Impact of a single-day multidisciplinary clinic on the management of patients with liver tumours

ACG Clinical Guideline: Focal Liver Lesions

Focal liver lesions (FLLs) have become an increasingly common finding on abdominal imaging, especially asymptomatic and incidental liver lesions. Gastroenterologists and hepatologists often see these patients in consultation and make recommendations for management of multiple types of liver lesions, including hepatocellular adenoma, focal nodular hyperplasia, hemangioma, and hepatic cystic lesions including polycystic liver disease. Malignancy is important to consider in the differential diagnosis of FLLs, and healthcare providers must be familiar with the diagnosis and management of FLLs. This American College of Gastroenterology practice guideline uses the best evidence available to make diagnosis and management recommendations for the most common FLLs.

Models and Outcomes of Multidisciplinary Clinics in Colorectal Cancer

Multidisciplinary clinics (MDCs) represent a potential platform through which high-quality, patient-centered care grounded in interdisciplinary expertise may be delivered for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This is increasingly important with the rapidly emerging diagnostic and treatment modalities as well as differential sequences of therapies available. MDCs have been reported to improve various outcomes across numerous non-colorectal cancers; however, data specific to the use of MDCs in CRC are more limited. In this report, we provide a narrative review of the different models of CRC MDCs in the literature and their associations with cancer care outcomes. We found significant heterogeneity in MDC operational logistics as well as reported outcomes across different practice settings. Further research is needed to better understand how MDCs may be optimally structured to meet the unique needs of patients with CRC and how they may affect CRC outcomes.

MASLD-Related HCC: A Comprehensive Review of the Trends, Pathophysiology, Tumor Microenvironment, Surveillance, and Treatment Options

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents a significant burden on global healthcare systems due to its considerable incidence and mortality rates. Recent trends indicate an increase in the worldwide incidence of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and a shift in the etiology of HCC, with MASLD replacing the hepatitis B virus as the primary contributor to new cases of HCC. MASLD-related HCC exhibits distinct characteristics compared to viral HCC, including unique immune cell profiles resulting in an overall more immunosuppressive or exhausted tumor microenvironment. Furthermore, MASLD-related HCC is frequently identified in older age groups and among individuals with cardiometabolic comorbidities. Additionally, a greater percentage of MASLD-related HCC cases occur in noncirrhotic patients compared to those with viral etiologies, hindering early detection. However, the current clinical practice guidelines lack specific recommendations for the screening of HCC in MASLD patients. The evolving landscape of HCC management offers a spectrum of therapeutic options, ranging from surgical interventions and locoregional therapies to systemic treatments, for patients across various stages of the disease. Despite ongoing debates, the current evidence does not support differences in optimal treatment modalities based on etiology. In this study, we aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature on the trends, characteristics, clinical implications, and treatment modalities for MASLD-related HCC.

Multidisciplinary approach for hepatocellular carcinoma patients: current evidence and future perspectives

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is challenging due to the complex relationship between underlying liver disease, tumor burden, and liver function. HCC is also notorious for its high recurrence rate even after curative treatment for early-stage tumor. Liver transplantation can substantially alter patient prognosis, but donor availability varies by each patient which further complicates treatment decision. Recent advancements in HCC treatments have introduced numerous potentially efficacious treatment modalities. However, high level evidence comparing the risks and benefits of these options is limited. In this complex situation, multidisciplinary approach or multidisciplinary team care has been suggested as a valuable strategy to help cope with escalating complexity in HCC management. Multidisciplinary approach involves collaboration among medical and health care professionals from various academic disciplines to provide comprehensive care. Although evidence suggests that multidisciplinary care can enhance outcomes of HCC patients, robust data from randomized controlled trials are currently lacking. Moreover, the implementation of a multidisciplinary approach necessitates increased medical resources compared to conventional cancer care. This review summarizes the current evidence on the role of multidisciplinary approach in HCC management and explores potential future directions.

