A randomized phase III trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for patients with up to 10 oligometastases and a synchronous primary tumor (SABR-SYNC): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Emerging randomized data, mostly from phase II trials, have suggested that patients with oligometastatic cancers may benefit from ablative treatments such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). However, phase III data testing this paradigm are lacking, and many studies have examined SABR in the setting of metachronous oligometastatic disease. The goal of the SABR-SYNC trial is to assess the effect of SABR in patients with oligometastatic cancers and a synchronous primary tumor. METHODS: One hundred and eighty patients will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio between standard of care (SOC) palliative-intent treatments vs. SOC + ablative therapy (SABR preferred) to all sites of known disease. Randomization will be stratified based on histology and number of metastases at enrollment. SABR may be delivered in 1-, 3- and 5-fraction regimens, with recommended doses of 20 Gy, 30 Gy, and 35 Gy, respectively. Non-SABR local modalities (e.g. surgery, thermal ablation, conventional radiation) may be used for treatment of the primary or metastases at the discretion of the treating physicians, if those modalities are clinically preferred. The primary endpoint is overall survival, and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, time to development of new metastatic lesions, time to initiation of next systemic therapy, quality of life, and toxicity. Translational endpoints include assessment of circulating tumor DNA and immunological predictors of outcomes. DISCUSSION: SABR-SYNC will provide phase III data to assess the impact of SABR on overall survival in a population of patients with synchronous oligometastases. The translational component will attempt to identify novel prognostic and predictive biomarkers to aid in clinical decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05717166 (registration date: Feb. 8, 2023).

The role of stereotactic body radiotherapy in oligoprogressive malignant disease (RADIANT): oncologic outcomes from a phase 2 non-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In oligoprogressive (OP) cancer there are a limited numbers of metastatic areas progressing on a background of stable or responding widespread cancer. While the standard-of-care for OP is changing systemic therapy (ST), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is being explored as an alternative local therapy targeting the sites of progression. MATERIALS/METHODS: XXX (NCTXXX) was a single-centre phase-2 study of patients with metastatic genitourinary (GU), breast and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, receiving ST for >3 months, with radiographic OP disease in <5 sites. Patients received SBRT to all OP disease in 1-5 fractions, and were maintained on ST. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of change in ST estimated using Aalen-Johansen method. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) estimated using Kaplan-Meier method, toxicity, and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL). Comparisons between diagnosis groups were done using log-rank test. A two-sided p-value of <0.05 was considered as statistical significance. RESULTS: Seventy patients were analyzed, with median age 69 years; 32 patients (46%) were female; median number of lines of prior ST was 3. Primary sites were GU (n=32; 46%), breast (n=23; 33%) and GI (n=15; 21%). Median follow-up was 12.3 months (IQR 8.2-21.6). At 1-year, change in ST occurred in 47% (95% CI 36-61%) (GU 45%, breast 41%, GI 60%, p=0.23). PFS at 1-year was 32% (95% CI 23-45%), and median PFS was 4.7 months (95% CI 3.8-8.1) (GU 4.8, breast 6.5, GI 3.2), which significantly differed by disease type (p=0.006). OS was 75% at 1-year (95% CI 65-87%), which significantly differed between cancer type (GU 86%, breast 96%, GI 22%, p<0.001). Cumulative incidence of late grade >2 toxicity was 1.2%, with 1 patient experiencing late grade 3 toxicity, and no grade 4-5 acute or late toxicities. HRQOL declined from mean (standard deviation) of 66.9 (20.2) at baseline to 60.5 (22.2) at 6 months, which did not meet the threshold for a minimal clinically important difference. CONCLUSIONS: SBRT for OP metastases delayed change in ST in approximately half of patients, warranting investigation in randomized trials.

