Effects of multidisciplinary team care on the survival of patients with different stages of non-small cell lung cancer: a national cohort study

Effectiveness of multi-disciplinary team management on 5-year overall survival for patients with stage III lung cancer

Background

Stage III lung cancer (LC) represents a heterogeneous group of diseases, and the optimal management is still a matter of debate. To date, only a few studies have assessed the role of multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion in impacting survival of stage III LC. Hence, we aimed to reported the impact of the implementation of MDT discussion on long-term survival of stage III LC patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective, observational, single-centre cohort study evaluating data of consecutive patients with a clinical and pathological diagnosis of stage III LC treated before [2005-2011] and after [2012-2020] the implementation of MDT. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 983 patients were enrolled with stage III LC, 411 (41.8%) pre-MDT and 572 (58.2%) post-MDT. The 5-year OS rates were 25.3% for the pre-MDT cohort and 33.9% for the post-MDT cohort (P=0.0008). Resected patients (n=670), who underwent trimodality therapy achieved a higher 5-year OS in both pre-MDT and post-MDT groups. An increased 5-year OS was observed in patients who underwent systemic therapy, from 28.2% in pre-MDT to 40.2% in post-MDT cohorts. In non-resected patients, there was an increased in 5-year OS in both systemic and chemoradiotherapy groups.

Conclusions

The implementation of an MDT increased the 5-year OS in both resected and non-resected stage III LC patients. Implementing MDT might be useful in improving the management of therapy with less invasive local and surgical strategies personalized for each LC patient.

A prospective analysis of the management practices for patients with Stage-III-N2Non-Small-Cell lung cancer (OBSERVE IIIA-B GFPC 04-2020Study)

BACKGROUND

Management of stage-III-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on a multimodal strategy (surgery or radiotherapycombined with systemic drugs) remains controversial. Patients are treated with a curative intent, and available data suggestprolonged survival after complete resection. However, no consensual definition of "tumor resectability" exists. This study aimed to analyze the concordanceamong French tumor board meeting (TBM)-emittedtherapeutic decisions forstage-III-N2 NSCLC.

METHODS

Six patients with stage-III-N2 NSCLC discussed at Saint-Etienne University Hospital'sthoracic TBMs were selected, anonymouslyreported, and submitted to the participating TBMs. The primary goal of this multicenter, prospective, observational study was to assess the consistency of TBMpanel decisions for each case. The secondary endpointwas identifying the demographic or technical factors that potentiallyaffected decision-making.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven TBMs from university hospitals, a cancer center, general hospitals, and a private hospitalparticipated in this study. None of their decisions for the six cases were unanimous.The decisions were homogenous for three cases (78%, 85%, and 88% TBMs opted for medical treatment, respectively),andmore ambivalent for the other three (medical versus surgical strategies were favored by 44%/56%, 46%/54%, and 58%/42% TBMs, respectively). Interestingly, decisions regarding chemoradiationand perioperative chemotherapyinthe medical and surgical strategies, respectively, were also discordant. Hospital type, specialist participation in TBMs, and activity volumes were not significantly associated with therapeutic decisions.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study highlight substantial disparities amongFrench TBMs regarding therapeutic management of stage-III-N2 NSCLC. The decisions were not associated with local conditions.

Multidisciplinary meeting review in nonsmall cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer diagnosis, staging and treatment may be enhanced by multidisciplinary participation and presentation in multidisciplinary meetings (MDM). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore literature evidence of clinical impacts of MDM exposure.

METHODS

A study protocol was registered (PROSPERO identifier CRD42021258069). Randomised controlled trials and observational cohort studies including adults with nonsmall cell lung cancer and who underwent MDM review, compared to no MDM, were included. MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on 31 May 2021. Studies were screened and extracted by two reviewers. Outcomes included time to diagnosis and treatment, histological confirmation, receipt of treatments, clinical trial participation, survival and quality of life. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool.

RESULTS

2947 citations were identified, and 20 studies were included. MDM presentation significantly increased histological confirmation of diagnosis (OR 3.01, 95% CI 2.30-3.95; p<0.00001) and availability of clinical staging (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.43-4.56; p=0.002). MDM presentation significantly increased likelihood of receipt of surgery (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.29-3.12; p=0.002) and reduced the likelihood of receiving no active treatment (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21-0.50; p=0.01). MDM presentation was protective of both 1-year survival (OR 3.23, 95% CI 2.85-3.68; p<0.00001) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.55-0.72; p<0.00001).

DISCUSSION

MDM presentation was associated with increased likelihood of histological confirmation of diagnosis, documentation of clinical staging and receipt of surgery. Overall and 1-year survival was better in those presented to an MDM, although there was some clinical heterogeneity in participants and interventions delivered. Further research is required to determine the optimal method of MDM presentation, and address barriers to presentation.

The Best Supportive Care in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is a major cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents most lung cancer cases, and approximately one-third of patients present with stage III disease at diagnosis. As multiple treatment plans can be adopted for these patients depending on tumor size and nodal staging, stage III NSCLC management is challenging. Over the past decades, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) have been implemented in healthcare services to coordinate actions among the different health care professionals involved in cancer care. The aim of this review was to discuss real-world evidence of the impact of MDTs on stage III NSCLC management, survival, and quality of life. Here, we performed a literature review to investigate the role of nutrition and navigational nursing in NSCLC care and the influence of MDTs in the choice of treatment plans, including immunotherapy consolidation, and in the management of chemotherapy and radiotherapy-related adverse events. We also performed a mapping review to identify gaps in the implementation of cancer care MDTs in healthcare services around the world.

