Virtual Clinical and Precision Medicine Tumor Boards: A Cloud-based Platform-mediated Implementation of Multidisciplinary Reviews among Oncology Centers in the Covid-19 Era. (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Livio Blasi ◽  
Roberto Bordonaro ◽  
Vincenzo Serretta ◽  
Dario Piazza ◽  
Alberto Firenze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Clinical Pathways ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Banking System ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

BACKGROUND Multidisciplinary tumor boards play a pivotal role in the patients -centered clinical management and in the decision-making process to provide best evidence -based, diagnostic and therapeutic care to cancer patients. Among the barriers to achieve an efficient multidisciplinary tumor board, lack of time and geographical distance play a major role. Therefore the elaboration of an efficient virtual multidisciplinary tumor board (VMTB) is a key-point to reach a successful oncology team and implement a network among health professionals and institutions. This need is stronger than ever in a Covid-19 pandemic scenario. OBJECTIVE This paper presents a research protocol for an observational study focused on exploring the structuring process and the implementation of a multi-institutional VMTB in Sicily. Other endpoints include analysis of cooperation between participants, adherence to guidelines, patients’ outcomes, and patients satisfaction METHODS This protocol encompasses a pragmatic, observational, multicenter, non-interventional, prospective trial. The study's programmed duration is five years, with a half-yearly analysis of the primary and secondary objectives' measurements. Oncology care health-professionals from various oncology subspecialties at oncology departments in multiple hospitals (academic and general hospitals as well as tertiary centers and community hospitals) are involved in a non-hierarchic fashion. VMTB employ an innovative, virtual, cloud-based platform to share anonymized medical data which are discussed via a videoconferencing system both satisfying security criteria and HIPAA compliance. RESULTS The protocol is part of a larger research project on communication and multidisciplinary collaboration in oncology units and departments spread in the Sicily region in Italy. Results of this study will particularly focus on the organization of VMTB involving oncology units present in different hospitals spread in the area and create a network to allow best patients care pathways and a hub and spoke relationship. Results will also include data concerning organization skills and pitfalls, barriers, efficiency, number and type con clinical cases, and customers’ satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS VMTB represents a unique opportunity to optimize patient’s management in a patient centered approach. An efficient virtualization and data banking system is potentially time-saving, a source for outcome data, and a detector of possible holes in the hull of clinical pathways. The observations and results from this VMTB study may hopefully useful to design nonclinical and organizational interventions that enhance multidisciplinary decision-making in oncology.

First Results of the Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Cancer Center Freiburg (CCCF) Tumor Board (TB) Multiple Myeloma (MM) Assessing TB-Questions, TB-Advice Adherence, TB-Satisfaction of Patients, Participants and Referring Physicians, Inclusion of Difficult-to-Treat-MM Pts in Clinical Trials (CT) and Patient Outcome

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2635-2635
Author(s):  
Ricarda Selder ◽  
Masa Pandurevic ◽  
Mandy-Deborah Möller ◽  
Johannes Waldschmidt ◽  
Milena Pantic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Clinical Pathways ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Stream Line ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Referring Physicians