Pivoting to telemedicine in a single-day multidisciplinary liver tumor clinic during COVID-19: the Texas Liver Tumor Center experience

Cancer guidelines recommend that all patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have an evaluation by a multidisciplinary team to assess liver health, stage the cancer, and discuss treatment and palliative care options. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a catastrophic impact on patients with cancer resulting in increased disease burden due to late diagnosis and treatment delays. Late diagnosis has highlighted the need for the early intervention of palliative care for patients with HCC. Conversion to telemedicine has been essential to caring for patients with all stages of cancer without added delays. Texas Liver Tumor Center (TLTC) offers patients with liver cancer at any stage a single-day multidisciplinary evaluation with tumor board review facilitating the early integration of treatment and palliative care services. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines support increasing and improving access to palliative care. TLTC allows for the early integration of palliative care within a 1-day clinic model with an incorporated tumor board. This unique model of patient care decreases the burden of separate patient visits, may expedite the time from diagnosis to first treatment, facilitates the early intervention of palliative care specialists, and allows for optimal screening for clinical trials. In this review, we will provide an overview of the current multidisciplinary models of care for HCC and describe the successful pivot of TLTC from a fully in-person single-day multidisciplinary clinic with a multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) to a fully virtual experience, thereby maintaining access to this unique clinical model of patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The ability to pivot from in-person clinical visits to completely virtual visits increases patient access to care and enables more physicians to participate. Areas for future study include the impact on patient experience, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of this high-resource model.

Multilevel factors associated with inequities in multidisciplinary cancer consultation

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in the prevalence of multidisciplinary cancer consultations (MDCc) over the last decade and examine patient, surgeon, hospital, and neighborhood factors associated with receipt of MDCc among individuals diagnosed with cancer.

DATA SOURCE

Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data from 2006 to 2016.

STUDY DESIGN

We used time-series analysis to assess change in MDCc prevalence from 2007 to 2015. We also conducted multilevel logistic regression with random surgeon- and hospital-level effects to assess associations between patient, surgeon, neighborhood, and health care organization-level factors and receipt of MDCc during the cancer treatment planning phase, defined as the 2 months following cancer diagnosis.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

We identified Medicare beneficiaries >65 years of age with surgically resected breast, colorectal (CRC), or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stages I-III (n = 103,250).

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

From 2007 to 2015, the prevalence of MDCc increased from 35.0% to 61.2%. Overall, MDCc was most common among patients with breast cancer compared to CRC and NSCLC. Cancer patients who were Black, had comorbidities, had dual Medicare-Medicaid coverage, were residing in rural areas or in areas with higher Black and Hispanic neighborhood composition were significantly less likely to have received MDCc. Patients receiving surgery at disproportionate payment-sharing or rural-designated hospitals had 2% (95% CI: -3.55, 0.58) and 17.6% (95% CI: -21.45, 13.70), respectively, less probability of receiving MDCc. Surgeon- and hospital-level effects accounted for 15% of the variance in receipt of MDCc.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of MDCc has increased over the last decade, but significant geographical and health care organizational barriers continue to impede equitable access to and delivery of quality care across cancer patient populations. Multilevel and multicomponent interventions that target care coordination, health system, and policy changes may enhance equitable access to and receipt of MDCc.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Liver Cancer Staging at a Multidisciplinary Liver Cancer Clinic

To compare liver cancer resectability rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background

Liver cancers usually present with nonspecific symptoms or are diagnosed through screening programs for at-risk patients, and early detection can improve patient outcomes. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic upended medical care across all specialties, but whether the pandemic was associated with delays in liver cancer diagnosis is not known.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of all patients evaluated at the Johns Hopkins Multidisciplinary Liver Cancer Clinic from January 2019 to June 2021 with a new diagnosis of suspected or confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or biliary tract cancer (BTC).