Bridging the care gap: radiation therapy in elderly and frail cancer patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to address the gap in radiation therapy (RT) care for elderly cancer patients. It will discuss the barriers to implementing effective RT in elderly and frail patients with a focus on breast cancer and metastatic settings. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies indicate that SBRT provides better pain control for bone metastases compared to cEBRT, but elderly patients are underrepresented in these trials. Evidence on the effectiveness of geriatric assessment tools in predicting RT tolerance and toxicity is mixed, with some studies showing a correlation while others do not. Comprehensive geriatric assessments, though promising, are often impractical due to time and resource constraints. SUMMARY: There is a critical need for more inclusive research to better understand the risks and benefits of RT in elderly patients. Developing streamlined geriatric assessment tools and integrating them into clinical practice can enhance treatment personalization. Future studies should prioritize elderly populations to generate robust data, thereby improving RT outcomes and quality of life for this growing patient group.

The Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT in Oncology Examination Questions.

The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy of Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) in response to oncology examination questions in the setting of one-shot learning. Consecutive national radiation oncology in-service multiple-choice examinations were collected and inputted into ChatGPT 4o and ChatGPT 3.5 to determine ChatGPT's answers. ChatGPT's answers were then compared with the answer keys to determine whether ChatGPT correctly or incorrectly answered each question and to determine if improvements in responses were seen with the newer ChatGPT version. A total of 600 consecutive questions were inputted into ChatGPT. ChatGPT 4o answered 72.2% questions correctly, whereas 3.5 answered 53.8% questions correctly. There was a significant difference in performance by question category (P < .01). ChatGPT performed poorer with respect to knowledge of landmark studies and treatment recommendations and planning. ChatGPT is a promising technology, with the latest version showing marked improvement. Although it still has limitations, with further evolution, it may be considered a reliable resource for medical training and decision making in the oncology space.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation for Oligoprogressive Cancers: Results of the Randomized Phase 2 STOP Trial.

PURPOSE: This trial examined if patients with ≤5 sites of oligoprogression benefit from the addition of SABR to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We enrolled patients with 1 to 5 metastases progressing on systemic therapy, and after stratifying by type of systemic therapy (cytotoxic vs noncytotoxic), randomized 1:2 between continued SOC treatment versus SABR to all progressing lesions plus SOC. The trial was initially limited to non-small cell lung cancer but was expanded to include all nonhematologic malignancies to meet accrual goals. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), lesional control, quality of life, adverse events, and duration of systemic therapy postrandomization. RESULTS: Ninety patients with 127 oligoprogressive metastases were enrolled across 8 Canadian institutions, with 59 randomized to SABR and 31 to SOC. The median age was 67 years, and 39 (43%) were women. The most common primary sites were lung (44%), genitourinary (23%), and breast (13%). Protocol adherence in the SOC arm was suboptimal, with 11 patients (35%) either receiving high-dose/ablative therapies (conflicting with trial protocol) or withdrawing from the study. The median follow-up was 31 months. There was no difference in PFS between arms (median PFS 8.4 months in the SABR arm vs 4.3 months in the SOC arm, but curves cross and 2-year PFS was 9% vs 24%, respectively; P = .91). The median OS was 31.2 months versus 27.4 months, respectively (P = .22). Lesional control was superior with SABR (70% vs 38%, respectively; P = .0015). There were 2 (3.4%) grade 3 and no grade 4/5 adverse events attributable to SABR. CONCLUSIONS: SABR was well-tolerated with superior lesional control but did not improve PFS or OS. Accrual to this study was difficult, and the results may have been impacted by an unwillingness to forgo ablative treatments on the SOC arm. (NCT02756793).

Physician and Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Cancer Questions From Social Media.

