Streamlining cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: challenges and solutions.

National guidance for cancer multidisciplinary teams recommends streamlining cases according to clinical complexity and guidelines. This article explores how the existing knowledge base and resources, accumulated since the introduction of multidisciplinary teams, can help to improve their effectiveness.

Successful strategies in implementing a multidisciplinary team working in the care of patients with cancer: an overview and synthesis of the available literature.

In many health care systems globally, cancer care is driven by multidisciplinary cancer teams (MDTs). A large number of studies in the past few years and across different literature have been performed to better understand how these teams work and how they manage patient care. The aim of our literature review is to synthesize current scientific and clinical understanding on cancer MDTs and their organization; this, in turn, should provide an up-to-date summary of the current knowledge that those planning or leading cancer services can use as a guide for service implementation or improvement. We describe the characteristics of an effective MDT and factors that influence how these teams work. A range of factors pertaining to teamwork, availability of patient information, leadership, team and meeting management, and workload can affect how well MDTs are implemented within patient care. We also review how to assess and improve these teams. We present a range of instruments designed to be used with cancer MDTs - including observational tools, self-assessments, and checklists. We conclude with a practical outline of what appears to be the best practices to implement (Dos) and practices to avoid (Don'ts) when setting up MDT-driven cancer care.

Immunotherapy for bladder cancer.

It is nearly 40 years since Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) was first used as an immunotherapy to treat superficial bladder cancer. Despite its limitations, to date it has not been surpassed by any other treatment. As a better understanding of its mechanism of action and the clinical response to it have evolved, some of the questions around optimal dosing and treatment protocols have been answered. However, its potential for toxicity and failure to produce the desired clinical effect in a significant cohort of patients presents an ongoing challenge to clinicians and researchers alike. This review summarizes the evidence behind the established mechanism of action of BCG in bladder cancer, highlighting the extensive array of immune molecules that have been implicated in its action. The clinical aspects of BCG are discussed, including its role in reducing recurrence and progression, the optimal treatment regime, toxicity and, in light of new evidence, whether or not there is a superior BCG strain. The problems of toxicity and non-responders to BCG have led to development of new techniques aimed at addressing these pitfalls. The progress made in the laboratory has led to the identification of novel targets for the development of new immunotherapies. This includes the potential augmentation of BCG with various immune factors through to techniques avoiding the use of BCG altogether; for example, using interferon-activated mononuclear cells, BCG cell wall, or BCG cell wall skeleton. The potential role of gene, virus, or photodynamic therapy as an alternative to BCG is also reviewed. Recent interest in the immune check point system has led to the development of monoclonal antibodies against proteins involved in this pathway. Early findings suggest benefit in metastatic disease, although the role in superficial bladder cancer remains unclear.

CanWalk: study protocol for a randomized feasibility trial of a walking intervention for people with recurrent or metastatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of people in the UK are living with recurrent or metastatic cancer, many of whom experience reduced quality of life resulting from the physical and psychosocial consequences of cancer and its treatment. While drug treatments are important at alleviating some symptoms, there is increasing evidence of the benefits of exercise in enhancing quality of life and health outcomes. Walking is an inexpensive and accessible form of exercise. To our knowledge, no studies have investigated whether a walking intervention is sufficient to enhance quality of life and alleviate symptoms in people with recurrent or metastatic cancer across a range of tumor types. This paper describes the CanWalk study protocol, which aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of undertaking a randomized controlled trial of a community-based walking program to enhance quality of life and well-being in people with recurrent or metastatic cancer. METHODS: A mixed methods feasibility study includes an exploratory two-center randomized controlled trial and qualitative interviews. A minimum of 60 participants will be recruited from two London NHS Trusts and randomized 1:1 between the walking intervention and standard care using minimization. The walking intervention consists of the initial provision of written/online information followed by a short motivational interview. Participants are instructed to walk for 30 min on alternate days and attend an organized volunteer-led walk once a week. Half of all participants will be asked to use a pedometer. Postal questionnaires will be completed at baseline (pre-randomization) and at 6, 12 and 24 weeks. A subsample of participants and stakeholders will be interviewed at the end of the study. RESULTS: Primary outcomes will be the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and trial. A range of secondary outcome assessments needed to design a main study, including estimates of recruitment, adherence and variability in quality of life, will be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study will be used to refine the walking intervention, investigate the acceptability of the intervention and study design, and determine the most appropriate outcome measures thereby providing estimates of the factors needed to design the main study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN42072606.

Using peer observers to assess the quality of cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: a qualitative proof of concept study.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) working is well established as the foundation for providing cancer services in the UK and elsewhere. A core activity is the weekly meeting (or case conference/tumor boards) where the treatment recommendations for individual patients are agreed. Evidence suggests that the quality of team working varies across cancer teams, and this may impact negatively on the decision-making process, and ultimately patient care. Feedback on performance by expert observers may improve performance, but can be resource-intensive to implement. This proof of concept study sought to: develop a structured observational assessment tool for use by peers (managers or clinicians from the local workforce) and explore its usability; assess the feasibility of the principle of observational assessment by peers; and explore the views of MDT members and observers about the utility of feedback from observational assessment. METHODS: For tool development, the content was informed by national clinical consensus recommendations for best practice in cancer MDTs and developed in collaboration with an expert steering group. It consisted of ten subdomains of team working observable in MDT meetings that were rated on a 10-point scale (very poor to very good). For observational assessment, a total of 19 peer observers used the tool (assessing performance in 20 cancer teams from four hospitals). For evaluation, telephone interviews with 64 team members and all peer observers were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: The tool was easy to use and areas for refinement were identified. Peer observers were identified and most indicated that undertaking observation was feasible. MDT members generally reported that observational assessment and feedback was useful, with the potential to facilitate improvements in team working. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that observation and feedback by peers may provide a feasible and acceptable approach to enhance MDT performance. Further tool refinement and validation is required.

The cancer multi-disciplinary team from the coordinators' perspective: results from a national survey in the UK.

BACKGROUND: The MDT-Coordinators' role is relatively new, and as such it is evolving. What is apparent is that the coordinator's work is pivotal to the effectiveness and efficiency of an MDT. This study aimed to assess the views and needs of MDT-coordinators. METHODS: Views of MDT-coordinators were evaluated through an online survey that covered their current practice and role, MDT chairing, opinions on how to improve MDT meetings, and coordinators' educational/training needs. RESULTS: 265 coordinators responded to the survey. More than one third of the respondents felt that the job plan does not reflect their actual duties. It was reported that medical members of the MDT always contribute to case discussions. 66.9% of the respondents reported that the MDTs are chaired by Surgeons. The majority reported having training on data management and IT skills but more than 50% reported that they felt further training is needed in areas of Oncology, Anatomy and physiology, audit and research, peer-review, and leadership skills. CONCLUSIONS: MDT-Coordinators' role is central to the care of cancer patients. The study reveals areas of training requirements that remain unmet. Improving the resources and training available to MDT-coordinators can give them an opportunity to develop the required additional skills and contribute to improved MDT performance and ultimately cancer care. Finally, this study looks forward to the impact of the recent launch of a new e-learning training programme for MDT coordinators and discusses implications for future research.