e18261 Background: Multidisciplinary tumor board meetings have shown to improve quality and outcome in the care of cancer patients. Many tertiary centers conduct site specific tumor board meetings but not all the centers especially community oncology and international centers have the manpower capacity to hold site specific meetings, the overall impact of tumor boards on patients care may vary based on its structure and composition. We propose that institutional collaboration in the comprehensive care of cancer patients utilizing E-consult and E tumor board may help to improve patient care. Methods: Retrospective data of 134 patient cases seen at the American hospital Dubai between 2016-2018 was analyzed. Cases that were reviewed at the American Hospital multidisciplinary tumor board meeting (AHD-MDT) and also referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board service were analyzed using electronic health record, AHD-MDT meeting minutes and reports of Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board. 3 major areas of case assessment for review were selected 1. Pathology . 2. Medical imaging. 3. Clinical recommendations. Variation in assessment and recommendations between AHD- MDT and Mayo Clinic were compared. Results: A total of 1018 cases were reviewed in the AHD-MDT between 2016 and 2018. 136 out of the 1018(13%) cases were referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo E-Consult or E-tumor board service. 117 cases were included in the analysis as there was missing data in 4 patients, 9 were duplicate and 4 were cancelled and 7 cases were not reviewed at AHD-MDT. In 78 cases pathology was reviewed at Mayo but 4 (5%) were not reviewed at AHD. In 74 (95%) cases, pathology was reviewed both at AHD and Mayo. There was change (Ch) in 2 (3%), 7(9%)updated(Ud) and no change(Ch) in 65 cases(88%). 97 cases of imaging had change(Ch) in 1 case (1%). 101 cases of e-consult/e-tumor board were assessed for clinical recommendations. There was change(Ch) in 3(3%), 2/3 cases had a change in plan due to change in the pathology. In 35(35%) the plan was updated (Ud) and 7 out of 35(20%) were due to updated(Ud) pathology. Conclusions: Our data indicates that international collaboration as part of MCCN has resulted in significant improvement in the patient care. In a select group of challenging cases, 35% had an improvement in the final treatment plan after utilization of e-consult/e-tumor board service.
14622 Background: Although the risk for developing prostate cancer increases with age, few studies have reported the incidence of prostate cancer in men younger than 60 from an urban setting. Methods: All patients diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer at The Cancer Institute of New Jersey at Cooper University Hospital in Camden County, New Jersey from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004 were retrospectively identified from our tumor registry. Age comparison at diagnosis was made utilizing the Cooper registry and the National Cancer Database (NCDB), 2001. Results: A total of 141 men (88 Caucasians, 37 African Americans, 14 Hispanic, and 6 unknown) with a median age of 64 years (range, 44–88 years) were diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2004. Staging revealed Stage II (118), Stage III (3), Stage IV (4), Stage unknown (16) cases. Median Gleason score was 6. 74 patients underwent radical prostatectomy, 50 had radiation, 30 received hormone therapy and 2 received chemotherapy. At diagnosis, 19.95% of the men were under 50 and 41.84% were under 60 years of age. Our dataset from these two age groups compared to NJ and US figures are noted below. Conclusions: When comparing the respective data sets from CINJ at Cooper to NJ and US utilizing the NCDB, there are striking differences with a higher incidence of prostate cancer in younger men. These incidences parallel those seen in other urban university teaching hospitals from the Healthcare Utilization Project (2005), where more patients under the age of 60 are being diagnosed with prostate cancer when compared to community centers. Subset analysis shows that our institution had a disproportionately larger number of African American men with prostate cancer which may relate to our culturally directed screening program, accounting for the higher incidence. These data support that hospital characteristics may impact age at diagnosis of prostate cancer, and further investigation is warranted. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
14130 Background: Locally advanced esophageal cancer studies have reported a three year overall survival rate of 32% with a median survival of 16 months. These patients were treated with combined chemotherapy and radiation with surgery, when applicable. We conducted this study to determine whether using an individualized, multidisciplinary approach affected survival outcomes in patients treated for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods: All patients treated for locally advanced esophageal cancer were retrospectively identified from our database at The Cancer Institute of New Jersey at Cooper University Hospital. All patients were presented and discussed in a multidisciplinary gastrointestinal tumor board conference. After a consensus was obtained, a treatment plan was established for each patient based on his or her respective clinical characteristics: stage, performance status, medical suitability for surgery and resectabilty. Results: A total of 23 patients (median age: 66 years [range, 55–88 years]) were identified, the histopathologic diagnosis was adenocarcinoma in 13 and squamous cell carcinoma in 10 cases. TNM staging was as follows: 18 (78.3%) stage II or III and 5 (21.7%) stage IV. Initial management included esophagectomy for 9 (39.1%), 6 of which received preoperative chemotherapy (5-FU) and three received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, 14 (60.9%) received only combined chemotherapy (average four cycles of 5FU 1000 mg per square meter of body surface + Cisplatin 75 mg per square meter of body surface) and radiation at doses 50–64 Gy. Overall median survival was not reached since only five patients (21.7%) have died. The 1- year and 2-year survival rates were 87% and 74% respectively. Median follow-up for patients who received combination chemotherapy and radiation vs. surgery with preoperative therapy was 29 and 41 months, respectively. Conclusion: This retrospective analysis shows promising outcomes compared to published data supporting the role of an individualized, multidisciplinary approach in the management of each patient with esophageal cancer. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.