Effect of multidisciplinary team care on patient survival in chronic hepatitis B or C hepatocellular carcinoma

Introduction

Multidisciplinary team care coordinates with medical teams to improve the quality of cancer care. This study explored multidisciplinary team care in hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma patients from the time of diagnosis to the first-time treatment interval and investigated treatment outcomes and prognosis.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included data from a nationwide population from 2007 to 2016. Data were collected from the Taiwan Cancer Registry Database, linked to the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:2 to reduce the selection bias. A multiple regression model with generalized estimating equations was used to analyze whether multidisciplinary team care affected the diagnosis-to-treatment interval. The stratified Cox proportional hazards model examined whether involvement in multidisciplinary team care influenced survival status.

Results

A total of 10,928 and 21,856 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma received multidisciplinary and non-multidisciplinary care, respectively. Participants with multidisciplinary care had a longer diagnosis-to-treatment interval but a lower risk of cumulative cancer death (HR=0.88, 95% CI:0.84-0.92). In patients with intermediate- to advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, multidisciplinary team care has obvious benefits for improving survival.

Conclusion

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who participated in multidisciplinary team care had a longer diagnosis-to-treatment interval but a lower risk of cancer death. Patients with intermediate- to advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma who received multidisciplinary team care significantly benefited from this outcome. Hospitals should provide HCC patients with multidisciplinary team care to improve cancer care.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Operable Stage II/III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of a Modified Delphi Process

The treatment paradigm for patients with stage II/III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is rapidly evolving. We performed a modified Delphi process culminating at the Early-stage Lung cancer International eXpert Retreat (ELIXR23) meeting held in Montreal, Canada, in June 2023. Participants included medical and radiation oncologists, thoracic surgeons and pathologists from across Quebec. Statements relating to diagnosis and treatment paradigms in the preoperative, operative and postoperative time periods were generated and modified until all held a high level of consensus. These statements are aimed to help guide clinicians involved in the treatment of patients with stage II/III NSCLC.

Real-world clinical practice and outcomes in treating stage III non-small cell lung cancer: KINDLE-Asia subset

Introduction

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous disease requiring multimodal treatment approaches. KINDLE-Asia, as part of a real world global study, evaluated treatment patterns and associated survival outcomes in stage III NSCLC in Asia.

Methods

Retrospective data from 57 centers in patients with stage III NSCLC diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2017 were analyzed. Median progression free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) estimates with two sided 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined by applying the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

Results

Of the total 1874 patients (median age: 63.0 years [24 to 92]) enrolled in the Asia subset, 74.8% were men, 54.7% had stage IIIA disease, 55.7% had adenocarcinoma, 34.3% had epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (EGFRm) and 50.3% had programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (i.e. PD-L1 ≥1%). Of the 31 treatment approaches as initial therapy, concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) was the most frequent (29.3%), followed by chemotherapy (14.8%), sequential CRT (9.5%), and radiotherapy (8.5%). Targeted therapy alone was used in 81 patients of the overall population. For the Asia cohort, the mPFS and mOS were 12.8 months (95% CI, 12.2–13.7) and 42.3 months (95% CI, 38.1–46.8), respectively. Stage IIIA disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ≤1, age ≤65 years, adenocarcinoma histology and surgery/concurrent CRT as initial therapy correlated with better mOS (p &lt; 0.05).

Conclusions

The results demonstrate diverse treatment patterns and survival outcomes in the Asian region. The high prevalence of EGFRm and PD-L1 expression in stage III NSCLC in Asia suggests the need for expanding access to molecular testing for guiding treatment strategies with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapies in this region.

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

Virtual versus in-person multidisciplinary musculoskeletal tumor conferences in times of COVID-19

Introduction

Multidisciplinary tumor conferences are a fundamental component in the treatment of oncological patients. The COVID-19 pandemic and its resulting social distancing restrictions offered the opportunity to compare in-person to virtual multidisciplinary tumor conferences.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of first-time presentations in tumor conferences at a university musculoskeletal tumor center in the time periods from September 2019 to February 2020 (in-person) and May 2020 to October 2020 (virtual).

Results

A total of 209 patients were first-time discussed in one of 52 analyzed musculoskeletal multidisciplinary tumor conferences (105 patients in 25 in-person, and 104 patients 27 virtual meetings). The total number of participants was slightly lower with virtual meetings (p < .001) and more disciplines were represented in virtual tumor conferences (p < .001). With median six consultants present in either, the level of available expertise did not differ between the conference formats (p  =  .606). Compared to in-person tumor meetings, the patients were discussed earlier in the virtual conferences (p  =  .028). The interval between first presentation to biopsy was significantly shorter after virtual tumor conferences (median 4 vs. 7 days, p < .001). There was no significant difference in the interval between initial presentation and resection (p  =  .544) among the two conference formats.

Conclusions

The implementation of virtual tumor conferences appears to have had a positive effect on timely diagnosis and multidisciplinarity during tumor conferences. This may result in better decision-making and treatment of patients with musculoskeletal tumors and could be routinely implemented into cancer care.

Navigating patient journey in early diagnosis of lung cancer in India

Lung cancer (LC) is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths worldwide. In India, the incidence of LC is increasing rapidly, and a majority of the patients are diagnosed at advanced stages of the disease when treatment is less likely to be effective. Recent therapeutic developments have significantly improved survival outcomes in patients with LC. Prompt specialist referral remains critical for early diagnosis for improved patient survival. In the Indian scenario, distinguishing LC from benign and endemic medical conditions such as tuberculosis can pose a challenge. Hence, awareness regarding the red flags-signs and symptoms that warrant further investigations and referral-is vital. This review is an effort toward encouraging general physicians to maintain a high index of clinical suspicion for those at risk of developing LC and assisting them in refering patients with concerning symptoms to specialists or multidisciplinary teams as early as possible.

