Tumor Conference Research Articles

P14.64 PriCoTTF Trial: A phase I/II trial of TTFields prior and concomitant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Abstract BACKGROUND TTFields therapy is applied at 200 kHz by arrays that are placed at the patients’ scalp. In the phase 3 EF-14 trial, survival rates were significantly improved when adding tumor-treating fields (TTFields) to adjuvant temozolomide-based chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM). In preclinical studies, the combination of TTFields and radiotherapy synergistically impaired proliferation and growth of glioblastoma cells. Here, we present the PriCoTTF trial, which is enrolling nGBM patients and will assess the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to radiochemotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS Following surgery and complete wound-healing, TTFields therapy is initiated in adult nGBM patients. TTFields therapy continues throughout radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for a total of approximately 9 months. During radiotherapy, the arrays - through which TTFields is delivered - remain on the patients’ scalp. Totally, thirty-three patients are planned to be enrolled in two treatment arms. In arm A, 20 patients receive normo-fractionated radiotherapy, whereas in the elderly arm, arm B, 13 patients receive hypo-fractionated radiotherapy. Concomitant and adjuvant chemotherapy follow institutional standards and interdisciplinary tumor conference recommendations. RESULTS The primary endpoint of this trial is safety and tolerance that will be gauged by a set of pre-specified treatment-limiting toxicities. Secondary endpoints include the frequency of adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The trial is currently enrolling patients at four sites in Germany. At the time of abstract submission, 9 patients enrolled in Arm B. Patient recruitment for arm A has been completed with 20 patients enrolled. We will present initial practical experiences as well as preliminary safety and tolerance data. CONCLUSION There is a biological rationale for combining TTFields and radiotherapy to further improve survival of GBM patients. In the presented phase I/II trial, the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to RT in nGBM will be assessed. In addition, initial efficacy data (phase II) may serve as a rationale for a putative randomized phase III trial.

Is patient participation in multidisciplinary tumour conferences associated with their information needs? A multicentre prospective observational study

ObjectivesTo determine the association between participation of patients with breast cancer and patients with gynaecological cancer in their own multidisciplinary tumour conference (MTC) and their information needs with regard to...

Malignant Diseases in the Elderly

A majority of patients with newly diagnosed malignant disease are 70 years old or older. Frailty - i. e. increased vulnerability towards stressors at older age - is a major challenge during the oncological work-up and treatment in the elderly. Therefore, older cancer patients should receive a systematic assessment of frailty by use of standard tools. Assessment results should be carefully considered during oncological treatment decisions, e. g. in interdisciplinary tumor conferences. Moreover, they are prerequisite to initiate geriatric co-management for which there is emerging new evidence. Advances in tumor surgery and irradiation as well as personalized precision medicine with novel targeted drugs have facilitated the treatment of cancer even in old age and frailty. However, patients with such characteristics are at increased risk of complications compared to younger subjects. Physicians and medical staff involved in treatment must therefore co-operate well. This article provides an overview of the current evidence and highlights key aspects of diagnosis and treatment of malignant diseases in the elderly.

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences: How is it implemented? What is the patients' role? What are patients' experiences?

BackgroundPrior research has shown that around 5%–7% of patients in breast cancer centers in Germany participate in the discussion of their own case within a multidisciplinary tumor conference (MTC). The PINTU study is one of the first to research this practice. The objective is to describe (a) how patient participation in MTCs is implemented, (b) what is the role of patients, and (c) how patients experience MTCs.MethodsMTCs in six breast and gynecological cancer centers in North Rhine‐Westphalia, Germany, with and without patient participation, are studied prospectively by (non)participatory, structured observation. Breast and gynecological cancer patients completed surveys before, directly after, and 4 weeks after MTC participation. Data are analyzed descriptively.ResultsCase discussions of a sample of n = 317 patients (n = 95 with MTC participation and n = 222 without) were observed. Survey data were obtained from n = 242 patients (n = 87 and n = 155). Observational data showed heterogeneity in the ways MTC participation was practiced. Among participating patients, 89% had the opportunity to express their opinion and 61% were involved in decision‐making. Whereas most patients reported positive experiences and would recommend participation, some had negative experiences and regretted participating.ConclusionsDue to a lack of recommendations, hospitals implement patient participation in MTCs in many different ways. So far, it is unknown which setting and procedures of MTC participation are beneficial for patients. However, existing evidence on communication in cancer care together with this exploratory study's findings can build the basis for developing recommendations for hospitals that invite their patients to MTCs.Clinical trial registration numberGerman Clinical Trials Register Nr. DRKS00012552.