Results

There were 456 liver cancer patients (258 HCC and 198 BTC). From January 2019 to March 2020 (pre-pandemic), the surgical resectability rate was 20%. The subsequent 6 months (early pandemic), the resectability rate decreased to 11%. Afterward from October 2020 to June 2021 (late pandemic), the resectability rate increased to 27%. The resectability rate early pandemic was significantly lower than that for pre-pandemic and later pandemic combined (11% lower; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-20%). There was no significant difference in resectability rates pre-pandemic and later pandemic (7% difference; 95% CI, -3% to 16%). In subgroup analyses, the early pandemic was associated with a larger impact in BTC resectability rates than HCC resectability rates. Time from BTC symptom onset until Multidisciplinary Liver Clinic evaluation increased by over 6 weeks early pandemic versus pre-pandemic (Hazard Ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.91).

Conclusions

During the early COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a drop in the percentage of patients presenting with curable liver cancers. This may reflect delays in liver cancer diagnosis and contribute to excess mortality related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Optimizing the Diagnosis and Biomarker Testing for Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a heterogenous group of malignancies originating in the biliary tree, and associated with poor prognosis. Until recently, treatment options have been limited to surgical resection, liver-directed therapies, and chemotherapy. Identification of actionable genomic alterations with biomarker testing has revolutionized the treatment paradigm for these patients. However, several challenges exist to the seamless adoption of precision medicine in patients with CCA, relating to a lack of awareness of the importance of biomarker testing, hurdles in tissue acquisition, and ineffective collaboration among the multidisciplinary team (MDT). To identify gaps in standard practices and define best practices, multidisciplinary hepatobiliary teams from the University of California (UC) Davis and UC Irvine were convened; discussions of the meeting, including optimal approaches to tissue acquisition for diagnosis and biomarker testing, communication among academic and community healthcare teams, and physician education regarding biomarker testing, are summarized in this review.

Integrating a Disease-Focused Tumor Board as a Delivery-of-Care Model to Expedite Treatment Initiation for Patients With Liver Malignancies

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatobiliary malignancies are especially vulnerable to treatment delays. This study sought to evaluate the impact of implementing a new delivery-of-care model centered around a hepatobiliary multidisciplinary tumor board (HB-MTB) and integrated with an optimized patient workflow process to expedite treatment initiation.

METHODS

A hybrid type 2 study (effectiveness-implementation) was performed. Implementation measures were examined prospectively using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) approach during 5 years after the HB-MTB program deployment (2015-2020). The primary outcome was effectiveness, measured as time to treatment initiation (TTI) using a before and after design (1 year each). The patients were grouped into before (BP) and after (AP) categories based on date of HB-MTB program implementation. Multivariable Cox and linear regression analyses were performed to examine and compare time to treatment initiation between groups.

RESULTS

The HB-MTB program enrolled 2457 patients (reach). The RE-AIM measures were favorable and improved over time (P < 0.01 for all). The median TTI was lower for the AP group than for the BP group (17 vs 24 days; P < 0.01). In the multivariable Cox and linear regressions, treatment in the AP group was associated with a faster TTI (hazard ratio, 1.75; 95 % confidence interval, 1.31-2.35; p < 0.01), and a mean of 13 days faster treatment initiation than the BP group (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an HB-MTB program integrated with an optimized patient workflow was successful and led to faster treatment initiation. This delivery-of-care model can serve as a blueprint to expedite treatment of patients with cancer.