Optimising tissue acquisition and the molecular testing pathway for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A UK expert consensus statement

Targeted therapy against actionable variants has revolutionised the treatment landscape for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Approximately half of NSCLC adenocarcinomas have an actionable variant, making molecular testing a critical component of the diagnostic process to personalise therapeutic options, optimise clinical outcomes and minimise toxicity. Recently, genomic testing in England has undergone major changes with the introduction of Genomic Laboratory Hubs, designed to consolidate and enhance existing laboratory provision and deliver genomic testing as outlined in the National Genomic Test Directory. Similar changes are ongoing in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. However, multiple challenges exist with current tissue acquisition procedures and the molecular testing pathway in the UK, including quantity and quality of available tissue, adequacy rates, test availability among genomic laboratories, turnaround times, multidisciplinary team communication, and limited guidance and standardisation. The COVID-19 pandemic has added an extra layer of complexity. Herein, we summarise best practice recommendations, based on expert opinion, to overcome existing challenges in the UK. The least invasive biopsy technique should be undertaken with the aim of acquiring the greatest quality and quantity of tissue. Use of sedation should be considered to improve patient experience. Rapid on-site evaluation may also be useful to help guide adequate sampling, and liquid biopsy may be beneficial in some instances. Sample processing should be appropriate to facilitate biomarker testing, in particular, next-generation sequencing for comprehensive genomic information. Steps to optimise tissue utilisation and turnaround times, such as planning of tissue usage, limiting immunohistochemistry, tumour enrichment, and reflex testing at diagnosis, should be implemented. Guidelines for tissue acquisition and sample processing may help to improve sample adequacy to perform downstream testing. Communication among genomic laboratories will help to standardise test availability across England and local auditing could identify further areas for optimisation, including ways to improve turnaround times and adequacy rates.

Impact of integrated health care on elderly population: A systematic review of Taiwan's experience

BACKGROUND

Care fragmentation in the elderly population prompted the need for integrated health care systems. However, evidence regarding the impact of the integrated care system in Taiwan is unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the impact of Taiwan's integrated health care programs on geriatric population.

METHODS

We searched bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Airiti Library for relevant publications throughout May 2022. Studies investigating the effectiveness of Taiwan's integrated care programs were included. We used the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) checklist, to assess the risk of bias of included studies.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies, with a total of 838,026 study subjects, were assessed. The systematic review on 11 subthemes (diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, hepatitis C virus, fractures, cancer, dementia, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, mechanical ventilation, terminal illness, outpatients and community-dwelling patients), demonstrated that the implementation of integrated health care could not only provide benefits on survival, self-care ability, health quality, physical, and functional rehabilitation outcomes, but also significantly reduce medical utilization and expenditures.

CONCLUSION

The integrated health care system for multiple morbidities benefits the Taiwanese geriatric population in physical and functional outcomes. The thematic synthesis provides references for future rigorous clinical trials.

Integrating supportive care into the multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: we can't wait any longer

INTRODUCTION

Due to important achievements in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic tools and the complexity of the disease itself, lung cancer management needs a multidisciplinary approach. To date, the classical multidisciplinary team involves different healthcare providers mainly dedicated to lung cancer diagnosis and treatments. Nevertheless, the underlying disease and related treatments significantly impact on patient function and psychological well-being. In this sense, supportive care may offer the best approach to relieve and manage patient symptoms and treatment-related adverse events.

AREAS COVERED

Evidence report that exercise, nutrition, smoking cessation and psychological well-being bring many benefits in patients with lung cancer, from both a physical and socio-psychological points of view, and potentially improving their survival. Nevertheless, supportive care is rarely offered to patients, and even less frequently these needs are discussed within the multidisciplinary meeting.

EXPERT OPINION

Integrating supportive care as part of the standard multidisciplinary approach for lung cancer involves a series of challenges, the first one represented by the daily necessity of specialists, such as kinesiologists, dietitians, psycho-oncologists, able to deliver a personalized approach. In the era of precision medicine this is an essential step forward to guarantee comprehensive and patient-centered care for all patients with lung cancer.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Management of Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing clinicians on management of patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

An Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary oncology, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts was convened to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2021. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 127 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address evaluation and staging workup of patients with suspected stage III NSCLC, surgical management, neoadjuvant and adjuvant approaches, and management of patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines.

Virtual Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards: A Narrative Review Focused on Lung Cancer

To date, the virtual multidisciplinary tumor boards (vMTBs) are increasingly used to achieve high-quality treatment recommendations across health-care regions, which expands and develops the local MTB team to a regional or national expert network. This review describes the process of lung cancer-specific MTBs and the transition process from face-to-face tumor boards to virtual ones. The review also focuses on the project organization's description, advantages, and disadvantages. Semi-structured interviews identified five major themes for MTBs: current practice, attitudes, enablers, barriers, and benefits for the MTB. MTB teams exhibited positive responses to modeled data feedback. Virtualization reduces time spent for travel, allowing easier and timely patient discussions. This process requires a secure web platform to assure the respect of patients' privacy and presents the same unanswered problems. The implementation of vMTB also permits the implementation of networks especially in areas with geographical barriers facilitating interaction between large referral cancer centers and tertiary or community hospitals as well as easier access to clinical trial opportunities. Studies aimed to improve preparations, structure, and conduct of MTBs, research methods to monitor their performance, teamwork, and outcomes are also outlined in this article. Analysis of literature shows that MTB participants discuss 5-8 cases per meeting and that the use of a vMTB for lung cancer and in particular stage III NSCLC and complex stage IV cases is widely accepted by most health professionals. Despite still-existing gaps, overall vMTB represents a unique opportunity to optimize patient management in a patient-centered approach.

