Tumor Board Meetings Research Articles

Genetic counselling referral practices for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A French retrospective multicentre observational cohort study (CAPANCOGEN)

Background/objectivesGenetic counselling (GC) is a key step in the identification of inherited germline mutations. However, the oncogenetic practices are poorly described for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) in Europe. The CAPANCOGEN study aimed to describe the GC referral practices in France and assess the implementation of international guidelines in patients with PA. MethodsInformation about GC referrals with PA was collected in 13 French centres from September 2019 to October 2021. In the 5 largest centres, personal and familial histories of cancers and diseases associated with a higher risk of germline mutations were collected in 460 patients, according to international, American, European and French GC referral guidelines. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify the factors influencing GC referral. ResultsAmong 833 patients, a total of 100 patients (12%) had an indication of GC according to local multidisciplinary tumour board meetings (MTBM). Among these patients, 41% did not undergo GC. The median time between MTBM and GC was 55 days (IQR: 14.5–112). Among 460 patients with collected personal and familial history, 31.5% were not referred to a GC despite an existing indication. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, suspected CDKN2A (p = 0.032) or BRCA mutation (p < 0.001), familial pancreatic cancer history (p < 0.001) and controlled disease with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (p < 0.001) increased the referral rate. Conversely, older age (p = 0.002) and a locally advanced PA (p = 0.045) decreased the risk of GC referral. ConclusionsGC referral is inadequate despite valuable information in patients’ medical files.

Radiomics for therapy-specific head and neck squamous cell carcinoma survival prognostication (part I)

BackgroundTreatment plans for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) are individually decided in tumor board meetings but some treatment decision-steps lack objective prognostic estimates. Our purpose was to explore the potential of radiomics for SCCHN therapy-specific survival prognostication and to increase the models’ interpretability by ranking the features based on their predictive importance.MethodsWe included 157 SCCHN patients (male, 119; female, 38; mean age, 64.39 ± 10.71 years) with baseline head and neck CT between 09/2014 and 08/2020 in this retrospective study. Patients were stratified according to their treatment. Using independent training and test datasets with cross-validation and 100 iterations, we identified, ranked and inter-correlated prognostic signatures using elastic net (EN) and random survival forest (RSF). We benchmarked the models against clinical parameters. Inter-reader variation was analyzed using intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC).ResultsEN and RSF achieved top prognostication performances of AUC = 0.795 (95% CI 0.767–0.822) and AUC = 0.811 (95% CI 0.782–0.839). RSF prognostication slightly outperformed the EN for the complete (ΔAUC 0.035, p = 0.002) and radiochemotherapy (ΔAUC 0.092, p < 0.001) cohort. RSF was superior to most clinical benchmarking (p ≤ 0.006). The inter-reader correlation was moderate or high for all features classes (ICC ≥ 0.77 (± 0.19)). Shape features had the highest prognostic importance, followed by texture features.ConclusionsEN and RSF built on radiomics features may be used for survival prognostication. The prognostically leading features may vary between treatment subgroups. This warrants further validation to potentially aid clinical treatment decision making in the future.

Assessing current diagnostic, staging, and treatment practices in community and academic centers for individuals with stage IB-IIIA non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