Molecular tumor boards- insights and perspectives

The rapid development of molecular technologies and targeted therapies has fostered the implementation of specialized tumor conferences, known as molecular tumor boards (MTBs). MTBs become particularly important when treatment recommendations are needed based on molecular alterations beyond the approved targeted therapies. While an MTB's goals are based on individualized diagnostics and therapies of tumor patients using innovative technologies and biomarkers, the procedures of MTBs are still quite heterogeneous. This applies to the primary inclusion criteria for tumor patients, the composition of MTBs, the applied diagnostic tests and their assessment and reporting, the evaluation of their clinical value and implementation in atherapeutic strategy, and the associated quality assurance measurements as well as knowledge-gaining, economical, legal, and ethical aspects.This article provides an overview of the spectrum of MTBs, their challenges, and the potential for individualized cancer medicine.

Effects of therapy modifications during the last decade on the outcome of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

During the last decade, numerous therapeutic regimes were assessed to improve the outcome of patients with esophageal carcinoma. We analyzed the impact of therapy alterations, including the establishment of a standardized clinical pathway and the introduction of an interdisciplinary tumor conference on the outcome of patients undergoing esophagectomy because of esophageal cancer. Three hundred one patients were included (204 adenocarcinoma and 97 squamous cell carcinoma) who underwent an esophagectomy between 2006 and 2015. Patients were divided into 3 groups: interval A (2006-2008), interval B (2009-2011) and interval C (2012-2015) and evaluated separately focusing on therapy management and patients' outcome. Over the time periods, the incidence of tumor entity of adenocarcinoma increased from 61% to 76.2% (P=0.059). Patients with an initial tumor stage uT1 increased significantly from 4% to 15.9% over the intervals (P=0.002), while positive nodal involvement remained comparable (P=0.237). Patients in the later interval suffered from greater physical impairments preoperatively, represented by a significantly increased American Society Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P=0.023) and a reduced Karnofsky Index (P<0.001). The tumor conference was accompanied by an increasing implementation of neoadjuvant therapy (27.1% vs. 42.2%, P=0.097). After establishing the clinical pathway 30-day mortality decreased (P=0.67). Grad III anastomotic leakage decreased significantly from 6.5% to 2% (P=0.01). However, gastrointestinal (P=0.007), pulmonary complications (P<0.001) including pneumonia (P<0.001) increased. Over the past ten years both overall survival and relapse-free survival prolonged (P=0.056 and P=0.063, respectively). Patients' collective suffering from esophageal cancer has changed over the last decade. Continuous further developments of the therapy regimes are needed to meet the requirements of reducing perioperative mortality and extending survival time.

Is patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences associated with their fear of progression?

