The tumor board or multidisciplinary cancer meeting (MCM) is the foundation of high value multidisciplinary oncology care, coordinating teams of specialists. Little is known on how these meetings are implemented in Neuro-oncology. Benefits of MCMs include coordination, direction for complicated cases, education, and a forum for communication, emerging technology, and clinical trials. This study identifies participation and utilization of neuro-oncology MCMs. A cross-sectional descriptive survey was dispersed through an internet questionnaire. The Society of Neuro-Oncology and the American Brain Tumor Association provided a list of dedicated neuro-oncology centers. All National Cancer Institute designated centers, and participants in the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium or the Brain Tumor Trials Collaborative were included, identifying 85 centers. Discussion included primary brain tumors (100%), challenging cases (98%), recurrent disease (96%), neoplastic spine disease (93%), metastatic brain lesions (89%), pre-surgical cases (82%), pathology (76%), and paraneoplastic disease (40%). MCMs were composed of neuro-oncologists, neurosurgeons, and radiation oncologists (100%), radiologists (98%), pathologists (96%), and clinical trial participants (64%). Individual preparation ranged from 15 to 300 min. MCMs were valued for clinical decision making (94%), education (89%), and access to clinical trials (69%). 13% documented MCMs in the medical record. 38% of centers used a molecular tumor board; however, many commented with uncertainty as to how this is defined. Neuro-oncology MCMs at leading U.S. institutions demonstrate congruity of core disciplines, cases discussed, and perceived value. We identified variability in preparation time and implementation of MCM recommendations. There is high uncertainty as to the definition and application of a molecular tumor board.

The role of tumor board conferences in neuro-oncology: a nationwide provider survey

Background Lung cancer continues to be one of the most common cancers in Canada, with approximately 28,400 new cases diagnosed each year. Although timely care can contribute substantially to quality of life for patients, it remains unclear whether it also improves patient outcomes. In this work, we used a set of quality indicators that aim to describe the quality of care in lung cancer patients. We assessed adherence with existing guidelines for timeliness of lung cancer care and concordance with existing standards of treatment, and we examined the association between timeliness of care and lung cancer survival. Methods Patients with lung cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the Pulmonary Division Lung Cancer Registry at our centre. Results We demonstrated that the interdisciplinary pulmonary oncology service successfully treated most of its patients within the recommended wait times. However, there is still work to be done to decrease variation in wait time. Our results demonstrate a significant association between wait time and survival, supporting the need for clinicians to optimize the patient care trajectory. Interpretation It would be helpful for Canadian clinicians treating patients with lung cancer to have wait time guidelines for all treatment modalities, together with standard definitions for all time intervals. Any reductions in wait times should be balanced against the need for thorough investigation before initiating treatment. We believe that our unique model of care leads to an acceleration of diagnostic steps. Avoiding any delay associated with referral to a medical oncologist for treatment could be an acceptable strategy with respect to reducing wait time.

https://www.mdpi.com/1718-7729/24/5/3611/pdf

Lung cancer care trajectory at a Canadian centre: an evaluation of how wait times affect clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION Cutaneous spindle cell carcinoma describes a heterogenous group of tumors that share an atypical spindle cell morphology and infiltrative growth pattern. Examples include dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, desmoplastic melanoma, malignant fibrous histiocytoma, leiomyosarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, and spindle cell squamous cell carcinoma. Given their common histopathologic appearance with hematoxylin and eosin stain, immunohistochemistry is typically used to distinguish their cell of origin, although despite this, rare variants may obscure a clear diagnosis. We report a patient with a diagnostically challenging cutaneous spindle cell carcinoma, its treatment with Mohs micrographic surgery, and subsequent aggressive clinical course.

A diagnostically challenging spindle cell carcinoma of the neck: Treatment with Mohs micrographic surgery and clinical course.

OBJECTIVE. Second-opinion review of breast imaging studies can be a time-consuming and labor-intensive process. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether reinterpretation of studies obtained at institutions outside a cancer center influences clinical management, specifically by revealing additional cancer and preventing unnecessary biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A review was conducted of breast imaging studies of 200 patients who underwent ultrasound and MRI at community facilities and had the images submitted for second opinions at a cancer center between January and April 2014. Each case was evaluated for concordance between the original report and the second-opinion interpretation. Second-opinion review resulting in the recommendation and performance of new biopsies was further subdivided into benign, high-risk, and malignant categories based on the histopathologic results obtained at the cancer center. RESULTS. Second-opinion review of the 200 cases showed a change in interpretation i...

Second-Opinion Review of Breast Imaging at a Cancer Center: Is It Worthwhile?

Background: Tumor board conferences (TBCs) are used by oncologic specialists to review patient cases, exchange knowledge, and discuss options for cancer management. These multidisciplinary meetings are often a cornerstone of treatment at leading cancer centers and are required for accreditation by certain groups, such as the American College of Surgeons' Commission on Cancer. Little is known regarding skin cancer TBCs. The objective of this study was to characterize the structure, function, and impact of existing skin cancer TBCs in the United States. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was administered to physician leaders of skin cancer TBCs at NCI-designated Comprehensive and Clinical Cancer Centers. Results: Of the 59 centers successfully contacted, 14 (24%) reported not having a conference where skin cancer cases were discussed, and 45 (76%) identified 53 physician leaders. A total of 38 physicians (72%) completed the survey. Half of the meeting leaders were medical and/or surgical oncologists, and dermatologists led one-third of meetings. TBCs had a moderate to significant impact on patient care according to 97% of respondents. All respondents indicated that the meetings enhanced communication among physicians and provided an opportunity for involved specialists and professionals to discuss cases. The most frequently cited barrier to organizing TBCs was determining a common available date and time for attendees (62%). The most common suggestion for improvement was to increase attendance, specialists, and/or motivation. Conclusions: Results showed overall consistency in meeting structure but variability in function, which may be a reflection of institutional resources and investment in the conference. Future directions include defining metrics to evaluate changes in diagnosis or management plan after tumor board discussion, attendance, clinical trial enrollment, and cost analysis. Results of this survey may aid other institutions striving to develop and refine skin cancer TBCs.

/pdf/tumor-board-conferences-for-multidisciplinary-skin-cancer-15it8i0ajx.pdf

Tumor Board Conferences for Multidisciplinary Skin Cancer Management: A Survey of US Cancer Centers.

BACKGROUND Recent advances in diagnostic and therapeutic modalities have made oncologic care ever more challenging, and multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) are increasingly being used as a forum to discuss and coordinate care for complex oncology patients. Literature on the use of MTBs specific to cutaneous oncology and dermatologic surgery remains limited. OBJECTIVE To share our experiences with cutaneous oncology MTBs at the University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC). METHODS We describe the formation, timing, participation, clinical discussion, case follow-up, and coordination of care of our MTBs. RESULTS A log of all cases discussed at cutaneous oncology MTBs from August 2018 to August 2019 is presented as an example. Five specific cases are described in further detail to demonstrate critical components of multidisciplinary care. CONCLUSION The MTBs at UVMMC has created a collaborative environment for providers in multiple specialties to jointly formulate and coordinate optimal treatment plans for difficult cases, particularly when treatment guidelines do not exist or are insufficient. Furthermore, MTBs can serve as an educational forum for all participants.

Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Dermatologic Surgery.

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

We encountered an error while loading the panel. Please try refreshing the page.

Something went wrong

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

Anyone with the link can view this chat. You can switch it back to private anytime.

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Chris Anker

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards in Dermatologic Surgery.