Improving outcomes in lung cancer: the value of the multidisciplinary health care team

Integrating physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and psychologists in the management of chronic and complex musculoskeletal pain in the municipality - a workshop study

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is a major societal burden, costing up to 2 % of the EU's gross national product. Complex cases often involve comorbidities, increasing treatment challenges. Integrating physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and psychological support in primary care may improve patient outcomes. Aalborg Municipality, Denmark, is exploring interdisciplinary care models to enhance treatment for chronic MSK pain.

AIM

This study investigates physiotherapists', occupational therapists', and psychologists' perspectives on i) current management of chronic and complex MSK pain, ii) elements of ideal care, and iii) strategies for implementation.

METHOD

Using an action research approach, we conducted two workshops with 30 healthcare professionals. WS1 employed a future workshop design to explore solutions, while WS2 used an adapted affinity diagram to define patient characteristics. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three main themes emerged: 1) Navigating a State of Limbo: Challenges Faced by Patients with Chronic MSK Pain, including difficulties in navigating treatment, emotional distress, and social relationships; 2) Navigating Healthcare: Receiving and Providing in a Frustrating System, highlighting systemic frustrations and limitations in care coordination; and 3) Optimizing Patient Care Pathways: Strategies for Enhanced Engagement, Integration and Collaboration, emphasizing improved collaboration, patient engagement, and support for transitions in care.

CONCLUSION

Findings highlight the importance of a person-centered, interdisciplinary approach to managing chronic MSK pain. Key strategies include early interventions, patient empowerment, and enhanced communication among professionals. Implementing a biopsychosocial model within healthcare systems is essential for improving patient outcomes and addressing complex needs.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Advancing comprehensive biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer

Comprehensive biomarker testing is a crucial requirement for the optimal treatment of advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with emerging relevance in the adjuvant treatment setting. To advance its goal of ensuring optimal therapy for persons diagnosed with lung cancer, the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (ACS NLCRT) held The Summit on Optimizing Lung Cancer Biomarkers in Practice in September 2020 to align its partners toward the goal of ensuring comprehensive biomarker testing for all eligible patients with NSCLC. The ACS NLCRT's Strategic Plan for Advancing Comprehensive Biomarker Testing in NSCLC, a product of the summit, comprises actions to promote comprehensive biomarker testing for all eligible patients. The approach is multifaceted, including policy-level advocacy and the development and dissemination of targeted educational materials, clinical decision tools, and guides to patients, physicians, and payers aimed at ameliorating barriers to testing experienced by each of these groups. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The ACS NLCRT works to improve care for patients with lung cancer. The ACS NLCRT supports comprehensive biomarker testing as essential to determine treatment options for all eligible patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Many factors lead to some patients not receiving optimal biomarker testing. The ACS NLCRT held a collaborative summit and developed a strategic plan to achieve and promote comprehensive biomarker testing for all patients. These plans include developing educational materials and physician tools and advocating for national policies in support of biomarker testing.

The American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable strategic plan: Implementation of high-quality lung cancer screening

More than a decade has passed since researchers in the Early Lung Cancer Action Project and the National Lung Screening Trial demonstrated the ability to save lives of high-risk individuals from lung cancer through regular screening by low dose computed tomography scan. The emergence of the most recent findings in the Dutch-Belgian lung-cancer screening trial (Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek [NELSON]) further strengthens and expands on this evidence. These studies demonstrate the benefit of integrating lung cancer screening into clinical practice, yet lung cancer continues to lead cancer mortality rates in the United States. Fewer than 20% of screen eligible individuals are enrolled in lung cancer screening, leaving millions of qualified individuals without the standard of care and benefit they deserve. This article, part of the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable (ACS NLCRT) strategic plan, examines the impediments to successful adoption, dissemination, and implementation of lung cancer screening. Proposed solutions identified by the ACS NLCRT Implementation Strategies Task Group and work currently underway to address these challenges to improve uptake of lung cancer screening are discussed. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The evidence supporting the benefit of lung cancer screening in adults who previously or currently smoke has led to widespread endorsement and coverage by health plans. Lung cancer screening programs should be designed to promote high uptake rates of screening among eligible adults, and to deliver high-quality screening and follow-up care.

Incidence, prevalence, and survival of lung cancer in the United Kingdom from 2000-2021: a population-based cohort study

Background

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-associated mortality worldwide. In the United Kingdom (UK), there has been a major reduction in smoking, the leading risk factor for lung cancer. Therefore, an up-to-date assessment of the trends of lung cancer is required in the UK. This study aims to describe lung cancer burden and trends in terms of incidence, prevalence, and survival from 2000-2021, using two UK primary care databases.

Methods

We performed a population-based cohort study using the UK primary care Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) GOLD database, compared with CPRD Aurum. Participants aged 18+ years, with 1-year of prior data availability, were included. We estimated lung cancer incidence rates (IRs), period prevalence (PP), and survival at 1, 5 and 10 years after diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method.

Results

Overall, 11,388,117 participants, with 45,563 lung cancer cases were studied. The IR of lung cancer was 52.0 [95% confidence interval (CI): 51.5 to 52.5] per 100,000 person-years, with incidence increasing from 2000 to 2021. Females aged over 50 years of age showed increases in incidence over the study period, ranging from increases of 8 to 123 per 100,000 person-years, with the greatest increase in females aged 80-89 years. Alternatively, for males, only cohorts aged over 80 years showed increases in incidence over the study period. The highest IR was observed in people aged 80-89 years. PP in 2021 was 0.18%, with the largest rise seen in participants aged over 60 years. Median survival post-diagnosis increased from 6.6 months in those diagnosed between 2000-2004 to 10.0 months between 2015-2019. Both short and long-term survival was higher in younger cohorts, with 82.7% 1-year survival in those aged 18-29 years, versus 24.2% in the age 90+ years cohort. Throughout the study period, survival was longer in females, with a larger increase in survival over time than in males.

Conclusions

The incidence and prevalence of lung cancer diagnoses in the UK have increased, especially in female and older populations, with a small increase in median survival. This study will enable future comparisons of overall disease burden, so the overall impact may be seen.

Multidisciplinary care meeting practices across diverse international settings

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary care (MDC) meetings improve the quality of cancer care by providing a space for interdisciplinary communication. The Pediatric Oncology Facility Integrated Local Evaluation (PrOFILE) tool assesses MDC meetings as part of the Service Integration module. We aimed to evaluate the characteristics of MDC meetings at institutions that completed PrOFILE.

METHODS

From 2019 to 2021, 112 institutions from 23 countries collected data by utilizing the abbreviated version of PrOFILE. Within a secondary data analysis, we descriptively analyzed the characteristics of MDC meetings stratified by income level.

RESULTS

Participating institutions were located in low-income countries (LICs) (n = 6), lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) (n = 34), upper-middle-income countries (UMICs) (n = 55), and high-income countries (HICs) (n = 17). Of the 112 participating facilities, 79% reported having MDC meetings. The existence of an MDC varied with income, with 50% of LICs and 100% of HICs hosting MDCs. The frequency of MDC meetings also differed, with 100% of MDCs in LICs occurring weekly, while 53% of MDCs in HICs occurred monthly. Specialties regularly represented at MDC meetings across all participating institutions were hematology/oncology (93%), pathology (52%), radiology (60%), general surgery (57%), and radiation oncology (51%). All MDC meetings in LICs reported representation from these specialties. Availability of test results and discussion of new cases did not vary with income. Residual disparities were identified for the following characteristics: discussion of new and interesting cases, inclusion of patient preferences, and ability to meet urgently.

CONCLUSIONS

The existence and components of a functional MDC meeting may vary between countries' income levels. Variation in certain components, such as access to tests, may be due to differences in resource distribution, but other factors such as inclusion of patient preferences and ability to meet urgently can be optimized in all settings to foster high-quality teamwork and communication.

[Current Situation and Future Direction of Multidisciplinary Diagnosis and Treatment of Lung Cancer]

Although multidisciplinary team (MDT) diagnosis and treatment model can improve the quality of life and survival prognosis of the patients, why does it not reach the expected goal of the MDT diagnosis and treatment model? The main reason is that the diagnosis and treatment mode of MDT in lung cancer lags behind the progress of various treatment methods. By analyzing the latest research results of MDT diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer at home and abroad, combined with the experience of MDT diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer in the Lung Cancer Center of West China Hospital of Sichuan University, this article will discuss and summarize the progress and future direction of MDT in lung cancer from the following aspects: (1) The connotation and extension of MDT diagnosis and treatment mode of lung cancer need to be changed and adapted to new methods of diagnosis and treatment; (2) The clinical decision making in the diagnosis and treatment of MDT in lung cancer should be transformed from "multidisciplinary consultation (MDC)" to "MDT"; (3) The diagnosis and treatment process of MDT in lung cancer should shift from "fire brigade mode" to "firewall mode", and finally implement "individualized whole-process management mode"; (4) The path of MDT diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer should be changed from "temporary convening mode" to "single disease center system mode of lung cancer".
.

Improving the quality of patient care in lung cancer: key factors for successful multidisciplinary team working

International Guidelines as well as Cancer Associations recommend a multidisciplinary approach to lung cancer care. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) can significantly improve treatment decision-making and patient coordination by putting different physicians and other health professionals "in the same room", who collectively decide upon the best possible treatment. However, this is not a panacea for cancer treatment. The impact of multidisciplinary care (MDC) on patient outcomes is not univocal, while the effective functioning of the MDT depends on many factors. This review presents the available MDT literature with an emphasis on the key factors that characterize high-quality patient care in lung cancer. The study was conducted with a bibliographic search using different electronic databases (PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Google) referring to multidisciplinary cancer care settings. Many key elements appear consolidated, while others emerge as prevalent and actual, especially those related to visible barriers which work across geographic, organizational, and disciplinary boundaries. MDTs must be sustained by strategic management, structured within the entity, and cannot be managed as a separate care process. Furthermore, they need to coordinate with other teams (within and outside the organization) and join with the broad range of services delivered by multiple providers at various points of the cancer journey or within the system, with the vision of integrated care.

The development and implementation of the Northern Health lung cancer digital care pathway: a case study in service change

This case study details the approach utilised to establish an easy to use, accessible and sustainable method for routine collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for patients newly diagnosed with lung cancer. We sought to enhance communication with patients and their families, particularly around shared decision making, their quality of life and symptoms, as well as the impacts of their care or treatment. We detail the co-design methodology utilised with consumers and healthcare providers to develop and implement a multi-lingual, fully automated digital care pathway which has been proven to be highly impactful and powerful for both healthcare providers working within the service and consumers enrolled within the digital pathway. This innovative initiative has changed the practice of the lung cancer service across a health service. Furthermore, its success has evolved the organisational strategy, to embed 'Outcomes for Impact' across the health service.

Health system and patient-level factors associated with multidisciplinary care and patient education among hospitalized, older cancer survivors

Objective

The purpose of this study was to examine system- and patient-level factors associated with the number of healthcare disciplines involved in delivery of patient education among hospitalized older cancer survivors.

Methods

We used electronic health record (EHR) data from a single institution documenting patient education among hospitalized older patients (≥65 years) with a history of cancer between 9/1/2018 and 10/1/2019. We used parametric ordinal logistic regression to assess the number of healthcare disciplines involved in documented education activities.

Results

The sample (n = 446) was predominantly male, White, and on average 74 years old. Adjusting for patient and system-level variables, men and larger department units had higher odds of receiving education from fewer healthcare disciplines. Patients with a history of breast or prostate cancer and longer lenths of stay had lower odds of receiving patient education from fewer healthcare disciplines.

Conclusion

Hospital size, severity of illness, and cancer type are associated with delivery of multidisciplinary education in this sample.

Innovation

EHR provides an opportunity to identify patterns in patient education among cancer survivors. Future research should investigate provider perspectives of the findings to inform provider- and system-level strategies to improve patient education.

Does Multidisciplinary Team Management Improve Clinical Outcomes in NSCLC? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The implementation of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) has been found to be effective for improving outcomes in oncology. Nevertheless, there is still a dearth of robust literature on patients with NSCLC. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review regarding the impact of MDTs on patient with NSCLC outcomes.

Methods

Databases were systematically searched up to February 2023. Two reviewers independently performed study selection and data extraction. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa and certainty of evidence by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Overall survival was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of survival, progression-free survival, time from diagnosis to treatment, complete staging, treatment received, and adherence to guidelines. A meta-analysis with a random-effect model was performed. Statistical analysis was performed with the R 3.6.2 package.