Previous studies found that some breast cancer patients in Germany are invited to participate in a multidisciplinary tumor conference (MTC) during the discussion of their own case. MTCs are regular meetings of a treatment team in which the diagnosis and treatment plan of cancer patients are discussed. Psychological consequences concerning the patients' participation in an MTC have not been examined yet. This study examines the association between patients' participation in MTC and patients' fear of progression (FoP). This analysis is part of a larger project named "Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences in Breast Cancer Care" (PINTU) which is a multicenter observational mixed-methods study. The study was conducted in six breast and gynecological cancer centers in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Data were collected from 2018 to 2020 by patient survey at three time points. Patients with (n=81) and without (n=120) MTC participation were compared. FoP was measured with a 12-item short form of the FoP Questionnaire (FoP-Q-SF) at all three measurement time points. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, a one-way repeated variance analysis (ANOVA), and a one-way repeated ANCOVA using the propensity score as a covariate. Data of n=201 patients were included in the analysis. In general, FoP scores decreased in both groups from T0 to T2 (F=36.539, p<0.001, η2 =0.155). Non-participating patients did not differ with regard to their FoP from patients who participated in an MTC before and after participation. The results of AN(C)OVA revealed no significant effects concerning the influence of patient participation in an MTC on FoP (F=0.014, p=0.907, η2 = <0.001 and (F=0.013, p=0.909, η2 = <0.001). Since the FoP is not influenced by participation, the findings do not support recommendations for or against patient participation in an MTC. Further research should focus on the question of which patient groups might benefit from participation in an MTC with regard to which outcome variables.

Impact of the Novel Coronavirus 2019 (COVID‐19) Pandemic on Head and Neck Cancer Care

ObjectiveThe study aimed to assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on head and neck oncologic care at a tertiary care facility.Study DesignThis was a cross-sectional study conducted between March 18, 2020, and May 20, 2020. The primary planned outcome was the rate of treatment modifications during the study period. Secondary outcome measures were tumor conference volume, operative volume, and outpatient patient procedure and clinic volumes.SettingThis single-center study was conducted at a tertiary care academic hospital in a large metropolitan area.MethodsThe study included a consecutive sample of adult subjects who were presented at a head and neck interdepartmental tumor conference during the study period. Patients were compared to historical controls based on review of operative data, outpatient procedures, and clinic volumes.ResultsIn total, 117 patients were presented during the review period in 2020, compared to 69 in 2019. There was an 8.4% treatment modification rate among cases presented at the tumor conference. There was a 61.3% (347 from 898) reduction in outpatient clinic visits and a 63.4% (84 from 230) reduction in procedural volume compared to the prior year. Similarly, the operative volume decreased by 27.0% (224 from 307) compared to the previous year.ConclusionRestrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in limited treatment modifications. Transition to virtual tumor board format observed an increase in case presentations. While there were reductions in operative volume, there was a larger proportion of surgical cases for malignancy, reflecting the prioritization of oncologic care during the pandemic.

The impact of COVID-19 on head and neck cancer diagnosis and disease extent.

BackgroundDue to COVID‐19, diagnostic delays and a surge of advanced head and neck cancer (HNC) is anticipated. We hereby evaluate patient and tumor characteristics before and during the early COVID‐19 period.MethodsRetrospective review of patients with HNC presented at a multidisciplinary tumor conference from May 14, 2020 to June 18, 2020 was performed and compared to a similar 6‐week period a year before. Demographics, time to diagnosis, and tumor characteristics were analyzed.ResultsThere was a 25% reduction in newly diagnosed malignancies. Groups were similar in baseline characteristics, duration of symptoms, and time to diagnosis. However, median primary tumor size was significantly larger (p = 0.042) and T stage more advanced for mucosal subsites (p = 0.025) in the COVID‐19 group.ConclusionOur findings suggest increased tumor burden in patients with HNC presenting during the pandemic, despite a similar time to diagnosis. This may become more pronounced as the pandemic duration is extended.

Evaluation of internal mammary lymph node biopsy during microsurgical breast reconstruction: An analysis of 230 consecutive patients.

