Multidisciplinary Oncology Clinic Research Articles

A Comparison of Palliative Care Perceptions Across Metastatic Spine Patients and the General Population.

Background: Palliative care (PC) has been shown to benefit patients with metastatic cancer by managing symptoms, improving quality of life, and facilitating advance care planning. Despite this, PC is often misunderstood and underutilized. Objective: To deepen our understanding of PC barriers seen among the spine metastasis population. Design/Setting: Between March 2021 and August 2022, people with metastatic spine tumors (MSTs) at a multidisciplinary oncology clinic were administered a survey on PC prior to their scheduled appointment. These responses were compared with the Health Information National Trends Survey 5 (HINTS 5), which is a validated survey created by the National Cancer Institute between February and June of 2020. Chi-squared statistical analysis was used. Results: Fifty-six people with MST were compared with 3795 patients from the HINTS 5 database. People with MST reported a significantly higher baseline understanding of PC when compared with the general population (GP) (chi-squared = 34.4, p = <0.0001). People with MST had a higher frequency of disagreement with the statement "PC is equivalent with death" when compared with the GP (chi-squared = 12.8, p = 0.0124). Over 25% of the MST group reported no understanding of PC. Conclusion: MST patients are often referred to PC services due to the extreme symptom burden of their disease. Based on this study, in comparison to the GP, people with MST tended to have a more accurate and well-adjusted perception of the goals and functions of PC. Although reassuring, there remains a high proportion of patients who have no knowledge of PC, and groups erroneously associated PC with hospice status.

Hepatocellular cancer. Current trends and the results in surgical treatment

Aim. To analyze the results of a multidisciplinary approach to the treatment of patients with hepatocellular cancer in a multidisciplinary oncology clinic.Materials and Methods. From 2007 to 2021, 259 patients with hepatocellular cancer were surgically treated in the Department of Liver and Pancreas Surgery of the city clinical hospital named after S.P. Botkin. Liver resections of different extent were performed in 74 (28.6%) patients, radiofrequency ablation – in 19 (7.3%), microwave ablation – in 20 (7.7%), hepatic artery chemoembolization with radiofrequency ablation – in 34 (13.1%), regional chemotherapy – in 104 (40.2%), liver transplantation – in 8 (3.1%) patients.Results. The overall five- and ten-year survival after liver resection was 51.4% and 31.1% respectively. The poor prognostic factors following liver resection were age &gt;70 years (p = 0.03), postoperative complications (p = 0.04), lymph node metastases (p = 0.01), and a body mass index &gt;30 kg/m2 (p = 0.045). Complications that developed after radiofrequency (microwave) ablation and chemoembolization of the hepatic artery with radiofrequency ablation were 5.1% and 5.8%. Within 90 days after liver resection, three (1.1%) patients died. Complications after resection developed in 18 (24.3%) cases during the same period. With metastases measuring ≤3 cm, the overall five-year survival after radiofrequency and microwave ablation was 36.8% and 35% respectively. With neoplasms measuring 3–5 cm, the best five-year survival was after hepatic artery chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation (44.1%). The overall fiveyear survival after hepatic artery chemoembolization was 11.5%. No complications or deaths resulted from liver transplantation. With an average follow-up period of 12.5 months, none of the patients experienced disease recurrence or died.Conclusion. Using a multidisciplinary approach in a multidisciplinary oncology clinic improves the results of treating patients with hepatocellular cancer.

Patient perspectives on delays in cervical cancer screening and follow-up care in Botswana: a mixed methods study

BackgroundDelays in screening and timely diagnosis contribute significantly to global disparities in cervical cancer mortality in Botswana and other low- and middle-income countries, particularly those with high rates of HIV. Little is known about the modifiable factors shaping these delays from the perspectives of women themselves and how these perspectives may differ between those living with and without HIV.MethodsFrom March–May 2019, we conducted a concurrent, mixed methods study of women receiving treatment for cervical cancer at a multidisciplinary oncology clinic in Botswana. Enrolled participants completed a one-time, concurrent semi-structured interview and structured questionnaire assessing patient characteristics, screening and HIV-related beliefs and knowledge, and barriers and facilitators to screening and follow-up care. Qualitative data were analyzed using directed content analysis guided by the Model of Pathways to Treatment and triangulated with quantitative questionnaire data to identify areas of convergence and divergence. Fisher’s exact tests were used to explore associations between questionnaire data (e.g., screening knowledge) and HIV status.ResultsForty-two women enrolled in the study, 64% of whom were living with HIV and 26% were diagnosed with stage III cervical cancer. Median age was 45 years (IQR 54–67) in those living with HIV and 64 years (IQR 42–53) in those living without. Overall screening rates before symptomatic disease were low (24%). Median time from most proximal screen to diagnosis was 52 median days (IQR 15–176), with no significant differences by HIV status. General screening knowledge was higher among those living with HIV versus those without (100% vs 73%; p < 0.05), but knowledge about HPV and other risk factors was low in both groups. Similar to questionnaire results, qualitative results indicate limited awareness of the need to be screened prior to symptoms as a central barrier to timely screening. Some participants also noted that delays in the receipt of screening results and fear also contributed to treatment delays. However, many participants also described myriad sources of social and tangible support that helped them to overcome some of these challenges.ConclusionInterventions focused on increasing routine screening and supporting timely awareness and access to care are needed to reduce global disparities in cervical cancer.

