiple outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. Ideal methods for integrating these disciplines is an ongoing area of discussion. One method of integration is a palliative oncology tumor board (POTB).

OBJECTIVES

To describe the implementation of a POTB in a community cancer center as a method of integrating oncology and palliative care by providing a forum for multidisciplinary discussion of complex cases.

METHODS

During development of the POTB, multiple influencing factors and barriers were considered including the setting of implementation, culture prior to implementation, design elements, engagement of stakeholders, and evaluation of implementation. The focus of this POTB was to address the identified communication gap between inpatient and outpatient care teams. Two complex hospitalized oncology patients were selected to be discussed weekly.

RESULTS

Conferences were attended by an average of 23 individuals. The highest proportion of attendees were members of oncology support services (including nurse navigators, social workers, chaplains, dietitians, financial counselors; OSS; 31%), followed by medical oncology (25%). The most common theme of discussion was methods of communication with patient and/or family (68% of cases). Thirty days after presentation, a total of 50 new referrals were placed to inpatient palliative care, OSS, and outpatient palliative care and 11 new advance care plans were documented in the electronic medical record.

CONCLUSION

This paper describes a sustainable method to implement a POTB in a community cancer center setting, which is one method of integrating palliative care into standard oncologic care.

Contributions to Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in Cancer Care: Predictors of Complete Case Information and Comprehensive Case Discussions

Purpose

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings integrate complex information and base recommendations for clinical management on interdisciplinary and multiprofessional decision-making. To support high-quality decision-making and define key performance indicators, we aimed to determine completeness of case information and contributions to MDT case discussions in cancer care.

Methods

In a prospective observational study design, based on three MDTs, we applied the Metric for Observation of Decision-Making (MODe) tool to assess the quality of case presentation and team members’ contributions to case discussions. The MDTs handled patients with brain tumors, soft tissue sarcomas and hepatobiliary cancers. The results were correlated to patient and team characteristics and to MDT leadership skills.

Results

Data were collected from 349 case discussions during 32 MDT meetings. Information on radiology received the highest scores, followed by case history and information on histopathology. Patient-related information was less frequently mentioned and generally received low scores. Contributions to the case discussions were predominantly by the chair, surgeons, and oncologists with limited contributions from nurses. Leadership skills showed a positive correlation with case presentations scores and failure to reach a treatment recommendation correlated with lower case discussion scores.

Conclusion

Considerable resources are spent on MDT meetings in cancer care, which motivate initiatives to ensure high-quality and efficient decision-making processes. We identify unbalanced contributions from team members during MDT meetings, demonstrate limited provision of patient-related information and show that leadership skills may positively influence the quality of the case presentations. We suggest that MDTs should consider and develop these aspects to ensure high-quality MDT-based case management and decision-making.

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.

Clinicians' Attitude to Doublet Plus Anti-EGFR Versus Triplet Plus Bevacizumab as First-line Treatment in Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Multicenter, "Real-Life", Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Doublets plus antiepidermal growth factor receptors monoclonal antibodies (EGFRi) are widely considered the preferable first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), resulting superior in terms of activity and efficacy compared to doublets plus bevacizumab. However, data comparing doublet plus EGFRi and triplet plus bevacizumab are lacking, and the relative benefit of an intensive regimen plus an antiangiogenic backbone in this population is debated.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians' attitude to triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi as first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in clinical practice at 22 Oncology Units from March 2012 to October 2020. A random case-control matching was performed to compare activity (ORR), and effectiveness (PFS, OS, secondary resection rate of metastases with curative intent) between triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi, on the basis of ECOG-PS, age, gender, and burden of disease.

RESULTS

A total of 718 patients were consecutively treated with doublet-EGFRi (686, 95.5%) or triplet-bevacizumab (32, 4.5%). After case-control matching, median PFS was 13.6 (95% CI, 8.9-31.7) and 16.1 (95% CI, 12.1-36.8) months (P= .621), while median OS was 30.2 (95% CI, 14.4-69.5) and 38.1 (95% CI, 33.1-101.1) months (P= .0283) in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. The ORR was 65.6% and 90.6% (P= .016), while the secondary resection rate was 18.8% and 46.9% (P= .016), in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. Triplet-bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of G3/G4 neutropenia (25.0% vs. 12.5%, P= .041).

CONCLUSION

Although a doublet-EGFRi remains the recommended upfront regimen in patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC, our real life data suggest a triplet-bevacizumab might be at least equally active and effective in properly selected cases.

Multidisciplinary decision-making in older patients with cancer, does it differ from younger patients?

BACKGROUND

In order to tailor treatment to the individual patient, it is important to take the patients context and preferences into account, especially for older patients. We assessed the quality of information used in the decision-making process in different oncological MDTs and compared this for older (≥70 years) and younger patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cross-sectional observations of oncological MDTs were performed, using an observation tool in a University Hospital. Primary outcome measures were quality of input of information into the discussion for older and younger patients. Secondary outcomes were the contribution of different team members, discussion time for each case and whether or not a treatment decision was formulated.

RESULTS

Five-hundred and three cases were observed. The median patient age was 63 year, 32% were ≥70. In both age groups quality of patient-centered information (psychosocial information and patient's view) was poor. There was no difference in quality of information between older and younger patients, only for comorbidities the quality of information for older patients was better. There was no significant difference in the contributions by team members, discussion time (median 3.54 min) or number of decision reached (87.5%).

CONCLUSION

For both age groups, we observed a lack of patient-centered information. The only difference between the age groups was for information on comorbidities. There were also no differences in contributions by different team members, case discussion time or number of decisions. Decision-making in the observed oncological MDTs was mostly based on medical technical information.

The Next Step Toward Patient-Centeredness in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings: An Interview Study with Professionals

Background

Patient-centeredness is essential in complex oncological multidisciplinary team decision-making. Improvement seems to be needed, while there is a lack of knowledge about health care providers’ needs for improvement.

Objective

To explore multidisciplinary team members’ perspectives on the need to improve patient-centeredness in complex decision-making, and subsequently the strategies to enhance it.

Methods

This was a qualitative descriptive interview study. The participants were twenty-four professionals who attended multidisciplinary cancer team meetings weekly. The setting was five multidisciplinary teams (gastrointestinal, gynecological, urological, head and neck, and hematological cancer) in a Dutch academic hospital. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews and were analyzed with a combination of inductive and deductive content analysis.

Results

The participants voiced the need for additional information (patient-centered information, patients’s needs and preferences, individualized medical information) during the multidisciplinary team meeting, to be more patient-centered in the decision-making conversation with the patient following the meeting, and for more information following the meeting to support patient-centeredness. The strategies, which mostly originated from the needs, were categorized as organization, decision-making, and communication. The most prominent strategies were those aimed at collecting and using patient-centered information, and to facilitate the decision-making conversation with the patient following the multidisciplinary team meeting.

Conclusion

Our findings highlighted the need to improve patient-centeredness in oncological multidisciplinary teams and provided a comprehensive overview of strategies for improvement, supported by multidisciplinary team members. These strategies emphasize involvement of patients throughout the continuous process of decision-making for patients with cancer. These strategies may be implemented in other oncological multidisciplinary teams, taking in mind the local needs. Future research may help to prioritize the strategies and to determine and evaluate the effect on endpoints, like patient or professional satisfaction, shared decision-making, and on the decision that was made.

The attitude and practice of general surgeons toward cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: A cross-sectional study

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) mandate well-established HIPEC and oncology centers, which are not available in many medical institutions. This study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and practice toward CRS and HIPEC of general surgeons in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Patients and methods

General surgeons (n = 266) from nine hospitals who treat patients with gastrointestinal cancer were surveyed. The responses of surgeons who work in HIPEC and academic centers (Group A) and surgeons working in tertiary and secondary hospitals (Group B) were compared. The survey response rate was 48.1% (128/266).

Results

Surgeons in group B treated significantly more patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis per year than surgeons in group A (P = .001). Group B reported having a HIPEC specialist at their hospital, and 71.4% reported that the nearest HIPEC center was within 30 miles, compared to 4.5% of respondents in group A (P = .001). Lack of access to a HIPEC specialist was reported by 15.5% of surgeons in group B and 0% of surgeons in group A (P = .006). HIPEC as a possible therapeutic option for appendiceal cancer was cited by 60.7% of surgeons in group B compared to 84.1% of surgeons in group A (P = .007) and as a therapeutic option for ovarian cancer by 52.4% of surgeons in group B and 81.8% of surgeons in group A (P = .001).

