Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology 2/2013

01-04-2013 | Original Article

Impact of a multidisciplinary tumour board meeting for upper-GI malignancies on clinical decision making: a prospective cohort study

Authors: Pieter van Hagen, Manon C. W. Spaander, Ate van der Gaast, Caroline M. van Rij, Hugo W. Tilanus, J. Jan B. van Lanschot, Bas P. L. Wijnhoven

Published in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background/aims

The Dutch guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of upper-GI malignancies recommend review of patients by a multidisciplinary tumour board (MDT). The purpose of this study was to determine the effect on clinical decision making of an MDT for patients with upper-GI malignancies.

Methods

All physicians participating in the MDT completed an electronic standardised case form to delineate their proposed treatment plan for the patients they presented, including the intent of treatment and the modality of treatment. This therapeutic or diagnostic proposal was then compared with the plan on which consensus was reached by the MDT.

Results

A total of 252/280 (90.0%) forms were completed and suitable for analysis. In 87/252 (34.5%) of the case presentations, the MDT altered the proposed plan of management. In 29/87 (33.3%) cases, a more extensive diagnostic work-up was decided upon. In 8/87 (9.2%) cases the curative intent of the proposed treatment was altered to palliation only. In 2/75 (2.7%) cases, however, it was decided that a patient could be treated with curative intent instead of the proposed palliative intent.

Conclusion

In over 1/3 of cases, the diagnostic work-up or treatment plan is altered after evaluation by a multidisciplinary tumour board. This study supports Dutch guidelines recommending discussion of patients with upper-GI malignancies by a multidisciplinary tumour board.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kaifi JT, Gusani NJ, Jiang Y et al (2011) Multidisciplinary management of early and locally advanced esophageal cancer. J Clin Gastroenterol 45:391–399PubMedCrossRef Kaifi JT, Gusani NJ, Jiang Y et al (2011) Multidisciplinary management of early and locally advanced esophageal cancer. J Clin Gastroenterol 45:391–399PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Siersema PD, Rosenbrand CJ, Bergman JJ et al (2006) Richtlijn ‘diagnostiek en behandeling oesofaguscarcinoom’ [guideline ‘diagnosis and treatment of oesophageal carcinoma’]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 150:1877–1882PubMed Siersema PD, Rosenbrand CJ, Bergman JJ et al (2006) Richtlijn ‘diagnostiek en behandeling oesofaguscarcinoom’ [guideline ‘diagnosis and treatment of oesophageal carcinoma’]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 150:1877–1882PubMed
3.
go back to reference Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR (1994) Management of ovarian cancer: referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer 70:363–370PubMedCrossRef Junor EJ, Hole DJ, Gillis CR (1994) Management of ovarian cancer: referral to a multidisciplinary team matters. Br J Cancer 70:363–370PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Davison AG, Eraut CD, Haque AS et al (2004) Telemedicine for multidisciplinary lung cancer meetings. J Telemed Telecare 10:140–143PubMedCrossRef Davison AG, Eraut CD, Haque AS et al (2004) Telemedicine for multidisciplinary lung cancer meetings. J Telemed Telecare 10:140–143PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Wheless SA, McKinney KA, Zanation AM (2010) A prospective study of the clinical impact of a multidisciplinary head and neck tumor board. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 143:650–654PubMedCrossRef Wheless SA, McKinney KA, Zanation AM (2010) A prospective study of the clinical impact of a multidisciplinary head and neck tumor board. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 143:650–654PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Newman EA, Guest AB, Helvie MA et al (2006) Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board. Cancer 107:2346–2351PubMedCrossRef Newman EA, Guest AB, Helvie MA et al (2006) Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board. Cancer 107:2346–2351PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Pfeiffer SI, Naglieri JA (1983) An investigation of multidisciplinary team decision-making. J Learn Disabil 16:588–590PubMedCrossRef Pfeiffer SI, Naglieri JA (1983) An investigation of multidisciplinary team decision-making. J Learn Disabil 16:588–590PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Ruhstaller T, Roe H, Thurlimann B et al (2006) The multidisciplinary meeting: an indispensable aid to communication between different specialities. Eur J Cancer 42:2459–2462PubMedCrossRef Ruhstaller T, Roe H, Thurlimann B et al (2006) The multidisciplinary meeting: an indispensable aid to communication between different specialities. Eur J Cancer 42:2459–2462PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Greer HO, Frederick PJ, Falls NM et al (2010) Impact of a weekly multidisciplinary tumor board conference on the management of women with gynecologic malignancies. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20:1321–1325PubMed Greer HO, Frederick PJ, Falls NM et al (2010) Impact of a weekly multidisciplinary tumor board conference on the management of women with gynecologic malignancies. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20:1321–1325PubMed
10.
go back to reference Menges M (2011) Gastric cancer: where is the place for the surgeon, the oncologist and the endoscopist today? World J Gastrointest Oncol 3:10–13PubMedCrossRef Menges M (2011) Gastric cancer: where is the place for the surgeon, the oncologist and the endoscopist today? World J Gastrointest Oncol 3:10–13PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Quiros RM, Bui CL(2009) Multidisciplinary approach to esophageal and gastric cancer. Surg Clin North Am 89:79–96, viii Quiros RM, Bui CL(2009) Multidisciplinary approach to esophageal and gastric cancer. Surg Clin North Am 89:79–96, viii
12.
go back to reference Low DE (2011) Update on staging and surgical treatment options for esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 15:719–729PubMedCrossRef Low DE (2011) Update on staging and surgical treatment options for esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 15:719–729PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chang JH, Vines E, Bertsch H et al (2001) The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Cancer 91:1231–1237PubMedCrossRef Chang JH, Vines E, Bertsch H et al (2001) The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Cancer 91:1231–1237PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Bumm R, Feith M, Lordick F et al (2009) Impact of multidisciplinary tumor boards on diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer. Eur Surg 39:136–140CrossRef Bumm R, Feith M, Lordick F et al (2009) Impact of multidisciplinary tumor boards on diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer. Eur Surg 39:136–140CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Devitt B, Philip J, McLachlan SA (2010) Team dynamics, decision making, and attitudes toward multidisciplinary cancer meetings: health professionals’ perspectives. J Oncol Pract 6:e17–e20PubMedCrossRef Devitt B, Philip J, McLachlan SA (2010) Team dynamics, decision making, and attitudes toward multidisciplinary cancer meetings: health professionals’ perspectives. J Oncol Pract 6:e17–e20PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M et al (2007) Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol 2:69–72PubMedCrossRef Leo F, Venissac N, Poudenx M et al (2007) Multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: how to test its efficacy? J Thorac Oncol 2:69–72PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Grotenhuis BA, van Hagen P, Wijnhoven BP et al (2010) Delay in diagnostic workup and treatment of esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 14:476–483PubMedCrossRef Grotenhuis BA, van Hagen P, Wijnhoven BP et al (2010) Delay in diagnostic workup and treatment of esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 14:476–483PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Impact of a multidisciplinary tumour board meeting for upper-GI malignancies on clinical decision making: a prospective cohort study
Authors
Pieter van Hagen
Manon C. W. Spaander
Ate van der Gaast
Caroline M. van Rij
Hugo W. Tilanus
J. Jan B. van Lanschot
Bas P. L. Wijnhoven
Publication date
01-04-2013
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Oncology / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 1341-9625
Electronic ISSN: 1437-7772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-011-0362-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

International Journal of Clinical Oncology 2/2013 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine