The Effects of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings on Clinical Practice for Colorectal, Lung, Prostate and Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our systematic review is to identify the effects of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) for lung, breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. Methods: Our systematic review, performed following PRISMA guidelines, included studies examining the impact of MDTMs on treatment decisions, patient and process outcomes. Electronic databases PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for articles published between 2000 and 2020. Risk of bias and level of evidence were assessed using the ROBINS-I tool and GRADE scale. Results: 41 of 13,246 articles were selected, evaluating colorectal (21), lung (10), prostate (6) and breast (4) cancer. Results showed that management plans were changed in 1.6–58% of cases after MDTMs. Studies reported a significant impact of MDTMs on surgery type, and a reduction of overall performed surgery after MDTM. Results also suggest that CT and MRI imaging significantly increased after MDTM implementation. Survival rate increased significantly with MDTM discussions according to twelve studies, yet three studies did not show significant differences. Conclusions: Despite heterogeneous data, MDTMs showed a significant impact on management plans, process outcomes and patient outcomes. To further explore the impact of MDTMs on the quality of healthcare, high-quality research is needed.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review (Part 6): Correlation of PD-L1 Expression with the Status of Mismatch Repair System, BRCA, PTEN, and Other Genes

“…Systematic literature reviews and metanalyses (SLRs) conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines (including an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting) ( , accessed on 8 May 2021) are increasingly important in health care, keeping medical doctors up to date, and also representing the background for developing clinical guidelines/trials, as well as the justification for financial supports of research projects. Usually conducted by multidisciplinary teams, SLRs performed according to these guidelines could be applicable in various topics/contexts, improving the research quality not only of pure meta-analyses but also of SLRs applied to case report/series [ 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 234 , 235 , 236 , 237 , 238 , 239 , 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244 , 245 , 246 , 247 , 248 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 , 256 , …”

From “Cure” to “Care”: The Role of the MultiDisciplinary Team on Colorectal Cancer Patients’ Satisfaction and Oncological Outcomes

“…The clinical management of patients by MDT has now entered clinical practice and is recommended by several oncologic guidelines, 26,27 although the implementation is heterogenous worldwide, 28 especially in developing countries. 29 It is well established that the accuracy of diagnosis is improved, with the indication to perform examinations to guarantee a more complete staging [14][15][16][17]30 and cancer care can be improved using newly developed electronic health record and cloudbased software. 11,12,31 Consequently, treatment is also modified and integrated among all the specialists taking part in the discussion, thus increasing the adherence to the guidelines.…”

The effect of digital-enabled multidisciplinary therapy conferences on efficiency and quality of the decision making in prostate-cancer care

“…10 While it has been shown that MDTs lead to more accurate staging, 11 higher adherence to clinical guidelines, 12 and shorter time to treatment after diagnosis, 13 several prior studies have failed to show improved outcome among patients discussed in MDT meetings [14][15][16] while other have reported better outcomes. [17][18][19] The MDT conference is a costly process, and it is important that future studies justify the costs through evidence of better outcomes.…”