Importance: Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots pose the opportunity to draft template responses to patient questions. However, the ability of chatbots to generate responses based on domain-specific knowledge of cancer remains to be tested. Objective: To evaluate the competency of AI chatbots (GPT-3.5 [chatbot 1], GPT-4 [chatbot 2], and Claude AI [chatbot 3]) to generate high-quality, empathetic, and readable responses to patient questions about cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This equivalence study compared the AI chatbot responses and responses by 6 verified oncologists to 200 patient questions about cancer from a public online forum. Data were collected on May 31, 2023. Exposures: Random sample of 200 patient questions related to cancer from a public online forum (Reddit r/AskDocs) spanning from January 1, 2018, to May 31, 2023, was posed to 3 AI chatbots. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were pilot ratings of the quality, empathy, and readability on a Likert scale from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). Two teams of attending oncology specialists evaluated each response based on pilot measures of quality, empathy, and readability in triplicate. The secondary outcome was readability assessed using Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Results: Responses to 200 questions generated by chatbot 3, the best-performing AI chatbot, were rated consistently higher in overall measures of quality (mean, 3.56 [95% CI, 3.48-3.63] vs 3.00 [95% CI, 2.91-3.09]; P < .001), empathy (mean, 3.62 [95% CI, 3.53-3.70] vs 2.43 [95% CI, 2.32-2.53]; P < .001), and readability (mean, 3.79 [95% CI, 3.72-3.87] vs 3.07 [95% CI, 3.00-3.15]; P < .001) compared with physician responses. The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of physician responses (mean, 10.11 [95% CI, 9.21-11.03]) was not significantly different from chatbot 3 responses (mean, 10.31 [95% CI, 9.89-10.72]; P > .99) but was lower than those from chatbot 1 (mean, 12.33 [95% CI, 11.84-12.83]; P < .001) and chatbot 2 (mean, 11.32 [95% CI, 11.05-11.79]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that chatbots can generate quality, empathetic, and readable responses to patient questions comparable to physician responses sourced from an online forum. Further research is required to assess the scope, process integration, and patient and physician outcomes of chatbot-facilitated interactions.

Rapid multi-catheter segmentation for magnetic resonance image-guided catheter-based interventions.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for delineating cancerous lesions in soft tissue. Catheter-based interventions require the accurate placement of multiple long, flexible catheters at the target site. The manual segmentation of catheters in MR images is a challenging and time-consuming task. There is a need for automated catheter segmentation to improve the efficiency of MR-guided procedures. PURPOSE: To develop and assess a machine learning algorithm for the detection of multiple catheters in magnetic resonance images used during catheter-based interventions. METHODS: In this work, a 3D U-Net was trained to retrospectively segment catheters in scans acquired during clinical MR-guided high dose rate (HDR) prostate brachytherapy cases. To assess confidence in segmentation, multiple AI models were trained. On clinical test cases, average segmentation results were used to plan the brachytherapy delivery. Dosimetric parameters were compared to the original clinical plan. Data was obtained from 35 patients who underwent HDR prostate brachytherapy for focal disease with a total of 214 image volumes. 185 image volumes from 30 patients were used for training using a five-fold cross validation split to divide the data for training and validation. To generate confidence measures of segmentation accuracy, five trained models were generated. The remaining five patients (29 volumes) were used to test the performance of the trained model by comparison to manual segmentations of three independent observers and assessment of dosimetric impact on the final clinical brachytherapy plans. RESULTS: The network successfully identified 95% of catheters in the test set at a rate of 0.89 s per volume. The multi-model method identified the small number of cases where AI segmentation of individual catheters was poor, flagging the need for user input. AI-based segmentation performed as well as segmentations by independent observers. Plan dosimetry using AI-segmented catheters was comparable to the original plan. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of catheters were accurately identified by AI segmentation, with minimal impact on plan outcomes. The use of multiple AI models provided confidence in the segmentation accuracy and identified catheter segmentations that required further manual assessment. Real-time AI catheter segmentation can be used during MR-guided insertions to assess deflections and for rapid planning of prostate brachytherapy.