Development, Practice Patterns, and Early Clinical Outcomes of a Multidisciplinary Liver Cancer Clinic

Multidisciplinary care has been associated with improved survival in patients with primary liver cancers. We report the practice patterns and real world clinical outcomes for patients presenting to the Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) multidisciplinary liver clinic (MDLC). We analyzed hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, n = 100) and biliary tract cancer (BTC, n = 76) patients evaluated at the JHH MDLC in 2019. We describe the conduct of the clinic, consensus decisions for patient management based on stage categories, and describe treatment approaches and outcomes based on these categories. We describe subclassification of BCLC stage C into 2 parts, and subclassification of cholangiocarcinoma into 4 stages. A treatment consensus was finalized on the day of MDLC for the majority of patients (89% in HCC, 87% in BTC), with high adherence to MDLC recommendations (91% in HCC, 100% in BTC). Among patients presenting for a second opinion regarding management, 28% of HCC and 31% of BTC patients were given new therapeutic recommendations. For HCC patients, at a median follow up of 11.7 months (0.7-19.4 months), median OS was not reached in BCLC A and B patients. In BTC patients, at a median follow up of 14.2 months (0.9-21.1 months) the median OS was not reached in patients with resectable or borderline resectable disease, and was 11.9 months in patients with unresectable or metastatic disease. Coordinated expert multidisciplinary care is feasible for primary liver cancers with high adherence to recommendations and a change in treatment for a sizeable minority of patients.

Role of Multidisciplinary Care in the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Despite advances in treatment options for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 5-year survival for HCC remains below 20%. This poor survival is multifactorial but is partly related to underuse of curative treatment in clinical practice. In light of growing treatment options, delivered by different types of providers, optimal management requires input from multiple specialties. A multidisciplinary approach has been evolving over the past couple of decades, bringing different specialists together to develop a therapeutic plan to treat and manage HCC, which significantly increases timely guideline-concordant treatment and improves overall survival. The present review attempts to highlight the need for such a multimodal approach by providing insights on its potential structure and impact on the various aspects of HCC management.

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

Importance

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

Objective

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

Design, Setting, and Participants

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

Main Outcomes and Measures

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

Results

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

New advances in the diagnosis and management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is one of the leading causes of cancer related death in the world. Biannual surveillance for the disease in patients with cirrhosis and in high risk carriers of hepatitis B virus allows early stage cancer detection and treatment with good long term outcomes. Liver ultrasonography and serum α fetoprotein are the most commonly used surveillance tests. If suspicious results are found on the surveillance test, multiphasic computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging should be undertaken to confirm the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. If radiologic tests show inconclusive results, liver biopsy or repeat imaging could be considered for confirmation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Management of the disease is complex. Patients should be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team, and the selection of treatment should consider factors such as tumor burden, severity of liver dysfunction, medical comorbidities, local expertise, and preference of patients. Early stage hepatocellular carcinoma is best managed by curative treatment, which includes resection, ablation, or transplantation. Patients with intermediate stage disease often receive locoregional treatment. Systemic treatment is reserved for patients with advanced disease. Several positive, phase III, randomized controlled trials have expanded the systemic treatment options for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with promising long term outcomes, especially trials using combination treatments, which could also have eventual implications for the treatment of earlier stage disease.

Is hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in high-risk populations effective?

Several professional societies recommend hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance in high-risk patients including patients with cirrhosis from any etiology and subsets of noncirrhotic chronic hepatitis B virus infection. The efficacy of HCC surveillance to increase early detection and improve survival has been demonstrated in a large randomized controlled trial among hepatitis B virus patients and several cohort studies among those with cirrhosis. However, the effectiveness on HCC surveillance, when applied in clinical practice, is lower due to low utilization of HCC surveillance among at-risk patients, poorer test performance given operator dependency and differences in patient characteristics, and downstream process failures such as treatment delays. Interventions to increase surveillance utilization and improve surveillance test performance should improve surveillance effectiveness in the future.

The effect of 1-day multidisciplinary clinic on breast cancer treatment

PURPOSE

A delay in breast cancer treatment is associated with inferior survival outcomes; however, no clear guidelines exist defining the appropriate time frame from diagnosis to definitive treatment of breast cancer. A multidisciplinary approach for breast cancer treatment can minimize the time from diagnosis to first treatment. We hypothesized single-day multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) may accelerate the time to first treatment on complex breast cancer cases at our institution.