Implementing multidisciplinary tumor boards in oncology: a narrative review

The healthcare industry compares unfavorably with other ultra-safe industries such as aviation and nuclear power plants, which address complexity by reducing the vulnerability of a single person and promoting teams and strong systems. A multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) is an evidence-based organizational approach to implementing a more effective concept in oncology practice. Studies addressing the correlation between MTBs and cancer outcomes show promising results, and other potential benefits are also addressed. The objectives of this article are to define and characterize MTBs in modern oncology practice, review the current literature on MTBs effectiveness and address challenges to the implementation and maintenance of MTBs. In this commentary-type narrative review, the authors present their opinions and, whenever possible, substantiate recommendations by citing supportive literature.

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.

Providing outpatient cancer care for CALD patients: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

There have been few descriptions of how outpatient cancer care is provided to patients from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities. As populations who experience disparities in cancer care access and outcomes, deeper understanding is needed to help identify those factors which can shape the receipt of multidisciplinary care in ambulatory settings. This paper reports on data collected and analysed as part of a multicentre characterisation of care in Australian public hospital cancer outpatient clinics (OPCs).

RESULTS

Analysis of data from our ethnographic study of four OPCs identified three themes: "Identifying CALD patient language-related needs"; "Capacity and resources to meet CALD patient needs", and "Making it work for CALD communities." The care team comprises not only clinicians but also families and non-clinical staff; OPCs serve as "touchpoints" facilitating access to a range of therapeutic services. The findings highlight the potential challenges oncology professionals negotiate in providing care to CALD communities and the ways in which clinicians adapt their practices, formulate strategies and use available resources to support care delivery.

Survival Impact of an Enhanced Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Conference in a Regional Community Health Care System

INTRODUCTION

We compared NSCLC treatment and survival within and outside a multidisciplinary model of care from a large community health care system.

METHODS

We implemented a rigorously benchmarked "enhanced" Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Conference (eMTOC) and used Tumor Registry data (2011-2017) to evaluate guideline-concordant care. Because eMTOC was located in metropolitan Memphis, we separated non-MTOC patient by metropolitan and regional location. We categorized National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-concordant treatment as "preferred," or "appropriate" (allowable under certain circumstances). We compared demographic and clinical characteristics across cohorts using chi-square tests and survival using Cox regression, adjusted for multiple testing. We also performed propensity-matched and adjusted survival analyses.

RESULTS

Of 6259 patients, 14% were in eMTOC, 55% metropolitan non-MTOC, and 31% regional non-MTOC cohorts. eMTOC had the highest rates of African Americans (34% versus 28% versus 22%), stages I to IIIB (63 versus 40 versus 50), urban residents (81 versus 78 versus 20), stage-preferred treatment (66 versus 57 versus 48), guideline-concordant treatment (78 versus 70 versus 63), and lowest percentage of nontreatment (6 versus 21 versus 28); all p values were less than 0.001. Compared with eMTOC, hazard for death was higher in metropolitan (1.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.4-1.7) and regional (1.7, 1.5-1.9) non-MTOC; hazards were higher in regional non-MTOC versus metropolitan (1.1, 1.0-1.2); all p values were less than 0.05 after adjustment. Results were generally similar after propensity analysis with and without adjusting for guideline-concordant treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary NSCLC care planning was associated with significantly higher rates of guideline-concordant care and survival, providing evidence for rigorous implementation of this model of care.

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

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

Conduct of neuro-oncology multidisciplinary team meetings and closing the "gaps" in the clinical management of childhood central nervous system tumors in a middle-income country

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are essential in the clinical management of pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Evaluations of the impact of MDTMs on childhood CNS tumors and clinicians' perspectives on their effectiveness are scarce.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of pediatric patients (aged <18 years) with CNS tumors diagnosed and treated in the Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Division at the University Malaya Medical Center from 2008 to 2019. We also conducted a web-based survey of the core members of the multidisciplinary team to evaluate the impact of the MDTMs.

RESULTS

During the pre-MDTM era (2008-2012), 29 CNS tumors were diagnosed and treated, and during the MDTM era (2014-2019), 49 CNS tumors were diagnosed and treated. The interval for histologic diagnosis was significantly shorter during the MDTM era (p=0.04), but the interval from diagnosis to chemotherapy or radiotherapy and the 5-year overall survival of the 78 patients did not improve (62.1% ± 9.0% vs. 68.8% ± 9.1%; p=0.184). However, the 5-year overall survival of patients with medulloblastoma or rare tumors significantly improved in the MDTM era (p=0.01). Key factors that contributed to delayed treatment and poor outcomes were postoperative complications, the facility's lack of infrastructure, poor parental education about early treatment, cultural beliefs in alternative medicine, and infection during chemotherapy. Eighteen clinicians responded to the survey; they felt that the MDTMs were beneficial in decision-making and enhanced the continuity of coordinated care.

CONCLUSION

MDTMs significantly reduced the diagnostic interval and improved the overall outcomes. However, delayed treatment remains a major challenge that requires further attention.

Navigating Diagnostic and Treatment Decisions in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Expert Commentary on the Multidisciplinary Team Approach

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately one in five cancer-related deaths, and management requires increasingly complex decision making by health care professionals. Many centers have therefore adopted a multidisciplinary approach to patient care, using the expertise of various specialists to provide the best evidence-based, personalized treatment. However, increasingly complex disease staging, as well as expanded biomarker testing and multimodality management algorithms with novel therapeutics, have driven the need for multifaceted, collaborative decision making to optimally guide the overall treatment process. To keep up with the rapidly evolving treatment landscape, national-level guidelines have been introduced to standardize patient pathways and ensure prompt diagnosis and treatment. Such strategies depend on efficient and effective communication between relevant multidisciplinary team members and have both improved adherence to treatment guidelines and extended patient survival. This article highlights the value of a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and staging, treatment decision making, and adverse event management in NSCLC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This review highlights the value of a multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and makes practical suggestions as to how multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can be best deployed at individual stages of the disease to improve patient outcomes and effectively manage common adverse events. The authors discuss how a collaborative approach, appropriately leveraging the diverse expertise of NSCLC MDT members (including specialist radiation and medical oncologists, chest physicians, pathologists, pulmonologists, surgeons, and nursing staff) can continue to ensure optimal per-patient decision making as treatment options become ever more specialized in the era of biomarker-driven therapeutic strategies.

