Policy statement on multidisciplinary cancer care

BackgroundCancer care is undergoing an important paradigm shift from a disease-focused management to a patient-centred approach, in which increasingly more attention is paid to psychosocial aspects, quality of life, patients’ rights and empowerment and survivorship. In this context, multidisciplinary teams emerge as a practical necessity for optimal coordination among health professionals and clear communication with patients. The European Partnership for Action Against Cancer (EPAAC), an initiative launched by the European Commission in 2009, addressed the multidisciplinary care from a policy perspective in order to define the core elements that all tumour-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) should include. To that effect, a working group conference was held in January 2013 within the EPAAC Work Package 7 (on Healthcare) framework.MethodsThe consensus group consisted of high-level representatives from the following European scientific societies, patient associations and stakeholders: European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European SocieTy for Radiology & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG), European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS), International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS),European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), EuropaColon, Europa Donna - The European Breast Cancer Coalition, Association of European Cancer Leagues (ECL), Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI), EUSOMA - European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists, European Hospital and Healthcare Federation (HOPE) and EPAAC Work Packages 5 (Health promotion and prevention), 7, 8 (Research), 9 (Information systems) and 10 (Cancer plans). A background document with a list of 26 core issues drawn from a systematic review of the literature was used to guide the discussion. Five areas related to MDTs were covered: care objectives, organisation, clinical assessment, patients’ rights and empowerment and policy support. Preliminary drafts of the document were widely circulated for consultation and amendments by the working group before final approval.ResultsThe working group unanimously formulated a Policy Statement on Multidisciplinary Cancer Care to define the core elements that should be implemented by all tumour-based MDTs. This document identifies MDTs as the core component in cancer care organisation and sets down the key elements to guide changes across all European health systems.ConclusionMDTs are an essential instrument of effective cancer care policy, and their continued development crucial to providing patients the care they need and deserve. While implementation must remain in local hands, European health systems can still benefit from having a basis for an effective multidisciplinary model of cooperation. This policy statement is intended to serve as a reference for policymakers and healthcare providers who wish to improve the services currently provided to the cancer patients whose lives and well-being depend on their action.     

Improving the quality of care for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: Program components,implementation barriers,and recommendations

The high lethality of ovarian cancer in the United States and associated complexities of the patient journey across the cancer care continuum warrant an assessment of current practices and barriers to quality care in the United States. The objectives of this study were to identify and assess key components in the provision of high-quality care delivery for patients with ovarian cancer, identify challenges in the implementation of best practices, and develop corresponding quality-related recommendations to guide multidisciplinary ovarian cancer programs and practices. This multiphase ovarian cancer quality-care initiative was guided by a multidisciplinary expert steering committee, including gynecologic oncologists, pathologists, a genetic counselor, a nurse navigator, social workers, and cancer center administrators. Key partnerships were also established. A collaborative approach was adopted to develop comprehensive recommendations by identifying ideal quality-of-care program components in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer management. The core program components included: care coordination and patient education, prevention and screening, diagnosis and initial management, treatment planning, disease surveillance, equity in care, and quality of life. Quality-directed recommendations were developed across 7 core program components, with a focus on ensuring high-quality ovarian cancer care delivery for patients through improved patient education and engagement by addressing unmet medical and supportive care needs. Implementation challenges were described, and key recommendations to overcome barriers were provided. The recommendations emerging from this initiative can serve as a comprehensive resource guide for multidisciplinary cancer practices, providers, and other stakeholders working to provide quality-directed cancer care for patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer and their families.     

Multidisciplinary training of cancer specialists in Europe

The best care for patients with cancer is most likely to be achieved when decisions about diagnosis, staging and treatment are made at multidisciplinary and multiprofessional meetings, preferably when all the professional expertise relevant to the patient's condition is gathered together. Questionnaires were sent to National Societies of Radiation Oncology and Medical Oncology concerning similarities and differences in training programs and multidisciplinary care in member states in Europe. Results indicated wide variation in training systems and practice. Data were lacking for Surgery because Surgical Oncology is not recognised as a speciality in the EU and most specialist training in cancer surgery is organ based. A period of time in cross-disciplinary training in each of the other two disciplines for all trainees in Medical Oncology, Radiation Oncology and Surgical Oncology (including all surgeons training in cancer surgery) is recommended. This is likely to improve the value of multidisciplinary meetings and may result in improved patient care. The Expert Group on Cancer Control of the European Commission has endorsed this recommendation.     