Results

A total of 22 studies were included in the systematic review. Ten outcomes were identified, favoring the MDT group over the non-MDT group. Pooled analysis revealed that patients managed by MDTs had better overall survival (three studies; 38,037 participants; hazard ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.75, I2 = 78%), shorter treatment time compared with patients in the non-MDT group (six studies; 15,235 participants; mean difference = 12.20 d, 95% CI: 10.76-13.63, I2 = 63%), and higher proportion of complete staging (four studies; 14,925 participants; risk ratio = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.17-1.57, I2 = 89%).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis revealed that MDT-based patient care was associated with longer overall survival and better quality-of-care-related outcomes.

Experience with the US health care system for Black and White patients with advanced prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess differences in reported information about treatment, integration into care, and respect by self-identified Black and White individuals with advanced prostate cancer in the United States.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of 701 participants (20% identifying as Black) enrolled in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer at 37 US sites from 2017 to 2022. Participants were asked six questions from the Cancer Australia National Cancer Control Indicators about their experience with care at study enrollment. Prevalence differences by self-reported race were estimated using marginal standardization of logistic-normal mixed effects models (adjusted for age at enrollment and disease state at enrollment), and 95% CIs were estimated using parametric bootstrapping.

RESULTS

Most participants reported a high quality of care for each question. Black participants generally reported higher care quality compared with White participants. Black participants reported more frequently that they were offered a written assessment and care plan (71%) compared with White participants (58%; adjusted difference, 13 percentage points; 95% CI, 4-23). Black participants also reported more frequently being given the name of nonphysician personnel who would support them (64%) than White participants (52%; adjusted difference, 10; 95% CI, 1-20). Prevalence differences did not differ by disease state at enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

Black participants generally reported a higher quality of care compared with White participants. This study calls attention to the need to study potential mediating factors and interpersonal aspects of care in this population to improve survivorship.

Acquiring tissue for advanced lung cancer diagnosis and comprehensive biomarker testing: A National Lung Cancer Roundtable best-practice guide

Advances in biomarker-driven therapies for patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) both provide opportunities to improve the treatment (and thus outcomes) for patients and pose new challenges for equitable care delivery. Over the last decade, the continuing development of new biomarker-driven therapies and evolving indications for their use have intensified the importance of interdisciplinary communication and coordination for patients with or suspected to have lung cancer. Multidisciplinary teams are challenged with completing comprehensive and timely biomarker testing and navigating the constantly evolving evidence base for a complex and time-sensitive disease. This guide provides context for the current state of comprehensive biomarker testing for NSCLC, reviews how biomarker testing integrates within the diagnostic continuum for patients, and illustrates best practices and common pitfalls that influence the success and timeliness of biomarker testing using a series of case scenarios.

Adherence to Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Recommendations in Patients With Curable Esophageal and Gastric Cancers

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary tumor board (MDT) discussion is standard practice in the management of Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers. However, poor adherence to MDT recommendations may account for the lack of improved oncological outcomes with MDTs. We aim to quantify adherence rates and compare outcomes between adherent and non-adherent patients.

METHODS

We included all patients with potentially curable primary UGI carcinomas who were discussed at UGI MDT from 2017 to 2018. MDT recommendations were compared to actual treatment received. Oncological and survival outcomes were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

Amongst 153 patients, 64 (41.8%) were non-adherent to MDT recommendations. Reasons for non-adherence were patient refusal (50.0%), treatment-related complications (31.3%), disease factors (17.2%) and clinician decision (1.56%). Univariate analysis showed that non-adherent patients were older (71.6 vs 65.2 years, p < 0.001), with higher clinical stage at point of diagnosis (p = 0.028), pathological stage after resection (p < 0.001) and were more likely to be recommended for multimodal therapy. No significant factors were associated with non-adherence at multivariate analysis. Non-adherent patients had worse median overall survival (19.5 months) compared to adherent patients (not reached at follow-up) with both unmatched and propensity-score matched analysis. Patients who received only part of the intended adjuvant chemotherapy course had worse median overall survival and disease-free survival compared to patients who completed or did not initiate adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-adherence to MDT recommendations was associated with advanced age and tumor stage, and potentially contributes to the worse oncological outcomes in a group of patients already predisposed to poor outcomes.

Addressing the unmet needs of patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma in Latin America: Expert perspective

Melanoma represents an increasing public health burden with extensive unmet needs in Latin America (LA). A mutation in the BRAF gene is present in approximately 50% of all melanomas in White populations and is a target of precision medicine, with the potential to dramatically improve patient outcomes. Thus, increased access to BRAF testing and therapy is LA must be explored. At a multi-day conference, a panel of Latin American experts in oncology and dermatology were provided with questions to address the barriers limiting access to testing for BRAF mutation in patients with melanoma in LA, who may be eligible for targeted therapy to improve their prognosis. During the conference, responses were discussed and edited until a consensus on addressing the barriers was achieved. Identified challenges included ignorance of BRAF-status implications, limited human and infrastructural resources, affordability and reimbursement, fragmented care delivery, pitfalls in the sample journey, and lack of local data. Despite the clear benefits of targeted therapies for BRAF-mutated melanoma in other regions, there is no clear path to prepare LA for a sustainable personalized medicine approach to this disease. Due to melanoma’s time-sensitive nature, LA must aim to provide early access to BRAF testing and consider mutational status within treatment decision making. To this end, recommendations are provided and include establishing multidisciplinary teams and melanoma referral centers and improving access to diagnosis and treatment.

SHMT2 is Associated with Tumor Purity, CD8+ T Immune Cells Infiltration, and a Novel Therapeutic Target in Four Different Human Cancers

AIMS

This study was launched to identify the SHMT2 associated Human Cancer subtypes.

BACKGROUND

Cancer is the 2nd leading cause of death worldwide. Previous reports revealed the limited involvement of SHMT2 in human cancer. In the current study, we comprehensively analyzed the role of SHMT2 in 24 major subtypes of human cancers using in silico approach and identified a few subtypes that are mainly associated with SHMT2.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to comprehensively analyze the role of SHMT2 in 24 major subtypes of human cancers using in silico approach and identified a few subtypes that are mainly associated with SHMT2. Earlier, limited knowledge exists in the medical literature regarding the involvement of Serine Hydroxymethyltransferase 2 (SHMT2) in human cancer.

