Patient attendance at molecular tumor board: A new means of shared decision making?

Cannon, Timothy Lewis; Knopp, Laura; Wang, Hongkun; DeMarco, Tiffani A.; Jessup, J. Milburn; Randall, Jamie; Kim, Erica; Trump, Donald L.

doi:10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2022.100860

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some tumor boards have tried to implement patient attendance, citing improved patient education and satisfaction. 15 The results to our survey showed that a large percentage (66%) of our patients wanted to be present for their own tumor board discussion. There are numerous logistical hurdles to achieve this, including maintaining patient privacy (cannot discuss cases in front of other patients), coordination in order to accommodate patient presence, and the added time it would take to incorporate patient perspective and answer their questions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Multidisciplinary Endocrine Tumor Board: Assessment of the Patient Experience

Gorris,

Needham,

Finnegan

et al. 2024

Journal of Patient Experience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research surrounding tumor boards has focused on patient outcomes and care coordination. Little is known about the patient experience with tumor boards. This survey examined aspects of the patient experience for patients presented at our multidisciplinary endocrine tumor board (ETB). A 15-item survey was distributed via the online patient portal to patients over the age of 18 whose case had been discussed at our ETB over an 18-month period. Descriptive statistics were reported, and a Fisher's exact test was used to examine relationships between variables. A total of 47 patients completed the survey (46%). A majority (72%) report their provider explained what the ETB is, and 77% report being informed their case would be discussed. Most patients were satisfied their case was being discussed (72%). A number of patients did report moderate or severe anxiety knowing their case was being discussed (15%). Sixty-four percent of patients report the ETB recommendations were clearly explained; however, satisfaction with the recommendations was slightly lower (53%). Despite the somewhat low satisfaction with the recommendations, 75% of patients felt more confident in their treatment plan knowing their case was discussed. Finally, if given the chance, 66% responded that they would have been interested in participating in their own ETB discussion. This study provides some insight into the patient experience surrounding tumor board discussions. Overall, patients are satisfied when their case is discussed at ETB. Patients can also experience anxiety about these discussions, and many patients desire to be present for their own discussions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Multidisciplinary Endocrine Tumor Board: Assessment of the Patient Experience

Gorris,

Needham,

Finnegan

et al. 2024

Journal of Patient Experience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Molecular tumor boards typically comprise medical oncologists, surgical oncologists, pathologists, basic scientists, pharmacists, clinical nurses, physician assistants, and genetic counselors. Some authors have recommended that patients also be included to increase their engagement and knowledge of biomarker testing ( Cannon et al, 2022 ). Several groups have developed precision medicine practice models that include MTBs, which involve oncology pharmacists, physician assistants, and nurses, with the goal of improving patient care ( Walko et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Molecular Tumor Boardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Advanced Practitioner’s Role in the Rapidly Evolving Landscape of Precision Medicine

C. Moore, PharmD, BCPS, BCOP, DPLA, FCCP,

S. Guinigundo, MSN, RN, CNP, ANP-BC

2023

JADPRO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The advent of precision medicine targeting oncogenic mutations and other alterations has led to a paradigm shift in the treatment of many solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. For many of these agents, predictive biomarker testing is necessary to determine the presence of such alterations in order to select patients who are most likely to respond, and to avoid the use of ineffective and potentially harmful alternative therapy. Recent technological advances such as next-generation sequencing have facilitated the identification of targetable biomarkers in patients with cancer and thus help inform treatment decisions. Moreover, new molecular-guided therapies and associated predictive biomarkers continue to be discovered. For some cancer therapeutics, regulatory approval requires the use of a companion diagnostic to ensure proper patient selection. Advanced practitioners therefore need to be aware of current biomarker testing guidelines regarding who should be tested, how and when to test, and how these results can guide treatment decisions using molecular-based therapies. They should also recognize and address potential barriers and disparities in biomarker testing to ensure equitable care for all patients, and assist in educating patients and colleagues alike on the importance of testing and integration into clinical practice to enhance outcomes.

show abstract