Palliative care needs in a District General Hospital: a survey of patients with cancer

Although sophisticated treatment of cancer requires the resources of specialist cancer treatment centres, most patients with cancer still undergo initial diagnostic investigation and treatment in district general hospitals (DGHs). The DGH frequently remains the principle site of referral for management of symptoms and terminal care. This survey was carried out at a DGH which has no palliative care services. It aimed to demonstrate the need for such services by collecting data on inpatients with cancer and interviewing members of the nursing staff. Of 63 patients studied, 76% were admitted as emergencies, 50% had newly diagnosed cancer and 27% died in hospital. The majority (85%) were cared for on general medical, surgical and care of the elderly wards. Assessment of patients' symptoms suggested thet 39 (62%) might have benefited from the services of a palliative care team. Interviews with nursing staff highlighted the need for improved communication between professionals, increased staff education and support, and highlighted the particular difficulties that exist in caring for patients with advanced cancer and their families on busy acute general hospital wards. Imaginative and flexible approaches to the design and delivery of palliative services are essential if patients with cancer in DGHs are to receive the highest standards of care at all stages of their illness.     

European Breast Cancer Conference manifesto on breast centres/units

Manifesto—CALL TO ACTION

• •The 2016 deadline for all patients in European Union countries to access specialist, multidisciplinary breast cancer units or centres, will be missed by most countries, despite numerous resolutions and declarations issued since the year 2000 that have called for universal specialist services. This means that many women, and some men, do not receive optimal breast cancer care in Europe.
• •We call on policymakers and politicians to ensure, as soon as possible, that all women and men with breast cancer in Europe are treated in a specialist breast unit.
• To do this, we ask that policymakers and politicians, together with healthcare professionals and patient advocates:
  • -Promote, in public and professional settings, the evidence that breast units staffed with specialist multidisciplinary teams deliver superior care and quality of life to women and men with breast cancer.
  • -Acknowledge the evidence that treatment in multidisciplinary units lead to overall cost savings as well as higher quality of care.
  • -Audit the current national provision of breast cancer care using accredited auditors.
  • -Implement mandatory reimbursement and care models that mean treatment can only be carried out in specialist breast units.
  • -Introduce a breast unit quality certification scheme that is accredited by an accreditation body.
  • -Join European-wide scientific societies and groups that promote the availability and quality of breast units, and together commit to providing access to such units for all patients.

     

Multidisciplinary care in cancer: do the current research outputs help?

CAREY M., SANSON‐FISHER R., LOTFI‐JAM K., SCHOFIELD P. & ARANDA S. (2010) European Journal of Cancer Care
Multidisciplinary care in cancer: do the current research outputs help? This review examined whether the increased attention on multidisciplinary care (MDC) in cancer over the last 10 years has been underpinned by an increase in methodologically vigorous intervention research in this field. Electronic search of Medline and CINAHL databases. This review examined whether the proportion of (1) data‐based and (2) intervention research meeting Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) criteria increased between two time periods (1997–2001 and 2002–2006). Papers meeting the following inclusion criteria were identified: relevant to MDC for cancer patients; included the term ‘multidisciplinary’ in the abstract; published in English; published between 1997 and 2006. The proportion of data‐based papers did not increase over time, nor did the proportion of intervention papers using EPOC‐accepted designs. Only three intervention studies using EPOC‐accepted designs were identified, all in the later time period. MDC is widely advocated in cancer care. This review indicates a pressing need to focus attention on the development of rigorous intervention research. Such research should answer important questions such as which models of MDC are most effective, for which outcomes and for which patients.     

‘Listening to Patients’: what is the value of age‐appropriate care to teenagers and young adults with cancer?

MARRIS S., MORGAN S. & STARK D. (2010) European Journal of Cancer Care 20 , 145–151 ‘Listening to Patients’: what is the value of age‐appropriate care to teenagers and young adults with cancer? Current healthcare policy increasingly recognises the importance of patient experience in determining care. The 2005 UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Improving Outcomes Guidance encompasses caring for young people with cancer in an age‐appropriate model of care developing regional principal treatment centres for this purpose. When published this was based upon limited outcomes evidence, and only a small amount of teenage and young adult patient and parent opinion. We have systematically reviewed the literature between 1996 and 2008, examining how far the experiences of this patient group support or refute the current policy. The recent literature describes with increasing consistency that teenage and young adult cancer patients have specific care needs, and gain benefits from an age‐appropriate environment of care, including peer group support, age‐appropriate information, recreational and vocational support, and staff expert in both the cancer and care of their age group. Many patients are prepared to travel to receive such care, if services are not in place to deliver excellent shared care between principal treatment centres and services nearer home. Some of these needs are unmet in non‐specialist units. There remains, however, a paucity of rigorous comparative studies quantifying the value of specialist cancer care for this patient group.     

Quality assurance in the treatment of colorectal cancer: the EURECCA initiative

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers in Europe. Over the past few decades, important advances have been made in screening, staging and treatment of colorectal cancer. However, considerable variation between and within European countries remains, which implies that further improvements are possible. The most important remaining question now is: when are we, health care professionals, delivering the best available care to patients with colon or rectal cancer? Currently, quality assurance is a major issue in colorectal cancer care and quality assurance awareness is developing in almost all disciplines involved in the treatment of colorectal cancer patients. Quality assurance has shown to be effective in clinical trials. For example, standardisation and quality control were introduced in the Dutch TME trial and led to marked improvements of local control and survival in rectal cancer patients. Besides, audit structures can also be very effective in monitoring cancer management and national audits showed to further improve outcome in colorectal cancer patients. To reduce the differences between European countries, an international, multidisciplinary, outcome-based quality improvement programme, European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA), has been initiated. In the near future, the EURECCA dataset will perform research on subgroups as elderly patients or patients with comorbidities, which are often excluded from trials. For optimal colorectal cancer care, quality assurance in guideline formation and in multidisciplinary team management is also of great importance. The aim of this review was to create greater awareness and to give an overview of quality assurance in the management of colorectal cancer.     

A review of a multiprofessional cancer course

The report of the Expert Advisory Group on Cancer (the Calman–Hine Report) ( Department of Health 1995 ) set out a clear framework of services for people with cancer in England and Wales. Subsequent developments, such as The NHS Cancer Plan ( Department of Health 2000a ), have built on this framework. What emerges clearly from these documents is the importance of a skilled and knowledgeable workforce in delivering high-quality cancer services. Although appropriate educational courses exist for some professional groups, such as nurses, cancer care has traditionally received scant attention in curricula for the allied health professionals (AHPs), either before or after qualification. This article describes the development and successful implementation of a course in cancer care aimed specifically at AHPs. Using Skilbeck's (1984 ) curriculum model as a framework, the development and design of the course, and aspects of its delivery, are examined. Evaluation of the first 2 years of the course reveals that it is popular and perceived as interesting and relevant to AHPs involved with patients with cancer in general and specialist settings.     

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: evolving role of the multidisciplinary team approach in management

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare tumors of the GI tract arising from mesenchymal cells. Treatment options include surgical resection and medical therapy with imatinib. A summary of National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European Society of Medical Oncology clinical practice guidelines relating to GIST management are presented here. A multidisciplinary team of physicians is essential to the successful treatment of GIST. Evidence supports multidisciplinary team management with a gastroenterologist, surgeon, medical oncologist, pathologist and radiologist. Consultations between them are recommended to ensure optimal care of patients with GIST. The role for individual core team workers is highlighted. The benefits of multidisciplinary disease management of patients include reducing recurrent disease, optimizing timing of surgery and organ preservation, prolonging survival for the patient and enhancing response to targeted therapies.     

