All cancer patients are discussed in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs).

Certain patients are referred tothe Central MDT based on specific national criteria. We wanted to see whether the Central MDT aided in the decision-makingprocess above that of the Local MDT alone.

All MDT forms (local and central) for 2007 were retrospectively reviewed.

A total of 217 patients were reviewed at the Local MDT. Of these 217 cases, 102 (47.0%) cases were referred tothe Central MDT and 15 of the 102 (14.7%) cases were awaiting investigations at the time of the Local MDT and were, therefore,excluded. For the prostate cancer cases (n = 67), the Central MDT did not change outright the Local MDT decision in anycase, but in 6 of 67 (9.0%), advised/excluded patients from clinical trials. For bladder cancer cases (n = 19), 4 of 19(21.0%) patients had their management changed by the Central MDT. The one kidney cancer case had its Local MDT decisionchanged by the Central MDT.

This audit suggests that the Central MDT plays a useful role in the decision-making process for bladder andkidney cancers, and helps determine eligibility for clinical trials in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Its value over the LocalMDT alone in the decision-making process for non-metastatic prostate cancer is questionable.

Written by:
Sooriakumaran P, Dick JA, Thompson AC, Morley R. Are you the author?

Reference:
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2009 Sep 25. Epub ahead of print.
doi:10.1308/003588409X12486167521190

PubMed Abstract
PMID:19785943

UroToday.com Prostate Cancer Section

Please log-in or register in order to submit comments.

Powered by AkoComment!