Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 15, Issue 8, pp 2081–2088 | Cite as

Evaluating the Impact of a Single-Day Multidisciplinary Clinic on the Management of Pancreatic Cancer

  • Timothy M. Pawlik
  • Daniel Laheru
  • Ralph H. Hruban
  • JoAnn Coleman
  • Christopher L. Wolfgang
  • Kurt Campbell
  • Syed Ali
  • Elliot K. Fishman
  • Richard D. Schulick
  • Joseph M. Herman
  • the Johns Hopkins Multidisciplinary Pancreas Clinic Team
Gastrointestinal Oncology

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of a multidisciplinary clinic on the clinical care recommendations of patients with pancreatic cancer compared with the recommendations the patients received prior to review by the multidisciplinary tumor board.

Methods

The records of 203 consecutive patients referred to the Johns Hopkins pancreatic multidisciplinary clinic were prospectively collected from November 2006 to October 2007. Cross-sectional imaging, pathology, and medical history were evaluated by a panel of medical/radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, pathologists, diagnostic radiologists, and geneticists. Alterations in treatment recommendations between the outside institution and the multidisciplinary clinic were recorded and compared.

Results

On presentation, the outside computed tomography (CT) report described locally advanced/unresectable disease (34.9%), metastatic disease (17.7%), and locally advanced disease with metastasis (1.1%). On review of submitted imaging and imaging performed at Hopkins, 38 out of 203 (18.7%) patients had a change in the status of their clinical stage. Review of the histological slides by dedicated pancreatic pathologists resulted in changes in the interpretation for 7 of 203 patients (3.4%). Overall, 48 out of 203 (23.6%) patients had a change in their recommended management based on clinical review of their case by the multidisciplinary tumor board. Enrollment into the National Familial Pancreas Tumor Registry increased from 52 out of 106 (49.2%) patients in 2005 to 158 out of 203 (77.8%) with initiation of the multidisciplinary clinic.

Conclusion

The single-day pancreatic multidisciplinary clinic provided a comprehensive and coordinated evaluation of patients that led to changes in therapeutic recommendations in close to one-quarter of patients.

Keywords

Multidisciplinary Pancreas Cancer Outcome 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Support: Dr. Pawlik is supported by Grant Number 1KL2RR025006-01 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. The contents of the publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of NCRR or NIH.

References

  1. 1.
    Back MF, Ang EL, Ng WH, et al. Improvements in quality of care resulting from a formal multidisciplinary tumour clinic in the management of high-grade glioma. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2007;36:347–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gabel M, Hilton NE, Nathanson SD. Multidisciplinary breast cancer clinics. Do they work? Cancer 1997;79:2380–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Petty JK, Vetto JT. Beyond doughnuts: tumor board recommendations influence patient care. J Cancer Educ 2002;17:97–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nyquist JG, Radecki SE, Gates JD, et al. An educational intervention to improve hospital tumor conferences. J Cancer Educ 1995;10:71–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Radecki SE, Nyquist JG, Gates JD, et al. Educational characteristics of tumor conferences in teaching and non-teaching hospitals. J Cancer Educ 1995;9:204–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wright FC, De Vito C, