Referral rates to multidisciplinary team meetings: Is there disparity between tumour streams?

Abstract

Introduction The multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) approach is accepted as standard of care to optimise treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer. This retrospective audit reviews the proportion of patients whose care is being discussed at cancer MDTMs within the Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service (SCHHS). Methods Patients included were those diagnosed with cancer within the SCHHS between 2010 and 2015, and subsequently referred to a public MDTM for discussion. Data were extracted from the Queensland Cancer Control Analysis Team (QCCAT) database regarding the incidence of breast, lung, upper gastrointestinal (GI), colorectal, genitourinary and malignant haematological cancers and the number of patients referred to the corresponding MDTM. Results Data from 2015 show referral rates to MDTMs as follows: lung 100%, upper gastrointestinal 100%, colorectal 64%, breast 60%, malignant haematology 40% and genitourinary 28%. Of the genitourinary presentations, 70% were prostate cases and 14% bladder cases. Review of genitourinary MDTM outcomes found that, of the patients with prostate cancer discussed, 30% were metastatic, 19% were poor surgical candidates and 15% had biochemical recurrence. Conclusion This audit demonstrates variable utilisation of MDTMs between tumour streams. Our study shows a high and increasing referral rate to all tumour stream MDTMs except for genitourinary. This suggests a possible underutilisation of genitourinary MDTMs to discuss treatment options for patients with genitourinary cancer. Collaborative research is warranted to further investigate whether this is a local or widespread issue.

Survival Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of a Multidisciplinary Tumor Board for Breast Cancer in Mozambique, Sub-Saharan Africa

“…In a report using data from the U.S. SEER‐Medicare database, only 70% of patients had access to multidisciplinary care, and this proportion was even lower among those living in a rural area [8]. In an Australian study, only 60% of breast cancer cases diagnosed during 2010–2015 were discussed in MTBs [9]. In China, less than 2% of patients operated for breast cancer during 2006–2016 in a large cancer center were discussed in an MTB [10], and, in Taiwan, only 28% were presented in a multidisciplinary meeting [11].…”

Translation of oncology multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) recommendations into clinical practice

“…For the major tumour sites, the number of patients discussed at the Liverpool Hospital MDMs represented approximately 14% of genitourinary cancers, 45% of breast cancers, 32% of bowel cancers and 59% of respiratory cancers diagnosed in SWSLHD for a 6 month period [ 36 ]. There is an underrepresentation of discussion of genitourinary cases at MDMs, a similar finding to Atwell et al [ 37 ] In Australia, the decision to discuss cases at a MDM is made by the clinician and not mandated by legislation as in France [ 25 ] or for cancer society certification as in Germany [ 20 ].…”

Cooperative behavior and management of a patient care team in an oncohematology hospital service

“…In the oncohematology sector, it is suggested to hold discussions and moments focused on the reflection of multidisciplinary teams, with a view to better coping with situations that generate workers' moral distress (30) . Moreover, meetings and discussions with multidisciplinary teams reflect in the reduction of patients' treatment time and increase their survival (31) .…”