Multidisciplinary team approach in breast cancer: a nationwide survey in Korea

Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Proposal and Final Therapeutic Choice in Early Breast Cancer: Is There an Agreement?

Background

A multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) approach in breast cancer (BC) management is a standard of care. One of the roles of MDMs is to identify the best diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for patients (pts) with new diagnosis of early BC. The purpose of this study was to define whether there was an agreement between the planned program (i.e., MDMs-based decision) and that actually applied. In addition, the study explored factors associated with discordance.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of a consecutive series of 291 patients with new diagnosis of early BC, discussed at MDMs at the University Hospital of Udine (Italy), from January 2017 to June 2018. The association between clinico-biological factors and discordance between what was decided during the MDMs and what was consequently applied by the oncologist was explored through uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

Results

The median age was 62 years (range 27-88 years). Among invasive early BC patients, the most frequent phenotype was luminal A (38%), followed by luminal B (33%), HER2-positive (12%), and triple-negative (5%). In situ carcinoma (DCIS) represented 12% of cases. The median time from MDM discussion to first oncologic examination was 2 weeks. The rate of discordance between MDM-based decision and final choice, during a face-to-face consultation with the oncologist, was 15.8% (46/291). The most frequent reason for changing the MDM-based program was clinical decision (87%). Follow-up was preferred to the chemotherapy (CT) proposed within the MDMs in 15% of cases, and to the endocrine therapy (ET) in 39% of cases (among these, 44.5% had a diagnosis of DCIS). Therapeutic change from sequential CT-ET to ET alone was chosen in 16/46 pts (35%): among these patients, seven had a luminal B disease and six had an HER2-positive disease. On univariate analysis, factors associated with discordance were values of Ki-67 14%-30% (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19-12.9), age >70 years (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.28-4.63), housewife/retired status (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.14-4.85), polypharmacy (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.02-3.72), postmenopausal status (OR 4.15; 95% CI 1.58-10.9), and high Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.09-1.57). The association with marital status, educational level, alcohol and smoke habits, presence of a caregiver, parity, grading, histotype and phenotype, and stage was not statistically significant. On multivariate analysis, only Ki-67 value maintained its statistical significance.

Conclusion

The results of our study could be useful for enhancing the role of MDMs in the clinical decision-making process in early BC.

How do surgeons approach breast cancer surgery in Turkey? A national survey

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the experience, practice and approaches of general surgeons in relation to the treatment of breast cancer in Turkey.

METHODS

A survey was conducted between November 2012 and February 2013 with 453 general surgeons who claimed to perform breast surgery. Initial and most preferred approaches for breast cancer surgery and demographic features of participants were questioned. Initial approaches of surgeons for a suspected breast mass were assessed with a clinical scenario.

RESULTS

A total of 12.6 % of practicing general surgeons in Turkey responded to the survey. A multidisciplinary assessment was employed by 57.2 % of participants. The most frequently used diagnostic tool was needle biopsies (64.9 %) and the most frequently performed surgery for early stage cancers was breast-conserving surgery (72.2 %). The initial approach for locally advanced breast cancer was neoadjuvant chemotherapy (59.8 %) and mastectomy for metastatic cancer (22.7 %). Sentinel lymph node biopsies were utilized by 59.2 % of participants by different methods in appropriate cases. Oncoplastic breast surgery was performed by 9.0 % of participants, frequently or constantly. The surgeons' initial approaches for the clinical scenario were imaging (56.7 %) and biopsy (40.6 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there are efforts to improve up-to-date approaches towards breast cancer surgery by surgeons, currently there are significant inadequacies for evidence-based medicine practices.