e20608 Background: The five-year survival for individuals with surgically resected, early-stage NSCLC is around 50%. Recent availability of biomarker driven therapy after surgery has the promise of improved outcomes. However, deficits in the quality of diagnostic evaluation, evidence-based treatment delivery, care coordination, and biomarker testing are still barriers to optimal outcomes. Methods: In 2022, the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) conducted a survey of NSCLC providers to assess current patterns in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with early-stage (IB-IIIA) NSCLC. The survey, which was distributed to ACCC members and their associated networks, collected information about each respondent and their cancer program processes around diagnosis, treatment planning, and care delivery. We administered it Qualtrics and analyzed results with SAS 9.4. Results: We had 124 survey respondents from 33 US states. Respondents’ institutions were 60% urban, 23% suburban, and 17% rural, 53% community cancer programs, 37% academic/NCI designated cancer programs, 9% private practice. On average, initial tissue biopsy was performed by interventional radiologists in 29% of cases, interventional pulmonologist in 22%, and thoracic surgeons in 16%. In stage IIA-IIIA, on average 49% typically perform invasive mediastinal staging before surgery, 17% during surgery, and 18% do not typically perform invasive mediastinal staging. The most frequent barriers to optimal staging and diagnosis included scheduling (73%), cost (51%), tissue quality (46%), limited access to tests or procedures (42%), and missed appointments (36%). Multidisciplinary tumor board use included 31% with a general cancer tumor board, 50% with a thoracic specific tumor board, and 14% have a dedicated molecular tumor board. Tumor board meetings were weekly in 57%, 2-3 times a month in 22%, and once a month in 11%. 66% have a standard biomarker testing protocol for resected NSCLC. 51% typically order EGFR and 31% regularly order PDL1 testing for patients with resected NSCLC. The largest barriers to optimal care included: scheduling (23%), patient refusal (19%), communication breakdowns (17%), inadequate staffing (15%), and limited access to subspecialties (14%). 83% agree their center has the staff and resources to help patients navigating the health system. However, only 45% typically assign a nurse navigator to individuals with early-stage NSCLC. Palliative care service referrals were made sometimes or often in 48% of sites, while 51% refer rarely or never. Conclusions: In this broad sample of oncology practices across the US, we identified several strengths and barriers to optimal care for persons with early-stage NSCLC. Improved care coordination and standardized staging and diagnosis practices could optimize care in this dynamic treatment landscape.

Teaching Potential of Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Meetings for Orthopedic Residents: Insights From a French Sarcoma Reference Center.

Multidisciplinary tumor boardmeetings (MTBMs) have been established in oncology to improve patient care. While their benefits for patients have been well-documented, there are no previous studies on the teaching opportunities they provide for residents and medical students. This study aimed to examine the teaching provided to residents during MTBM and identify areas for improvement. The study hypothesized that although the primary objective of MTBM is not teaching, they could still contribute to residents' learning. The study focused on the tumors board meeting for bone metastasis and musculoskeletal tumors/sarcoma in a French reference center for musculoskeletal oncology. The composition of the MTBM included specialists from various disciplines, and it convened on a weekly basis to discuss cases. The orthopedic oncology residents (OORs) actively participated in the MTBM as part of their training. A questionnaire was distributed to OORs who had served between 2014 and 2021, and their responses were analyzed. The results showed that the OOR perceived MTBM as interesting, beneficial for their training, and challenging. While opinions were divided on whether MTBM was a suitable place for education, the majority believed it improved their knowledge of different specialties and provided valuable elements applicable to daily practice. They also felt it facilitated future access to MTBs if needed. OORs recommended the rotation as an orthopedic oncology resident to younger residents. Recommendations for improvement included incorporating more dedicated teaching time, active involvement of residents in the learning process, availability of learning materials, and post-MTBM debriefing sessions. The study highlighted the importance of case presentations, public speaking skills, interdisciplinary collaboration, and clinical reasoning observed during MTBM. In conclusion, while not primarily designed for teaching, MTBM offers valuable learning opportunities for residents. Enhancing the teaching experience through dedicated debriefing sessions, resident involvement, and improved support can further optimize their educational impact. Future evaluations are needed to assess the effectiveness of these improvements. This study provides insights into the teaching potential within MTBM and can guide educational initiatives in the field of oncology.

Utilization of a Virtual Tumor Board for the Care of Patients With Renal Masses: Experience From a Quality Improvement Collaborative.

Multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) meetings are useful sources of insight and collaboration when establishing treatment approaches for oncologic cases. However, such meetings can be time intensive and inconvenient. We implemented a Virtual Tumor Board (VTB) within Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) to discuss and improve the management of complicated renal masses (RMs). Urologists were invited to discuss decision-making for RMs through voluntary engagement. Communication was performed exclusively through email. Case details were collected and responses were tabulated. All participants were surveyed about their perceptions of the VTB. 50 RM cases were reviewed in a VTB that included 53 urologists. Patients ranged from 20-90 years old and 94% had localized RM. The cases generated 355 messages, ranging from 2-16 (median 7) per case; 144 responses (40.6%) were sent via smart-phone. All urologists (100%) who submitted to the VTB had their questions answered. The VTB provided suggestions to those with no stated treatment plan in 42% of cases, confirmed the physician's initial approach to their case in 36%, and offered alternative approaches in 16% of cases. 83% of survey respondents felt the experience was "Beneficial" or "Very Beneficial" and 93% stated increased confidence in their case management. MUSIC's initial experience with a VTB showed good engagement. The format reduced barriers to multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary discussions and improved the quality of care for selected patients with complex RMs.

Multidisciplinary approach to cancer care in Rwanda: the role of tumour board meetings

Multidisciplinary approach to cancer care in Rwanda: the role of tumour board meetings

Breast Cancer Tumor Board: A Radiologist’s Guide to Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy

Radiation therapy represents a pillar in the current management of breast cancer. Historically, postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has been administered only in patients with locally advanced disease and a poor prognosis. These included patients with large primary tumors at diagnosis and/or more than three metastatic axillary lymph nodes. However, during the past few decades, several factors have prompted a shift in perspective, and recommendations for PMRT have become more fluid. Guidelines for PMRT in the United States are outlined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society for Radiation Oncology. Because evidence to support performing PMRT is frequently discordant, the decision to offer radiation therapy often requires team discussion. These discussions are usually held in multidisciplinary tumor board meetings in which radiologists play a pivotal role by providing critical information such as the location and extent of disease. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy is optional and is safe in cases in which the patient's clinical status allows it. The preferred method in the setting of PMRT is autologous reconstruction. If this is not possible, then a two-step implant-based reconstruction is recommended. Radiation therapy does involve a risk of toxicity. Complications can be seen in acute and chronic settings and range from fluid collections and fractures to radiation-induced sarcomas. Radiologists have a key role in detecting these and other clinically relevant findings and should be prepared to recognize, interpret, and address them. © RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Multidisciplinary approach to cancer care in Rwanda: the role of tumour board meetings.

Cancer treatment is complex and necessitates a multidisciplinary approach. Tumour Board Meetings (TBMs) provide a multidisciplinary platform for health care providers to communicate about treatment plans for patients. TBMs improve patient care, treatment outcomes and, ultimately, patient satisfaction by facilitating information exchange and regular communication among all parties involved in a patient's treatment. This study describes the current status of case conference meetings in Rwanda including their structure, process and outcomes. The study included four hospitals providing cancer care in Rwanda. Data gathered included patients' diagnosis, number of attendance and pre-TBM treatment plan, as well as changes made during TBMs, including diagnostic and management plan changes. From 128 meetings that took place at the time of the study, Rwanda Military Hospital hosted 45 (35%) meetings, King Faisal Hospital had 32 (25%), Butare University Teaching Hospital (CHUB) had 32 (25%) and Kigali University Teaching Hospital (CHUK) had 19 (15%). In all hospitals, General Surgery 69 (29%) was the leading speciality in presenting cases. The top three most presented disease site were head and neck 58 (24%), gastrointestinal 28 (16%) and cervix 28 (12%). Most (85% (202/239)) presented cases sought inputs from TBMs on management plan. On average, two oncologists, two general surgeons, one pathologist and one radiologist attended each meeting. TBMs in Rwanda are increasingly getting recognised by clinicians. To influence the quality of cancer care provided to Rwandans, it is crucial to build on this enthusiasm and enhance TBMs conduct and efficiency.

Data-driven support to decision-making in molecular tumour boards for lymphoma: A design science approach.