METHODS

In the current study, we comprehensively analyzed the role of SHMT2 in 24 major subtypes of human cancers using in silico approach and identified a few subtypes that are mainly associated with SHMT2. Pan-cancer transcriptional expression profiling of SHMT2 was done using UALCAN while further validation was performed using GENT2. For translational profiling of SHMT2, we utilized Human Protein Atlas (HPA) platform. Promoter methylation, genetic alteration, and copy number variations (CNVs) profiles were analyzed through MEXPRESS and cBioPortal. Survival analysis was carried out through Kaplan-Meier (KM) plotter platform. Pathway enrichment analysis of SHMT2 was performed using DAVID, while the gene-drug network was drawn through CTD and Cytoscape. Furthermore, in the tumor microenvironment, a correlation between tumor purity, CD8+ T immune cells infiltration, and SHMT2 expression was accessed using TIMER.

RESULTS

SHMT2 was found overexpressed in 24 different subtypes of human cancers and its overexpression was significantly associated with the reduced Overall survival (OS) and Relapse-free survival durations of Breast cancer (BRCA), Kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma (KIRP), Liver hepatocellular carcinoma (LIHC), and Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients. This implies that SHMT2 plays a significant role in the development and progression of these cancers. We further noticed that SHMT2 was also up-regulated in BRCA, KIRP, LIHC, and LUAD patients of different clinicopathological features. Pathways enrichment analysis revealed the involvement of SHMT2 enriched genes in five diverse pathways. Furthermore, we also explored some interesting correlations between SHMT2 expression and promoter methylation, genetic alterations, CNVs, tumor purity, and CD8+ T immune cell infiltrates.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested that overexpressed SHMT2 is correlated with the reduced OS and RFS of the BRCA, KIRP, LIHC, and LUAD patients and can be a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for these cancers.

Lung cancer awareness training experiences of community health workers in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Awareness interventions in the developing world remain scarce. Community health workers (CHWs) are a critical component towards ensuring efficient delivery of healthcare services in low- and middle-income countries.

AIM

This study explored the experiences of CHWs of their training as lung cancer awareness intervention implementers.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a resource-poor setting, with CHWs from previously disadvantaged communities.

METHODS

On the last day of training, 10 CHWs were requested to voluntarily participate in a focus group discussion regarding their experiences of the training, utilising a discussion guide.

RESULTS

The participants expressed positive experiences with the training. They cited the amenable and conducive learning environment established by the facilitator. The participants felt empowered through the newly acquired knowledge and wanted to help their communities. However, some participants expressed a desire to have other forms of learning incorporated in future training. The participants were also cognisant of existing gaps in their own knowledge that could be elaborated upon in preparation for potential questions by the community. Some participants confirmed their role as agents of change.

CONCLUSION

The authors propose large-scale intervention studies of lung cancer awareness utilising the CHW programme to gather conclusive evidence regarding their effectiveness at a community level.Contribution: This article provides insight into the training of community health workers on lung cancer awareness and future research on the integration of the intervention into already existing programmes.

The Interdisciplinary Management of Lung Cancer in the European Community

Lung cancer continues to be the largest cause of cancer-related mortality among men and women globally, accounting for around 27% of all cancer-related deaths. Recent advances in lung cancer medicines, particularly for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), have increased the need for multidisciplinary disease care, thereby enhancing patient outcomes and quality of life. Different studies in the European community have evaluated the impact of multidisciplinary care on outcomes for lung cancer patients, including its impact on survival, adherence to guideline treatment, utilization of all treatment modalities, timeliness of treatment, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and referral to palliative care. This publication will examine the roles and duties of all multidisciplinary members and the influence of multidisciplinary care on lung cancer outcomes in Europe. Multidisciplinary treatment is the foundation of lung cancer treatment. The optimal setting for interdisciplinary collaboration between specialists with complementary functions is multidisciplinary meetings. Multidisciplinary care in lung cancer facilitates the delivery of a high-quality service, which may improve lung cancer patients’ survival, utilization of all treatment modalities, adherence to guideline management, and quality of life, despite the fact that only limited observational data have demonstrated these results. To confirm the relationship between multidisciplinary treatment and improved lung cancer patient outcomes, however, further research is required.

Choosing Wisely Philippines: ten low-value or harmful practices that should be avoided in cancer care

The Choosing Wisely Philippines campaign is an initiative that identifies low-value or potentially harmful practices that are relevant to patients with cancer in the Philippines. The main purpose of these initiatives is to facilitate quality improvement systems and maximise patient outcomes. Of the ten practices identified, four are new recommendations, and six are modified adaptations from previous Choosing Wisely initiatives in the USA and Africa. Recommendations in the final list include interventions involving diagnosis (two practices), treatment (five practices), palliative and supportive care (two practices) and surveillance (1 practice).

Croatian National Cancer Patient Experience Survey

Background: Cancer patients’ experiences of the healthcare system, care, and treatment are increasingly viewed as important in order to inform and improve quality of care, patient safety, and treatment efficacy. Understanding patient experience is a key step in moving toward patient-centred care. The aims of this study were to determine the experience of cancer patients in Central and Eastern European countries and to identify the needs and perspectives of oncological patients during the cancer treatment. In this paper, results from Croatia are presented. Methods: A sixty-nine item online survey was translated by native-language participating countries. Only registered members (subjects with confirmed cancer diagnosis) of the national patient oncology associations in each participating country were allowed to access and complete the online questionnaire (n = 16,458). Data were collected between October 2018 to February 2019. The Croatian Coalition of Health Associations enabled the authors of this paper to use the collected data from a sample of the Croatian participants (n = 2460) for the purposes of publication. Results: Two-thirds (67.3%) of the respondents reported satisfaction with the length of time needed for getting tests done. Bad news was delivered sensitively to 52.97% of the participants, and 52.76% received a cancer treatment plan. During the hospitalisation, 45.93% responded that they did not find someone from the hospital staff whom they could talk to about their worries and fears, and 57.48% were not given any contact information in case of concerns about their condition or treatment following the discharge. Regarding the patients’ preferences, needs, and values, 60.81% of the respondents felt that the greatest improvement would be to perform all services in one place, and 55.28% felt that improvement would be achieved through a multidisciplinary team coordinated by one person. Conclusions: The study reveals domains that need to be addressed in the overall Croatian healthcare system for oncology patients. Based on the obtained data, we can conclude that there is a large need for improvement in patient experience on the oncology pathway.

