BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment is constantly evolving toward a more personalized approach based on clinical features, imaging, and genomic pathology information. To ensure the best care for patients, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) meet regularly to review cases. Notwithstanding, the conduction of MDT meetings is challenged by medical time restrictions, the unavailability of critical MDT members, and the additional administrative work required. These issues may result in members missing information during MDT meetings and postponed treatment. To explore and facilitate improved approaches for MDT meetings in France, using advanced breast cancers (ABCs) as a model, Centre Léon Bérard (CLB) and ROCHE Diagnostics cocreated an MDT application prototype based on structured data. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we want to describe how an application prototype was implemented for ABC MDT meetings at CLB to support clinical decisions. METHODS: Prior to the initiation of cocreation activities, an organizational audit of ABC MDT meetings identified the following four key phases for the MDT: the instigation, preparation, execution, and follow-up phases. For each phase, challenges and opportunities were identified that informed the new cocreation activities. The MDT application prototype became software that integrated structured data from medical files for the visualization of the neoplastic history of a patient. The digital solution was assessed via a before-and-after audit and a survey questionnaire that was administered to health care professionals involved in the MDT. RESULTS: The ABC MDT meeting audit was carried out during 3 MDT meetings, including 70 discussions of clinical cases before and 58 such discussions after the implementation of the MDT application prototype. We identified 33 pain points related to the preparation, execution, and follow-up phases. No issues were identified related to the instigation phase. Difficulties were grouped as follows: process challenges (n=18), technological limitations (n=9), and the lack of available resources (n=6). The preparation of MDT meetings was the phase in which the most issues (n=16) were seen. A repeat audit, which was undertaken after the implementation of the MDT application, demonstrated that (1) the discussion times per case remained comparable (2 min and 22 s vs 2 min and 14 s), (2) the capture of MDT decisions improved (all cases included a therapeutic proposal), (3) there was no postponement of treatment decisions, and (4) the mean confidence of medical oncologists in decision-making increased. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the MDT application prototype at CLB to support the ABC MDT seemed to improve the quality of and confidence in clinical decisions. The integration of an MDT application with the local electronic medical record and the utilization of structured data conforming to international terminologies could enable a national network of MDTs to support sustained improvements to patient care.