Abstract Introduction: Tumor boards have become a crucial institution in oncology practice to provide paramount interdisciplinary cancer treatment, stream-line patient (pt) entries and to ensure treatment according to clinical pathways (CP). We initiated a weekly MM-TB at our institution in 6/2012. Participating experts are hematologist-oncologists, pathologists/cytogenetic specialists, orthopedists, radiotherapists, immunologists/rheumatologists and, if needed, nephrologists, cardiologists and others. Pt applications to be discussed are centrally organized through our CCCF, with the TB advice being centrally stored within our electronic pt information system. Recommended TB advice is made according to best current literature/knowledge and international CP. The development of mandatory CCCF-CP and transparency of decision making are key quality criteria. Methods: This first analysis focused on a) discussed TB questions, b) given recommendations, c) pt characteristics, d) pts’, referring- and participating-physicians' satisfaction with the TB, e) inclusion of these challenging-to-treat pts in clinical trials (CT) and f) PFS/OS of TB pts as compared to the literature (Kumar SK. Leukemia 2012). Grades of recommendations were assigned using the GRADE criteria (Engelhardt M. Haematologica 2014) and meticulously assessed, as well as whether TB recommendations were pursued. Pts’, referring- and participating-physicians' satisfaction with the TB was evaluated via standardized questionnaires, the aimed sample size being n=100 for consecutive pts and ~n=30 each for participating and referring physicians. Results: From 6/2012-5/2014, 483 pts have been discussed within 90 MM-TB sessions, substantially increasing these from 2011 to 2012, 2013 and 2014 by 12-fold. Of the entire MM cohort seen at our institution, 60% of these challenging-to-treat pts were discussed within the TB in 2012, increasing to 71% in 2013. We have currently assessed 200 TB-protocols for pt characteristics, clinical outcome and adherence to TB decisions. Of those, 2% were presented for explicit diagnosis-finding, 17% had newly diagnosed MM, 41% relapsed/refractory MM and 40% had attained stable disease or better with their last-line therapy and were discussed to resolve their ongoing treatment. Expectedly, most pts (89%) were discussed for their next-line treatment, 43% due to strains with comorbidities, symptom control, side effects, diagnosis finding and MM-staging, and 11% due to various other reasons (multiple entries possible). Mean treatment lines of pts discussed in the TB was 2 (range 0-10), deciding on their 3rd-line-treatment. Within the TB cohort, 70% were presented once, but 30% several times (mean 2, range 2-4). Of these multiple presentations, most pts had relapsed or refractory MM, this rate further increasing towards the 3rd and 4th TB-presentation. The adherence to TB-recommendations was excellent with 93% of decisions being pursued. Reasons for adapted approaches were practicable issues or disagreement of the pt, family or referring physician. Of currently 80/100 interviewed pts, 95% were entirely satisfied with their care, treating oncologists/MM-expert team and very supportively perceived the MM-TB. Of note, 94% considered their cancer care ideally achieved by the TB, 92% that their local physician profited greatly and 88% that their personal preferences were also accounted for. Of 30 interviewed participating physicians, 97% considered themselves well-educated and their time well-spent. Of currently 18 referring physicians, 73% were unconditionally satisfied with all TB-diagnostics and -therapies, with the university centers' cooperation and 65% acknowledged no information loss. Of 288 pts assessed for their CT suitability, 28% were suggested by the TB to be included, with 53% actually being able to enter therein. Thus, 15% of our MM-TB cohort could be included in a CT, which is considerable since these were challenging-to-treat pts who had received extensive prior therapies and showed several comorbidities. This also confirms current CT accrual rates for cancer pts of 5-15%, which can be increased with well-structured TB. Conclusions: Our preliminary results suggest that this MM-TB is a highly relevant exchange platform and allows physicians from different disciplines to intensely and rewardingly collaborate for state-of-the-art cancer care. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals The Radiologist’s Role in a Breast Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-381
Author(s):  
Steven J Rockoff ◽  
Meghan R Flanagan ◽  
Janice N Kim ◽  
Kalyan Banda ◽  
Kristine E Calhoun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Conservation ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Breast Conservation Therapy ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Partial Breast Irradiation ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

Abstract Breast multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) play an important role in determining treatment. This article serves as a guide for the radiologist participating in a breast MTB, as the information presented at MTB can significantly influence treatment plans and dictate future steps for further patient work-up. Multidisciplinary tumor board preparation involves a careful review of the patient’s history while gathering all relevant imaging studies, and reinterpreting them when appropriate. Presented images should be carefully selected, annotated, and displayed clearly before providing final recommendations for localization and incompletely assessed findings. Anatomic staging factors from the AJCC Breast Cancer Staging System, such as tumor size and degree of suspected skin involvement, should be described. In addition, there are many other types of information that the treatment specialists want to know. The surgeon is interested in anatomic information that will help them decide whether breast conservation therapy is feasible or if local structures, such as the nipple, can be spared. The radiation oncologist may need to know whether accelerated partial breast irradiation is feasible or if postmastectomy radiation therapy is indicated. The medical oncologist is looking for factors that may provide an indication for neoadjuvant therapy and ensuring there is a reliable follow-up method for evaluating the response to treatment, such as comparative MRI. Additionally, all specialists need to know the extent of suspected nodal involvement. By clearly and comprehensively presenting this information to the rest of the MTB team, the radiologist provides a vital contribution that guides treatment and ensures adherence to clinical guidelines.