Incorporation of Functional Lung Imaging Into Radiation Therapy Planning in Patients With Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Our purpose was to provide an understanding of current functional lung imaging (FLI) techniques and their potential to improve dosimetry and outcomes for patients with lung cancer receiving radiation therapy (RT). Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), PubMed, and Cochrane Library were searched from 1990 until April 2023. Articles were included if they reported on FLI in one of: techniques, incorporation into RT planning for lung cancer, or quantification of RT-related outcomes for patients with lung cancer. Studies involving all RT modalities, including stereotactic body RT and particle therapy, were included. Meta-analyses were conducted to investigate differences in dose-function parameters between anatomic and functional RT planning techniques, as well as to investigate correlations of dose-function parameters with grade 2+ radiation pneumonitis (RP). One hundred seventy-eight studies were included in the narrative synthesis. We report on FLI modalities, dose-response quantification, functional lung (FL) definitions, FL avoidance techniques, and correlations between FL irradiation and toxicity. Meta-analysis results show that FL avoidance planning gives statistically significant absolute reductions of 3.22% to the fraction of well-ventilated lung receiving 20 Gy or more, 3.52% to the fraction of well-perfused lung receiving 20 Gy or more, 1.3 Gy to the mean dose to the well-ventilated lung, and 2.41 Gy to the mean dose to the well-perfused lung. Increases in the threshold value for defining FL are associated with decreases in functional parameters. For intensity modulated RT and volumetric modulated arc therapy, avoidance planning results in a 13% rate of grade 2+ RP, which is reduced compared with results from conventional planning cohorts. A trend of increased predictive ability for grade 2+ RP was seen in models using FL information but was not statistically significant. FLI shows promise as a method to spare FL during thoracic RT, but interventional trials related to FL avoidance planning are sparse. Such trials are critical to understanding the effect of FL avoidance planning on toxicity reduction and patient outcomes.

Stereotactic Radiation for Ultra-Central Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Safety and Efficacy Trial (SUNSET).

PURPOSE: The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for tumors in close proximity to the central mediastinal structures has been associated with a high risk of toxicity. This study (NCT03306680) aimed to determine the maximally tolerated dose of stereotactic body radiation therapy for ultracentral non-small cell lung carcinoma, using a time-to-event continual reassessment methodology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with T1-3N0M0 (≤6 cm) non-small cell lung carcinoma were eligible. The maximally tolerated dose was defined as the dose of radiation therapy associated with a ≤30% rate of grade (G) 3 to 5 prespecified treatment-related toxicity occurring within 2 years of treatment. The starting dose level was 60 Gy in 8 daily fractions. The dose-maximum hotspot was limited to 120% and within the planning tumor volume; tumors with endobronchial invasion were excluded. This primary analysis occurred 2 years after completion of accrual. RESULTS: Between March 2018 and April 2021, 30 patients were enrolled at 5 institutions. The median age was 73 years (range, 65-87) and 17 (57%) were female. Planning tumor volume was abutting proximal bronchial tree in 19 (63%), esophagus 5 (17%), pulmonary vein 1 (3.3%), and pulmonary artery 14 (47%). All patients received 60 Gy in 8 fractions. The median follow-up was 37 months (range, 8.9-51). Two patients (6.7%) experienced G3-5 adverse events related to treatment: 1 patient with G3 dyspnea and 1 G5 pneumonia. The latter had computed tomography findings consistent with a background of interstitial lung disease. Three-year overall survival was 72.5% (95% CI, 52.3%-85.3%), progression-free survival 66.1% (95% CI, 46.1%-80.2%), local control 89.6% (95% CI, 71.2%-96.5%), regional control 96.4% (95% CI, 77.2%-99.5%), and distant control 85.9% (95% CI, 66.7%-94.5%). Quality-of-life scores declined numerically over time, but the decreases were not clinically or statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty Gy in 8 fractions, planned and delivered with only a moderate hotspot, has a favorable adverse event rate within the prespecified acceptability criteria and results in excellent control for ultracentral tumors.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy in Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Interstitial Lung Disease: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) and early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been reported to be at high risk of toxic effects after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), but for many patients, there are limited alternative treatment options. Objective: To prospectively assess the benefits and toxic effects of SABR in this patient population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted at 6 academic radiation oncology institutions, 5 in Canada and 1 in Scotland, with accrual between March 7, 2019, and January 12, 2022. Patients aged 18 years or older with fibrotic ILD and a diagnosis of T1-2N0 NSCLC who were not candidates for surgical resection were enrolled. Intervention: Patients were treated with SABR to a dose of 50 Gy in 5 fractions every other day. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study prespecified that SABR would be considered worthwhile if median overall survival-the primary end point-was longer than 1 year, with a grade 3 to 4 risk of toxic effects less than 35% and a grade 5 risk of toxic effects less than 15%. Secondary end points included toxic effects, progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC), quality-of-life outcomes, and changes in pulmonary function. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. Results: Thirty-nine patients enrolled and received SABR. Median age was 78 (IQR, 67-83) years and 59% (n = 23) were male. At baseline, 70% (26 of 37) of patients reported dyspnea, median forced expiratory volume in first second of expiration was 80% (IQR, 66%-90%) predicted, median forced vital capacity was 84% (IQR, 69%-94%) predicted, and median diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide was 49% (IQR, 38%-61%) predicted. Median follow-up was 19 (IQR, 14-25) months. Overall survival at 1 year was 79% (95%, CI 62%-89%; P < .001 vs the unacceptable rate), and median overall survival was 25 months (95% CI, 14 months to not reached). Median PFS was 19 months (95% CI, 13-28 months), and 2-year LC was 92% (95% CI, 69%-98%). Adverse event rates (highest grade per patient) were grade 1 to 2: n = 12 (31%), grade 3: n = 4 (10%), grade 4: n = 0, and grade 5: n = 3 (7.7%, all due to respiratory deterioration). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, use of SABR in patients with fibrotic ILD met the prespecified acceptability thresholds for both toxicity and efficacy, supporting the use of SABR for curative-intent treatment after a careful discussion of risks and benefits. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03485378.

