Literature DB >> 17396087

Place of multidisciplinary consulting meetings and clinical trials in the management of colorectal cancer in France in 2000.

Anne-Marie Bouvier1, Eric Bauvin, Arlette Danzon, Pascale Grosclaude, Patricia Delafosse, Antoine Buémi, Brigitte Trétarre, Nicole Raverdy, Nabil Maarouf, Michel Velten, Guy Launoy, Jean Faivre.   

Abstract

AIM: The 1998 consensus conference dealing with colon cancer, and the 2003 Cancer Plan underlined the need for multidisciplinary meetings and for including patients in therapeutic trials. The aim of this study, which pooled data from the French Cancer Registries operating within the Francim network, was to report on diagnostic and therapeutic practices in the general French population before implementation of the Cancer Plan.
METHODS: The study population was composed of 2935 patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed in 2000 in twelve French administrative districts accounting for 15% of the geographical area of France. Data were collected using a standardized procedure. Three categories of place of diagnosis were defined: public university hospitals, public non-university hospitals, and private clinics.
RESULTS: Overall, multidisciplinary meeting was conducted for 32.2% of patients with colorectal cancer. This proportion varied from 6.4% to 76.9%, depending on the geographical area (P<0.001). The place of diagnosis affected this practice: 52% in public university hospitals, 31% in public non-university hospitals and 29% in private clinics (P<0.001). In multivariate analysis, age (OR(>75 years): 0.71, P<0.001), site (OR(rectum): 1.80, P<0.001) and health care facilities (OR(public non-university vs public university): 0.36, P<0.001, OR(private vs public university): 0.40, P<0.001) affected the use of multidisciplinary meeting. Overall, 4.3% of patients were included in a therapeutic trial. This concerned 6.2% of patients aged under 75 and 1.0% of those aged over 75 (P<0.001). The proportion of inclusions, taking into account the trials proposed in 2000 and 2001, varied from 0.7% to 16.4% according to geographical area (P<0.001). This proportion was 10.3% if there had been multidisciplinary meeting and 5.1% if not (P<0.001). Neither cancer site, gender, nor healthcare facility responsible for diagnosis influenced trial inclusion.
CONCLUSION: This population-based study underlines geographical variations in the management of colorectal cancer in France. In 2000, multidisciplinary meeting was conducted for an insufficient proportion of patients, and an insufficient number of patients were included in therapeutic trials. Repeating the same survey in 2005 will provide information on the effects of the Cancer Plan and the diffusion of these recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17396087     DOI: 10.1016/s0399-8320(07)89375-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin Biol        ISSN: 0399-8320


  12 in total

1.  Implementation of a regional virtual tumor board: a prospective study evaluating feasibility and provider acceptance.

Authors:  Christy L Marshall; Nancy J Petersen; Aanand D Naik; Nancy Vander Velde; Avo Artinyan; Daniel Albo; David H Berger; Daniel A Anaya
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 3.536

2.  Do multidisciplinary meetings follow guideline-based care?

Authors:  Shalini K Vinod; Mark A Sidhom; Geoff P Delaney
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  Establishment of a Regional Virtual Tumor Board Program to Improve the Process of Care for Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Aitua C Salami; Gala M Barden; Diana L Castillo; Mina Hanna; Nancy J Petersen; Jessica A Davila; Aanand D Naik; Daniel A Anaya
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Proposal and Final Therapeutic Choice in Early Breast Cancer: Is There an Agreement?

Authors:  Lucia Bortot; Giada Targato; Claudia Noto; Marco Giavarra; Lorenza Palmero; Diego Zara; Elisa Bertoli; Arianna Dri; Claudia Andreetta; Gaetano Pascoletti; Elena Poletto; Stefania Russo; Luca Seriau; Mauro Mansutti; Carla Cedolini; Debora Basile; Gianpiero Fasola; Marta Bonotto; Alessandro Marco Minisini
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  Using computerised decision support to improve compliance of cancer multidisciplinary meetings with evidence-based guidance.

Authors:  Vivek Patkar; Dionisio Acosta; Tim Davidson; Alison Jones; John Fox; Mohammed Keshtgar
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery and care according to patient-, tumor-, and hospital-related factors.

Authors:  Simone Mathoulin-Pélissier; Yves Bécouarn; Geneviève Belleannée; Elodie Pinon; Anne Jaffré; Gaëlle Coureau; Dominique Auby; Jean-Louis Renaud-Salis; Eric Rullier
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: evidence, challenges, and the role of clinical decision support technology.

Authors:  Vivek Patkar; Dionisio Acosta; Tim Davidson; Alison Jones; John Fox; Mohammad Keshtgar
Journal:  Int J Breast Cancer       Date:  2011-07-17

8.  Overcoming obstacles to establish a multidisciplinary team approach to hepatobiliary diseases: a working model in a Caribbean setting.

Authors:  Shamir O Cawich; Peter B Johnson; Sundeep Shah; Patrick Roberts; Milton Arthurs; Trevor Murphy; Kimon O Bonadie; Ivor W Crandon; Hyacinth E Harding; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Neil W Pearce
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2014-05-28

9.  A study of the decision outcomes and financial costs of multidisciplinary team meetings (MDMs) in oncology.

Authors:  P B De Ieso; J I Coward; I Letsa; U Schick; M Nandhabalan; S Frentzas; M E Gore
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  What is the role of a specialist regional mesothelioma multidisciplinary team meeting? A service evaluation of one tertiary referral centre in the UK.

Authors:  Anna C Bibby; Katie Williams; Sarah Smith; Nidhi Bhatt; Nick A Maskell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.