A Web-Based Self-assessment Model for Evaluating Multidisciplinary Cancer Teams in Spain: Development and Validation Pilot Study

Background

Tumor boards constitute the main consensus and clinical decision–making body of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in cancer care. With the increasing clinical complexity of treatment options (eg, targeted therapies, multimodal treatments) and the progressive incorporation of new areas of intervention (eg, survivorship care), tumor boards are now required to play a central role in all cancer processes. However, although frameworks are in place to evaluate MDT quality, only few web-based tools are available for this purpose; indeed, no web-based MDT evaluation tools have been developed for or adapted to the Spanish National Health System.

Objective

The first aim of this study was to develop a web-based self-assessment model (Autoevaluación de Equipos Multidisciplinares de Atención al Cáncer [AEMAC]) for evaluating multidisciplinary cancer teams in Spain and the second aim was to validate this tool by testing its metric properties, acceptability, and usability.

Methods

We designed and validated the AEMAC program in 3 stages. In the first stage (research), we reviewed the available scientific evidence and performed a qualitative case study of good practice in multidisciplinary care within the Spanish National Health System (n=4 centers and 28 health care professionals). The results were used to define the thematic areas and quality criteria for the self-evaluation model, which were then discussed and validated by a group of experts. The second stage (development) involved the technological development of a web app that would be accessible from any mobile device. In the third stage (piloting and validation), we conducted 4 pilot tests (n=15 tumor boards, 243 professionals) and used the results to analyze the acceptability and usefulness of the tool.

Results

We designed a self-assessment model based on 5 thematic areas encompassing a total of 25 quality components, which users rated on a 3-option development scale. The evaluation process, which was managed entirely from the web app, consisted of individual self-assessment, group prioritization, and creation of an improvement plan. Cronbach alpha (.86), McDonald’s omega (0.88), and various fit indices (comparative fit index between 0.95 and 1 and goodness-of-fit index between 0.97 and 0.99 for all 5 aspects) confirmed internal consistency. The mean rating for overall satisfaction with the tool and for consistency between the content of the tool and the reality of tumor boards was 7.6 out of 10.

Conclusions

The results obtained during the period of research and piloting of the AEMAC program showed that it has an appropriate structure and metric properties and could therefore be implemented in a real context and generalized to other hospitals. As a virtual tool, it helps to measure the key aspects of MDT quality, such as effectiveness of collaboration and communication, leadership, and the organizational environment.

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of malignancy-related mortality worldwide due to its heterogeneous features and diagnosis at a late stage. Artificial intelligence (AI) is good at handling a large volume of computational and repeated labor work and is suitable for assisting doctors in analyzing image-dominant diseases like lung cancer. Scientists have shown long-standing efforts to apply AI in lung cancer screening via CXR and chest CT since the 1960s. Several grand challenges were held to find the best AI model. Currently, the FDA have approved several AI programs in CXR and chest CT reading, which enables AI systems to take part in lung cancer detection. Following the success of AI application in the radiology field, AI was applied to digitalized whole slide imaging (WSI) annotation. Integrating with more information, like demographics and clinical data, the AI systems could play a role in decision-making by classifying EGFR mutations and PD-L1 expression. AI systems also help clinicians to estimate the patient's prognosis by predicting drug response, the tumor recurrence rate after surgery, radiotherapy response, and side effects. Though there are still some obstacles, deploying AI systems in the clinical workflow is vital for the foreseeable future.

Virtual Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards: A Narrative Review Focused on Lung Cancer

To date, the virtual multidisciplinary tumor boards (vMTBs) are increasingly used to achieve high-quality treatment recommendations across health-care regions, which expands and develops the local MTB team to a regional or national expert network. This review describes the process of lung cancer-specific MTBs and the transition process from face-to-face tumor boards to virtual ones. The review also focuses on the project organization's description, advantages, and disadvantages. Semi-structured interviews identified five major themes for MTBs: current practice, attitudes, enablers, barriers, and benefits for the MTB. MTB teams exhibited positive responses to modeled data feedback. Virtualization reduces time spent for travel, allowing easier and timely patient discussions. This process requires a secure web platform to assure the respect of patients' privacy and presents the same unanswered problems. The implementation of vMTB also permits the implementation of networks especially in areas with geographical barriers facilitating interaction between large referral cancer centers and tertiary or community hospitals as well as easier access to clinical trial opportunities. Studies aimed to improve preparations, structure, and conduct of MTBs, research methods to monitor their performance, teamwork, and outcomes are also outlined in this article. Analysis of literature shows that MTB participants discuss 5-8 cases per meeting and that the use of a vMTB for lung cancer and in particular stage III NSCLC and complex stage IV cases is widely accepted by most health professionals. Despite still-existing gaps, overall vMTB represents a unique opportunity to optimize patient management in a patient-centered approach.

Quality indicators and excellence requirements for a multidisciplinary lung cancer tumor board by the Spanish Lung Cancer Group

Multidisciplinary care is needed to decide the best therapeutic approach and to provide optimal care to patients with lung cancer (LC). Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are optimal strategies for the management of patients with LC and have been associated with better outcomes, such as an increase in quality of life and survival. The Spanish Lung Cancer Group has promoted this review about the current situation of the existing national LC-MDTs, which also offers a set of excellence requirements and quality indicators to achieve the best care in any patient with LC. Time and sufficient resources; leadership; administrative and institutional support; and recording of activity are key factors for the success of LC-MDTs. A set of excellence requirements in terms of staff, resources and organization of the LC-MDT have been proposed. At last, a list of quality indicators has been agreed to achieve and measure the performance of current LC-MDTs.

Consensus study on the health system and patient-related barriers for lung cancer management in South Africa

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the highest incident cancer globally and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality particularly if identified at a late stage. Poor patient outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC's) might reflect contextual patient and health system constraints at multiple levels, that act as barriers to prevention, disease recognition, diagnosis, and treatment. Lung cancer screening, even for high-risk patients, is not available in the public health sector in South Africa (SA), where the current HIV and tuberculosis (TB) epidemics often take precedence. Yet, there has been no formal assessment of the individual and health-system related barriers that may delay patients with lung cancer from seeking and accessing help within the public health care system and receiving the appropriate and effective diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to derive consensus from health-system stakeholders in the urban Gauteng Province of SA on the most important challenges faced by the health services and patients in achieving optimum lung cancer management and to identify potential solutions.

METHODS

The study was undertaken among 27 participant stakeholders representing clinical managers, clinicians, opinion leaders from the public health sector and non-governmental organisation (NGO) representatives. The study compromised two components: consensus and engagement. For the consensus component, the Delphi Technique was employed with open-ended questions and item ranking from five rounds of consensus-seeking, to achieve collective agreement on the most important challenges faced by patients and the health services in achieving optimal lung cancer management. For the engagement component, the Nominal Group Technique was used to articulate ideas and reach an agreement on the group's recommendations for solution strategies and approaches.