Dose-response of localized renal cell carcinoma after stereotactic body radiation therapy: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SBRT) is an emerging treatment option for primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC), particularly in patients who are unsuitable for surgery. The aim of this review is to assess the effect of increasing the biologically equivalent dose (BED) via various radiation fractionation regimens on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies published up to October 2023. Studies reporting on patients with localized RCC receiving SBRT were included to determine its effectiveness on local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival. A random effects model was used to meta-regress clinical outcomes relative to the BED for each study and heterogeneity was assessed by I2. RESULTS: A total of 724 patients with RCC from 22 studies were included, with a mean age of 72.7 years (range: 44.0-81.0). Local control was excellent with an estimate of 99 % (95 %CI: 97-100 %, I2 = 19 %), 98 % (95 %CI: 96-99 %, I2 = 8 %), and 94 % (95 %CI: 90-97 %, I2 = 11 %) at one year, two years, and five years respectively. No definitive association between increasing BED and local control, progression-free survival and overall survival was observed. No publication bias was observed. CONCLUSIONS: A significant dose response relationship between oncological outcomes and was not identified, and excellent local control outcomes were observed at the full range of doses. Until new evidence points otherwise, we support current recommendations against routine dose escalation beyond 25-26 Gy in one fraction or 42-48 Gy in three fractions, and to consider de-escalation or compromising target coverage if required to achieve safe organ at risk doses.

Review of brachytherapy clinical trials: a cross-sectional analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov.

INTRODUCTION: Characterizing the landscape of clinical trials including brachytherapy can provide an overview of the current status and research trends which may guide further areas of investigation. METHOD: We queried 449,849 clinical trials from the ClinicalTrials.gov registry using brachytherapy-related keywords from 1980 to 2023, yielding 245 multi-arm and 201 single-arm, brachytherapy trials. Multi-arm and single-arm brachytherapy trials were compared using 12 trial protocol elements. RESULTS: The number of trials including brachytherapy has increased over time, with over 60% of trials registered in 2010 onwards. The majority of clinical trials were Phase 2 or 3, evaluated both safety and efficacy, and were funded by academic sponsors. The most common tumor sites evaluated in brachytherapy clinical trials include prostate, cervix, liver, endometrium, and breast. CONCLUSION: There remains continued interest in clinical trials including brachytherapy focused on evaluation of novel delivery systems, treatment planning, and new indications. More brachytherapy clinical trials are needed to define the optimal clinical utilization and advance prospective research in this field.

