Practice and Impact of Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards on Patient Management: A Prospective Study.

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) have become commonplace. The use, attendance, and function of MTBs need continued assessment and improvement. METHODS: We prospectively recorded and assessed all cases presented at MTBs between October 2013 and December 2014. Data were collected before and during each MTB. Data were analyzed using SPSS for Windows version 23 (SPSS, Chicago, IL). RESULTS: Five hundred three cases were presented: 234 cases (46%) at GI cancer MTBs, 149 cases (29.6%) at breast cancer MTBs, 69 cases (13.7%) at thoracic/head and neck cancer MTBs, and 51 cases (10.7%) at neuro-oncology MTBs. A total of 86.7% of MTB cases were presented to make plans for management. Plans for upfront management were made in 67% of the breast cancer cases, 63% of GI cases, 59% of thoracic/head and neck cases, and 49% of neuro-oncology cases. Three hundred ninety-four cases (78.3%) were presented by medical oncologists, whereas only 74 cases (14.7%) were presented by surgeons, and 10 cases (2%) were presented by radiation oncologists. The majority of MTBs, with the exception of the neurosurgery MTBs, were led by medical oncologists. Surgeons presented the least number of cases but attended the most, and their contributions to discussions and decision making were essential. CONCLUSION: MTBs enhance the multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer. Upfront multidisciplinary decision making should be considered as an indicator of benefit from MTBs, in addition to changes in management plans made at MTBs. Increasing the contributions of surgeons to MTBs should include bringing more of their own cases for discussion.

BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in ethnic Lebanese Arab women with high hereditary risk breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in Lebanon and in Arab countries, with 50% of cases presenting before the age of 50 years. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2012, 250 Lebanese women with breast cancer who were considered to be at high risk of carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations because of presentation at young age and/or positive family history (FH) of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited. Clinical data were analyzed statistically. Coding exons and intron-exon boundaries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 were sequenced from peripheral blood DNA. All patients were tested for BRCA1 rearrangements using multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA). BRCA2 MLPA was done in selected cases. RESULTS: Overall, 14 of 250 patients (5.6%) carried a deleterious BRCA mutation (7 BRCA1, 7 BRCA2) and 31 (12.4%) carried a variant of uncertain significance. Eight of 74 patients (10.8%) aged ≤40 years with positive FH and only 1 of 74 patients (1.4%) aged ≤40 years without FH had a mutated BRCA. Four of 75 patients (5.3%) aged 41-50 years with FH had a deleterious mutation. Only 1 of 27 patients aged >50 years at diagnosis had a BRCA mutation. All seven patients with BRCA1 mutations had grade 3 infiltrating ductal carcinoma and triple-negative breast cancer. Nine BRCA1 and 17 BRCA2 common haplotypes were observed. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of deleterious BRCA mutations is lower than expected and does not support the hypothesis that BRCA mutations alone cause the observed high percentage of breast cancer in young women of Lebanese and Arab descent. Studies to search for other genetic mutations are recommended.

Global Practice and Efficiency of Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards: Results of an American Society of Clinical Oncology International Survey.

PURPOSE: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) are universally recommended, but recent literature has challenged their efficiency. METHODS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conducted a survey of a randomly selected cohort of international ASCO members. The survey was built on SurveyMonkey and was sent via e-mail to a sample of 5,357 members. RESULTS: In all, 501 ASCO members practicing outside the United States responded, and 86% of them participated in MDTBs at their own institutions. Those who attended represented a variety of disciplines in 70% to 86% of all MDTBs. The majority of MDTBs held weekly specialty and/or general meetings. Eighty-nine percent of 409 respondents attended for advice on treatment decisions. Survey respondents reported changes of 1% to 25% in treatment plans for 44% to 49% of patients with breast cancer and in 47% to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer. They reported 25% to 50% changes in surgery type and/or treatment plans for 14% to 21% of patients with breast cancer and 12% to 18% of patients with colorectal cancer. Of the 430 respondents 96% said overall benefit to patients was worth the time and effort spent at MDTBs, and 96% said that MDTBs have teaching value. Mini tumor boards held with whatever types of specialists were available were considered valid. In all, 94.8% (425 of 448) said that MDTBs should be required in institutions in which patients with cancer are treated. CONCLUSION: MDTBs are commonplace worldwide. A majority of respondents attend them to obtain recommendations, and they report changes in patient management. Change occurred more frequently with nonmedical oncologists and with physicians who had less than 15 years in practice. MDTBs helped practitioners make management decisions. Mini tumor boards may improve time efficiency and are favored when the full team is not available. Suggestions for improving MDTBs included making them more efficient, better selection and preparation of cases, choosing an effective team leader, and improving how time is used, but more research is needed on ways to improve the efficiency of MDTBs.

Enhancing cancer care in areas of limited resources: our next steps.