Conclusion

New strategies are needed to improve the knowledge and implementation of the referral system for HIPEC among general surgeons. Our study was limited by a low response rate.

●

Exposure to HIPEC centers during residency or fellowship training was reported by half of our respondents.

●

Surgeons in tertiary and secondary hospitals treated significantly more patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis per year than surgeons in HIPEC and academic centers.

●

Lack of access to a HIPEC specialist was significantly reported by surgeons working in tertiary and secondary hospitals.

●

HIPEC was significantly cited as an option for appendiceal cancer by surgeons in HIPEC and academic centers compared to surgeons in tertiary and secondary hospitals.

Curing pancreatic cancer

The distinct biology of pancreatic cancer with aggressive and early invasive tumor cells, a tumor promoting microenvironment, late diagnosis, and high therapy resistance poses major challenges on clinicians, researchers, and patients. In current clinical practice, a curative approach for pancreatic cancer can only be offered to a minority of patients and even for those patients, the long-term outcome is grim. This bitter combination will eventually let pancreatic cancer rise to the second leading cause of cancer-related mortalities. With surgery being the only curative option, complete tumor resection still remains the center of pancreatic cancer treatment. In recent years, new developments in neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment have emerged. Together with improved perioperative care including complication management, an increasing number of patients have become eligible for tumor resection. Basic research aims to further increase these numbers by new methods of early detection, better tumor modelling and personalized treatment options. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on clinical and biologic features, surgical and non-surgical treatment options, and the improved collaboration of clinicians and basic researchers in pancreatic cancer that will hopefully result in more successful ways of curing pancreatic cancer.

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.

The Radiology Virtual Reading Room: During and Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the radiology reading room with a potentially lasting impact. This disruption could introduce the risk of obviating the need for the reading room, which would be detrimental to many of the roles of radiology that occur in and around the reading room. This disruption could also create the opportunity for accelerated evolution of the reading room to meet the strategic needs of radiology and health care through thoughtful re-design of the virtual reading room. In this article, we overview the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on radiology in our institution and across the country, specifically on the dynamics of the radiology reading room. We introduce the concept of the virtual reading room, which is a redesigned alternative to the physical reading room that can serve the diverse needs of radiology and healthcare during and beyond the pandemic.

Reorganizing the Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in a Tertiary Centre for Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Adds Value to the Internal and Regional Care Pathways. A Mixed Method Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

The reorganisation of the structure of a Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Multidisciplinary Team Meeting (GIO-MDTM) in a tertiary centre with three care pathways is evaluated on added value.

METHODS

In a mixed method investigation, process indicators such as throughput times were analysed and stakeholders were interviewed regarding benefits and drawbacks of the reorganisation and current MDTM functioning.

RESULTS

For the hepatobiliary care pathway, the time to treatment plan increased, but the time to start treatment reduced significantly. The percentage of patients treated within the Dutch standard of 63 days increased for the three care pathways. From the interviews, three themes emerged: added value of MDTMs, focus on planning integrated care and awareness of possible improvements.

DISCUSSION

The importance of evaluating interventions in oncology care pathways is shown, including detecting unexpected drawbacks. The evaluation provides insight into complex dynamics of the care pathways and contributes with recommendations on functioning of an MDTM.

CONCLUSIONS

Throughput times are only partly determined by oncology care pathway management, but have influence on the functioning of MDTMs. Process indicator information can help to reflect on integration of care in the region, resulting in an increase of patients treated within the Dutch standard.

Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Staging and Multimodal Therapy of Esophageal and Gastric Tumors

Gastric and esophageal tumors are diverse neoplasms that involve mucosal and submucosal tissue layers and include squamous cell carcinomas, adenocarcinomas, spindle cell neoplasms, neuroendocrine tumors, marginal B cell lymphomas, along with less common tumors. The worldwide burden of esophageal and gastric malignancies is significant, with esophageal and gastric cancer representing the ninth and fifth most common cancers, respectively. The approach to diagnosis and staging of these lesions is multimodal and includes a combination of gastrointestinal endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, and cross-sectional imaging. Likewise, therapy is multidisciplinary and combines therapeutic endoscopy, surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic chemotherapeutic tools. Future directions for diagnosis of esophageal and gastric malignancies are evolving rapidly and will involve advances in endoscopic and endosonographic techniques including tethered capsules, optical coherence tomography, along with targeted cytologic and serological analyses.

One-year excess mortality and treatment in surgically treated patients with colorectal cancer: A EURECCA European comparison

BACKGROUND

Mortality in the first postoperative year represents an accurate reflection of the perioperative risk after colorectal cancer surgery. This research compares one-year mortality after surgery divided into three age-categories (18-64, 65-74, ≥75 years), focusing on time trends and comparing treatment strategies.

MATERIAL

Population-based data of all patients diagnosed and treated surgically for stage I-III primary colorectal cancer from 2007 to 2016, were collected from Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Stratified for age-category and stage, treatment was evaluated, and 30-day, one-year and one-year excess mortality were calculated for colon and rectal cancer separately. Results were evaluated over two-year time periods.

RESULTS

Data of 206,024 patients were analysed. Postoperative 30-day and one-year mortality reduced significantly over time in all countries and age-categories. Within the oldest age category, in 2015-2016, one-year excess mortality varied from 9% in Belgium to 4% in Sweden for colon cancer and, from 9% in Belgium to 3% in the other countries for rectal cancer. With increasing age, patients were less likely to receive additional therapy besides surgery. In Belgium, colon cancer patients were more often treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). For neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer, patients in Belgium and Norway were mostly treated with chemoradiotherapy. In the Netherlands and Sweden, radiotherapy alone was preferred (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite improvement over time in all countries and age-categories, substantial variation exists in one-year postoperative mortality. Differences in one-year excess postoperative mortality could be due to differences in treatment strategies, highlighting the consequences of under- and over-treatment on cancer survival.

A multi-method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT-FIT) across a large integrated cancer system

BACKGROUND

Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT-FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT-members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT-FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS).

METHODS

MDT-FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT-FIT: set up; assessment (self-report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team-feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence-based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes.

RESULTS

All 10 MDTs participated in MDT-FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9-month period. Adaptations to MDT-FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT-FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT-FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT-FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support).

CONCLUSIONS

This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi-site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in "real world" settings.

Head and neck tumors in children and adolescents: Impact of a multidisciplinary tumor board

INTRODUCTION

Cancer treatment in France is based on Multidisciplinary Tumor Board (MTB). In the Ile-de-France region (IDF), which includes 12 million inhabitants from Paris and the surrounding area, pediatric tumors of head and neck are discussed since 2013 in a dedicated Interregional Pediatric Multicentric MTB (IPMTB). The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the IDF head and neck IPMTB on the management of these tumors, 5 years after their implementation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study of all patient files presented in the IPMTB for a benign or malignant head-and-neck tumor, between 2013 and 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 679 discussions were analyzed representing 428 patients. Median age was 7.5 years (range: 0-31 years). Malignant tumors represented 71% of cases, including 36% of rhabdomyosarcoma. Overall, 12% percent of the cases discussed came from centers outside of IDF. All meetings complied with multidisciplinary criteria required by French law. Proposals made during the IPMTB were followed in 86% of cases. Among the 251 proposals made by the referring teams prior to the IPMTB, 29% were secondarily modified after being discussed in the IPMTB.

CONCLUSION

Thanks to their multidisciplinarity, high number of cases discussed and usual respect of their proposals, the IPMTB have made it possible to improve the coordination between all specialties involved in the patient's management, to apply the most recent and scientifically validated protocols, and to share the knowledge of different teams concerning the management of particularly rare tumors.

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.