RESULTS

Public health sector stakeholders suggested that a lack of knowledge and awareness of lung cancer, and the apparent stigma associated with the disease and its risk factors, as well as symptoms and signs, are critical to treatment delay. Furthermore, delays in up-referral of patients with suspected lung cancer from district health care level were attributed to inadequate knowledge arising from a lack of in-service training of nurses and doctors regarding oncologic symptoms, risk factors, need for further investigation, interpretation of x-rays and available treatments. At a tertiary level, participants suggested that insufficient availability of specialised diagnostic resources (imaging, cytological and pathological services including biomolecular assessment of lung cancer), theatres, cardiothoracic surgeons, and appropriate therapeutic modalities (chemotherapeutic agents and radiation oncology) are the main barriers to the provision of optimal care. It was suggested that a primary prevention programme initiated by the government that involves private-public partnerships may improve lung cancer management nationally.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable barriers to the early identification and treatment of lung cancer exist. Finding solutions to overcome both individual and health-system level obstacles to lung cancer screening and management are vital to facilitate early identification and treatment, and to improve survival. Furthermore, research on inexpensive biomarkers for asymptomatic disease detection, the introduction of diagnostic imaging tools that utilise artificial intelligence to compensate for inadequate human resources and improving clinical integration across all levels of the healthcare system are essential.

Molecular biomarkers in early stage lung cancer

Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, together with the recent advances in targeted and immunotherapies, have shown to improve non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survival. Furthermore, screening has increased the number of early stage-detected tumors, allowing for surgical resection and multimodality treatments when needed. The need for improved sensitivity and specificity of NSCLC screening has led to increased interest in combining clinical and radiological data with molecular data. The development of biomarkers is poised to refine inclusion criteria for LDCT screening programs. Biomarkers may also be useful to better characterize the risk of indeterminate nodules found in the course of screening or to refine prognosis and help in the management of screening detected tumors. The clinical implications of these biomarkers are still being investigated and whether or not biomarkers will be included in further decision-making algorithms in the context of screening and early lung cancer management still needs to be determined. However, it seems clear that there is much room for improvement even in early stage lung cancer disease-free survival (DFS) rates; thus, biomarkers may be the key to refine risk-stratification and treatment of these patients. Clinicians’ capacity to register, integrate, and analyze all the available data in both high risk individuals and early stage NSCLC patients will lead to a better understanding of the disease’s mechanisms, and will have a direct impact in diagnosis, treatment, and follow up of these patients. In this review, we aim to summarize all the available data regarding the role of biomarkers in LDCT screening and early stage NSCLC from a multidisciplinary perspective. We have highlighted clinical implications, the need to combine risk stratification, clinical data, radiomics, molecular information and artificial intelligence in order to improve clinical decision-making, especially regarding early diagnostics and adjuvant therapy. We also discuss current and future perspectives for biomarker implementation in routine clinical practice.

A multi-method evaluation of the implementation of a cancer teamwork assessment and feedback improvement programme (MDT-FIT) across a large integrated cancer system

BACKGROUND

Globally, Multidisciplinary Teams (MDTs) are considered the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other conditions, but variability in performance has led to demand for improvement tools. MDT-FIT (Multidisciplinary Team Feedback for Improving Teamwork) is an improvement programme developed iteratively with over 100 MDTs (≥1100 MDT-members). Complex interventions are often adapted to context, but this is rarely evaluated. We conducted a prospective evaluation of the implementation of MDT-FIT across an entire integrated care system (ICS).

METHODS

MDT-FIT was implemented within all breast cancer MDTs across an ICS in England (n = 10 MDTs; 275 medical, nursing, and administrative members). ICS managers coordinated the implementation across the three stages of MDT-FIT: set up; assessment (self-report by team members plus independent observational assessment); team-feedback and facilitated discussion to agree actions for improvement. Data were collected using process and systems logs, and interviews with a purposively selected range of participants. Analysis was theoretically grounded in evidence-based frameworks for implementation strategies and outcomes.

RESULTS

All 10 MDTs participated in MDT-FIT; 36 interviews were conducted. Data from systems and process logs covered a 9-month period. Adaptations to MDT-FIT by the ICS (e.g., coordination of team participation by ICS rather than individual hospitals; and reducing time protected for coordination) reduced Fidelity and Adoption of MDT-FIT. However, the Acceptability, Appropriateness and Feasibility of MDT-FIT remained high due to embedding implementation strategies in the development of MDT-FIT (e.g., stakeholder engagement, interactive support).

CONCLUSIONS

This is a unique and comprehensive evaluation of the multi-site implementation of a complex team improvement programme. Findings support the imperative of considering implementation strategies when designing such programmes to minimize potentially negative impacts of adaptations in "real world" settings.

Barriers and Facilitators for Implementation of a Computerized Clinical Decision Support System in Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Team Meetings-A Qualitative Assessment

Simple Summary

Oncological computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) are currently being developed to facilitate workflows of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs). To successfully implement these systems in MDTMs, the aim of this qualitative assessment was to identify barriers and facilitators for implementation and to provide actionable findings for an implementation strategy. The main facilitators for implementation of the CCDSS were considered to be easy access to well-structured data, and reducing time spent by clinicians on MDTM preparation and duration of the MDTMs. Main barriers for adoption were seen in incomplete or non-trustworthy output generated by the system and insufficient adaptability of the system to local and contextual needs. Actionable findings for an implementation strategy were a usability test and validation study involving key users in the organization’s real-life setting. Given the growing interest in CCDSSs in oncology care, insight in barriers and facilitators for successful implementation seems highly relevant.

Abstract

Background: Oncological computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) to facilitate workflows of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) are currently being developed. To successfully implement these CCDSSs in MDTMs, this study aims to: (a) identify barriers and facilitators for implementation for the use case of lung cancer; and (b) provide actionable findings for an implementation strategy. Methods: The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science was used to create an interview protocol and to analyze the results. Semi-structured interviews were conducted among various health care professionals involved in MDTMs. The transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis following a deductive approach. Results: Twenty-six professionals participated in the interviews. The main facilitators for implementation of the CCDSS were considered to be easy access to well-structured patient data, and the resulting reduction of MDTM preparation time and of duration of MDTMs. Main barriers for adoption were seen in incomplete or non-trustworthy output generated by the system and insufficient adaptability of the system to local and contextual needs. Conclusion: Using a CCDSS in lung cancer MDTMs was expected to increase efficiency of workflows. Successful implementation was seen as dependent on the reliability and adaptability of the CCDSS and involvement of key users in the implementation process.

