Survival impact of multidisciplinary thoracic oncology care in a regional healthcare system.

Abstract

2004 Background: Much-advocated, the value and impact of multidisciplinary care and planning (MDC) needs greater evidence. We compared non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient characteristics, treatment patterns and survival in a large community healthcare system spanning 3 US states with some of the highest lung cancer incidence and mortality rates. Methods: We identified MDC patients in the Tumor Registry NSCLC data from 2011-2017. Because the MDC program was located in metropolitan Memphis, we separated non-MDC patients by location of care resulting in 3 cohorts: MDC, non-MDC metropolitan care and non-MDC regional care. Using National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, we categorized treatment by stage as ‘preferred’, ‘appropriate’ (allowable under certain circumstances). We compared demographic and clinical characteristics across cohorts using chi-squared tests and compared survival using Cox regression with Bonferroni adjustment. We repeated survival analysis with propensity matched cohorts. Results: Of 6259 patients, 14% received MDC, 56% metro care and 30% regional care; MDC had the highest rates of African Americans (34% v 28% v 22%), stage I-IIIB (63 v 40 v 50), urban residents (81 v 78 v 20), stage-preferred treatment rates (66 v 57 v 48), stage-appropriate treatment rates (78 v 70 v 63;), and lowest non-treatment rates (6 v 21 v 28). All p<0.001. Compared to MDC, the hazard for death was higher in metro (1.4, 95% confidence interval 1.3-1.6) and regional (1.7, 1.5-1.9); hazards were higher in regional care v metro (1.2, 1.1-1.3); all p<0.001 after adjustment. Results were similar for MDC comparisons after propensity matching with and without adjusting for preferred treatment. No differences in regional and metro cohorts. Conclusions: In this large community-based healthcare system, receipt of MDC for NSCLC was associated with significantly higher rates of guideline-concordant care and survival, providing strong evidence for recommending rigorous implementation of MDC. [Table: see text]