Treatment facility volume and patient outcomes in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia

Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) has an annual incidence of 3-3.2 cases per million-person/year. National Cancer Data Base was used to identify newly diagnosed WM cases requiring initiation of therapy and their annual facility volume was used to divide the treatment facilities into four quartiles (Qs). Cox regression was used to analyze the association between facility volume and survival, adjusted by demographics, socioeconomic, geographic, comorbidity factors and year of diagnosis. A total of 3064 patients treated in 795 facilities were included. The unadjusted median overall survival (OS) by facility volume was: Q1:6.5 years (5-year OS 55%), Q2:7 years (5-year OS 60%), Q3:8 years (5-year OS 64%), and Q4: NR (5-year OS 71%), p < 0.0001. Our results demonstrated that a volume-outcome relationship exists in WM and is an independent predictor of overall survival in addition to the established risk factors as age and disease severity.

Locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: the place of specialist thoracic surgery in the multidisciplinary team

One reason that lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide, is that surgical intervention is highly dependent on earlier tumor stage and good patient condition. As large proportion of cases are already metastatic at presentation and many are locally advanced, curative surgery is only possible in a minority of fit patients. Increasing the number of patients achieving complete resection is one of the avenues to increase overall survival using our existing technology. In the past, complex cases may have been sporadically discussed between various specialists in order to achieve better outcomes. More recently, the idea of discussing those cases on a routine basis, rather than an accident of geography or referral pattern, gave rise to the multidisciplinary team. Lung cancer management is now increasingly complex, especially with novel modalities such as targeted therapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors and stereotactic body radiotherapy delivery. Likewise, in thoracic surgery, minimally invasive techniques, early recovery after surgery protocols and complex techniques for resecting locally advanced tumours or preserving lung parenchyma must all be deployed appropriately to continue our incremental gains in survival and quality of life. To highlight the role of specialist thoracic surgeon in the multidisciplinary care of locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer, we conducted a search of English language publications for its multidisciplinary-based surgical management. We limited our search to the last decade, then hand-searched relevant references. In addition, we used our large prospective database as a team-oriented specialized thoracic surgical service to benchmark and demonstrate the benefits of specialist surgeons in the modern multidisciplinary team. In conclusion, patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer should have any surgical option withheld without a specialist thoracic surgical opinion as part of the multidisciplinary team discussion.

A review on the impact of lung cancer multidisciplinary care on patient outcomes

International guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary approach to the management of lung cancer due to the complexity of both patients and their disease and the multiple treatment options available. This care can be provided through patient discussion at multidisciplinary meetings where relevant medical and allied health staff formulate a consensus management plan taking all factors into consideration. This model can be extended further to include multidisciplinary clinics where the patient is present for assessment and discussion. However, conducting regular multidisciplinary meetings or clinics has significant time, resource and financial costs and therefore, it is important to assess the impact of multidisciplinary care. We aimed to review published evidence, from 2000 to 2019, to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary care on lung cancer outcomes. There were 29 studies found, 11 evaluating multidisciplinary clinics, 14 studying multidisciplinary meetings and four where the model of care was not defined. There was only one randomised trial and three prospective studies, the remainder being retrospective studies. Despite limitations in trial design and confounding factors, overall, multidisciplinary care in lung cancer was associated with improvements in patient outcomes, in particular improved survival for all stages of lung cancer. Lung cancer patients managed in a multidisciplinary setting were more likely to receive active treatment and had improved utilisation of all treatment modalities: surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. In addition, the treatment recommendations were more likely to be consistent with lung cancer management guidelines. These improved outcomes support the recommendations for a multidisciplinary approach to lung cancer care.

Implementation of lung cancer multidisciplinary teams: a review of evidence-practice gaps

Multidisciplinary care (MDC) is considered best practice in lung cancer care. Health care services have made significant investments in MDC through the establishment of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings. This investment is likely to be sustained in future. It is imperative that MDT meetings are efficient, effective, and sufficiently nimble to introduce new innovations to enable best practice. In this article, we consider the ‘evidence-practice gaps’ in the implementation of lung cancer MDC. These gaps were derived from the recurrent limitations outlined in existing studies and reviews. We address the contributions that implementation science and quality improvement can make to bridge these gaps by increasing translation and improving the uptake of innovations by teams.

Optimizing lung cancer MDT data for maximum clinical impact-a scoping literature review

Multidisciplinary care in is widely recommended as best practice for lung cancer in many countries and jurisdictions. A number of studies suggest multidisciplinary care benefits patient outcomes, with analyses based on a range of data sources including national, state and local registries as well as multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT)-based data collections, often focused on different questions depending on data sources. MDT data collection and linkage are not standardized and not routine although data collection and feedback are specifically recommended by at least one statutory body. We performed a scoping review of current evidence for lung cancer MDT data collection and analysis, to identify discrete strategies through illustrative examples and to make recommendations for future approaches. Thirteen studies were identified that presented lung cancer MDT-related clinical outcomes, three included MDTs from multiple tumour streams while 10 studies focussed on lung cancer MDT meetings. Eleven studies measured the effect of MDT discussion on clinical outcomes of which eight were positive. Data sources included MDT records (3 studies), medical or hospital records (3 studies), institutional registries (5 studies) and state or national administrative datasets (6 studies), with some overlap. Examples of studies based on different data sources (local MDT, institutional registry, national registry) exemplified the different types of clinical research questions appropriate for each data source. While MDT data collection is not well-defined, the importance of clinical audit and data feedback and the potential for real-time analysis to improve outcomes deserve further investigation. Optimized datasets and linkage strategies are likely to maximize benefits for patients.