Multidisciplinary care models for patients with lung cancer

Multidisciplinary care is the cornerstone of lung cancer treatment in the developed world, even though there is a relative lack of consistent evidence that this care model improves outcomes. In this review, we present the available literature regarding how to set up and run an efficient multidisciplinary care model for lung cancer patients with emphasis on team members' roles and responsibilities. Moreover, we present some limited evidence about multidisciplinary care and its impact on lung cancer outcomes and survival. This review provides simple guidance on setting up and running a multidisciplinary service for lung cancer patients. It highlights the importance of defined roles and responsibilities for team members. It also presents concise information based on the literature regarding the impact of multidisciplinary care in lung cancer outcomes (e.g. survival of patients undergoing lung cancer surgery).

[Treatment for Brain Metastases from EGFR Mutations NSCLC Patients: How Should We Choose in Clinical Practice?]

Brain metastasis of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) sensitive mutations is a hot and difficult point in targeted era of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment, meanwhile it is also the central issue of controversy in the field of lung cancer treatment. Different results of different studies and different understanding of different disciplines, this field of treatment has been accompanied by different voices, patients without clinical symptoms can use targeted therapy first, and then start local radiotherapy with clinical symptoms or disease progression. It is a major model of the medical oncology. That is to say, taking symptoms and progress as indication and standard of local treatment intervention. In the absence of symptoms, local radiotherapy may increase patients' pain, which belongs to overtreatment. However, the perspective of radiotherapy is that brain metastases need to be treated clinically as early as possible, if not, it may affect the survival of patients. Early treatment of local lesions and increasing the depth of treatment are helpful to prolong the survival time of patients. This article refers to relevant literatures and summarizes the discussion from the perspective of pursuing the truth of disease treatment and problem solving in order to provide reference for patients' clinical practice.

Accuracy of lung cancer staging in the multidisciplinary team setting

Accurate staging of lung cancer is of utmost importance in determining the stage-appropriate treatment and prognosis. Imaging tests which include contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) examination of the chest to include the liver and adrenal glands and 18-fluoro-2 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scan facilitate the initial tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging of the disease and provide guidance on the optimal biopsy site and biopsy method. The diagnostic and staging approach should be tailored to the individual patient according to risk, benefit, patient preferences, and available expertise. Diagnosis and staging should preferably be accomplished with a single procedure or the least number of invasive procedures if more than one is needed. Ideally, centers managing lung cancer patients should have a multidisciplinary thoracic oncology board prescribing personalized evidence-based management tailored to each individual patient. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings provide a platform for key experts from various disciplines to contribute specific advice on the management of each individual patient. As assessment of mediastinal lymph node involvement is an important component of lung cancer staging, optimal mediastinal staging can be achieved with a variety of techniques that can be discussed and performed by the various specialists in the MDT. Despite a relative paucity of quality evidence that MDT contributes to improvements in lung cancer survival outcomes, this approach has evolved to become the standard of care in many centers around the world. Thoracic MDT has resulted in more focused and timely investigations for histopathologic diagnosis and disease staging which translate into earlier treatment initiation. Moreover, there is increasing evidence that MDT care facilitates and allows access to investigations that lead to improved accuracy of tumor and nodal staging. However, there is still a paucity of evidence on the accuracy of lung cancer staging in the MDT setting.

Plasma metabolite biomarkers predictive of radiation induced cardiotoxicity

PURPOSE

Although advancements in cancer treatments using radiation therapy (RT) have led to improved outcomes, radiation-induced heart disease (RIHD) remains a significant source of morbidity and mortality in survivors of cancers in the chest. Currently, there are no diagnostic tests in clinical use due to a lack of understanding of the natural history and mechanisms of RIHD development. Few studies have examined the utility of using metabolomics to prospectively identify cancer survivors who are at risk of developing cardiotoxicity.

METHODS

We analyzed plasma and left ventricle heart tissue samples collected from a cohort of male Sprague Dawley (SD) rats that were either sham irradiated or received fractionated doses (9 Gy per day × 5 days) of targeted X-ray radiation to the heart. Metabolomic and lipidomic analyses were utilized as a correlative approach for delineation of novel biomarkers associated with radiation-induced cardiac toxicity. Additionally, we used high-resolution mass spectrometry to examine the metabolomic profiles of plasma samples obtained from patients receiving high dose thoracic RT for esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

Metabolic alterations in the rat model and patient plasma profiles, showed commonalities of radiation response that included steroid hormone biosynthesis and vitamin E metabolism. Alterations in patient plasma profiles were used to develop classification algorithms predictive of patients at risk of developing RIHD.

CONCLUSION

Herein, we report the feasibility of developing a metabolomics-based biomarker panel that is associated with adverse outcomes of cardiac function in patients who received RT for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

New Frontiers for Molecular Pathology

Lung cancer remains a serious oncological problem worldwide. The delayed diagnosis and a prevalence of advanced stages in up to 70% of cases at recognition are still observed. Thanks to targeted therapies and immunotherapy a significant progress in achieving prolonged survival in some lung cancer patients is reported. A precise histopathological diagnosis, especially the recognition of adenocarcinoma, and a progress in the methods of clinical staging underlie the proper qualification of patients for a tailored therapy. The deep molecular characteristics of lung cancer in liquid biopsy, for example blood, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), cell suspension from needle aspirates, are currently available. The molecular characteristic has recently been extended with molecular aberrations of BRAF, KRAS, MET, ERBB2, RET, NTRK next to the well-known EGFR mutations and ALK, ROS-1 relocation. The present paper discusses the usefulness of adequate pathological methods and molecular testing for the identification of a broad spectrum of predictive biomarkers for a molecular-directed lung cancer therapy. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is approved in the first line therapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. To date only PD-L1 expression on tumor cells has been found to be a marker of response to ICIs. The efficacy of ICIs as well as the susceptibility to immune-related adverse events are highly individual, so immune biomarkers are widely investigated. The candidates for predictive factors for ICIs immunotherapy include cancer cell antigenicity, presence of regulatory/suppressory molecules on cancer cells, cancer stem cells or on exosomes, and, on the other hand, an immune status of the patient. Cancers with high immune infiltration in the tumor milieu, referred to as “hot” tumors, seem to ensure a better response to ICIs than the “cold” ones. BALF analysis may replace cancer tissue examination, which is of limited access in advanced stages, for the recognition of the nature of immune response in the tumor environment. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was shown to correlate with a good response to ICIs, especially when combined with other anticancer therapies. The present paper demonstrates the results of recent studies on lung cancer characteristics which bring us closer to the definition of useful prognostic/predictive factors.