Secret sauce in collaborative tumor boards: Team-based characteristics that optimize tumor board functionality.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23015-e23015
Author(s):  
Barbara Oureilidis-DeVivo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Interdisciplinary Teams ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Decision Making Processes

e23015 Background: Interdisciplinary teams are an indispensable characteristic of modern organizations, particularly in healthcare settings that require specialists to work together to solve multifaceted patient care problems. Multidisciplinary tumor boards (TBs) aim to coordinate multidisciplinary perspectives to help the oncology team devise the best treatment program for the patient. Yet, while this is their purpose, studies have found that TBs do not always achieve that goal effectively. Why are some tumor board (TB) teams more effective than others? This study shed light on key characteristics found among highly effective TBs. It provides a theoretical explanation of their organizational behaviors and structures and their effect on cancer treatment decision-making. The research is grounded in organizational behavior theories that have historical prominence in group decision-making, social hierarchy, and interdisciplinary collaboration, and are used to explain the phenomenon under investigation best. Methods: Qualitative research was used in the study. Data from 44 different TB observations and 18 interviews were gathered over four years at seven research hospitals in the United States and United Kingdom. The data were then coded, analyzed and synthesized with organizational behavior theory to explain the social phenomena under investigation. Results: The study revealed that certain TBs practice strong collaboration displaying high levels of partnership, cooperation, equality, and interdependency, which was incorporated explicitly into their meeting systems to achieve their common goal. Team-based characteristics such as members’ consistent shared preferences and identity, coordinated interactions, a collective learning process, and shared power and partnership are key markers found within these teams that positively influenced treatment decision-making processes and outcomes, earmarking best practices in TB groups. Conclusions: Organizational theory that suggests that for a collaborative process to be effective, team-based mechanisms need to be adopted in which each member respects, trusts, and acknowledges the skills and expertise of other disciplines in the organization, shares team values, decision-making processes, responsibilities, and planning, relies mutually upon other team members, and works outside normal professional boundaries openly and willingly. In an egalitarian structure like that of the TBs reviewed in this study, where preferences and identities are consistent and groups are collaborative, treatment decisions are less biased and incorporate multidisciplinary perspectives. Thus, this study suggests that by possessing both team- and task-based characteristics and practices, TBs engage in best practices, and thereby optimize their functionality.

scholarly journals Challenges and Experiences Extending the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics to a Molecular Tumor Board Platform

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niklas Reimer ◽  
Philipp Unberath ◽  
Hauke Busch ◽  
Melanie Börries ◽  
Patrick Metzger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Genomics ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Molecular Profile ◽  
Therapy Recommendations ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Research Platform ◽  
Molecular Tumor Board ◽  
Aid Decision

In Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs), therapy recommendations for cancer patients are discussed. To aid decision-making based on the patient’s molecular profile, the research platform cBioPortal was extended based on users’ requirements. Additionally, a comprehensive dockerized workflow was developed to support the deployment of cBioPortal and connected services. In this work, we present the challenges and experiences of nearly two years of implementing and deploying an MTB platform based on cBioPortal and compare those to findings of a previous study.

INNV-16. CNS-TAP TOOL RECOMMENDATIONS OF TARGETED ANTI-CANCER AGENTS COMPARED TO THOSE SELECTED BY A MULTIDISCIPLINARY TUMOR BOARD IN A MOLECULARLY-DRIVEN DIPG CLINICAL TRIAL (PNOC003)

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi108-vi108
Author(s):  
Holly Roberts ◽  
Karthik Ravi ◽  
Allison Schepers ◽  
Bernard Marini ◽  
Cassie Kline ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anticancer Agents ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Study Participant ◽  
Targeted Treatment ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Genomic Profiling ◽  
Genetic Sequencing ◽  
Tumor Boards ◽  
Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

Abstract Genetic sequencing of diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPG) has revealed genomic heterogeneity, sparking an interest in individualized and targeted treatment options for this particularly devastating disease. A feasibility study, PNOC003: Molecular Profiling for Individualized Treatment Plan for DIPG (NCT02274987), was completed within the Pacific Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Consortium. In this study, a multidisciplinary tumor board reviewed detailed molecular and genomic profiling of each participant’s tumor and made molecularly-targeted treatment recommendations. Separately, our team developed the Central Nervous System Targeted Agent Prediction (CNS-TAP) tool, which combines pre-clinical, clinical, and CNS penetration data with patient-specific genomic information to derive numeric scores for targeted anticancer agents, aimed to objectively evaluate these therapies for use in patients with CNS tumors. We hypothesized that highly-scored agents within CNS-TAP would overlap with the agents recommended by the tumor board in PNOC003. For each study participant, we used the genomic profiling report to identify actionable alterations and incorporated these data into CNS-TAP to identify the highest-scoring agents. We compared high-scoring agents within CNS-TAP with recommendations from the tumor board for each of the enrolled 28 participants. Overall, 93% of patients (26/28) had at least one agent recommended by both the tumor board and CNS-TAP. Additionally, 38% of all agents (36/95) recommended by the tumor board were also selected by CNS-TAP. We identified factors that likely contributed to the differences in therapy recommendations between these two methods: CNS-TAP requires additional clinician input to account for drug-drug interactions, includes only classically-defined anticancer agents, and cannot easily be updated in real-time as new data emerge. However, CNS-TAP provides an objective evaluation of targeted therapies, whereas tumor boards are inherently subjective. A prospective study incorporating both CNS-TAP and a molecular tumor board for targeted therapy selection in high-grade glioma is currently ongoing to further compare and objectively evaluate these methods.