Palliative care for patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers

Because most patients with pancreatic and biliary cancer have advanced disease, the palliation of debilitating symptoms is critically important in patient management. A multidisciplinary team consisting of representatives from surgery, medical oncology, gastroenterology, radiology, and palliative care medicine is essential for the optimal palliation of symptoms. In this article, the key issues in palliative care for patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer are discussed. In particular, the prevention and amelioration of suffering due to obstructive jaundice, gastric outlet obstruction, cancer-related pain, pancreatic enzyme insufficiency, and thromboembolic disease is addressed. To this end, an algorithm for the multidisciplinary management of these challenging patients is proposed with the goal of providing clinicians with a useful framework for providing palliative care for patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancer.     

Genetic testing in prostate cancer management: Considerations informing primary care

Inherited genetic mutations can significantly increase the risk for prostate cancer (PC), may be associated with aggressive disease and poorer outcomes, and can have hereditary cancer implications for men and their families. Germline genetic testing (hereditary cancer genetic testing) is now strongly recommended for patients with advanced/metastatic PC, particularly given the impact on targeted therapy selection or clinical trial options, with expanded National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and endorsement from multiple professional societies. Furthermore, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend genetic testing for men with PC across the stage and risk spectrum and for unaffected men at high risk for PC based on family history to identify hereditary cancer risk. Primary care is a critical field in which providers evaluate men at an elevated risk for PC, men living with PC, and PC survivors for whom germline testing may be indicated. Therefore, there is a critical need to engage and educate primary care providers regarding the role of genetic testing and the impact of results on PC screening, treatment, and cascade testing for family members of affected men. This review highlights key aspects of genetic testing in PC, the role of clinicians, with a focus on primary care, the importance of obtaining a comprehensive family history, current germline testing guidelines, and the impact on precision PC care. With emerging evidence and guidelines, clinical pathways are needed to facilitate integrated genetic education, testing, and counseling services in appropriately selected patients. There is also a need for providers to understand the field of genetic counseling and how best to collaborate to enhance multidisciplinary patient care.     

Survival Outcomes Among Lung Cancer Patients Treated Using a Multidisciplinary Team Approach

Background

Evidence favoring a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach in the treatment of lung cancer is scarce, especially in the United States. The purpose of the present investigation was to evaluate survival outcomes of lung cancer patients treated with an MDT compared with a traditional care model.

Increased health care utilization among long-term cancer survivors compared to the average Dutch population: a population-based study

In the present study, self-reported health care utilization of cancer survivors is compared with those of an age- and gender-matched normative population and predictors of health care utilization are identified. A population-based, cross-sectional survey among 1893 long-term survivors of endometrial and prostate cancer and malignant lymphomas (Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's) diagnosed between 1989 and 1998 was conducted using the cancer registry of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre South. Cancer survivors visited their general practitioner somewhat more often compared to the age and gender-matched general Dutch population but this effect was not always statistically significant. In addition, they visited their medical specialist significantly more often. Survivors only sporadically (0-3%) visited or required a dietician, sexologist, oncology nurse, pastor, creative therapy or recovery program. Contact with a psychologist, physiotherapist and other cancer survivors took place somewhat more often. Patients visited a medical specialist less often if they were diagnosed with endometrial cancer (OR = 0.2; 95% CI = 0.1-0.5), if they were diagnosed between 10-15 years ago (OR = 0.6; 95% CI = 0.1-0.5) and if they were not married or divorced (OR = 0.5; 95% CI = 0.3-0.9). Contact with a psychologist was related to having a university or college degree (OR = 3.6; 95% CI = 1.3-9.4). Cancer survivors visited their specialist more often compared to the normative population. Changes in health care, such as less administrative work for the specialist and more efficiency, are probably necessary in order to cope adequately with the increasing demand on the system.     