METHODS

We identified patients who were treated at Johns Hopkins for stage II or III breast cancer, who were at least 18 years of age, and were seen in a new single-day MDC with coordination between two or three specialties or by specialists from varying disciplines on different days (IDC). Patients who initiated treatment between May 2015 (initiation of MDC clinic) and December 2017 were included in our study.

RESULTS

A total of 296 patient records were reviewed independently. The mean (SD) patient age was 55 (13) years. The median time to first neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was significantly reduced for patients seen in the MDC (12.7 days), compared to those seen at the IDC (24.4 days, logrank p < 0.001). The median time to definitive surgery was similar between groups (31 and 32 days for the MDC and IDC cohorts, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

A single-day MDC visit is associated with a reduced time from diagnosis to NACT. Further studies are needed to determine if a shorter interval can improve the management and the outcome of complex breast cancer cases.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Outcomes After Resection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Intersection of Travel Distance and Hospital Volume

BACKGROUND

Data on the impact of hospital volume and travel distance on patient outcomes after major abdominal surgery remain poorly defined. We sought to characterize the relationship of travel distance, hospital volume, and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing surgical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was used to identify patients who underwent resection of HCC. Patients were stratified according to travel distance and hospital volume quartiles, and multivariable regression models were utilized to examine the impact of travel distance, hospital volume, and travel distance/hospital volume on overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among the 12,266 patients identified, procedures included wedge/segmental resections (N = 7354, 59.9%), hemi-hepatectomy (N = 4003, 32.6%), and extended hepatectomy (N = 909, 7.5%). Stratifying data into quartiles, travel distance to surgical care was ≤ 5.7 miles (mi), > 5.7-14.2 mi, > 14.2-44.4 mi, and ≥ 44.4 mi, while hospital volume quartiles determined on the hospital level were ≤ 1 case per year, 1.1-4, 4.1-12.5, and ≥ 12.5. On multivariable analysis, increased hospital volume was associated with decreased hazard of mortality (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-0.82, p < 0.001). Travel distance was not significantly associated with hazard of mortality. Furthermore, only hospital volume was associated with mortality (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.80, p < 0.001) after controlling for both travel distance and hospital volume.

CONCLUSIONS

Only hospital volume was associated with increased hazard of mortality. The benefits of undergoing resection for HCC at a high-volume hospital appear to outweigh the inconvenience of longer travel distances.

Thoracic Oncology Multidisciplinary Clinic Reduces Unnecessary Health Care Expenditure Used in the Workup of Patients With Non-small-cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

National costs of lung cancer care exceed $12 billion. We investigate the resource-savings benefit of a single-day thoracic oncology multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) in the diagnostic period prior to non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From July 2007 to January 2015, patients with NSCLC treated with multimodality therapy at a tertiary hospital-based cancer center in Maryland were identified. Patient and treatment details were collected. Health care resources utilized in the 90 days prior to receipt of first oncologic treatment were identified using billed activity codes. Associated total charges, including professional fees and hospital-based technical fees, were identified and inflated to 2014 dollars using the Consumer Price Index. Codes were categorized into provider visits, procedures, pathology/laboratory, radiology, and other tests. χ², Student t, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests compared charges of patients seen in and out of the MDC.

RESULTS

Two-hundred ninety-seven (non-MDC = 161, 54%; MDC = 136, 46%) of 308 patients identified had total charges available. Patients seen through MDC had on average a 23% decrease in total charges per patient incurred ($5839 savings; range, $5213-$6464) compared with patients seen through non-MDC settings. Evaluation through MDC reduced the average number of provider visits per patient (non-MDC, 6.8 vs. MDC, 4.8; P < .01) prior to treatment start, which led to a 50% (average $3092; range, $2451-$3732) reduction in provider charges per patient (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of patients with NSCLC through a coordinated single-day MDC reduced hospital charges per patient by 23% during the diagnostic period prior to treatment when compared with evaluation through traditional referral-based thoracic oncology clinics.

