Nicola Tamburini1, Pio Maniscalco1, Sara Mazzara1, Elisa Maietti2, Alessandra Santini3, Nunzio Calia4, Antonio Stefanelli5, Antonio Frassoldati3, Ivan Santi6, Rosa Rinaldi7, Fares Nigim8, Riccardo Righi9, Stefania Pedrazzi3, Giorgio Cavallesco1. 1. Department of Morfology, Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Section of General and Thoracic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 2. Center for Clinical Epidemiology of the School of Medicine, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. 3. Department of Clinical Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 4. Department of Respiratory Diseases, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 6. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Section of Nuclear Medicine, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 7. Department of Anatomic Pathology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy. 8. Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 9. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The management of patients affected by lung cancer requires the expertise of specialists from different disciplines. Although the advantages of multidisciplinary team discussions seem obvious, there are limited studies evaluating the influence of this approach on postoperative outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study is to examine the impact of a multidisciplinary approach on survival of patients undergoing surgery for NSCLC. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive patients who underwent surgery for NSCLC between January 2008 and December 2015. Data were compared between patients treated before the implementation of a multidisciplinary tumour board (MTB), between 2008 and 2012, and those who received treatment after the implementation of the MTB, between 2012 and 2015. Patients were matched one to one according to the discussion of the MTB and on the basis of a propensity score built using several patient characteristics. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to compare patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were treated prior to the initiation of the MTB and 231 patients after the initiation of the MTB. Based on the propensity score, 2 well-matched groups of 170 patients were identified. Patients who were discussed at the MTB were noted to have better outcomes when compared with those who were not discussed at the MTB on different terms including complete staging evaluation, early tumour, node and metastasis (TNM) stages and 1-year survival rate. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a multidisciplinary thoracic malignancy conference increased the 1-year survival rate of patients who underwent a surgical resection for NSCLC.
OBJECTIVES: The management of patients affected by lung cancer requires the expertise of specialists from different disciplines. Although the advantages of multidisciplinary team discussions seem obvious, there are limited studies evaluating the influence of this approach on postoperative outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study is to examine the impact of a multidisciplinary approach on survival of patients undergoing surgery for NSCLC. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive patients who underwent surgery for NSCLC between January 2008 and December 2015. Data were compared between patients treated before the implementation of a multidisciplinary tumour board (MTB), between 2008 and 2012, and those who received treatment after the implementation of the MTB, between 2012 and 2015. Patients were matched one to one according to the discussion of the MTB and on the basis of a propensity score built using several patient characteristics. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to compare patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were treated prior to the initiation of the MTB and 231 patients after the initiation of the MTB. Based on the propensity score, 2 well-matched groups of 170 patients were identified. Patients who were discussed at the MTB were noted to have better outcomes when compared with those who were not discussed at the MTB on different terms including complete staging evaluation, early tumour, node and metastasis (TNM) stages and 1-year survival rate. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a multidisciplinary thoracic malignancy conference increased the 1-year survival rate of patients who underwent a surgical resection for NSCLC.
Authors: Francesca Bravi; Eugenio Di Ruscio; Antonio Frassoldati; Giorgio Narciso Cavallesco; Giorgia Valpiani; Anna Ferrozzi; Ulrich Wienand; Tiziano Carradori Journal: Int J Integr Care Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 5.120
Authors: Marius Freytag; Ulrich Herrlinger; Stefan Hauser; Franz G Bauernfeind; Maria A Gonzalez-Carmona; Jennifer Landsberg; Jens Buermann; Hartmut Vatter; Tobias Holderried; Thorsten Send; Martin Schumacher; Arne Koscielny; Georg Feldmann; Mario Heine; Dirk Skowasch; Niklas Schäfer; Benjamin Funke; Michael Neumann; Ingo G H Schmidt-Wolf Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 4.430