In:
Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 37, No. 15_suppl ( 2019-05-20), p. e18261-e18261
Abstract:
e18261 Background: Multidisciplinary tumor board meetings have shown to improve quality and outcome in the care of cancer patients. Many tertiary centers conduct site specific tumor board meetings but not all the centers especially community oncology and international centers have the manpower capacity to hold site specific meetings, the overall impact of tumor boards on patients care may vary based on its structure and composition. We propose that institutional collaboration in the comprehensive care of cancer patients utilizing E-consult and E tumor board may help to improve patient care. Methods: Retrospective data of 134 patient cases seen at the American hospital Dubai between 2016-2018 was analyzed. Cases that were reviewed at the American Hospital multidisciplinary tumor board meeting (AHD-MDT) and also referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board service were analyzed using electronic health record, AHD-MDT meeting minutes and reports of Mayo e-consult/e-tumor board. 3 major areas of case assessment for review were selected 1. Pathology . 2. Medical imaging. 3. Clinical recommendations. Variation in assessment and recommendations between AHD- MDT and Mayo Clinic were compared. Results: A total of 1018 cases were reviewed in the AHD-MDT between 2016 and 2018. 136 out of the 1018(13%) cases were referred for second opinion utilizing Mayo E-Consult or E-tumor board service. 117 cases were included in the analysis as there was missing data in 4 patients, 9 were duplicate and 4 were cancelled and 7 cases were not reviewed at AHD-MDT. In 78 cases pathology was reviewed at Mayo but 4 (5%) were not reviewed at AHD. In 74 (95%) cases, pathology was reviewed both at AHD and Mayo. There was change (Ch) in 2 (3%), 7(9%)updated(Ud) and no change(Ch) in 65 cases(88%). 97 cases of imaging had change(Ch) in 1 case (1%). 101 cases of e-consult/e-tumor board were assessed for clinical recommendations. There was change(Ch) in 3(3%), 2/3 cases had a change in plan due to change in the pathology. In 35(35%) the plan was updated (Ud) and 7 out of 35(20%) were due to updated(Ud) pathology. Conclusions: Our data indicates that international collaboration as part of MCCN has resulted in significant improvement in the patient care. In a select group of challenging cases, 35% had an improvement in the final treatment plan after utilization of e-consult/e-tumor board service.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0732-183X
,
1527-7755
DOI:
10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.e18261
Language:
English
Publisher:
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Publication Date:
2019
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2005181-5
Permalink