Multidisciplinary Approach to Breast Cancer： A New Outlook on Nursing Care

The treatment and general care for women diagnosed with breast cancer has made a tremendous change and advance in the last decades. Better methods for early detection and screening of the disease, higher compliance of women to go for screening, an open social and political discourse of women and the health care team and others, are just a few that both enabled and are a result of this change. Nurses have been highly involved in these changes, which resulted in the specialization of nursing in the field of breast cancer. This article will focus on the main four points that influence the nursing specialist care, that is, the tailoring of treatment and the ability to offer women treatment which is more specific to their own cancer; the importance of the multidisciplinary team as providing a State of the Art care; the involvement of women in the decision-making regarding their treatment and the specific developing role of the specialist breast care nurse.     

Multidisciplinary Approach to Breast Cancer: A New Outlook on Nursing Care

The treatment and general care for women diagnosed with breast cancer has made a tremendous change and advance in the last decades. Better methods for early detection and screening of the disease, higher compliance of women to go for screening, an open social and political discourse of women and the health care team and others, are just a few that both enabled and are a result of this change. Nurses have been highly involved in these changes, which resulted in the specialization of nursing in the field of breast cancer. This article will focus on the main four points that influence the nursing specialist care, that is, the tailoring of treatment and the ability to offer women treatment which is more specific to their own cancer; the importance of the multidisciplinary team as providing a State of the Art care; the involvement of women in the decision-making regarding their treatment and the specific developing role of the specialist breast care nurse.     

Cancer statistics for American Indian and Alaska Native individuals, 2022: Including increasing disparities in early onset colorectal cancer

American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) individuals are diverse culturally and geographically but share a high prevalence of chronic illness, largely because of obstacles to high-quality health care. The authors comprehensively examined cancer incidence and mortality among non-Hispanic AIAN individuals, compared with non-Hispanic White individuals for context, using population-based data from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Overall cancer rates among AIAN individuals were 2% higher than among White individuals for incidence (2014 through 2018, confined to Purchased/Referred Care Delivery Area counties to reduce racial misclassification) but 18% higher for mortality (2015 through 2019). However, disparities varied widely by cancer type and geographic region. For example, breast and prostate cancer mortality rates are 8% and 31% higher, respectively, in AIAN individuals than in White individuals despite lower incidence and the availability of early detection tests for these cancers. The burden among AIAN individuals is highest for infection-related cancers (liver, stomach, and cervix), for kidney cancer, and for colorectal cancer among indigenous Alaskans (91.3 vs. 35.5 cases per 100,000 for White Alaskans), who have the highest rates in the world. Steep increases for early onset colorectal cancer, from 18.8 cases per 100,000 Native Alaskans aged 20–49 years during 1998 through 2002 to 34.8 cases per 100,000 during 2014 through 2018, exacerbated this disparity. Death rates for infection-related cancers (liver, stomach, and cervix), as well as kidney cancer, were approximately two-fold higher among AIAN individuals compared with White individuals. These findings highlight the need for more effective strategies to reduce the prevalence of chronic oncogenic infections and improve access to high-quality cancer screening and treatment for AIAN individuals. Mitigating the disparate burden will require expanded financial support of tribal health care as well as increased collaboration and engagement with this marginalized population.     

Providing cancer services to remote and rural areas: consensus study

There is controversy about how cancer care should be provided to patients in remote and rural areas. The aim of this project was to measure consensus among health professionals who treat rural patients with cancer about priorities for cancer care. A modified Delphi process was used. Of 78 health professionals in Grampian, 62 responded (79%). Of 49 items suggested, there was agreement on 26 (53%), encompassing fast access to diagnosis, high-quality specialist treatment, and well-coordinated delivery of care with good and fast communication and effective team working between all health professionals involved. Specialist oncology nurses in local hospitals were considered a priority along with good facilities, accommodation, and transport for patients. There was no agreement on the best location for chemotherapy (local or central). The only large difference of opinion between participants based in primary and secondary care concerned chemotherapy provision at local community hospitals (primary care was in favour, hospital practitioners against, P&<0.001). In making their decisions, participants took problems of access into account, but were also concerned with quality of care and feasibility in the current health service. Our findings show that more evidence is needed regarding the balance of risks and benefits of local chemotherapy provision. Overall, however, there is agreement on many principles for cancer care that could be translated into practice.