Impact of technological advances in treatment planning, image guidance, and treatment delivery on target margin design for prostate cancer radiotherapy: an updated review.

Recent innovations in image guidance, treatment delivery, and adaptive radiotherapy (RT) have created a new paradigm for planning target volume (PTV) margin design for patients with prostate cancer. We performed a review of the recent literature on PTV margin selection and design for intact prostate RT, excluding post-operative RT, brachytherapy, and proton therapy. Our review describes the increased focus on prostate and seminal vesicles as heterogenous deforming structures with further emergence of intra-prostatic GTV boost and concurrent pelvic lymph node treatment. To capture recent innovations, we highlight the evolution in cone beam CT guidance, and increasing use of MRI for improved target delineation and image registration and supporting online adaptive RT. Moreover, we summarize new and evolving image-guidance treatment platforms as well as recent reports of novel immobilization strategies and motion tracking. Our report also captures recent implementations of artificial intelligence to support image guidance and adaptive RT. To characterize the clinical impact of PTV margin changes via model-based risk estimates and clinical trials, we highlight recent high impact reports. Our report focusses on topics in the context of PTV margins but also showcase studies attempting to move beyond the PTV margin recipes with robust optimization and probabilistic planning approaches. Although guidelines exist for target margins conventional using CT-based image guidance, further validation is required to understand the optimal margins for online adaptation either alone or combined with real-time motion compensation to minimize systematic and random uncertainties in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer.

The Use of Wearable Devices in Oncology Patients: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the current literature on wearable technologies in oncology patients for the purpose of prognostication, treatment monitoring, and rehabilitation planning. METHODS: A search was conducted in Medline ALL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, up until February 2022. Articles were included if they reported on consumer grade and/or non-commercial wearable devices in the setting of either prognostication, treatment monitoring or rehabilitation. RESULTS: We found 199 studies reporting on 18 513 patients suitable for inclusion. One hundred and eleven studies used wearable device data primarily for the purposes of rehabilitation, 68 for treatment monitoring, and 20 for prognostication. The most commonly-reported brands of wearable devices were ActiGraph (71 studies; 36%), Fitbit (37 studies; 19%), Garmin (13 studies; 7%), and ActivPAL (11 studies; 6%). Daily minutes of physical activity were measured in 121 studies (61%), and daily step counts were measured in 93 studies (47%). Adherence was reported in 86 studies, and ranged from 40% to 100%; of these, 63 (74%) reported adherence in excess of 80%. CONCLUSION: Wearable devices may provide valuable data for the purposes of treatment monitoring, prognostication, and rehabilitation. Future studies should investigate live-time monitoring of collected data, which may facilitate directed interventions.

The impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on overall survival: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary cancer conferences consist of regular meetings between diverse specialists working together to share clinical decision making in cancer care. The aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effect of multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on the overall survival of patients with cancer. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for studies published up to July 2023. Studies reporting on the impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on patient overall survival were included. A standard random-effects model with the inverse variance-weighted approach was used to estimate the pooled hazard ratio of mortality (multidisciplinary cancer conference vs non-multidisciplinary cancer conference) across studies, and the heterogeneity was assessed by I2. Publication bias was examined using funnel plots and the Egger test. RESULTS: A total of 134 287 patients with cancer from 59 studies were included in our analysis, with 48 467 managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences and 85 820 in the control arm. Across all cancer types, patients managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences had an increased overall survival compared with control patients (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% confidence interval = 0.62 to 0.71, I2 = 84%). Median survival time was 30.2 months in the multidisciplinary cancer conference group and 19.0 months in the control group. In subgroup analysis, a positive effect of the multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on overall survival was found in breast, colorectal, esophageal, hematologic, hepatocellular, lung, pancreatic, and head and neck cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our meta-analysis found a significant positive effect of multidisciplinary cancer conferences compared with controls. Further studies are needed to establish nuanced guidelines when optimizing multidisciplinary cancer conference integration for treating diverse patient populations.