Impact of provider volume on front-line chemotherapy guideline compliance and overall survival in elderly patients with advanced ovarian cancer

PURPOSE

We sought to evaluate whether provider volume or other factors are associated with chemotherapy guideline compliance in elderly patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

METHODS

We queried the SEER-Medicare database for patients ≥66 years, diagnosed with FIGO stage II-IV EOC from 2004 to 2013 who underwent surgery and received chemotherapy within 7 months of diagnosis. We compared NCCN guideline compliance (6 cycles of platinum-based doublet) and chemotherapy-related toxicities across provider volume tertiles. Factors associated with guideline compliance and chemotherapy-related toxicities were assessed using logistic regression. Overall survival (OS) was compared across volume tertiles and Cox proportional-hazards model was created to adjust for case-mix.

RESULTS

1924 patients met inclusion criteria. The overall rate of guideline compliance was 70.3% with a significant association between provider volume and compliance (64.5% for low-volume, 72.2% for medium-volume, 71.7% for high-volume, p = .02). In the multivariate model, treatment by low-volume providers and patient age ≥ 80 years were independently associated with worse chemotherapy-guideline compliance. In the survival analysis, there was a significant difference in median OS across provider volume tertiles with median survival of 32.8 months (95%CI 29.6, 36.4) low-volume, 41.9 months (95%CI 37.5, 46.7) medium-volume, 42.1 months (95%CI 38.8, 44.2) high-volume providers, respectively (p < .01). After adjusting for case-mix, low-volume providers were independently associated with higher rates of mortality (aHR 1.25, 95%CI: 1.08, 1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

In a modern cohort of elderly Medicare patients with advanced EOC, we found higher rates of non-compliant care and worse survival associated with treatment by low-volume Medicare providers. Urgent efforts are needed to address this volume-outcomes disparity.

Leadership perspectives in multidisciplinary team meetings; observational assessment based on the ATLAS instrument in cancer care

OBJECTIVES

High-quality leadership and chairing skills are central components in team performance during multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings. We hypothesized that the recently developed A Tumor Leadership Assessment inStrument (ATLAS) could provide relevant information to support more detailed insights into MDT chairing and leadership aspects of relevance for team feedback and targeted improvements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The observational assessment instrument ATLAS rates chairing and leadership skills during MDT meetings in 12 predefined domains that include e.g. time management, case prioritization, team involvement, discussion climate and clarity of treatment recommendations. We used ATLAS to prospectively assess 33 MDT meetings in neuro-oncology, sarcoma and hepatobiliary cancer.

RESULTS

The aspects time management, effective case prioritization and provision of clear treatment plans were found to be well-functioning, whereas facilitatation of case discussions, encouragment of team member contributions, keeping the meeting focused and ability to summarize case discussions showed variable and partly weak results.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the ATLAS instrument effectively captures various aspects of MDT leadership and chairing skills. It may thereby provide relevant information to prioritize initiatives that support and develop effective teamwork and decision-making during MDT meetings.

Physicians’ attitudes and perspectives regarding the uptake of psychosocial aspects and/or patient preferences during multidisciplinary team meetings in oncology

Introduction

Coordinating cancer care is challenging because of its complexity. To partly encounter this complexity, multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) were implemented to evaluate diagnosis, discuss treatment options and collectively decide upon the most optimal patient care and treatment plan. In cancer trajectories, medical professionals have a coordinating role and final decision responsibility. As a consequence patient-centred non-biomedical information are easily overlooked during discussions in MDTMs. This study aims to uncover physicians’ perceived barriers regarding the uptake of psychosocial aspects and/or patient preferences in the cancer treatment decision-making process during Multidisciplinary Oncology Consultations (MOCs), a specific type of MDTM in Belgium.

Methods

Between March 2019 and May 2019 semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty medical professionals specialized in oncology. Grounded theory principles were used to detect and classify perceived barriers and patterns emerging regarding the uptake of psychosocial information in the cancer treatment decision-making process.

Results

Although physicians showed an open attitude towards taking into account psychosocial aspects and patient preferences in treatment decisions, the majority of respondents is not convinced the MOC is the best place to discuss these aspects. Physicians reported organisational, work process, and health system related barriers.

Discussion

The MOC emerges as a medicalized form of team discussion that, in its current form, does not reach its objective of truly integrated multidisciplinarity as cancer care is demanding. The working practices of the MOC can be optimized to evolve towards a truly interdisciplinary approach.