Intra-observer agreements in multidisciplinary team assessments of pancreatic cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

Treatment strategies for pancreatic cancer patients are made by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) board. We aimed to assess intra-observer variance at MDT boards. Participating units staged, assessed resectability, and made treatment allocations for the same patients as they did two years earlier. We disseminated clinical information and CT images of pancreatic cancer patients judged by one MDT board to have nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer to the participating units. All units were asked to re-assess the TNM stage, resectability, and treatment allocation for each patient. To assess intra-observer variance, we computed %-agreements for each participating unit, defined as low (<50%), moderate (50%-75%), and high (>75%) agreement.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were re-assessed by six MDT boards. The overall agreement was moderate for TNM-stage (ranging from 50%-70%) and resectability assessment (53%) but low for treatment allocation (46%). Agreement on resectability assessments was low to moderate. Findings were similar but more pronounced for treatment allocation. We observed a shift in treatment strategy towards increasing use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, particularly in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial intra-observer agreement variations across six different MDT boards of 18 pancreatic cancer patients with two years between the first and second assessment.

The overriding role of surgery and tumor grade for long-term survival in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A population-based cohort study

Background

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP‐NENs) comprise a heterogeneous disease group. Factors that affect long‐term survival remain uncertain. Complete population‐representative cohorts with long‐term follow‐up are scarce.

Aim

To evaluate factors of importance for the long‐term survival.

Methods and results

An Observational population‐based study on consecutive GEP‐NEN patients diagnosed from 2003 to 2013, managed according to national guidelines. Univariable and multivariable survival analyses were performed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and to identify independent prognostic factors. One hundred ninety eligible patients (males, 58.9%) (median age, 60.0 years; range, 10.0–94.2 years) were included. The small bowel, appendix, and pancreas were the most common tumor locations. The World Health Organization (WHO) tumor grade 1–3 distributions varied according to the primary location and disease stage. Primary surgery with curative intent was performed in 66% of the patients. The median OS of the study population was 183 months with 5‐ and 10‐year OS rates of 66% and 57%, respectively. Only age, WHO tumor grade, and primary surgical treatment were independent prognostic factors for OS.

Conclusion

The outcomes of GEP‐NEN patients are related to several factors including age and primary surgical treatment. WHO tumor grading, based on the established criteria, should be routine in clinical practice. This may improve clinical decision‐making and allow the comparison of outcomes among different centers.

Multicentre study of multidisciplinary team assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability and treatment allocation

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings have been adopted widely to ensure optimal treatment for patients with cancer. Agreements in tumour staging, resectability assessments and treatment allocation between different MDTs were assessed.

METHODS

Of all patients referred to one hospital, 19 patients considered to have non-metastatic pancreatic cancer for evaluation were selected randomly for a multicentre study of MDT decisions in seven units across Northern Europe. Anonymized clinical information and radiological images were disseminated to the MDTs. All patients were reviewed by the MDTs for radiological T, N and M category, resectability assessment and treatment allocation. Each MDT was blinded to the decisions of other teams. Agreements were expressed as raw percentages and Krippendorff's α values, both with 95 per cent confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 132 evaluations in 19 patients were carried out by the seven MDTs (1 evaluation was excluded owing to technical problems). The level of agreement for T, N and M categories ranged from moderate to near perfect (46·8, 61·1 and 82·8 per cent respectively), but there was substantial variation in assessment of resectability; seven patients were considered to be resectable by one MDT but unresectable by another. The MDTs all agreed on either a curative or palliative strategy in less than half of the patients (9 of 19). Only fair agreement in treatment allocation was observed (Krippendorff's α 0·31, 95 per cent c.i. 0·16 to 0·45). There was a high level of agreement in treatment allocation where resectability assessments were concordant.

CONCLUSION

Considerable disparities in MDT evaluations of patients with pancreatic cancer exist, including substantial variation in resectability assessments.