• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

多学科团队差异对肺癌预后分析和治疗公平性的影响。

Impact of multidisciplinary team discrepancies on comparative lung cancer outcome analyses and treatment equality.

机构信息

Department of Respiratory Diseases and Allergy, Aarhus University Hospital (AUH), Aarhus N, DK-8200, Denmark.

The Danish Lung Cancer Group, Odense University Hospital (OUH), Odense, DK-5000, Denmark.

出版信息

BMC Cancer. 2024 Nov 18;24(1):1423. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-13188-4.

DOI:10.1186/s12885-024-13188-4
PMID:39558297
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11575113/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the consistency of lung cancer case assessments across multidisciplinary team (MDT) sites in Denmark. The goal was to appraise the comparability of outcomes between hospitals in a real-world context.

METHODS

We prepared sixty comprehensive, fictitious lung cancer case stories, complete with images, and distributed them to the four primary lung cancer MDT conferences in Denmark. These cases were subsequently evaluated as had they been ordinary patients during regular MDT meetings. We compared the conclusions on assigned TNM stage and proposed treatment intent using Kappa statistics.

RESULTS

The consensus on assigned stage (Stages IA-B, IIA-B, IIIA-B, IV, and undetermined) corresponded to a Fleiss' Kappa-value of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.71). The overall assessment of curability, categorized as Curable, Incurable, and Undetermined, corresponded to a Kappa-value of 0.72 (CI: 0.61-0.84). However, for cases unanimously judged by all MDT sites to be Stage III, the concordance on treatment intent was poor, with an agreement coefficient of only 0.32 (95% CI: -0.27-0.97).

CONCLUSION

In detail, the level of agreement on assigned stages was less than desired. In consequence, comparative analyses of treatment results from different hospitals or centres may be prone to bias caused by systematic differences in stage assessment or intent of treatment. The least consensus was observed for cases in Stage III, indicating a need for quality improvement efforts to ensure a higher degree of consistency in MDT decisions.

摘要

介绍

本研究旨在评估丹麦多学科团队(MDT)站点间肺癌病例评估的一致性。目标是评估真实环境下医院间结果的可比性。

方法

我们准备了 60 个全面的、虚构的肺癌病例故事,附有图像,并分发给丹麦的四个主要肺癌 MDT 会议。这些病例随后在常规 MDT 会议期间作为普通患者进行评估。我们使用 Kappa 统计比较分配的 TNM 分期和建议的治疗意向的结论。

结果

在分配的阶段(IA-B、IIA-B、IIIA-B、IVA 和未确定)上的共识对应 Fleiss' Kappa 值为 0.62(95%CI:0.52-0.71)。可治愈性的总体评估,分为可治愈、不可治愈和未确定,对应 Kappa 值为 0.72(CI:0.61-0.84)。然而,对于所有 MDT 站点一致判断为 III 期的病例,治疗意向的一致性较差,仅为 0.32(95%CI:-0.27-0.97)。

结论

详细来说,分配阶段的一致性低于预期。因此,不同医院或中心的治疗结果的比较分析可能容易受到分期评估或治疗意向的系统差异引起的偏差的影响。对于 III 期病例的一致性最低,表明需要进行质量改进努力,以确保 MDT 决策有更高程度的一致性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0349/11575113/d6d7c81ef106/12885_2024_13188_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0349/11575113/d6d7c81ef106/12885_2024_13188_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0349/11575113/d6d7c81ef106/12885_2024_13188_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Impact of multidisciplinary team discrepancies on comparative lung cancer outcome analyses and treatment equality.多学科团队差异对肺癌预后分析和治疗公平性的影响。
BMC Cancer. 2024 Nov 18;24(1):1423. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-13188-4.
2
Variation Between Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Clinical Staging and Treatment Recommendations for Patients With Locally Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.多学科肿瘤委员会在局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者临床分期和治疗建议方面的差异。
Chest. 2020 Dec;158(6):2675-2687. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.07.054. Epub 2020 Jul 30.
3
Does presentation at multidisciplinary team meetings improve lung cancer survival? Findings from a consecutive cohort study.多学科团队会议展示是否能改善肺癌患者的生存率?一项连续队列研究的结果。
Lung Cancer. 2018 Oct;124:199-204. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.07.032. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
4
The impact of multidisciplinary team meetings on patient assessment, management and outcomes in oncology settings: A systematic review of the literature.多学科团队会议对肿瘤学环境中患者评估、管理和结局的影响:文献系统评价。
Cancer Treat Rev. 2016 Jan;42:56-72. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.11.007. Epub 2015 Nov 24.
5
Impact of the lung oncology multidisciplinary team meetings on the management of patients with cancer.肺癌多学科团队会议对癌症患者管理的影响。
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun;12(2):e298-304. doi: 10.1111/ajco.12192. Epub 2014 Mar 27.
6
Clinically decisive (dis)agreement in multidisciplinary team assessment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; a prospective, national, multicenter study.多学科团队评估食管鳞癌的临床决策(不一致);一项前瞻性、全国性、多中心研究。
Acta Oncol. 2021 Sep;60(9):1091-1099. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2021.1937308. Epub 2021 Jul 27.
7
Multidisciplinary team discussion results in survival benefit for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.多学科团队讨论使 III 期非小细胞肺癌患者获益。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 8;15(10):e0236503. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236503. eCollection 2020.
8
Consensus minimum data set for lung cancer multidisciplinary teams: Results of a Delphi process.肺癌多学科团队的共识最小数据集:德尔菲法的结果。
Respirology. 2018 Oct;23(10):927-934. doi: 10.1111/resp.13307. Epub 2018 Apr 11.
9
Do multidisciplinary team meetings make a difference in the management of lung cancer?多学科团队会议对肺癌的管理有影响吗?
Cancer. 2011 Nov 15;117(22):5112-20. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26149. Epub 2011 Apr 26.
10
Multi-disciplinary team meetings for lung cancer in Norway and Denmark: results from national surveys and observations with MDT-MODe.挪威和丹麦的肺癌多学科团队会议:来自全国性调查和 MDT-MODe 观察的结果。
Acta Oncol. 2024 Aug 11;63:678-684. doi: 10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40777.