The increasing amount of molecular data and knowledge about genomic alterations from next-generation sequencing processes together allow for a greater understanding of individual patients, thereby advancing precision medicine. Molecular tumour boards feature multidisciplinary teams of clinical experts who meet to discuss complex individual cancer cases. Preparing the meetings is a manual and time-consuming process. To design a clinical decision support system to improve the multimodal data interpretation in molecular tumour board meetings for lymphoma patients at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. We investigated user needs and system requirements, explored the employment of artificial intelligence, and evaluated the proposed design with primary stakeholders. Design science methodology was used to form and evaluate the proposed artefact. Requirements elicitation was done through a scoping review followed by five semi-structured interviews. We used UML Use Case diagrams to model user interaction and UML Activity diagrams to inform the proposed flow of control in the system. Additionally, we modelled the current and future workflow for MTB meetings and its proposed machine learning pipeline. Interactive sessions with end-users validated the initial requirements based on a fictive patient scenario which helped further refine the system. The analysis showed that an interactive secure Web-based information system supporting the preparation of the meeting, multidisciplinary discussions, and clinical decision-making could address the identified requirements. Integrating artificial intelligence via continual learning and multimodal data fusion were identified as crucial elements that could provide accurate diagnosis and treatment recommendations. Our work is of methodological importance in that using artificial intelligence for molecular tumour boards is novel. We provide a consolidated proof-of-concept system that could support the end-to-end clinical decision-making process and positively and immediately impact patients. Augmenting a digital decision support system for molecular tumour boards with retrospective patient material is promising. This generates realistic and constructive material for human learning, and also digital data for continual learning by data-driven artificial intelligence approaches. The latter makes the future system adaptable to human bias, improving adequacy and decision quality over time and over tasks, while building and maintaining a digital log.

Blinatumomab As Toxicity Sparing First Line Treatment of Children and Young Persons with B-Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (B-ALL)

Introduction Recent studies have demonstrated that Blinatumomab is more effective and less toxic than intensive chemotherapy in children and young persons (CYP) with relapsed B-ALL. Although Blinatumomab is standard of care in adults with persistent MRD during first line therapy based on the BLAST study, there is no published evidence in CYP of its efficacy and toxicity in this setting. We report our experience of Blinatumomab as a toxicity sparing alternative to chemotherapy in first line treatment of CYP with B-ALL. Patients and Methods We audited the outcome of patients treated according to a consensus UK guideline for first line treatment with Blinatumomab of CYP patients with B-ALL who were considered unfit for post-remission intensive chemotherapy or CR1 HSCT because of toxicity to previous chemotherapy or significant co-morbidities. Treating clinicians obtained consent for treatment with Blinatumomab as standard of care after counselling patients and carers about the risk and benefits of this approach. The guideline mandated discussion of all such patients at national tumour board meetings and data was captured through a referral proforma and follow-up questionnaire. It recommended replacing consolidation and/or interim maintenance phases with 2 cycles of blinatumomab as a single agent with a 1-2 week break between cycles. Patients who obtained an MRD response (defined as MRD <0.01%) received delayed intensification (DI) followed by maintenance, or maintenance therapy alone if they were unfit for DI. Patients who had persistent MRD >0.01% were categorised as Blinatumomab failures and received either further chemotherapy, HSCT or CART depending on performance status. Events were defined as death, relapse, or secondary cancer. Results Sixty patients were eligible for analysis, including 4 cases of Ph+ ALL and 8 with Down syndrome. Compared to the B-ALL cohort in a previous trial, UKALL 2003, there was a higher proportion of NCI high risk, cytogenetic high risk, end of induction MRD positive and Down Syndrome patients (Table 1). All patients were in morphological complete remission prior to receiving Blinatumomab. Blinatumomab was administered for toxicity (47/60 (78%), including G3/4 pancreatitis, typhlitis, severe infections often requiring intensive care or surgery, disseminated fungal infections, CNS haemorrhage or liver failure) or co-morbidities (Down syndrome, Li-Fraumeni syndrome (n=2), Schimke immune-osseous dysplasia and 7q11.21-23 duplication) or in one case to minimise transfusion requirements (Jehovah's witness.) In the remaining 13 cases, blinatumomab was either administered for end of consolidation MRD of ≥0.05% (n=10) in patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy/HSCT, or positive end of induction MRD in patients with HR cytogenetics (n=3). Blinatumomab replaced consolidation and interim maintenance therapy in 32/60 (53%) cases, and interim maintenance in the remaining 28/60 (47%) cases. Blinatumomab was well tolerated with 1 G3 neurotoxicity (seizure in a Down syndrome patient who had not received prophylactic anti-convulsants) and no grade 2-4 CRS. Of the 50/60 patients with positive MRD pre-Blinatumomab (median = 0.1%, range = 0.01%-8%), 48 (96%) had a reduction in level to <0.01% (45 after cycle 1, 3 after cycle 2), and 10 patients maintained MRD negativity before and after 2 cycles of Blinatumomab. In the two patients who did not respond (3%), 1 received CART followed by transplant for persistent MRD, the other is receiving intensive chemotherapy. Of the responders, 47 (80%) received DI and maintenance and 10 maintenance alone. With a median follow up of 16 months (range 2-44 months), 2 patients have relapsed (1 at 2 years, the other at 9 months) but remain alive. The 4 patients with Ph+ ALL and the 8 with Down syndrome are alive and in remission, with a median follow up of 12.5 months (range 7-22 months). Conclusion In this large case series, we found Blinatumomab is safe and highly active with promising short-term efficacy in a higher risk cohort of CYP patients with B-ALL in first remission. Our results support its use in place of intensive chemotherapy for patients with relative chemo-intolerance. Furthermore, if the efficacy is sustained on longer follow-up, the results argue for replacing parts of post-remission intensive chemotherapy with Blinatumomab to reduce attendant morbidity and mortality. SS and AV are joint senior authors, AH and AM joint first authorsFigure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal

Tumor talk: A descriptive study of communication about tumor board meetings.

Tumor board meetings are behind-the-scenes settings where communication about health and strategizing about healthcare delivery take place. Despite their wide use in hospitals and cancer centers, there is a dearth of information about the communication practices in this context. Drawing upon six weeks of observations, this study investigated communication during tumor board meetings at a tertiary cancer center in the Southeastern United States. Findings revealed differences in communication among cancer specialties, with one tumor board consistently talking about the medical and non-medical elements of patient cases, while other specialties focused primarily on plans for treatment with little discussion about quality of life, economic, or caregiver support issues. The manuscript includes suggestions for modifying tumor conferences and opportunities for future research.

Real-world practice patterns in multidisciplinary squamous cell carcinoma care at community oncology centers.

261 Background: As the incidence of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) continues to rise and newer systemic therapies become available, coordination of care between dermatologists and oncologists will be vital to provide quality, patient-centered care. Methods: Between 8/17/2020 and 11/30/2020, we surveyed dermatology team members (n = 50) and oncology team members (n = 54) at 5 community oncology practices to assess current practices, challenges/barriers, and areas for improvement in multidisciplinary care of cSCC. Providers then participated in audit/feedback educational sessions and developed action plans to address identified gaps. Results: A majority of providers (72%) reported “very low” or “low” levels of care coordination between oncology and dermatology teams (5-point Likert scale). The three main barriers identified by dermatology/oncology teams included lack of relationship to other specialties (36%/47%), lack of multidisciplinary tumor board (30%/36%), and difficulty with patient navigation to follow-up and monitoring (44%/29%). In addition, lack of administrative support (30%/47%), lack of time (54%/42%), and high case load (32%/16%) hindered multidisciplinary tumor board meetings. Overall, dermatology teams reported lower confidence in making treatment decisions for patients with advanced cSCC compared to oncology teams. Specific strategies were identified to bridge these gaps and improve cSCC care including improving electronic communication, coordinating treatment plans with multidisciplinary teams, integrating educational seminars between oncologists and dermatologists, and finding better multimodality therapeutic options. Conclusions: These findings reveal important challenges in multidisciplinary care of cSCC in community oncology clinics. The identified gaps may inform future implementation science initiatives, and represent key opportunities for improvement in cSCC patient care.[Table: see text]

The painting of a patient: Provider representations of patient fitness and preferences in multi-disciplinary tumor board meetings.