Multidisciplinary team care in advanced lung cancer

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer mortality globally. A vast majority of lung cancer cases are diagnosed at advanced stages. Management of advanced lung cancer requires several diagnostic and therapeutic procedures provided by various specialists. To optimise the entire diagnostic and therapeutic process, a concept of care provided simultaneously by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) has been developed and implemented in specialised centres worldwide. Observational studies suggest that integrated and coordinated care increases adherence to clinical guidelines, significantly shortens the interval from diagnosis to treatment, and may increase survival and quality of life (QoL). Prospective studies are warranted to assess the real impact of MDT on treatment outcomes and to further refine this approach.

Accuracy of lung cancer staging in the multidisciplinary team setting

Accurate staging of lung cancer is of utmost importance in determining the stage-appropriate treatment and prognosis. Imaging tests which include contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) examination of the chest to include the liver and adrenal glands and 18-fluoro-2 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scan facilitate the initial tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging of the disease and provide guidance on the optimal biopsy site and biopsy method. The diagnostic and staging approach should be tailored to the individual patient according to risk, benefit, patient preferences, and available expertise. Diagnosis and staging should preferably be accomplished with a single procedure or the least number of invasive procedures if more than one is needed. Ideally, centers managing lung cancer patients should have a multidisciplinary thoracic oncology board prescribing personalized evidence-based management tailored to each individual patient. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings provide a platform for key experts from various disciplines to contribute specific advice on the management of each individual patient. As assessment of mediastinal lymph node involvement is an important component of lung cancer staging, optimal mediastinal staging can be achieved with a variety of techniques that can be discussed and performed by the various specialists in the MDT. Despite a relative paucity of quality evidence that MDT contributes to improvements in lung cancer survival outcomes, this approach has evolved to become the standard of care in many centers around the world. Thoracic MDT has resulted in more focused and timely investigations for histopathologic diagnosis and disease staging which translate into earlier treatment initiation. Moreover, there is increasing evidence that MDT care facilitates and allows access to investigations that lead to improved accuracy of tumor and nodal staging. However, there is still a paucity of evidence on the accuracy of lung cancer staging in the MDT setting.

Multidisciplinary Cancer Management of Colorectal Cancer in Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary cancer care is currently considered worldwide as standard for the management of patients with cancer. It improves patient diagnostic and staging accuracy and provides patients the benefit of having physicians of various specialties participating in their treatment plan. The purpose of this study was to describe the profile of patients discussed in the Tikur Anbessa Multidisciplinary Tumor Board (MTB) and the potential benefits brought by multidisciplinary care.

METHODS

The study involved the retrospective assessment of all patient cases presented to the Tikur Anbessa Hospital colorectal cancers MTB between March 2016 and November 2017. The data were collected from the MTB medical summary documents and were analyzed using SPSS version 20 (SPSS, Chicago, IL).

RESULTS

Of 147 patients with colorectal cancer, 96 (65%) were men. The median age at presentation was 46 years (range, 17-78 years). The predominant cancer was rectal (n = 101; 69%), followed by colon (n = 24; 16%). Of these, 68 (45%) and 22 (15%) had stage III and IV disease, respectively, on presentation to the MTB. The oncology department presented the majority of the patients for discussion. Most patients had undergone surgery before the MTB discussion but had no proper preoperative clinical staging information. The majority of patients with rectal cancer treated before the MTB discussion had undergone surgery upfront; however, most of the patients who were treatment naive before MTB received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before surgery.

CONCLUSION

Decisions made by tumor boards are more likely to conform to evidence-based guidelines than are those made by individual clinicians. Therefore, early referral of patients to MTB before any treatment should be encouraged. Finally, other hospitals in Ethiopia should take a lesson from the Tikur Anbessa Hospital colorectal cancers MTB and adopt multidisciplinary cancer management.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Clinical impact of data feedback at lung cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: A mixed methods study

AIM

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings can facilitate optimal lung cancer care, yet details of structured data collection and feedback remain sparse. This study aimed to investigate data collection and the impact of feedback to lung cancer MDTs.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study using pre and post-test surveys, semistructured interviews, and observation to evaluate data collection and response to modeled data feedback in three Australian lung cancer MDTs at different locations and development stage (site A: outer metropolitan, established; site B, outer metropolitan, new; and site C, inner metropolitan, established).

RESULTS

MDT attendees (range 13-25) discussed 5-8 cases per meeting. All sites collected data prospectively (80% prepopulated) into local oncology medical information systems. The pretest survey had 17 respondents in total (88% clinicians). At sites A and C, 100% of respondents noted regular data audits, occasional at site B. Regular audit data included number of cases, stage, final diagnosis, and time to diagnosis and treatment. The post-test survey had 25 respondents in total, all clinicians. The majority (88-96%) of respondents found modeled data easy to interpret, relevant to clinical practice and the MDT, and welcomed future regular data presentations (as rated on a 5-point Likert scale mean weighted average 4.5 where > 4 demonstrates agreement). Semistructured interviews identified five major themes for MDTs: current practice, attitudes, enablers, barriers, and benefits for the MDT.

CONCLUSIONS

MDT teams exhibited positive responses to modeled data feedback. Key characteristics of MDT data were identified and may assist with future team research and development.

