Evaluating the impact of the genitourinary multidisciplinary tumour board: Should every cancer patient be discussed as standard of care?

The evolving role of multidisciplinary teams in optimizing non-muscle invasive bladder cancer care

INTRODUCTION

Non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) represents a significant portion of bladder cancer cases and imposes a substantial economic burden, stemming from both direct treatment costs and long-term surveillance. As the treatment landscape evolves with advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapies, a multidisciplinary approach to management is increasingly crucial for optimizing patient outcomes and resource utilization.

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed search from 2010 to 15 June 2024 was conducted. This review examines the evolving role of multidisciplinary team (MDT) care in NMIBC management. It explores the potential benefits of MDT care, including improved risk stratification and personalized treatment plans, while acknowledging the challenges to implementation and proposing strategies to overcome them.

EXPERT OPINION

With a growing understanding of NMIBC and expanding therapeutic options, MDT care is pivotal in navigating patient care and maximizing outcomes. Strategic planning and collaborative efforts will facilitate the broader adoption of MDT care, enhancing the value of NMIBC treatment. MDT care holds promise for personalized, effective, and cost-efficient care for patients with NMIBC in the future.

Criteria and indicators to evaluate quality of care in genitourinary tumour boards

PURPOSE

Genitourinary (GU) multidisciplinary tumour boards (GUMTBs) are key components of patient care, as they might lead to changes in treatment plan, improved survival, and increased adherence to guidelines. However, there are no guidelines on how GUMTBs should operate or how to assess their quality of performance.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify criteria and indicators to evaluate quality in GUMTBs. A scientific committee-comprising 12 GU cancer specialists from seven disciplines-proposed a list of criteria and developed indicators, evaluated in two rounds of Delphi method. Appropriateness and utility of indicators were scored using a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as at least two-thirds of Delphi respondents selecting a score sub-category that encompassed the median score of the group.

RESULTS

Forty-five criteria were selected to evaluate the quality of GUMTBs covering five dimensions: organisation, personnel, protocol and documentation, resources, and interaction with patients. Then, 33 indicators were developed and evaluated in the first round of Delphi, leading to a selection of 26 indicators in two dimensions: function, governance and resources, and GUMTB sessions. In the second round, consensus was reached on the appropriateness of all 26 indicators and on the utility of 24 of them. Index cards for criteria and indicators were developed to be used in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Criteria and indicators were developed to evaluate the quality of GUMTBs, aiming to serve as a guide to improve quality of care and health outcomes in patients with GU cancer.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Implementation of the measure of case discussion complexity to guide selection of prostate cancer patients for multidisciplinary team meetings

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) provide an integrated team approach to ensure individualized and evidence-based treatment recommendations and best expert advice in cancer care. A growing number of patients and more complex treatment options challenge MDTM resources and evoke needs for case prioritization. In this process, decision aids could provide streamlining and standardize evaluation of case complexity. We applied the recently developed Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC, instrument with the aim to validate its performance in another healthcare setting and diagnostic area as a means to provide cases for full MDTM discussions.

METHODS

The 26-item MeDiC instrument evaluates case complexity and was applied to 364 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in Sweden. MeDiC scores were generated from individual-level health data and were correlated with clinicopathological parameters, healthcare setting, and the observed clinical case selection for MDTMs.

RESULTS

Application of the MeDiC instrument was feasible with rapid scoring based on available clinical data. Patients with high-risk prostate cancers had significantly higher MeDiC scores than patients with low or intermediate-risk cancers. In the total study, population affected lymph nodes and metastatic disease significantly influenced MDTM referral, whereas comorbidities and age did not predict MDTM referral. When individual patient MeDiC scores were compared to the clinical MDTM case selection, advanced stage, T3/T4 tumors, involved lymph nodes, presence of metastases and significant physical comorbidity were identified as key MDTM predictive factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of the MeDiC instrument in prostate cancer may be used to streamline case selection for MDTMs in cancer care and may complement clinical case selection.

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.

Addressing Challenges and Controversies in the Management of Prostate Cancer with Multidisciplinary Teams

The diagnostic and treatment landscapes of prostate cancer are rapidly evolving. This has led to several challenges and controversies regarding optimal management of the disease that outpace guidelines and clinical data. Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can be used to engage the array of specialists that collaborate to treat complex malignancies such as prostate cancer. While the rationale for the use of MDTs in prostate cancer is well known, ways to optimally use MDTs to address the challenges and controversies associated with prostate cancer management are less well understood. One area of MDT care that remains undefined is how MDTs can most effectively provide guidance on clinical decision-making in situations in which information from novel diagnostic testing (genetic testing, molecular imaging) is substantially different from the established clinical risk factors. In this review, we provide a clinical perspective on ways that MDTs can be used to address this and other challenges and controversies across the prostate cancer disease continuum, from diagnosis to end-of-life considerations. Beyond clinical scenarios, we also review ways in which MDTs can mitigate disparities of care in prostate cancer. Overall, MDTs play a central role in helping to address the daily vexing issues faced by clinicians related to diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment. Given the accelerating advances in precision medicine and targeted therapy, and the new questions and controversies these will bring, the value of MDTs for prostate cancer management will only increase in the future.

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.