Clinical significance of internal mammary (IM) lymph node biopsy during microvascular free flap breast reconstruction remains controversial. Some microsurgeons may choose to biopsy an IM lymph node during routine IM vessel dissection. The authors reviewed the results of IM lymph node biopsy during autologous breast reconstruction. A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction during a seven-year period (January 2010 to January 2017) was performed. Patient demographic data, disease staging, flap details, pathology reports, and adjuvant treatment were evaluated. A total of 230 patients with a mean age of 52.1 (SD 9.3) underwent IM lymph node biopsy (n=297). Single IM lymph node was removed in 169 patients, 2 nodes were removed in 56 patients, 3 nodes in 4 patients, and 4 nodes in a single patient. Histopathologic analysis demonstrated presence of IM lymph node metastasis in 16 patients (7.0%). Thirteen patients were found to have metastatic IM lymph nodes in the setting of immediate reconstruction. Three patients were found to have metastatic IM lymph nodes in the setting of delayed. Five out of 16 patients (31.3%) had negative axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy and IM lymph nodes were the only site of nodal metastases. All five of these patients were upstaged accordingly and received adjuvant therapy based on the discussion at the multidisciplinary breast tumor conference. Opportunistic internal mammary lymph node sampling during autologous breast reconstruction can be performed with minimal morbidity and has significant impact on the disease staging and adjuvant treatment.

CTNI-79. PRICOTTF TRIAL: A PHASE I/II TRIAL OF TTFIELDS PRIOR AND CONCOMITANT TO RADIOTHERAPY IN NEWLY DIAGNOSED GLIOBLASTOMA

Abstract OBJECTIVE Survival rates were significantly improved when adding TTFields to adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM) in the phase 3 EF-14 trial. TTFields therapy is applied at 200 kHz by arrays that are placed at the patients’ scalp. In preclinical studies, the combination of TTFields and radiotherapy demonstrated synergistically enhanced efficacy in GBM cells. Here, we present the PriCoTTF trial, which is currently enrolling nGBM patients and will assess the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to radiochemotherapy. METHODS After surgery and complete wound-healing, TTFields therapy will be initiated in newly diagnosed GBM patients. TTFields therapy will continue throughout radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for a total of approximately 9 months. Radiotherapy will be conducted through the arrays, by which TTFields therapy is delivered. Totally, thirty-three patients will be enrolled in two arms. In arm A, 20 adult patients will be enrolled to receive normo-fractionated radiotherapy and in arm B, 13 elderly patients will be treated by hypo-fractionated radiotherapy. The patients will receive chemotherapy according to institutional standard and interdisciplinary tumor conference. RESULTS Safety and tolerance based on the frequency of pre-specified treatment-limiting toxicities is defined as primary endpoint of the trial. Secondary endpoints include the frequency of adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The trial is currently enrolling patients at four sites in Germany. To date, 13 patients were included (May 2020). Initial practical experiences will be presented. CONCLUSION The combination of TTFields and radiotherapy is an encouraging approach to further improve survival of GBM patients. In the presented phase I/II trial, the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to RT in newly diagnosed GBM will be assessed. In addition, initial efficacy data (phase II) can serve as a rationale for a randomized phase III trial.

Patient Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences from the Providers' Perspective: Is It Feasible in Routine Cancer Care?

ObjectiveRecent studies from Germany show that a small amount of breast and gynecological cancer patients participate in multidisciplinary tumor conferences (MTCs) at some cancer centers. One reason for the variation by center might be the providers’ attitudes about and experiences with MTC patient participation (MTCpp), which has not been analyzed before. Therefore, it is the aim of this study to analyze the providers’ expected or experienced feasibility concerning MTCpp at breast and gynecological cancer centers in Germany.MethodsThis paper presents cross-sectional qualitative interview data from the PINTU study. From April to December 2018, n=30 health-care providers from n=6 breast and gynecological cancer centers in North-Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, were interviewed. One-half of the providers had no experience and the other half had experience with MTCpp. Inductive and deductive coding was performed in order to capture the feasibility aspects of participation.ResultsMTCpp seems not to be feasible in routine cancer care following providers’ expected barriers and negative experiences. However, MTCpp seems to be feasible for selected cancer patients following providers’ expected opportunities and positive experiences. Our results show that both provider groups report positive and negative experiences or expectations.ConclusionThe mixed findings regarding expected or experienced feasibility of MTCpp provide first insights into differences concerning MTCpp between organizations. Our results suggest that the providers’ perceptions (expectations and experiences) influence the possibility for patients to participate in an MTC in a cancer center.

