Practice Patterns Regarding Multidisciplinary Cancer Management and Suggestions for Further Refinement: Results from a National Survey in Korea

The influence of multidisciplinary team meetings on treatment decisions in advanced bladder cancer

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the role of specialised genitourinary multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) in decision-making and identify factors that influence the probability of receiving a treatment plan with curative intent for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data relating to patients with cT2-4aN0/X-1 M0 urothelial cell carcinoma, diagnosed between November 2017 and October 2019, were selected from the nationwide, population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry ('BlaZIB study'). Curative treatment options were defined as radical cystectomy (RC) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, chemoradiation or brachytherapy. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between MDTM factors and curative treatment advice and how this advice was followed.

RESULTS

Of the 2321 patients, 2048 (88.2%) were discussed in a genitourinary MDTM. Advanced age (>80 years) and poorer World Health Organization performance status (score 1-2 vs 0) were associated with no discussion (P < 0.001). Being discussed was associated with undergoing treatment with curative intent (odds ratio [OR] 3.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-4.9), as was the involvement of a RC hospital (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09-2.65). Involvement of an academic centre was associated with higher rates of bladder-sparing treatment (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.31-3.21). Patient preference was the main reason for non-adherence to treatment advice.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with MIBC, the probability of being discussed in a MDTM was associated with age, performance status and receiving treatment with curative intent, especially if a representative of a RC hospital was present. Future studies should focus on the impact of MDTM advice on survival data.

Comparison of Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes by Gender in Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (KCSG HN13-01)

We aimed to compare treatment modalities and outcomes by gender in patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC). We characterized the sex-specific differences and compared the overall survival (OS) between male and female patients in a multicenter cohort of LA-HNSCC. To minimize the observed confounding, propensity score matching was utilized. The study included 445 patients; 385 (86.5%) were men and 60 (13.5%) were women. In terms of age, smoking habits, drinking habits, and primary tumor locations, there was a significant imbalance in sex before the matching. Propensity score matching yielded 60 patient pairs, with no statistical difference between the sexes in terms of their characteristics. As for the treatment strategies, there were no significant differences between the sexes before (p = 0.260) and after (p = 0.585) the propensity score matching. When comparing the survival probabilities between the sexes, OS was not significantly different in the overall (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.59-1.76; p = 0.938) and propensity-score-matched population (HR 1.46; 95% CI 0.68-3.17; p = 0.331). These results suggest that there was no difference in prognosis by gender in the treatment modalities and outcomes of LA-HNSCC in real-world practice.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Supplementary information

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

Experiences and Perceptions of Gender Discrimination and Equality among Korean Surgeons: Results of a Survey of the Korean Surgical Society

BACKGROUND

Previous studies that have focused on the challenges faced by female surgeons, such as the gender pay gap, gender biases, lower likelihood of promotion, and gender differences in the perception of discrimination against women, are reviewed. A more comprehensive understanding of explicit and implicit gender discrimination and experiences and perceptions of discrimination is needed. This study aims to determine the current prevalence and degree of gender discrimination in the Korean Surgical Society and to compare the experiences and perceptions of gender discrimination between male and female surgeons.

METHODS

We analyzed 400 responses from a survey sent to all members of the Korean Surgical Society. This electronic survey included 16 items on experiences of gender discrimination and 17 items on perceptions of gender discrimination. We conducted χ² tests and binary logistic regression on the data regarding these experiences and perceptions of gender discrimination.

RESULTS

Adjusted analyses found that female surgeons were more likely to experience gender discrimination than their male counterparts across all categories of discrimination. Further, adjusted analyses showed that female surgeons were more likely to confirm the presence of gender discrimination than male surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Female surgeons were more likely to experience implicit and explicit gender biases and discrimination throughout all stages of their career progression. We also discovered significant gender differences in the perception of gender discrimination, as well as the experience of it. Changing the male-dominated culture and raising awareness of gender biases and discrimination among male surgeons are crucial steps toward addressing gender discrimination in surgery.

Treatment strategy and outcomes in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a nationwide retrospective cohort study (KCSG HN13-01)

Background

By investigating treatment patterns and outcomes in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA-HNSCC), we aimed at providing valuable insights into the optimal therapeutic strategy for physicians in real-world practice.

Methods

This is a multi-institutional study enrolled the patients with stage III to IVB LA-HNSCC, except for nasopharyngeal carcinoma, from 2004 to 2015 in thirteen referral hospitals capable of multidisciplinary care.