In-depth knowledge of local conditions is necessary in order to enhance care in low- and middle-income countries. In this review we discuss: improving cancer diagnosis, optimizing patient management, increasing health awareness, prevention, early detection, eradication of causative infectious diseases and agents, tobacco control, healthy diets and lifestyles, availability of diagnostic methods, easy access to care, affordable costs, improving infrastructures, quality care measures, implementing and adapting guidelines, multidisciplinary management, supportive and survivorship care, research and optimization of medical school curriculum and training in oncology. Establishment of national cancer control plans by policy makers, physician societies, medical schools, and patient advocates is recommended. We will review evidence and controversies, and outline the next steps needed to prevent cancer and enhance care of cancer patients in LMICs.

Outcome of Breast Cancer Patients Treated outside of Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Information on outcome of breast cancer patients treated in the community is scarce. Data on outcome of patients treated in real-life clinical practice may provide useful information for performance improvement. METHODS: Study population is from a single institution practice at the American University of Beirut Medical Center. Demographics, clinical characteristics and survival data on patients diagnosed 1997-2010 in two IRB-approved studies were entered and analyzed on SPSS program. Survival was estimated using Kaplan Meier Method. FINDINGS: Total was 519 patients. 23.9% had stage I, 39.7% stage II, 30.4% Stage III and 6% stage IV. ER positive in 74.4% of patients. 30.6% of patients <35 had TNBC compared to 12.3% for the whole group. 45.9% of non-metastatic patients had breast-conserving therapy (BCT). BCT rates increased to 64% during the second half of the study, coinciding with increasing awareness and changing cultural mores. 5-year and 10-year overall survivals for stage I were 98.9% and 80.5%, 89.2% and 70.7% for stage II, 67.6% and 35.5% for stage III, and 39.1% and 26.1% for stage IV respectively. INTERPRETATION: Patients treated outside clinical trials in a multidisciplinary fashion according to guidelines have comparable, and at times better, survival compared to data from trials or population statistics. Locally generated outcome data could be valuable for evaluating results of treatment at individual practices for the purpose of quality assessment and improvement. Our data also provides report of increased rate of breast conserving surgery from Middle East.

Tumor boards: optimizing the structure and improving efficiency of multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer worldwide.

Multidisciplinary management tumor boards are now conducted worldwide for the management of patients with cancer. Studies evaluating their influence on decision making and patient outcome are limited; however, single-center studies have reported significant changes in diagnosis and treatment plans. A survey from Arabic countries showed widespread use and reliance on tumor boards for decision making. A recent multi-institutional survey of veteran affairs (VA) hospitals in the United States found limited association between the presence of tumor boards and care and outcomes. The Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium looked at the association between tumor board features and measures of quality of care. Results of overall survival among the patients of these physicians participating in tumor boards is ongoing, but preliminary results are outlined along with a recent ASCO survey of international members on the presence, utilization, and influence of tumor boards in this article. Tumor boards allow for implementation of clinical practice guidelines and may help capture cases for clinical trials. Efforts to improve preparations, structure, and conduct of tumor boards, research methods to monitor their performance, teamwork, and outcomes are outlined also in this article. The concept of mini-tumor boards and more efficient methods for MDM in countries with limited resources are also discussed. In suboptimal settings, such as small community hospitals, rural areas, and areas with limited resources, boundaries in diagnosis and management can be overcome, or at least improved, with tumor boards, especially with the use of video-conferencing facilities. Studies from the United Kingdom showed that special training of multidisciplinary teams (MDT) led to better team dynamics and communication, improved patient satisfaction, and improved clinical outcome. The weight of the benefits versus the time and effort spent to improve efficiency, patient care, and better time management in the United States and in the international oncology community is also reviewed in this article.

Epidemiology and prognosis of breast cancer in young women.

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women with 6.6% of cases diagnosed in young women below the age of 40. Despite variances in risk factors, Age Standardized Incidence Rates of breast cancer in young women vary little between different countries. Review of modifiable risk factors shows that long-term use of oral contraceptives, low body mass index (BMI) and high animal fat diet consumption are associated with increased risk of premenopausal breast cancer. Decreased physical activity and obesity increase risks of breast cancer in postmenopausal women, but data on premenopausal women rather shows that high BMI is associated with decreased risk of breast cancer. Non-modifiable risk factors such as family history and genetic mutations do account for increased risks of breast cancer in premenopausal women. Breast cancer in young women is associated with adverse pathological factors, including high grade tumors, hormone receptor negativity, and HER2 overexpression. This has a significant negative impact on the rate of local recurrence and overall survival. Moreover, younger women often tend to present with breast cancer at a later stage than their older counterparts, which further explains worse outcome. Despite these factors, age per se is still being advocated as an independent role player in the prognosis. This entails more aggressive treatment modalities and the need for closer monitoring and follow-up.