Multidisciplinary approach is associated with improved survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients

Background

Given the complexity of managing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a multidisciplinary approach (MDT) is recommended to optimize management of HCC patients. However, evidence suggesting that MDT improves patient outcome is limited.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients newly-diagnosed with HCC between 2005 and 2013 (n = 6,619). The overall survival (OS) rates between the patients who were and were not managed via MDT were compared in the entire cohort (n = 6,619), and in the exactly matched cohort (n = 1,396).

Results

In the entire cohort, the 5-year survival rate was significantly higher in the patients who were managed via MDT compared to that of the patients who were not (71.2% vs. 49.4%, P < 0.001), with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.41–0.53). In the exactly matched cohort, the 5-year survival rate was higher in patients who were managed via MDT (71.4% vs. 58.7%, P < 0.001; HR [95% CI] = 0.67 [0.56–0.80]). The survival benefit of MDT management was observed in most pre-defined subgroups, and was especially significant in patients with poor liver function (ALBI grade 2 or 3), intermediate or advanced tumor stage (BCLC stage B or C), or high alphafetoprotein levels (≥200 ng/ml).

Conclusion

MDT management was associated with improved overall survival in HCC patients, indicating that MDT management can be a valuable option to improve outcome of HCC patients. This warrants prospective evaluations.

Treatment at a high-volume centre is associated with improved survival among patients with non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The association between case volume and outcomes is well-documented for several cancer types. However, it is unknown if patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated at high-volume centres have improved overall survival.

METHODS

About 135 442 patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma between 2004-2014 were identified in the Commission on Cancer's National Cancer Database and 53 795 patients were excluded for metastatic or node-positive disease. Average annual case volume was calculated as the total number of cases treated per centre from 2004-2014 and dividing by 10. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed the most significant case number threshold between high-volume centres and remaining centres. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Cox regression analysis to determine factors associated with improved survival. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used for overall survival estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 81 647 patients with stage I-III hepatocellular carcinoma were treated at a total of 1218 centres. The median [range] case volume per year averaged over the 10-year study period was 48.6 [0.1-205.5]. High-volume centres treated >114 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma annually while remaining centre treated ≤114 cases. Median survival for patients treated in high-volume centres and remaining centres were 31.9 and 16.6 months respectively (Log Rank P < .001). On multivariate analysis, average annual case volume was significantly associated with improved survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving treatment at a high-volume centre is significantly associated with survival for patients with non-metastatic disease. Improved survival at high-volume centres may be related to access to a variety of treatment modalities, multidisciplinary evaluation, and/or subspecialty expertise.

The Geography of Primary Hepatic Neoplasms Treatments in Canada: Changes in Latitudes and Changes in Attitudes

BACKGROUND

Studies on treatment modalities for primary hepatic neoplasms (PHN) in Canada are lacking. Our primary aim was to analyze the age-standardized incidence of hepatic resection, ablation, transplantation, and embolization for PHN between 2002 and 2013. Secondary aim was to evaluate temporal trends for these treatment modalities.

STUDY DESIGN

National Canadian Cancer Registries were accessed for relevant epidemiological data. Age-standardized incidence of treatment ratios (SIRs) was calculated and comparisons were performed for Atlantic Canada, Ontario, the Prairies, and British Columbia.

RESULTS

British Columbia recorded the highest SIRs for ablation (1.9; 95% CI 1.8-2.0), hepatic resection (1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3), and transarterial locoregional therapies (2.8; 95% CI 2.4-3.2). For hepatic resection, the lowest SIR was found in Atlantic Canada (0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.9), while the Prairies recorded the lowest estimate for transarterial therapies (0.2; 95% CI 0.1-0.4). Liver transplantation had the highest SIR in Ontario (1.5; 95% CI 1.3-1.6) and the lowest SIR in British Columbia. No significant temporal changes in SIRs were observed for any of the treatments except for transarterial therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of PHN in Canada differs by geography. Variations might be due to differences in expertise or access to therapeutic modalities.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Hospital Volume and Survival After Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