引用本文的文献

1
Discrepancies in regional lung cancer multidisciplinary team decisions can be reduced through national consensus meetings.通过全国性共识会议可以减少区域肺癌多学科团队决策中的差异。
Acta Oncol. 2025 Jun 16;64:793-796. doi: 10.2340/1651-226X.2025.43314.

本文引用的文献

1
Multi-disciplinary team meetings for lung cancer in Norway and Denmark: results from national surveys and observations with MDT-MODe.挪威和丹麦的肺癌多学科团队会议:来自全国性调查和 MDT-MODe 观察的结果。
Acta Oncol. 2024 Aug 11;63:678-684. doi: 10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40777.
2
Assessment of inter-centre agreement across multidisciplinary team meetings for patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma.评估腹膜后肉瘤患者多学科团队会议的中心间一致性。
Br J Surg. 2023 Aug 11;110(9):1189-1196. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad157.
3
Clinically decisive (dis)agreement in multidisciplinary team assessment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; a prospective, national, multicenter study.
多学科团队评估食管鳞癌的临床决策(不一致);一项前瞻性、全国性、多中心研究。
Acta Oncol. 2021 Sep;60(9):1091-1099. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2021.1937308. Epub 2021 Jul 27.
4
A review on the impact of lung cancer multidisciplinary care on patient outcomes.肺癌多学科护理对患者预后影响的综述。
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Aug;9(4):1639-1653. doi: 10.21037/tlcr.2019.11.03.
5
Variation Between Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Clinical Staging and Treatment Recommendations for Patients With Locally Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.多学科肿瘤委员会在局部晚期非小细胞肺癌患者临床分期和治疗建议方面的差异。
Chest. 2020 Dec;158(6):2675-2687. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.07.054. Epub 2020 Jul 30.
6
Analysis of 105.000 patients with cancer: have they been discussed in oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings? A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands.分析 105000 例癌症患者:他们是否在肿瘤多学科团队会议中讨论过?荷兰全国范围内基于人群的研究。
Eur J Cancer. 2019 Nov;121:85-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.08.007. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
7
Multicentre study of multidisciplinary team assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability and treatment allocation.多中心研究:多学科团队对胰腺癌可切除性和治疗分配的评估。
Br J Surg. 2019 May;106(6):756-764. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11093. Epub 2019 Mar 4.
8
Does presentation at multidisciplinary team meetings improve lung cancer survival? Findings from a consecutive cohort study.多学科团队会议展示是否能改善肺癌患者的生存率?一项连续队列研究的结果。
Lung Cancer. 2018 Oct;124:199-204. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.07.032. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
9
Measuring inter-rater reliability for nominal data - which coefficients and confidence intervals are appropriate?测量名义数据的评分者间信度——哪些系数和置信区间是合适的?
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Aug 5;16:93. doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0200-9.
10
Thoracic multidisciplinary tumor board routinely impacts therapeutic plans in patients with lung and esophageal cancer: a prospective cohort study.胸科多学科肿瘤委员会常规影响肺癌和食管癌患者的治疗方案:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2015 May;99(5):1719-24. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.11.019. Epub 2015 Feb 10.