Clinical efficacy of geriatric multidisciplinary oncology clinic for frail patients with colorectal cancer

Background: The role of the geriatric multidisciplinary oncology clinic(GMOC) for elderly patients offers the best means to manage all aspects of the patient’s health and the impact of treatments on health and quality of life. The GMOC at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital have counseled elderly cancer patients to evaluate the possibility of surgery, adjuvant therapy, and palliative therapy. This study aimed to appraise the clinical efficacy of this clinic analyzing the care process and outcomes of treatment.

Efficacy of geriatric multidisciplinary oncology clinic in the surgical treatment decision-making process for frail elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

PurposeMultidisciplinary care has become a cornerstone of colorectal cancer management. To evaluate the clinical efficacy of a geriatric multidisciplinary oncology clinic (GMOC), we analyzed the surgical treatment decision-making process and outcomes.MethodsThis retrospective single-center study reviewed the data of patients aged ≥65 years who participated in the GMOC at a tertiary referral hospital between 2015 and 2021. The clinical adherence rate, comprehensive geriatric assessment, and a multidimensional frailty score (MFS) were obtained. The groups that were recommended and not recommended for surgery were compared, analyzing the factors impacting the decision and 1-year survival outcomes. Furthermore, the postoperative complications of patients who underwent surgery were evaluated.ResultsA total of 165 patients visited the GMOC, and 74 had colorectal cancer (mean age, 85.5 years [range, 81.2–89.0 years]). Among patients with systemic disease (n = 31), 7 were recommended for surgery, and 5 underwent surgery. Among patients with locoregional disease (n = 43), 18 were recommended for surgery, and 12 underwent surgery. Patients recommended and not recommended for surgery had significantly different activities of daily living (ADL) (P = 0.024), instrumental ADL (P = 0.001), Mini-Mental State Examination (P = 0.014), delirium risk (P = 0.039), and MFS (P = 0.001). There was no difference in the 1-year overall survival between the 2 groups (P = 0.980). Of the 17 patients who underwent surgery, the median (interquartile range) of operation time was 165.0 minutes (120.0–270.0 minutes); hospital stay, 7.0 days (6.0–8.0 days); and 3 patients had wound complications.ConclusionProper counseling of patients through the GMOC could lead to appropriate management and favorable outcomes.

Predicting outcome in older patients with cancer: Comprehensive geriatric assessment and clinical judgment

ObjectivesComprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) has been incorporated into geriatric oncology to prevent unfavorable outcome from anticancer treatment. This study determined the value of CGA and medical oncologist's clinical judgment in predicting unfavorable outcome and explored whether treatment decisions can be based on CGA. Patients and MethodsIn this prospective cohort study, a multidomain CGA was performed by a geriatric nurse and geriatrician in 110 consecutive patients aged ≥70 years, newly referred to a multidisciplinary oncology clinic. CGA domains included comorbidity, polypharmacy, mood, cognition, nutrition, functionality and physical performance. Medical oncologist's clinical judgment on expected tolerance of standard treatment was noted (N = 62). Unfavorable outcome was defined as any ≥grade three chemotherapy toxicity, dose reduction, postponement of treatment, death before start of treatment and early progression before first evaluation of treatment (N = 80). ResultsCGA identified multidomain problems in 77 out of 110 patients (70.0%) and the medical oncologist had doubts about standard treatment tolerance in 30 out of 62 patients (48.4%). Unfavorable outcome occurred in 48 out of 80 patients (60%) who received anticancer treatment but could not be predicted by CGA, medical oncologists' clinical judgment or their combination. There was discrepancy between CGA and clinical judgment in 24 out of 62 patients (38.7%). ConclusionNeither CGA, medical oncologist's clinical judgment or a combination could predict unfavorable outcome in our heterogeneous sample. CGA and clinical judgment did not align in more than one-third of patients.

Evaluation and Improvement of Bottlenecking in a Multidisciplinary Oncology Clinic: An Electronic Medical Record Intervention.