Abstract PO-017: Evaluating the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on treatment paradigms in head and neck cancer at a tertiary care hospital

Abstract Objective: The study aimed to assess the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on head and neck oncologic care at a tertiary care hospital. The pandemic caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has led to policies designed to limit its spread. Policies including eliminating routine appointments, statewide stay-at-home orders, and restricting surgical cases to emergent surgeries have limited access to care. Therefore, we hypothesized that treatment modifications would be implemented for patients and cancer consultations would decrease compared to historical data. Methods: Information regarding treatment modifications was collected prospectively during interdepartmental tumor conferences from March 18, 2020 to May 20, 2020. Information regarding patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and incidence of new cancer consultations was collected via chart review. Treatment modifications were categorized as follows: Elimination of Systemic Therapy, Treatment Delay, Change to Non-Surgical Management, or Alteration in Adjuvant Therapy. Rationales for modification were similarly grouped as follows: Operating Room Limitations, Medical Co-Morbidities, COVID-19 positive, Patient concern, or System limitations. We determined the rate of treatment modifications and the frequencies of rationales and modification types. Demographic and tumor characteristics were compared between this population and a retrospectively collected cohort from 2019. Results: 117 patients were presented during the review period in 2020. There were 69 patients presented across the same time period in 2019. There were no differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. There was no difference between the tumor or nodal stages of the presented cases year over year. During the 2020 time period there were more total case presentations and new cancer cases compared to the 2019 time period. Of the 117 cases presented during the study period, there were 10/117 (8.4%) treatment modifications. The most common reason for modification was limited PPE supply. The most common modification was treatment delay. The second most common modification was change from primary surgical management to nonsurgical management. Treatment modifications occurred most commonly early in the review period and declined subsequently. Conclusions: Despite the ongoing pandemic and resulting state and institutional restrictions, there was no appreciable reduction in new cancer consultations for head and neck cancer. There were a small number of treatment modifications, particularly early in the course of our state and institutional response to the virus. However, over the 2-month period examined, patient care for these patients remained largely unaffected. While the restriction in elective surgical care was implemented across the state of Maryland, the oncologic triage and emergency surgery prioritization sustained the volume of oncologic practice. Citation Format: Joshua A. Thompson, Reju Joy, Joshua E. Lubek, Ranee Mehra, Jason K. Molitoris, Rodney J. Taylor, Jeffrey S. Wolf, Matthew E. Witek, Kyle M. Hatten. Evaluating the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on treatment paradigms in head and neck cancer at a tertiary care hospital [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2020 Jul 20-22. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(18_Suppl):Abstract nr PO-017.

Opportunities and limitations of shared decision making in multidisciplinary tumor conferences with patient participation – A qualitative interview study with providers

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine opportunities and limitations of shared decision making in multidisciplinary tumor conferences with patient participation from the providers’ perspective in breast and gynecological cancer centers. MethodsSemi-structured guideline-based expert interviews were conducted with providers from breast and gynecological cancer centers with and without patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences. Interviews were transcribed, anonymized and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. ResultsThe providers (n = 30) reported that some process steps of shared decision making can be implemented in limited form and under certain conditions in multidisciplinary tumor conferences with patient participation. Above all, patients can potentially ask questions and contribute individual additional information and their preferences. ConclusionThis study contributes first insights into the implementation of shared decision making in multidisciplinary tumor conferences with patient participation. From the providers’ perspective, the implementation of shared decision making seems difficult under the current circumstances. Further studies, using patient experiences, participative observations or interventional designs, are required. Practice ImplicationsDespite the limited implementation of shared decision making in tumor conferences, patient participation can be advantageous as it can allow patients to ask questions and contribute individual additional information as well as their preferences.

