Analysis of 105.000 patients with cancer: have they been discussed in oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings? A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands

Eur J Cancer. 2019 Nov:121:85-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.007. Epub 2019 Sep 26.

Abstract

Introduction: For optimal oncological care, it is recommended to discuss every patient with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM). This is a time consuming and expensive practice, leading to a growing demand to change the current workflow. We aimed to investigate the number of patients discussed in MDTMs and to identify characteristics associated with not being discussed.

Methods: Data of patients with a newly diagnosed solid malignant tumour in 2015 and 2016 were analysed through the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). We clustered tumour types in groups that were frequently discussed within a tumour-specific MDTM. Tumour types without information about MDTMs in the NCR were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to analyse factors associated with not being discussed.

Results: Out of 105.305 patients with cancer, 91% were discussed in a MDTM, varying from 74% to 99% between the different tumour groups. Significantly less frequently discussed were patients aged ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.6-0.7), patients diagnosed with disease stage I (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.5-0.6), IV (OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.4-0.4) or unknown (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.2-0.2) and patients who received no treatment (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.3-0.3). Patients who received a multidisciplinary treatment were more likely to be discussed in contrary to a monodisciplinary treatment (OR = 4.6, 95% CI = 4.2-5.1).

Conclusion: In general, most patients with cancer were actually discussed in a MDTM, although differences were observed between tumour groups. Factors associated with not being discussed may, at least partially, reflect the absence of a multidisciplinary question. These results form a starting point for debate on a more durable and efficient new MDTM strategy.

Keywords: Guideline adherence; Interdisciplinary communication; Multidisciplinary care; Neoplasms/epidemiology; Patient care team/ organisation and administration; Process assessment (health care); Quality of health care.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Interdisciplinary Communication*
  • Male
  • Medical Oncology / methods
  • Medical Oncology / organization & administration
  • Medical Oncology / standards
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasm Staging
  • Neoplasms / epidemiology*
  • Neoplasms / pathology
  • Neoplasms / therapy*
  • Netherlands / epidemiology
  • Patient Care Planning / organization & administration*
  • Patient Care Planning / standards
  • Patient Care Planning / statistics & numerical data
  • Patient Care Team / organization & administration*
  • Patient Care Team / standards
  • Patient Care Team / statistics & numerical data
  • Patient-Centered Care / organization & administration
  • Patient-Centered Care / standards
  • Practice Patterns, Physicians' / organization & administration
  • Practice Patterns, Physicians' / standards
  • Practice Patterns, Physicians' / statistics & numerical data*