246 Background: Pancreatic cancer treatment can involve multiple treatment modalities (e.g. chemotherapy, surgery, radiation) that vary greatly in intensity and timing. The most intense treatments are associated with substantial toxicity and only recommended for medically ‘fit’ patients regardless of age. Despite evidence-based guidelines demonstrating the benefit of including the geriatric assessment (GA) and patient preferences, these may not be formally included in multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) where treatment decisions are often made. Methods: This qualitative study evaluated MDTB meetings at a single institution between November 2021 and February 2022 for inclusion of fitness and patient preferences. Discussions of patients with stage I-IV pancreatic cancer were identified for inclusion. These recordings were transcribed and analyzed using NVivo for recurring themes and exemplary quotes regarding how providers characterize patients’ fitness and present their preferences to the board. Results: Thirteen MDTB meetings including 50 individuals with stage I-IV pancreatic cancer were included. Descriptions of patient fitness largely consisted of the presentation of common demographic traits such as age and gender. Additional context, primarily focused on occupation, comorbidities, and patient attitudes, was provided when demographic information did not align with perceived fitness level; for example “He’s 60 years old. He’s actually very strong. He used to, or he does, work in landscaping”. There was no formal inclusion of GA data. Explicit references to patient preferences or agentive decision-making only occurred in 19 cases; 11 referring to the patient’s (non-)interest in clinical trials, 3 denying additional testing (tone suggesting non-compliance), and 7 specifically referring to treatment type preference (e.g. surgery vs. chemotherapy). Conclusions: At present, MDTB treatment discussions primarily rely on shared understandings of the cultural significance and meaning of various demographic traits and rarely reference patient-reported preferences or fitness when determining the best pathway for patient care. Further work is needed to understand how to better formally incorporate fitness and preferences into decision-making.

Individualized Approach in the Surgical Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results from a Greek Multicentre Study.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer and the third leading cause of death worldwide. The management of HCC is complex, with surgical treatment providing long-term survival in eligible patients. This study aims to present the experience of aggressive surgical management of HCC in Greece. Methods: This is a retrospective multicentre clinical study with 242 patients. Results: Most patients were male (79%) and had a median age of 71 yrs. According to the most recent BCLC criteria, 172 patients (71.1%) were classified as BCLC 0-A stage, 33 patients (13.6%) were classified as BCLC B, and 37 (15.3%) were classified as BCLC C. A total of 54% of the patients underwent major hepatectomy. Major postoperative morbidity was 15.6%, and the 90-day postoperative mortality rate was 4.5%. The median follow-up was 33.5 months. Three- and five-year overall survival was 65% and 48%, respectively. The median overall survival was 55 months. Significantly, five-year survival was 55% for BCLC A, and 34% and 21% for BCLC B and C, respectively. In univariate analysis, cirrhosis, type of resection (R status), and BCLC stage were associated with overall survival. Multivariate analysis indicated that R1 and R2 resections compared to R0, and BCLC C compared to BCLC 0-A, were independently associated with increased mortality. Conclusions: Aggressive surgical treatment of HCC offers satisfactory long-term survival prospects. A significant percentage (29%) of HCCs that underwent liver resection were of the intermediate and advanced BCLC stage. The management of patients with HCC should be discussed in multidisciplinary tumour board meetings on a case-by-case basis to be more effective.

Virtual Tumor Board Increases Provider Attendance and Case Presentations.