Usefulness of PET-CT scan in recurrent thyroid cancer.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the risk of recurrence in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer and emphasize the importance of risk-group stratification, early recurrence identification and application of new imaging modalities, what is the PET-CT. Moreover, follow-up of patients with thyroid carcinoma should be carried out by specialized teams throughout life. Therefore, interdisciplinary case discussions in tumor conferences may improve the use of multimodal therapy especially in patients with poorly differentiated thyroid carcinomas. After baseline follow-up, if there is a suspicion of thyroid carcinoma, early PET-CT should be used for early detection and appropriate planning. Fortunately, due to the good localization possibility, the PET-CT enables a focused surgical procedure with avoidance of an unnecessary tumor search and thereby a reduction of the risk of injury of neighboring structures which is a concern with reoperative neck surgery.

Abstract CT106: PriCoTTF trial: A phase I/II trial of TTFields prior and concomitant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Abstract Objective: The EF-14 trial demonstrated significantly improved survival rates when adding Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) to adjuvant chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). In GBM patients, TTFields therapy at 200 kHz is delivered by transducer arrays that are applied to the patients' scalp. In preclinical settings, the combined treatment with TTFields and radiotherapy demonstrated synergistically enhanced efficacy in GBM cells. The presented PriCoTTF trial is currently enrolling and will evaluate the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to combined radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed GBM. Methods: After complete wound-healing following surgery, TTFields therapy will be initiated in newly diagnosed GBM patients. TTFields therapy will continue throughout radiochemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for a total of 9 months. Radiotherapy will be applied through the transducer arrays that mediate TTFields therapy. In total, thirty-three patients will be enrolled in two arms. In arm A, 20 adult patients will be enrolled to receive normofractionated radiotherapy whereas in Arm B, 13 elderly patients will be treated by hypofractionated radiotherapy. Chemotherapy will be applied according to institutional standard and interdisciplinary tumor conference. Results: The primary endpoint of the trial is safety and tolerance based on the frequency of prespecified treatment-limiting toxicities. Secondary endpoints consist in particular of the frequency of adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The trial is currently enrolling patients at four centers in Germany with 12 patients included at the time of abstract submission (January 2020). First practical experiences will be presented at the annual AACR meeting. Conclusion: The combination of TTFields and radiotherapy is a promising approach to improve survival of GBM patients further. This phase I/II trial will evaluate the safety and efficacy of TTFields initiated prior and concomitant to RT in newly diagnosed GBM. Moreover, the first data obtained on efficacy (phase II) will serve as a basis for a randomized phase III trial. Citation Format: Sied Kebir, Lazaros Lazaridis, Teresa Schmidt, Christoph Oster, Daniela Pierscianek, Nika Guberina, Christoph Kleinschnitz, Martin Proescholdt, Peter Hau, Anca-Ligia Grosu, Ulrich Sure, Björn Scheffler, Martin Stuschke, Martin Glas. PriCoTTF trial: A phase I/II trial of TTFields prior and concomitant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT106.

