Literature DB >> 11283921

The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience.

J H Chang1, E Vines, H Bertsch, D L Fraker, B J Czerniecki, E F Rosato, T Lawton, E F Conant, S G Orel, L Schuchter, K R Fox, N Zieber, J H Glick, L J Solin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of breast carcinoma have led to a multidisciplinary approach to management for patients with breast carcinoma. To assess the effect of this approach, the authors performed an evaluation for a cohort of patients examined in a multidisciplinary breast cancer center.
METHODS: An analysis was performed for the records of 75 consecutive women with 77 breast lesions examined in consultation in a multidisciplinary breast cancer center between January and June 1998. Each patient's case was evaluated by a panel consisting of a medical oncologist, surgical oncologist, radiation oncologist, pathologist, diagnostic radiologist, and, when indicated, plastic surgeon. A comprehensive history and physical examination was performed, and the relevant mammograms, pathology slides, and medical records were reviewed. Treatment recommendations made before this evaluation were compared with the consensus recommendations made by the panel.
RESULTS: For the 75 patients, the multidisciplinary panel disagreed with the treatment recommendations from the outside physicians in 32 cases (43%), and agreed in 41 cases (55%). Two patients (3%) had no treatment recommendation before consultation. For the 32 patients with a disagreement, the treatment recommendations were breast-conservation treatment instead of mastectomy (n = 13; 41%) or reexcision (n = 2; 6%); further workup instead of immediate definitive treatment (n = 10; 31%); treatment based on major change in diagnosis on pathology review (n = 3; 9%); addition of postmastectomy radiation treatment (n = 3; 9%); or addition of hormonal therapy (n = 1; 3%).
CONCLUSIONS: The multidisciplinary breast cancer evaluation program provided an integrated program in which individual patients were evaluated by a team of physicians and led to a change in treatment recommendation for 43% (32 of 75) of the patients examined. This multidisciplinary program provided important second opinions for many patients with breast carcinoma. Copyright 2001 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11283921     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010401)91:7<1231::aid-cncr1123>3.0.co;2-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  68 in total

Review 1.  Multidisciplinary breast cancer teams and proposed standards.

Authors:  Sertaç Ata Güler; N Zafer Cantürk
Journal:  Ulus Cerrahi Derg       Date:  2014-10-20

2.  Multidisciplinary management of cancer patients: chasing a shadow or real value? An overview of the literature.

Authors:  J M Croke; S El-Sayed
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Multidisciplinary care in the oncology setting: historical perspective and data from lung and gynecology multidisciplinary clinics.

Authors:  Laura Elise Horvath; Edgardo Yordan; Deepak Malhotra; Ileana Leyva; Katy Bortel; Denise Schalk; Patricia Mellinger; Marianne Huml; Christy Kesslering; Jeffrey Huml
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Tumor boards: beyond the patient care conference.

Authors:  Abdul Rahman Jazieh
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.037

5.  The proliferation of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs): how can radiology departments continue to support them all?

Authors:  Ravivarma Balasubramaniam; Manil Subesinghe; Jonathan T Smith
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Racial/ethnic disparities in knowledge about risks and benefits of breast cancer treatment: does it matter where you go?

Authors:  Sarah T Hawley; Angela Fagerlin; Nancy K Janz; Steven J Katz
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  Inter-institutional pathology consultations for breast cancer: impact on clinical oncology therapy recommendations.

Authors:  J A Price; E Grunfeld; P J Barnes; D E Rheaume; D Rayson
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.677

8.  Pathology re-review as an essential component of breast cancer management.

Authors:  C G Kleer
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.677

9.  Cancer diagnostic assessment programs: standards for the organization of care in Ontario.

Authors:  M Brouwers; T K Oliver; J Crawford; P Ellison; W K Evans; A Gagliardi; J Lacourciere; D Lo; V Mai; S McNair; T Minuk; L Rabeneck; C Rand; J Ross; J Smylie; J Srigley; H Stern; M Trudeau
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.677

10.  Effects and feasibility of a multi-disciplinary orientation program for newly registered cancer patients: design of a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Raymond Chan; Joan Webster; Linda Bennett
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.