An ethnographic study illuminating the effect of endogenous and exogenous uncertainty on tumor board decision making.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19156-e19156
Author(s):  
Barbara Oureilidis-DeVivo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Tumor Boards

e19156 Background: Hospital tumor boards (TBs) exist to help multidisciplinary specialists determine the best treatment plan for patients through multidisciplinary input and evidence-based treatment recommendations. However, decision-making processes and outcomes vary and may not consistently follow a linear, rational decision-making process or represent evidenced-based clinical guidelines. The ad hoc nature of multidisciplinary cancer teams can create limitations in interoperable functioning, especially in ambiguous environments. Methods: This qualitative ethnographic study explores levels of patient situational complexity under TB review within different structural dynamics in a group and describes how TBs cope with uncertainty when making treatment decisions. The study reports on original research and used ethnographic methods in 44 tumor boards at seven research hospitals in the United States and United Kingdom. Results: Results show TB decision-making process and outcomes are obstructed by the level of situational complexity in each patient’s case depending on the social dynamics of the group. Conclusions: Although multidisciplinary teams provide the benefit of variety in backgrounds and expertise, this structural diversity can also lead to limitations in the actual functioning of a group. By exploring the variations in this decision-making process, a deeper understanding can be reached of how oncology physicians make decisions about the clinical pathway for cancer patients and how this affects TB functionality.

A prospective blinded study of 1000 cases analyzing the role of artificial intelligence: Watson for oncology and change in decision making of a Multidisciplinary Tumor Board (MDT) from a tertiary care cancer center.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6533-6533 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.P. Somashekhar ◽  
Martín-J. Sepúlveda ◽  
Edward H Shortliffe ◽  
Rohit Kumar C ◽  
Amit Rauthan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cognitive Computing ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Phenotypic Data ◽  
Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

6533 Background: Artificial intelligence is being used to provide support for information-intensive decision making. In this report, we present our experience in explaining how artificial intelligence adds value to MDT’s decision making ability & paves way for personalized therapy. Methods: 1000 cases involving breast, lung, and colorectal cancer were evaluated by a multidisciplinary tumor board at a major cancer center in India between 2016 and 2018. After the tumor board decision was made, MDT was presented with the Watsons recommendations contemporaneously. MDT reviewed their decision after going through Watson’s recommendations and also the evidences that it put forth supporting its decision. Cases in which decision was changed, objective assessment was done by asking MDT to quote the reasons for reviewing and changing their decision. Results: Of 1000 cases, breast, lung, colon & rectal cancers were 620, 130,126 & 124 respectively. There were 712 non-metastatic & 288 metastatic cases. Mean age of the patients was 54.3 ± 12.2. Treatment concordance was observed in 92% for all cancers combined, 93% for rectal cancer, 92% for breast cancer, 89% for lung cancer, and 81% for colon cancer.MDT changed their decision in 136 cases (13.6%). The reasons for tumour board to change their decision was, Watson provided recent evidences for newer treatment in 55%, better personalized alternative in 30% & new insights from genotypic and phenotypic data and evolving clinical experiences in 15% of time. Conclusions: The study suggest that cognitive computing decision support system holds substantial promise to reduce the cognitive burden on oncologists by providing expert, updated, recent evidence-based insights for treatment-related decision-making. The 13.6 % incremental advantage over and above in a tertiary cancer centre with functioning MDT speaks in itself the value of having a learned colleague like Watson for oncology at our disposal. It will certainly add more value in settings lacking ready access to high quality cancer expertise and information. These systems can be valuable adjuncts to strong patient-clinician relationships in the delivery of high quality cancer care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document