Justus Kreyer1, Andreas Ranft2, Beate Timmermann3, Heribert Juergens4, Susanne Jung5, Karsten Wiebe6, Tobias Boelling7, Andreas Schuck8, Volker Vieth9, Arne Streitbuerger10, Jendrik Hardes10, Melina Heinemann11, Uta Dirksen2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 2. Department of Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 3. Particle Therapy Clinic at West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 4. Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Muenster, Germany. 5. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany. 6. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany. 7. Department Osnabrueck, Center for Radiotherapy Rheine-Osnabrueck, Osnabrueck, Germany. 8. Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, Germany. 9. Department of Clinical Radiology, Klinikum Ibbenbüren, Ibbenbüren, Germany. 10. Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 11. Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Interdisciplinary Tumor Board (ITB) of the Cooperative Ewing Sarcoma Study (CESS) Group was investigated to assess its impact on the overall survival (OAS) of Ewing sarcoma (EwS) patients. The ITB functions as a reference center for the international institutions participating in the clinical trials of the CESS group, but is also available internationally to patients who have not been treated within an appropriate clinical trial. The value of tumor boards in terms of benefit for the patients and the health care system in general is not well documented and is also the subject of controversial discussions. A review of the representative literature is included. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 481 patients who had been registered into the European Ewing Tumor Working Initiative of National Groups (EURO E.W.I.N.G.-99) clinical trial via the CESS data center between 2006 and 2009; this included 331 patients with localized disease and another 150 individuals with metastases at diagnosis. Median follow-up time was 3.2 years. RESULTS: Improved OAS was observed for patients with metastases who had received recommendations from the ITB compared with those who had not received recommendations. In patients with localized disease, a recommendation from the ITB had no influence on OAS. CONCLUSION: As a reference center for a rare disease, recommendations from our ITB impacted local therapy and led to higher OAS in patients with metastatic disease. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis that examines the value of a reference tumor board on a rare disease.
BACKGROUND: The Interdisciplinary Tumor Board (ITB) of the Cooperative Ewing Sarcoma Study (CESS) Group was investigated to assess its impact on the overall survival (OAS) of Ewing sarcoma (EwS) patients. The ITB functions as a reference center for the international institutions participating in the clinical trials of the CESS group, but is also available internationally to patients who have not been treated within an appropriate clinical trial. The value of tumor boards in terms of benefit for the patients and the health care system in general is not well documented and is also the subject of controversial discussions. A review of the representative literature is included. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 481 patients who had been registered into the European Ewing Tumor Working Initiative of National Groups (EURO E.W.I.N.G.-99) clinical trial via the CESS data center between 2006 and 2009; this included 331 patients with localized disease and another 150 individuals with metastases at diagnosis. Median follow-up time was 3.2 years. RESULTS: Improved OAS was observed for patients with metastases who had received recommendations from the ITB compared with those who had not received recommendations. In patients with localized disease, a recommendation from the ITB had no influence on OAS. CONCLUSION: As a reference center for a rare disease, recommendations from our ITB impacted local therapy and led to higher OAS in patients with metastatic disease. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis that examines the value of a reference tumor board on a rare disease.
Authors: Martin Eichler; Dimosthenis Andreou; Henriette Golcher; Leopold Hentschel; Stephan Richter; Peter Hohenberger; Bernd Kasper; Daniel Pink; Jens Jakob; Hany Ashmawy; Simone Hettmer; Armin Tuchscherer; Matthias Grube; Vitali Heidt; Christina Jentsch; Jessica Pablik; Eva Wardelmann; Karl-Friedrich Kreitner; Ulrich Kneser; Carolin Tonus; Pauline Wimberger; Olaf Schoffer; Peter Reichardt; Markus Wartenberg; Maria Eberlein-Gonska; Martin Bornhäuser; Jochen Schmitt; Markus K Schuler Journal: Oncol Res Treat Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 2.825
Authors: Mohd Yusran Othman; Sally Blair; Shireen A Nah; Hany Ariffin; Chatchawin Assanasen; Shui Yen Soh; Anette S Jacobsen; Catherine Lam; Amos H P Loh Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2020-08
Authors: Monika Engelhardt; Gabriele Ihorst; Martin Schumacher; Michael Rassner; Laura Gengenbach; Mandy Möller; Khalid Shoumariyeh; Jakob Neubauer; Juliane Farthmann; Georg Herget; Ralph Wäsch Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.430