Territorial inequalities in management and conformity to clinical guidelines for sarcoma patients: an exhaustive population-based cohort analysis in the Rhône-Alpes region.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare cancers with great variability in clinical and histopathological presentation. The main objective of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is to standardize diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: From March 2005 to February 2007, all patients diagnosed with localized sarcoma in the Rhône-Alpes region were included in a cohort-based study, to evaluate the compliance of sarcoma management with French guidelines in routine practice and to identify predictive factors for compliance with CGPs. RESULTS: 634 (71 %) patients with localized sarcoma satisfying the inclusion criteria were included out of 891 newly diagnosed sarcomas. Taking into account initial diagnosis until follow-up, overall conformity to CPGs was only 40 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) = 36-44], ranging from 54 % for gastrointestinal stromal tumor to 36 % for soft tissue sarcoma and 42 % for bone sarcoma. In multivariate analysis, primary tumor type [relative risk (RR) = 4.42, 95 % CI = 2.79-6.99, p < 0.001], dedicated multidisciplinary staff before surgery (RR = 4.19, 95 % CI = 2.39-7.35, p < 0.001) and management in specialized hospitals (RR = 3.71, 95 % CI = 2.43-5.66, p < 0.001) were identified as unique independent risk factors for conformity to CPGs for overall treatment sequence. CONCLUSIONS: With only 40 % of total conformity to CPGs, the conclusions support the improvement of initial sarcoma management and its performance in specialized centres or within specialized dedicated networks.

Multidisciplinarity and medical decision, impact for patients with cancer: sociological assessment of two tumour committees' organization.

PURPOSE: Medical practices in oncology are expected to be multidisciplinary, yet few articles studied how this may be concretely applied. In the present study, we evaluated the organization of two multidisciplinary committees, one for breast cancer and one for sarcoma, in a French Comprehensive Cancer Centre. METHODS: Both tumours were specifically chosen so as to emphasise substantial differences in relation with incidence, histological subtypes, management strategy, and scientific evidence. Between 2003 and 2004, 404 decision processes were observed, 210 for sarcoma (26 meetings) and 194 for breast cancer (10 meetings). The number of physicians who took part in the discussions and their medical specialties were systematically noted as well as the number of contradictory discussions, medical specialties represented in these contradictory discussions and the topics of contradiction. The last measured data was whether the final committee's decision was in conformity with the referent preferences or not. All these measures were related to the referent's medical speciality and working place, to the stage of the disease and to the disease management stage. RESULTS: Committees' specificities concerned their organization, referent's medical specialties, the number of participants in discussions and their medical specialties. Discussions in the sarcoma committee tended to be more multidisciplinary, involving more specialties. Initial strategy proposal for one patient was modified during the discussions for 86 patients out of 210 (41%) and for 62 out of 194 (32%) respectively for sarcoma and breast cancer. However, there was no significant difference in the rate of contradictory discussions between breast cancer and sarcoma committees (32% versus 41% respectively; P = 0.08). The rates of contradictory discussions were similar for localized cancers, local relapse and metastasis disease (37%, 41% and 34% respectively; P = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: The present study reports more than 30% of changes concerning strategy for patient with cancer due to multidisciplinary discussions. This indicates that, providing tumour committees are adapted to the pathologies' characteristics, they can promote a collective and multidisciplinary approach to oncology.