Barwon South Western Regional Integrated Cancer Services, Barwon Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Barwon South Western Regional Integrated Cancer Services, Barwon Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia; School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Public Health. 2017 Aug;149:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.04.022. Epub 2017 May 31.
Comparison of outcomes for cancer patients discussed and not discussed at a multidisciplinary meeting (MDM).
Retrospective analysis of the association of MDM discussion with survival.
All newly diagnosed cancer patients from 2009 to 2012, presenting to a large regional cancer service in South West Victoria, Australia (620 colorectal, 657 breast, 593 lung and 511 haematological) were recorded and followed up to 5 years after diagnosis. Treatment patterns and survival of patients whose treatment was discussed at an MDM compared to those who were not, were explored.
The proportion of patients presented to an MDM within 60 days after diagnosis was 56% (n = 366) for breast cancer, 59% (n = 363) for colorectal cancer, 27% (n = 137) for haematological malignancies and 60% (n = 355) for lung cancer. Seventy-three percent (n = 886) of patients discussed at an MDM had their tumour stage recorded in their medical records while only 52% (n = 604) of patients not discussed had their tumour stage recorded (P < 0.01). We found for haematological and lung cancer patients that those presented to an MDM prior to treatment had a significant reduction in mortality (lung cancer hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.76, P < 0.01) (haematological cancer HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.96, P = 0.03) compared to patients whose cases were not discussed at an MDM after adjusting for the potential cofounders of age, stage, comorbidities and treatment. This was not the case for colorectal and breast cancer patients where there was no significant difference.
MDM discussion has been recommended as best practice in the management of cancer patients, however, from a public health perspective this creates potential issues around access and resources. It is likely that MDM presentation patterns and outcomes across tumour streams are linked in complex ways. We believe that our data would demonstrate that these patterns differ across tumour streams and that more detailed work is required to better allocate relatively scarce and potentially costly MDM resources to tumour streams and patient groups that may get the most benefit.
比较癌症患者在多学科会议(MDM)上讨论和未讨论的结果。
回顾性分析 MDM 讨论与生存的关联。
记录 2009 年至 2012 年期间在澳大利亚西南部一个大型区域癌症服务中心就诊的所有新诊断癌症患者(620 例结直肠癌、657 例乳腺癌、593 例肺癌和 511 例血液恶性肿瘤),并在诊断后随访 5 年。探讨在 MDM 上讨论治疗方案的患者与未讨论的患者的治疗模式和生存情况。
在诊断后 60 天内,有 56%(n=366)的乳腺癌患者、59%(n=363)的结直肠癌患者、27%(n=137)的血液恶性肿瘤患者和 60%(n=355)的肺癌患者在 MDM 上进行了讨论。在 MDM 上讨论的 73%(n=886)的患者的肿瘤分期记录在病历中,而未在 MDM 上讨论的患者中只有 52%(n=604)的患者记录了肿瘤分期(P<0.01)。我们发现,对于血液和肺癌患者,在 MDM 上进行治疗前讨论的患者死亡率显著降低(肺癌风险比[HR]0.62,95%置信区间[CI]0.50-0.76,P<0.01)(血液恶性肿瘤 HR 0.58,95%CI 0.35-0.96,P=0.03),与那些在 MDM 上讨论后没有讨论病例的患者相比,在调整年龄、分期、合并症和治疗等潜在混杂因素后。对于结直肠癌和乳腺癌患者,情况并非如此,两者之间没有显著差异。
MDM 讨论已被推荐为癌症患者管理的最佳实践,但从公共卫生的角度来看,这可能会带来获得和资源方面的问题。MDM 呈现模式和肿瘤类型的结果之间可能存在复杂的联系。我们相信,我们的数据将表明这些模式在肿瘤类型之间存在差异,需要更详细的工作来更好地将相对稀缺和潜在昂贵的 MDM 资源分配给可能受益最大的肿瘤类型和患者群体。