Many cancer centers engage in multidisciplinary tumor board meetings to determine the optimal approach to complex cancer care. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many institutions changed the format of these meetings from in-person to virtual. The aim of this study was to determine if the change to a virtual meeting format had an impact on attendance and cases presented. Tumor board records were analyzed to obtain attendance and case presentation information at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Twelve-month in-person tumor board data were compared with 12-month virtual tumor board data to assess for difference in attendance and case presentation patterns. Seven separate weekly tumor board meetings at the beginning of the study (breast, GI, gynecology, liver, lung, melanoma, and urology) were expanded to nine meetings on the virtual platform (+endocrine and pancreas). Overall attendance increased by 46% on the virtual platform compared with in-person meetings (4,030 virtual attendances v 2,753 in-person, P < .001). Increased attendance was present across all specialties on the virtual platform. In addition, the number of patient cases discussed increased from 2,127 in in-person meeting to 2,656 on the virtual platform (a 20% increase, P < .001). A significant increase was observed in overall tumor board attendance and in case presentations per meeting, requiring the expansion of additional weekly meetings. Furthermore, in a major cancer center with multiple community affiliates, virtual tumor boards may encourage increased participation from remote sites with the benefit of obtaining expert specialist advice as compared with geographically challenging in-person meetings.

IMPACT OF COMPREHENSIVE GENOMIC PROFILING NGS PANELS IN PRECISION ONCOLOGY: THE CITY OF HOPE CMDL EXPERIENCE

The City of Hope (COH) Comprehensive Cancer Center provides a multidisciplinary, collaborative environment where basic, clinical, and translational research intersect and is recognized as one of the leaders in cancer treatment. The COH Clinical Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory (CMDL) has been a pioneer in molecular diagnostics with over twenty years of clinical experience in both somatic and germline molecular testing. The CMDL has been offering multiple next generation sequencing (NGS)-based comprehensive genomic profiling panels, HopeSeq Panels, for many years to guide clinicians in diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic strategies in cancer treatment by providing expanded coverage for the clinical trials and the gene targets which are recommended and cited by the professional organizations including the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Leukemia Net (ELN), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). Being a designated laboratory for the NCI-ComboMATCH study by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), these comprehensive genomic profiling panels have strengthened COH’s leading position in cancer research and treatment and have further expanded its position as a leading provider of Precision Oncology. The comprehensive genomic profiles of each patient are reviewed in daily multidisciplinary genomic tumor board meetings by an expert team which includes molecular pathologists, clinical molecular geneticists, hematopathologists and clinicians prior to reporting to ensure the variants are appropriately classified based on AMP/ACMG guidelines in the context of the patient’s cancer.&nbsp;

Percutaneous cryoablation for desmoid fibromatosis: initial experience at a UK centre

To report the first UK experience of cryoablation in desmoid fibromatosis (DF) with particular focus on technique, safety, and efficacy. Patients were selected at multidisciplinary tumour board meetings at a specialist cancer hospital. Radiation dose, procedure duration, and number of cryoprobes were compared for small versus large tumours (>10 cm long axis). Response at magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was evaluated using different criteria, and percentage agreement with clinical response as assessed in oncology clinic calculated. Thirteen procedures were performed in 10 patients (eight women, median age 51 years, IQR 42-69 years) between February 2019 and August 2021. Procedures for large tumours had higher radiation dose (2,012±1,012 versus 1,076±519 mGy·cm, p=0.048) used more cryoprobes (13±7 versus 4±2, p=0.009), and were more likely to have residual unablated tumour (38±37% versus 7.5±10%, p=0.045). Adverse events were minor apart from one transient radial nerve palsy. Eight of 10 patients had symptomatic benefit at clinical follow-up (median 353 days, IQR 86-796 days), and three started systemic therapy mean 393 days later. All patients who had complete ablation demonstrated symptomatic response, with no instances of repeat treatment, recurrence, or need for systemic therapy during the study period. All progression occurred outside ablation zones. Cryoablation for symptomatic DF is a reproducible technique with low, transient toxicity, where one or two treatments can achieve a meaningful response. Where possible, the ablation ice ball should fully cover DF tumours.