What is multidisciplinary cancer care like in practice? a protocol for a mixed-method study to characterise ambulatory oncology services in the Australian public sector

INTRODUCTION

An understanding of the real-world provision of oncology outpatient services can help maintain service quality in the face of escalating demand and tight budgets, by informing the design of interventions that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of provision. The aims of this study are threefold. First, to develop an understanding of cancer services in outpatient clinics by characterising the organisation and practice of multidisciplinary care (MDC). Second, to explore the key areas of: (a) clinical decision-making and (b) engagement with patients' supportive needs. Third, to identify barriers to, and facilitators of, the delivery of quality care in these settings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A suite of mixed-methods studies will be implemented at six hospitals providing cancer outpatient clinics, with a staged roll-out. In Stage One, we will examine policies, use unstructured observations and undertake interviews with key health professionals to characterise the organisation and delivery of MDC. In Stage Two, observations of practice will continue, to deepen our understanding, and to inform two focused studies. The first will explore decision-making practices and the second will examine how staff engage with patients' needs; both studies involve interviews, to complement observation. As part of the study of supportive care, we will examine the implications of an introduction of patient-reported measures (PRMs) into care, adding surveys to interviews before and after PRMs roll-out. Data analysis will account for site-specific and cross-site issues using an adapted Qualitative Rapid Appraisal, Rigorous Analysis approach. Quantitative data from clinician surveys will be statistically analysed and triangulated with the related qualitative study findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was granted by South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (no. 18/207). Findings will be shared with participating hospitals and widely disseminated through publications and presentations.

Does presentation at multidisciplinary team meetings improve lung cancer survival? Findings from a consecutive cohort study

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) presentation in lung cancer has the potential to improve longterm outcomes, although this varies between studies. This study aims to evaluate outcomes including survival, according to MDT presentation and to explore the utility of data obtained from local clinical sources.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective cases of lung cancer recorded in our institution's cancer registry were analyzed according to MDT presentation for patient and tumour characteristics, adjusted survival and referral to palliative care.

RESULTS

1197 cases were included, 295 (24.6%) with MDT presentation and 902 (75.4%) without. 60% of patients were male with median (IQR) age at diagnosis of 70 years (62-78). Histopathology distribution (non-small cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer) was similar between the two groups. Compared with the non-MDT group, the MDT group had (1) ECOG score recorded more often (71.9% vs. 47.6%), (2) higher proportion of ECOG 0 cases (31.2% vs. 11.9%) and ECOG 1 cases (28.8% vs. 20.3%), (3) higher proportion of early stage disease (stage I - 23.1% vs. 9.7% stage II - 10.2% vs. 4.8%, stage IIIA - 14.6% vs 6.3%) and (4) lower proportion of metastatic disease (stage IV - 39.3% vs. 56.1%). Referral to palliative care was incompletely recorded in both groups (MDT: n = 116/295, 39.3%; non-MDT: n = 430, 47.7%) but did not differ significantly for stage IV cases. Survival analyzed by stage was greater in the MDT group at 1, 2 and 5 years for all stages except stage IIIB at 1 year post-diagnosis. Adjusted survival analysis for the entire cohort showed improved survival at 5 years for the MDT group (HR 0.7 (0.58-0.85), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

MDT presentation is associated with improved adjusted survival for lung cancer in this single institutional cohort in an analysis of local clinical cancer registry data.

Benefits, barriers and opinions on multidisciplinary team meetings: a survey in Swedish cancer care

BACKGROUND

Case review and discussion at multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) have evolved into standard practice in cancer care with the aim to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations. As a basis for work to optimize the MDTMs, we investigated participants' views on the meeting function, including perceived benefits and barriers.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study design, 244 health professionals from south Sweden rated MDTM meeting structure and function, benefits from these meetings and barriers to reach a treatment recommendation.

RESULTS

The top-ranked advantages from MDTMs were support for patient management and competence development. Low ratings applied to monitoring patients for clinical trial inclusion and structured work to improve the MDTM. Nurses and cancer care coordinators did less often than physicians report involvement in the case discussions. Major benefits from MDTM were reported to be more accurate treatment recommendations, multidisciplinary evaluation and adherence to clinical guidelines. Major barriers to a joint treatment recommendation were reported to be need for supplementary investigations and insufficient pathology reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Health professionals' report multiple benefits from MDTMs, but also define areas for improvement, e.g. access to complete information and clarified roles for the different health professions. The emerging picture suggests that structures for regular MDTM evaluations and increased focus on patient-related perspectives should be developed and implemented.

Benefits, barriers and opinions on multidisciplinary team meetings: a survey in Swedish cancer care

BACKGROUND

Case review and discussion at multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) have evolved into standard practice in cancer care with the aim to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations. As a basis for work to optimize the MDTMs, we investigated participants' views on the meeting function, including perceived benefits and barriers.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study design, 244 health professionals from south Sweden rated MDTM meeting structure and function, benefits from these meetings and barriers to reach a treatment recommendation.

RESULTS

The top-ranked advantages from MDTMs were support for patient management and competence development. Low ratings applied to monitoring patients for clinical trial inclusion and structured work to improve the MDTM. Nurses and cancer care coordinators did less often than physicians report involvement in the case discussions. Major benefits from MDTM were reported to be more accurate treatment recommendations, multidisciplinary evaluation and adherence to clinical guidelines. Major barriers to a joint treatment recommendation were reported to be need for supplementary investigations and insufficient pathology reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Health professionals' report multiple benefits from MDTMs, but also define areas for improvement, e.g. access to complete information and clarified roles for the different health professions. The emerging picture suggests that structures for regular MDTM evaluations and increased focus on patient-related perspectives should be developed and implemented.