Results

A total of 445 LA-HNSCC patients were analyzed. The median age was 61 years (range, 24–89). The primary tumor location was the oropharynx in 191 (43%), oral cavity in 106 (24%), hypopharynx in 64 (14%), larynx in 57 (13%) and other sites in 27 (6%). The most common stage was T2 in 172 (39%), and N2 in 245 (55%). Based on treatment intents, 229 (52%) of the patients received definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and 187 (42%) underwent surgery. Approximately 158 (36%) of the study population received induction chemotherapy (IC). Taken together, 385 (87%) of the patients underwent combined therapeutic modalities. The regimen for definitive CCRT was weekly cisplatin in 58%, 3-weekly cisplatin in 28% and cetuximab in 3%. The preferred regimen for IC was docetaxel with cisplatin in 49%, and docetaxel, cisplatin plus fluorouracil in 27%. With a median follow-up of 39 months, one-year and two-year survival rates were 89 and 80%, respectively. Overall survival was not significantly different between CCRT and surgery group (p = 0.620).

Conclusions

In patients with LA-HNSCC, the majority of patients received combined therapeutic modalities. Definitive CCRT, IC then definitive CCRT, and surgery followed by adjuvant CCRT or radiotherapy are the preferred multidisciplinary strategies in real-world practice.

Practice patterns of multidisciplinary team meetings in Korean cancer care and patient satisfaction with this approach

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach is a cornerstone of clinical oncology. This study investigated the current state of MDT care, including patient satisfaction, in Korea.

METHODS

We obtained the annual number of cancer patients who have received MDT care since 2014 from the registry of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA). In addition, patients who received MDT care from August 2014 to May 2017 at four university hospitals were further characterized, and patient satisfaction was measured prospectively using a patient-reported questionnaire.

RESULTS

The total number of patients who received MDT care increased from 2014 to 2016 (2,113 to 9,998 patients, respectively) in the HIRA Cohort. The type of cancer that most often required MDT was breast cancer (23.8%), followed by colorectal cancer (19.1%). In the Representative Cohort (n = 1,032), MDT was requested by the surgeon more than half the time (55.7%). The main focus of MDT was decision making for further treatment planning (99.0%). The number of doctors participating in the MDT was usually five (70.0%). After initiating an MDT approach, the treatment plan changed for 17.4% of patients. Among these patients, 359 completed a prospective satisfaction survey regarding their MDT care. The overall satisfaction with the MDT approach was very high, with an average score of 9.6 out of 10 points.

CONCLUSION

The application of MDT care is a rapidly growing trend in clinical oncology, and shows high patient satisfaction. Further research is needed to determine which types of cancer patients could benefit most from MDT, and to enable MDT care to operate more efficiently so that it may expand successfully throughout Korea.

Changes in real-life practice for hepatocellular carcinoma patients in the Republic of Korea over a 12-year period: A nationwide random sample study

Backgrounds & aims

Comprehensive analyses through nationwide hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) registries are important to understand health care issues. We assessed changes in real-life practice for HCC over a long time period.

Methods

The Korean Liver Cancer Association and the Korean Central Cancer Registry jointly established the nationwide cohorts of newly diagnosed HCC patients between 2003 and 2005 and between 2008 and 2014. According to sorafenib reimbursement in the Republic of Korea (January 2011), patients were divided into early (E-Cohort: 2003~2010) and late (L-Cohort: 2011~2014) cohorts.

Results

L-Cohort (n = 4776) comprised patients with older age (60.8 vs. 58.3 years), higher proportions of patients with well-preserved liver function (75.6% vs. 68.2%) and non-viral etiologies (28.6% vs. 19.4%), and lower proportion of patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] 0~A stage (46.2% vs. 53.9%) than E-Cohort (n = 8203) (all p<0.05). Proportions of patients undergoing curative treatments were higher in L-Cohort than in E-Cohort (55.0% vs. 35.1%, 23.2 vs. 11.3%, and 17.3% vs. 9.6% in BCLC 0A, B, and C stages, respectively; all p<0.05). Accordingly, compared with that in E-Cohort, overall survival in L-Cohort significantly improved in patients with BCLC 0~A, B, and C stages (all p<0.05). As first-line treatment, 62.4% underwent locoregional treatments (LRTs), whereas only 9.7% received sorafenib, among BCLC stage C patients in L-Cohort.

Conclusions

For the past 12 years, curative treatments became more widely available to BCLC 0~A, B, and C stage patients, generally improving prognosis. Despite sorafenib reimbursement, LRTs remain the mainstay of first-line treatment for BCLC C stage patients.