Having both patient advocates and patients at the MDT meeting might be useful

Multi-disciplinary approach for the management of non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in the Middle East and Africa: Expert panel recommendations

The Middle East and Africa (MEA) region, a large geographical area, lies at the confluence of Asian, Caucasian and African races and comprises of a population with several distinct ethnicities. The course of management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) differs as per patients' performance status as well as stage of disease, requiring personalized therapy decisions. Although management of NSCLC has received a significant impetus in the form of molecularly targeted therapies and immune therapies in last few years, surgery remains gold standard for patients with early-stage disease. In case of unresectable disease, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are the primary management modalities. With newer therapies being approved for treatment of early stage disease, use of multi-disciplinary team (MDT) for comprehensive management of NSCLC is of prime importance. A group of experts with interest in thoracic oncology, deliberated and arrived at a consensus statement for the community oncologists treating patients with NSCLC in the MEA region. The deliberation was based on the review of the published evidence including literature and global and local guidelines, subject expertise of the participating panellists and experience in real-life management of patients with NSCLC. We present the proposed regional adaptations of international guidelines and recommends the MDT approach for management of NSCLC in MEA.

Process quality of decision-making in multidisciplinary cancer team meetings: a structured observational study

BACKGROUND

The quality of decision-making in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) depends on the quality of information presented and the quality of team processes. Few studies have examined these factors using a standardized approach. The aim of this study was to objectively document the processes involved in decision-making in MDTMs, document the outcomes in terms of whether a treatment recommendation was given (none vs. singular vs. multiple), and to identify factors related to type of treatment recommendation.

METHODS

An adaptation of the observer rating scale Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Metric for the Observation of Decision-Making (MDT-MODe) was used to assess the quality of the presented information and team processes in MDTMs. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and mixed logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

N = 249 cases were observed in N = 29 MDTMs. While cancer-specific medical information was judged to be of high quality, psychosocial information and information regarding patient views were considered to be of low quality. In 25% of the cases no, in 64% one, and in 10% more than one treatment recommendations were given (1% missing data). Giving no treatment recommendation was associated with duration of case discussion, duration of the MDTM session, quality of case history, quality of radiological information, and specialization of the MDTM. Higher levels of medical and treatment uncertainty during discussions were found to be associated with a higher probability for more than one treatment recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of different aspects of information was observed to differ greatly. In general, we did not find MDTMs to be in line with the principles of patient-centered care. Recommendation outcome varied substantially between different specializations of MDTMs. The quality of certain information was associated with the recommendation outcome. Uncertainty during discussions was related to more than one recommendation being considered. Time constraints were found to play an important role. Some of those aspects seem modifiable, which offers possibilities for the reorganization of MDTMs.