Referral for "Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy" for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer to a Multidisciplinary Board: Patterns, Management and Outcomes

Background

Utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of muscle invasive bladder cancer in everyday practice differs from that of clinical trials. We describe the patterns of referral for “neoadjuvant chemotherapy”, treatment and outcomes in a multidisciplinary tumor board.

Methods

This was an observational study. Patients referred for neoadjuvant chemotherapy received 4 cycles of dose-dense gemcitabine/cisplatin and were then assessed for definitive local therapy. Patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Primary objective was a 3-year disease-free survival rate.

Results

Forty-six patients (clinical stages II: 28, IIIA: 9, IIIB: 4, IVA: 3, missing: 2) were included. Following chemotherapy, 30 underwent radical cystectomy, 8 radiotherapy and 8 no further therapy. Pathological downstaging was observed in 14 (46.6%) of the 30 patients who underwent radical cystectomy; clinical TNM staging was correlated with disease-free survival in the whole population, while clinical and pathological stages, as well as pathological downstaging, were correlated with disease-free survival in patients undergoing radical cystectomy. Three-year disease-free survival rates for the whole cohort and for patients undergoing radical cystectomy were 67.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51–79.2) and 65.2 (95% CI: 44.9–79.6), respectively.

Conclusion

Real-world muscle invasive bladder cancer patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy are characterized by more advanced diseases and less frequent radical surgery than those included in clinical trials. Nevertheless, outcomes were comparable and, therefore, offering patients with stage II–IVA muscle invasive bladder cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy after assessment by multidisciplinary tumor boards should be strongly encouraged.

PROACTA: a survey on the actual attitude of the Italian radiation oncologists in the management and prescription of hormonal therapy in prostate cancer patients

AIM

To investigate the actual attitude of Radiation Oncologists in the prescription of hormonal therapy in prostate cancer (PC) with or without Radiation Therapy (RT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2019, a survey named Prescription of Radiation Oncologists ACtual Attitude including 18 items was sent to all Italian Radiation Oncologists of the Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology. The first 4 items were about the Radiation Oncology Centers characteristics and years of practice of the respondents. The remaining 14 items concerned the setting in which hormone therapy was prescribed in PC patients (radical, postprostatectomy/oligometastatic state), the kind of drug, the choice modality (Multidisciplinary Group/autonomy decision) and other factors.

RESULTS

A total of 127 questionnaires were returned, mainly by Northern Italy Radiation Oncology Centres (44.9%), and by experienced Radiation Oncologists (78%), who declared to prescribe independently hormone therapy in 85.8% of cases. The Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) prescription in castration naive PC was made independently by 56.7% of respondents and associated with radical RT, postoperative or salvage RT according to various risk factors. In castration-sensitive oligorecurrent PC, the majority (51.2%) administered ADT only if local ablative treatment was not feasible, while in metastatic castration resistant disease novel hormone therapy use was established in almost half of cases within multidisciplinary board. Radiation Oncologists could prescribe these drugs independently in 64% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Our survey established the prescription attitude of ADT and new hormonal agents (abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide) by Italian Radiation Oncologists and highlighted the importance of expertise in global PC management.

Multidisciplinary teams: perceptions of professionals and oncological patients

Multidisciplinary teams are increasingly employed to treat cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate the perception of physicians, other health care professionals, and hospitalized oncological patients regarding the multidisciplinary teams of the public and private sector. In total, 18 doctors were interviewed; 63 health professionals and 120 cancer patients. Satisfaction with the work of the multidisciplinary team was positive among patients and physicians (averages of 89.4% and 66.82% respectively), but higher among patients (p <0.0001), among women rather than men (averages of 77.5% and 85.21% respectively, p < 0.0001), elderly individuals in comparison with adults (averages of 91.98% and 76.01% respectively, p <0.0001), and in the public sector in comparison with the private sector (averages of 83.12 and 70.74 respectively, p < 0.0001). The results demonstrate that despite the difference between groups, patients and members of multidisciplinary groups were satisfied with multidisciplinary care, and some groups, such as elderly women from public services, may especially benefit from multi-professional groups.

Multidisciplinary Approach to HCC Management: How Can This Be Done?

Multidisciplinary tumor boards have evolved to address the increasing complexity of cancer care management. Given that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often arises in the setting of underlying cirrhosis, expert input from hepatologists alongside hepatobiliary and transplant surgeons, radiation oncologists, interventional and body radiologists, and medical oncologists has become increasingly important in order to offer patients appropriate cancer treatments. The MDLTB structure has evolved since the early 2000s to bring these specialists together at regularly scheduled meetings to develop a therapeutic treatment plan for HCC management. MDLTBs have reduced the time to treatment and improved patient satisfaction. Standardized documentation with common data elements has been recommended to ensure adequate communication from MDLTB to referring healthcare providers. Retrospective studies consistently highlight the frequency of changes in treatment plans after MDLTB review to better adhere to guideline recommended care. Despite several decades of MDLTBs implementation, few studies describe clinical outcomes associated with MDLTBs such as patient survival and cost benefits. More research is needed in this area to further justify the heavy use of resources that are needed to maintain MDLTBs. Development and use of a centralized database to store such information may assist with future studies of clinical outcomes and inform quality improvement projects.