LINC-12. Encouraging early outcomes with image guided pencil beam proton therapy for cranio-spinal irradiation and unique considerations for paediatric population – First report from India

BACKGROUND: To report our experience with image guided pencil beam proton beam therapy (PBT) for craniospinal irradiation (CSI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2019 to Dec 2021, we carried out a detailed audit of the first forty patients treated with PBT. All patients were carefully selected after approval from our institutional multidisciplinary tumour and proton board meetings. Median age of the patient cohort was 8 years, and histologies include 20 medulloblastoma, 7 recurrent ependymoma, 3 pineoblastoma, 3 were germ cell tumors and remaining 7 constituted other diagnoses. Forty percent patients received concurrent chemotherapy. We had recorded acute toxicities on a prospectively maintained database. We also report early outcomes in this cohort and discuss limitations of current contouring guidelines during CSI PBT planning. RESULTS: Median CSI dose was 23.4 GyE (Gray Equivalent; range 21.6 - 35). Thirty-five patients (87.5%) completed their CSI without interruption as an outpatient procedure. Five patients required hospital admission during treatment, while one developed grade 3 mucosal toxicity, requiring plan adaptation and treatment break. No patient had grade 2 or more weight loss during the treatment. Forty-five percent (18) developed grade 1 hematological toxicities and 20% (8) developed grade 2 or 3 toxicities; none had grade 4 toxicities. At median follow up of 12 months, 90 % patients are alive of whom 88.9 % are having local control. Special consideration with modification in standard contouring used at our institute helped in limiting acute toxicities in paediatric CSI patients. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary experience with modern contemporary PBT using pencil beam technology and daily image guidance in a range of tumours suitable for CSI is encouraging. Patients tolerated the treatment well with acceptable acute toxicity and expected short-term survival outcome. In paediatric CSI patients, modification in standard contouring guidelines required to achieve better results with PBT

The Molecular Tumor Board Portal supports clinical decisions and automated reporting for precision oncology

There is a growing need for systems that efficiently support the work of medical teams at the precision-oncology point of care. Here, we present the implementation of the Molecular Tumor Board Portal (MTBP), an academic clinical decision support system developed under the umbrella of Cancer Core Europe that creates a unified legal, scientific and technological platform to share and harness next-generation sequencing data. Automating the interpretation and reporting of sequencing results decrease the need for time-consuming manual procedures that are prone to errors. The adoption of an expert-agreed process to systematically link tumor molecular profiles with clinical actions promotes consistent decision-making and structured data capture across the connected centers. The use of information-rich patient reports with interactive content facilitates collaborative discussion of complex cases during virtual molecular tumor board meetings. Overall, streamlined digital systems like the MTBP are crucial to better address the challenges brought by precision oncology and accelerate the use of emerging biomarkers.

Lessons learned and keys to success: Provider experiences during the implementation of virtual oncology tumor boards in the era of COVID-19.

Background and ObjectivesThe COVID‐19 pandemic required rapid adaptation of multidisciplinary tumor board conferences to a virtual setting; however, there are little data describing the benefits and challenges of using such a platform.MethodsAn anonymous quality improvement survey was sent to participants of tumor board meetings at a large academic institution. Participants answered questions pertaining to the relative strengths and weaknesses of in‐person and virtual settings.ResultsA total of 335 responses (23.3% response rate) were recorded, and 253 met inclusion criteria. Respondents represented 25 different tumor board meetings, with colorectal, breast, and liver (18.6%, 17.0%, and 13.0%, respectively) being the most commonly attended. Virtual tumor boards were equivalent to in‐person across 9 of 10 domains queried, while a virtual format was preferred for participation in off‐site tumor boards. The lack of networking opportunities was ranked by physicians to be a significant challenge of the virtual format. Consistent leadership and organization, engaged participation of all attendees, and upgrading technology infrastructure were considered critical for success of virtual meetings.ConclusionsThe implementation of virtual tumor board meetings has been associated with numerous challenges. However, improving several key aspects can improve participant satisfaction and ensure excellent patient care.