Treatment modes for EGFR mutations in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: controversy, causes, and solutions

Brain metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations is a hot research topic, but also a difficulty in targeted NSCLC therapy, and is also the focus of controversy in the field of lung cancer treatment. According to medical oncology, asymptomatic patients were initially treated with targeted therapy, followed by local radiotherapy when symptoms present or disease progresses. However, from the perspective of the discipline of radiotherapy, brain metastases need to be treated before drug resistance, as it may affect survival. Controversies between disciplines have brought much confusion to the treatment choices of clinicians. We summarized and discussed relevant literatures in this article to seek the truth in providing reference in clinical practice for treating diseases and solving problems.

"All boats will rise": Physicians' perspectives on multidisciplinary lung cancer care in a community-based hospital setting

PURPOSE

We explored the perceived strengths, barriers to implementation, and suggestions for sustainable implementation of a multidisciplinary model within a community-based hospital system from the physicians' perspectives.

METHODS

We conducted 9 focus groups with 37 physicians involved in the care of lung cancer patients. Grounded theory methodology guided the identification of recurrent themes that emerged from the qualitative data analysis.

RESULTS

The majority of study participants agreed that the multidisciplinary model could benefit patients by promoting high quality, efficient, and well-coordinated care. Co-location, financial disincentives, and time constraints were identified as major deterrents to full participation in a multidisciplinary clinic. Other perceived challenges were the integration of a multidisciplinary care model into the existing healthcare system, maintenance of referral streams, and designation of the physician primarily responsible for a patient's care. Educating physicians about the availability of a multidisciplinary clinic, establishing efficient processes for initial consultations, implementing technology for virtual participation, and using a nurse navigator with reliable closed-loop communication were suggested to improve the implementation of the multidisciplinary model.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians generally agreed that the multidisciplinary model could improve lung cancer care, but they perceived significant personal, institutional, and system-level barriers that need to be addressed for its successful implementation in a community healthcare setting.

The value of neuroimaging team meetings for patients in a district general hospital

Neuroradiologists provide quality-assured neuroimaging -reports. We developed the use of a neuroimaging team meeting to provide second-opinion reporting by neuroradiologists on neuroimaging that had previously been reported by general -radiologists. Neuroimaging from selected patients was reviewed at the meeting. Where there were discrepancies between an original report from a general radiologist and the report obtained from the meeting involving a neuroradiologist, we classified the discrepancies, recorded the scan modality -involved and used the data to assess temporal trends in discrepancy rates. Over 4 years, 562 patients (312 women, 250 men, mean age 50.6 [SD 17.3] years) were studied. Agreement occurred for 396 (70.5%) patients. Discrepancies that were not clinically important occurred for 60 (10.7%) patients. Clinically important discrepancies were found for 106 (18.9%) patients: missed lesions for 47 (8.3%) patients and misinterpretations for 59 (10.5%) patients. Cerebrovascular disease was the most common reason for a recommendation of neuroimaging review at a meeting. Scan modality did not influence the frequency of discrepancies. Discrepancy rates decreased with time (chi-squared test for linear trend p=0.015), while the frequency of neuroradiologists' recommendations for new investigations was stable at one in seven patients. Neuroimaging team meetings can facilitate improvements in neurology diagnoses.

Successful strategies in implementing a multidisciplinary team working in the care of patients with cancer: an overview and synthesis of the available literature

In many health care systems globally, cancer care is driven by multidisciplinary cancer teams (MDTs). A large number of studies in the past few years and across different literature have been performed to better understand how these teams work and how they manage patient care. The aim of our literature review is to synthesize current scientific and clinical understanding on cancer MDTs and their organization; this, in turn, should provide an up-to-date summary of the current knowledge that those planning or leading cancer services can use as a guide for service implementation or improvement. We describe the characteristics of an effective MDT and factors that influence how these teams work. A range of factors pertaining to teamwork, availability of patient information, leadership, team and meeting management, and workload can affect how well MDTs are implemented within patient care. We also review how to assess and improve these teams. We present a range of instruments designed to be used with cancer MDTs - including observational tools, self-assessments, and checklists. We conclude with a practical outline of what appears to be the best practices to implement (Dos) and practices to avoid (Don'ts) when setting up MDT-driven cancer care.

Treatment of limited disease small cell lung cancer: the multidisciplinary team

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) presents multiple interdisciplinary challenges with several paradigm shifts in its treatment in recent years. SCLC treatment requires multidisciplinary management and timely treatment. The aim of this review is to focus on the team management aspects in the treatment of limited disease SCLC and how this can contribute towards improving outcomes.

A UK national survey of care pathways and support offered to patients receiving revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection in the highest volume NHS orthopaedic centres

Background

Deep prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of joint replacement surgery. It is difficult to treat, and patients often require multiple major revision surgeries to eradicate the infection. Treatment can have negative and long‐term impact on patients' quality of life. Understanding current service provision provides valuable information needed to design and evaluate support interventions for patients.

Aim

This survey aimed to identify usual care pathways and support in UK National Health Service (NHS) orthopaedic centres for patients receiving revision surgery for PJI after hip or knee replacement.

Methods

The 20 highest volume NHS orthopaedic centres treating prosthetic joint infection after hip or knee replacement were approached. Consultant orthopaedic surgeons specializing in treating PJI were invited to participate in a telephone or email survey about usual care provision and support for PJI.

Findings

Sixteen centres completed the survey. Findings showed a high degree of variation nationally in follow‐up time‐points after revision surgery. Multidisciplinary approaches to care focused more on clinical care and physical rehabilitation than social and psychological care. Patient management and referral to support services also varied and barriers to referrals included lack of availability or access to services, lack of knowledge of services, shortage of staff, and complexities of referring outside of the hospital catchment area.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that future development of interventions should focus on more inclusive and patient‐centred multidisciplinary approaches to care. Such interventions could more completely address psychological and social as well as physical aspects of patients' recovery.