CiRS-7 targeting miR-7 modulates the progression of non-small cell lung cancer in a manner dependent on NF-κB signalling

The purpose of this study was to figure out the effect of ciRS‐7/miR‐7/NF‐κB axis on the development of non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In response, the expressions of ciRS‐7, miR‐7 and NF‐κB subunit (ie RELA) within NSCLC tissues and cell lines were determined with real‐time polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) and Western blot. Moreover, the NSCLC cells were transfected with pcDNA3‐ciRS‐7‐ir, pcDNA3‐ciRS‐7, miR‐NC and miR‐7 mimic. Furthermore, the targeted relationships between ciRS‐7 and miR‐7, as well as between miR‐7 and RELA, were confirmed by luciferase reporter assay. The proliferation, migration and apoptosis of NSCLC cells were, successively, measured using CCK‐8 assay, wound‐healing assay and flow cytometry test. Consequently, ciRS‐7, miR‐7, histopathological grade, lymph node metastasis and histopathological stage could independently predict the prognosis of patients with NSCLC (all P < .05). Moreover, remarkably up‐regulated ciRS‐7 and RELA expressions, as along with down‐regulated miR‐7 expressions, were found within NSCLC tissues and cells in comparison with normal ones (P < .05). Besides, overexpressed ciRS‐7 and underexpressed miR‐7 were correlated with increased proliferation, migration and invasion, yet reduced apoptosis rate of NSCLC cells (P < .05). More than that, ciRS‐7 specifically targeted miR‐7 to reduce its expressions (P < .05). Ultimately, the NSCLC cells within miR‐7 + RELA group were observed with superior proliferative, migratory and invasive capabilities than those within miR‐7 group (P < .05), and RELA expression was also significantly modified by both ciRS‐7 and miR‐7 (P < .05). In conclusion, the ciRS‐7/miR‐7/NF‐kB axis could exert pronounced impacts on the proliferation, migration, invasion and apoptosis of NSCLC cells.

Lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: From a clinical perspective

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer are devastating pulmonary diseases that commonly coexist and present a number of clinical challenges. COPD confers a higher risk for lung cancer development, but available chemopreventive measures remain rudimentary. Current studies have shown a marked benefit of cancer screening in the COPD population, although challenges remain, including the common underdiagnosis of COPD. COPD-associated lung cancer presents distinct clinical features. Treatment for lung cancer coexisting with COPD is challenging as COPD may increase postoperative morbidities and decrease survival. In this review, we outline current progress in the understanding of the clinical association between COPD and lung cancer, and suggest possible cancer prevention strategies in this patient population.

Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings in practice: Results from a multi-institutional quantitative survey and implications for policy change

AIM

Multidisciplinary care is advocated as best practice in cancer care. Relatively little is documented about multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting functioning, decision making and the use of evidence to support decision making in Australia. This descriptive study aimed to examine team functioning, the role of team meetings and evidence use in MDTs whose institutions are members of Sydney Catalyst Translational Cancer Research Centre.

METHODS

We designed a structured 40-item survey instrument about topics that included meeting purpose, organization, resources and documentation; caseload estimates; use of evidence and quality assurance; patient involvement and supportive care needs; and open-ended items about the MDTs strengths and weaknesses. Participants were invited to participate via email and the survey was administered online. Data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven MDTs from seven hospitals participated (100% response) and represented common (70%) and rare tumor groups (30%). MDT meeting purpose was reported as treatment (100%) or diagnostic decision making (88%), or for education purposes (70%). Most MDTs based treatment decisions on group consensus (92%), adherence to clinical practice guidelines (57%) or other evidence-based medicine sources (33%). The majority of MDTs discussed only a proportion of new patients at each meeting emphasizing the importance of educational aspects for other cases. Barriers exist in the availability of data to enable audit and reflection on evidence-based practice. MDT strengths included collaboration and quality discussion about patients.

CONCLUSIONS

MDT meetings focus on treatment decision making, with group consensus playing a significant role in translating research evidence from guidelines into clinical decision making. With a varying proportion of patients discussed in each MDT meeting, a wider audit of multidisciplinary care would enable more accurate assessments of whether treatment recommendations are in accordance with best-practice evidence.

Effects of multidisciplinary team on emergency care for colorectal cancer patients: A nationwide-matched cohort study

The literature describing the effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) for the care of colorectal cancer remains unclear. We investigated the effects of MDT care on the quality of colorectal cancer treatment, and the emergency department visit number was used as an indicator. In total, 45,418 patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (2005-2009) were included. Propensity score matching with a ratio of 1:3 was adopted to reduce differences in characteristics between MDT care participants and non-MDT care participants. After matching, 3039 participation MDT care groups and 9117 nonparticipation groups were included and analyzed with χ and t tests, determine the distribution was similar. Without the control of variables, the percentage difference between participation and nonparticipation MDT care groups in utilization of emergency care was 0.03% (P > .05). The logistic regression model involving controlled variables demonstrated that odds ratio (OR) by probability of emergency care used for participation MDT care groups within a year of cancer diagnosis was less than that for nonparticipation (OR = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-0.96). Large amount data were used and confirmed significant benefits of MDT in colorectal cancer care.

Improved patient survivals with colorectal cancer under multidisciplinary team care: A nationwide cohort study of 25,766 patients in Taiwan

OBJECTIVES

The evidence of improved survival in patients of colorectal cancer (CRC) receiving multidisciplinary team (MDT) care remains inconclusive.

METHODS

All patients with incident CRC but no prior cancer history in 2005-2008 were included and followed till 2010. A logistic regression model was used to predict the associated factors to participate in the MDT care model. The propensity score method was included under Cox proportional hazards model to reduce potential bias and to conduct survival analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 25,766 patients were included; the mean follow-up period was 35.1 months. The factors associated with participating in MDT included receiving treatments at regional hospitals, at private hospitals, and stage III cancer (all p values <0.001). The favorable survival factors included participating in MDT (HR=0.91, p=0.001), age of 45-75, top-ranked income group, receiving treatments at district hospitals, or at hospitals or with doctors that had higher service volumes (all p values <0.05). Regarding individual stages, the risk of mortality was significantly lower at stage IV (HR=0.88, p=0.002).

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer patients with participation in MDT have a lower mortality risk; the improvements of survival exist in all colorectal cancer patients, especially in those with stage IV disease.