Surgical therapy of oropharyngeal cancer-state of the art

Surgical therapy, regardless of the procedure, remains of great importance for today's treatment of oropharyngeal carcinomas, despite advances in radiation and immunotherapy. The individual treatment plan should be defined in discussion with the patient and in an interdisciplinary tumor conference, taking into account the likelihood of achieving of tumor-free resection margins and an acceptable postoperative quality of life. With regard to conventional and possibly also open surgical procedures, agood overview of the surgical site-particularly in the case of more extensive carcinomas and challenging patient anatomy-and simplified reconstructability of the defect region are decisive aspects. Endoscopically, microsurgically, or even robot-assisted minimally invasive procedures have the advantage of precise and gentle removal of tumor tissue with improved maintenance of function. Overall, selection of the appropriate surgical procedure remains an individual decision based on tumor size, the facilities at the tumor center, and the surgeon's experience. The extent of surgical intervention, also with regard to simultaneous neck dissection, depends on tumor stage. In the case of oropharyngeal carcinomas, there will be an increasing distinction between human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative and HPV-positive tumors in the future; however, the therapeutic strategy is currently identical. Upcoming clinical trials will show whether treatment de-escalation is appropriate depending on HPV infection status.

Analysis of Oncological Second Opinions in a Certified University Breast and Gynecological Cancer Center Regarding Consensus between the First and Second Opinion and Conformity with the Guidelines

Introduction: Oncological second opinions are becoming increasingly important in the era of complex treatments and established certified cancer centers. Oncological guidelines with the highest levels of evidence are available, but these can only be effective to the extent that they are implemented. Therefore, we analyzed the effects of second opinions with regard to their agreement with first opinions and conformity with guidelines. Methods: In 164 patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer or gynecological malignancy who requested a second opinion, the first and second opinions, established at the interdisciplinary tumor conference, and conformity with the guidelines were evaluated. Results: The first opinion was not in agreement with the guidelines in 34.8% (15.2% diagnosis, 12.8% surgical therapy, 13.4% systemic therapy, and 5.5% radiotherapy), and the recommendations were optimized in the second opinion in 56.7% (28.7% diagnosis, 15.9% surgical therapy, 30.5% systemic therapy, and 8.5% radiotherapy). Conclusions: Oncological second opinions showed significant effects and one-third of first opinions were not in conformity with the guidelines. In a significant proportion of cases, the existing treatment plan was changed or supplemented to allow modern and individualized treatment approaches.

Patient participation in multidisciplinary tumor conferences: Providers' perceptions of patients' need satisfaction and emotional experiences.

In some breast and gynecological cancer centers in Germany, patients participate in multidisciplinary tumor conferences (MTCs) during the discussion of their own case. The aim of this study was to explore providers' perceptions concerning patients' emotional experiences during participation in an MTC by comparing the perspectives of providers with and without experience with patient participation. In this study, semi-structured interviews with n = 30 providers in n = 6 breast and gynecological cancer centers in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, were conducted. One half of the providers had no experience and the other half had experience with patient participation in MTCs. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed, and content analysis was performed. The results of this study show a mixed picture of met, unmet and disappointed needs of patients and their emotional reactions, which mainly overlap between both provider groups. Our results show that both provider groups report positive and negative experiences or expectations. The mixed results regarding expected and perceived patient experiences from the providers' perspective suggest that patient participation in MTCs may not be exclusively of benefit. Further research on advantages and disadvantages for patients and on feasibility from the providers' perspective is necessary and will be conducted within the PINTU project.

Ethical surgical triage of patients with head and neck cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BackgroundCoronavirus has serially overtaken our metropolitan hospitals. At peak, patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome may outnumber mechanical ventilators. In our Miami Hospital System, COVID‐19 cases have multiplied for 4 weeks and elective surgery has been suspended.MethodsAn Otolaryngologic Triage Committee was created to appropriately allocate resources to patients. Hospital ethicists provided support. Our tumor conference screened patients for nonsurgical options. Patients were tested twice for coronavirus before performing urgent contaminated operations. N95 masks and protective equipment were conserved when possible. Patients with low‐grade cancers were advised to delay surgery, and other difficult decisions were made.ResultsHundreds of surgeries were canceled. Sixty‐five cases screened over 3 weeks are tabulated. Physicians and patients expressed discomfort regarding perceived deviations from standards, but risk of COVID‐19 exposure tempered these discussions.ConclusionsWe describe the use of actively managed surgical triage to fairly balance our patient's health with public health concerns.