The association between hospital volume and outcome following high-risk low volume cancer surgery is well documented. However, this association is not well understood in cancer patients undergoing non-surgical therapies. We explored this association in a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Data from the 2000 through 2011 in Texas Cancer Registry were used to study adults with newly diagnosed HCC (17,231 patients from 322 hospitals). Hospital volume was stratified into low and high volume using Contal's outcome-based method. A multivariable Cox regression with shared frailty was used to evaluate the association between hospital volume and overall survival. The relationship between treatment modality and hospital volume was explored using mixed effects logistic regression.

RESULTS

The majority (61%) of HCC patients were seen in 21 high-volume hospitals. An annual hospital volume cutoff point of 24 patients was determined to stratify between high- and low-volume hospitals. Patients at high-volume hospitals presented more commonly with localized disease (56 vs. 50%, P<0.01) and were more likely to receive curative therapies including surgical resection, liver transplantation, or ablation (22 vs. 12%, P<0.01). High-volume hospitals were significantly associated with improved survival (HR=0.96, 95% CI=0.94-0.98). In multivariable analysis, hospital volume was associated with increased overall treatment utilization (OR=1.3, 95% CI=1.2-1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital volume is associated with improved overall survival, particularly in localized HCC. Improved survival may be mediated by increased utilization of treatments in high HCC volume hospitals.

Quality of Cancer Care in Patients with Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver cancer in patients with cirrhosis and is the leading cause of mortality in these patients. Despite existence of robust clinical practice guidelines for surveillance, diagnosis, and management for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the quality of care received by patients with HCC has been inconsistent. Several studies have reported disappointingly low surveillance rates in high-risk groups which likely contribute to most HCC cases being diagnosed at advanced stages. There is also data from large studies showing that significant under-referral to specialists and delay in initiation of treatment are linked to poor clinical outcomes. Given above circumstances, it is very important to perform studies which can identify areas in need of improvement in the care processes of HCC and design interventions to enhance quality of care. Unfortunately, data on validated quality indicators and quality metrics for HCC are non-existent. In this article, we review the existing literature pertaining to this issue and identify areas that need further research.

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

Background

Multidisciplinary cancer team meetings are intended to optimize the diagnosis of a patient with a malignancy. The aim of this study was to assess the number of correct diagnoses formulated by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and whether MDT decisions were implemented.

Methods

In a prospective study, data of consecutive patients discussed at gastrointestinal oncology MDT meetings were studied, and MDT diagnoses were validated with pathology or follow-up. Factors of influence on the correct diagnosis were identified by use of a Poisson regression model. Electronic patient records were used to assess whether MDT decisions were implemented, and reasons to deviate from these decisions were hand-searched within these records.

Results

In 74 MDT meetings, 551 patients were discussed a total of 691 times. The MDTs formulated a correct diagnosis for 515/551 patients (93.4 %), and for 120/551 (21.8 %) patients the MDT changed the referral diagnosis. Of the MDT diagnoses, 451/515 (87.6 %) were validated with pathology. Patients presented to the MDT by their treating physician were 20 % more likely to receive a correct diagnosis [relative risk (RR) 1.2, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.1–1.5], while the number of patients discussed or the duration of the meeting had no influence on this (RR 1.0, 95 % CI 0.99–1.0; RR 1.0, 95 % CI 0.9–1.1; resp.). MDT decisions were implemented in 94.4 % of cases. Deviations of MDT decisions occurred when a patient’s wishes or physical condition were not taken into account.

Conclusions

MDTs rectify 20 % of the referral diagnoses. The presence of the treating physician is the most important factor to ensure a correct diagnosis and adherence to the treatment plan.

Race not rural residency is predictive of surgical treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: Analysis of the Texas Cancer Registry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Rural patients have poor access to specialists and are less likely to receive evidence-based cancer care. We hypothesized that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients from rural counties in Texas would be less likely to receive surgical therapy than those from urban areas.