Purpose: Clinic members reported slower patient flow in the mornings at a multidisciplinary oncology clinic. This study identified the causes of clinic bottlenecking via analysis of patient schedules and transit times, then corrected discrepancies through a quality improvement program.Methods: Transit times were measured using tracking cards handed out at check-in, marked by each clinic member throughout the encounter, and collected upon discharge. Data were analyzed for differences between morning and afternoon patients, and a Pareto chart was formulated to assess for discrepancies in distribution. Repeat plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were conducted, implementing two changes to redistribute appointments to optimize clinic workflow.Results: A total of 2951 patient appointments were analyzed: 589 at baseline, 277 following an initial intervention, and 2085 following a subsequent intervention. Analysis of patient transit times revealed no significant differences between morning and afternoon patient groups (t-test, p=.13-.99), with no transit interval markedly longer than others (t-test, p=.32-.83). However, upon evaluation of appointment times, a maldistribution was noted with 57% of patients concentrated between 9:00 am to 12:00 pm, accounting for the perception of bottlenecking. An initial intervention offering patients afternoon appointments on a voluntary basis was insufficient for rebalancing distribution (chi-square test, p=.299); however, an electronic medical record (EMR) intervention with rigid appointment templates was successful (chi-square test, p<.001).Conclusion: An imbalance of appointment times contributed to the perception of slow clinic throughput. This study emphasizes the importance of systematically investigating even consensus observations for validity prior to costly interventions. Furthermore, these results support the utility of information technology in optimizing clinic workflow.

An evaluation of in-office flexible fiber-optic biopsies for laryngopharyngeal lesions

BackgroundOperative endoscopy and flexible fiber-optic in-office tissue biopsy are common techniques to assess suspicious laryngopharyngeal lesions.MethodsThe primary outcome was the delay to the initiation of treatment. Secondary outcomes were delay to biopsy, histopathological diagnosis, and assessment at a multidisciplinary oncology clinic. A retrospective analysis was performed to assess the relative delays between these approaches to biopsy of laryngopharyngeal lesions.ResultsThere were 114 patients in the study cohort; 44 in-office and 70 operative endoscopic biopsies). The mean delay from consultation to biopsy was 17.4 days for the operative endoscopy group and 1.3 days for the in-office group. The mean delay from initial otolaryngology consultation to initiation of treatment was 51.7 days and 44.6 days for the operative endoscopy and in-office groups, respectively.ConclusionIn-office biopsy reduced the time from initial consultation to biopsy. The temporal gains via in-office biopsy did not translate into faster access to treatment. This outcome highlights the opportunity to improve access to treatment for patients with early diagnosis.

Quality of Patient Decisions About Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy

ImportanceBreast reconstruction has the potential to improve a person’s body image and quality of life but has important risks. Variations in who undergoes breast reconstruction have led to questions about the quality of patient decisions.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of patient decisions about breast reconstruction.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA prospective, cross-sectional survey study was conducted from June 27, 2012, to February 28, 2014, at a single, academic, multidisciplinary oncology clinic among women planning to undergo mastectomy for stage I to III invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, or prophylaxis. ExposuresMastectomy only and mastectomy with reconstruction.Main Outcome and MeasuresKnowledge, as ascertained using the Decision Quality Instrument; preference concordance, based on rating and ranking of key attributes; and decision quality, defined as having knowledge of 50% or more and preference concordance.ResultsDuring the 20-month period, 214 patients were eligible, 182 were approached, and 32 missed. We enrolled 145 patients (79.7% enrollment rate), and received surveys from 131 patients (72.0% participation rate). Five participants became ineligible. The final study population was 126 patients. Among the 126 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 53.2 [12.1] years), the mean (SD) knowledge score was 58.5% (16.2%) and did not differ by treatment group (mastectomy only, 55.2% [15.0%]; mastectomy with reconstruction, 60.5% [16.5%]). A total of 82 of 123 participants (66.7%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy only; 39 of these women (47.6%) underwent mastectomy only. A total of 41 participants (32.5%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy with reconstruction; 36 of these women (87.8%) underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. Overall, 52 of 120 participants (43.3%) made a high-quality decision. In multivariable analysis, white race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.72; 95% CI, 1.00-7.38; P = .05), having private insurance (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.93; P < .001), having a high school education or less (vs some college) (OR, 4.84; 95% CI, 1.22-19.21; P = .02), having a college degree (vs some college) (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.53-2.49; P < .001), and not having a malignant neoplasm (eg, BRCA carriers) (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.25-7.85; P = .01) were independently associated with making a high-quality decision.Conclusions and RelevanceA minority of patients undergoing mastectomy in a single academic center made a high-quality decision about reconstruction. Shared decision making is needed to support decisions about breast reconstruction.

A Prostate and Genitourinary Multidisciplinary Oncology Clinic in a Multi-Hospital System

A Prostate and Genitourinary Multidisciplinary Oncology Clinic in a Multi-Hospital System