METHODS

The Texas Cancer Registry was queried (2000-2008). County-level data included "rural or urban" designation and income variables derived by zip code. Surgical intervention included: (i) ablation, (ii) resection-partial or total lobectomy, or (iii) transplantation. A multinomial logistic regression was created to determine predictors of intervention.

RESULTS

Five thousand thirty seven HCC patients were identified (86% urban) for study. A multinomial regression demonstrated, older age, African-American race, and lower income reduced the likelihood of ablation. Younger age, female gender, Caucasian, and Asian/other race predicted surgical resection, or transplantation. Hispanic race was associated with lower likelihood of resection (RRR 0.75) and transplantation (RRR 0.74), whereas African-American race was associated with pronounced decrease for transplantation (RRR 0.48). Area of residency was not predictive of intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural residency did not decrease the likelihood of surgical intervention for hepatocellular carcinoma. Race and income continue to be associated with significant treatment disparity. Additional investigation should focus on factors that govern the selection of resection or transplantation for potentially eligible patients.

Improving access and timeliness of care for veterans with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A multidisciplinary team's approach

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

With the prevalence of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) nearly twice as high in veterans (6%) than general populations (3%), the noted problems of long waits and access to care in United States Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals across the country are pressing. We examined primary outcome measures of timeliness and access to care for our patients with HNSCC assessing a multidisciplinary team approach at our VA hospital.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

METHODS

Our patients newly diagnosed with HNSCC were identified from two 24-month periods: diagnosis before (group 1, 2005-2006) and after (group 2, 2008-2009) implementing our multidisciplinary team in 2007. No significant differences in age (P = .13) or disease stage (P = .18) occurred between groups. Primary and secondary outcomes (i.e., treatment modality, imaging, completion of treatment, survival) were compared.

RESULTS

Timeliness to care improved for all measures. Improvement was significant for times from consult placed to seen in clinic (27.5-16.5 days; P < 0.0001) and from positive biopsy reported to date of initiating definitive treatment (35-27 days; P = 0.04). Pretreatment consults to various services represented by the multidisciplinary team increased from one to four (P < 0.0001). Two-year mortality was approximately the same between group 1 (33%) and group 2 (36%) (P = 0.035). Five-year mortality was slightly better in group 2 (50%) versus group 1 (61%), although not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Our veteran population with HNSCC had improved timeliness and access to care with our multidisciplinary approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 126:627-631, 2016.

Patterns of consultation and treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma presenting to a large academic medical center in the US

BACKGROUND

Management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often involves many subspecialist providers, as well as a broad range of treatment options. This study sought to evaluate referral and treatment patterns among patients with HCC at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Data from our cancer registry between 2003-2011 were abstracted on 394 patients who were primarily diagnosed/treated for HCC at Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH); data on patients who were diagnosed/treated with HCC elsewhere and who received secondary treatment at JHH (n = 391) were also abstracted for comparison purposes.

RESULTS

Among the main cohort, the most common specialties to be consulted were surgery (n = 225, 57.1%), gastroenterology (n = 225, 57.1%), and interventional radiologist (n = 206, 52.3%), while only 96 (24.4%) were referred to medical oncology. Factors associated with surgical consultation included younger age (odds ratio (OR) 3.35, 95% CI 1.62-6.92), tumor size <5 cm (OR 1.82, 1.09-3.02), and unilobar disease (OR 2.94, 1.31-6.59) (all P < 0.05). Patients initially diagnosed/treated elsewhere had larger tumors (4 vs. 6 cm), bilateral disease (19.2 vs. 26.8%), and were more likely to be seen by interventional radiology (all P < 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were seen by surgeons, gastroenterologists, or interventional radiologists, with only a minority being seen by medical oncologists. Referral patterns depended on patient-level factors, as well as extent of disease.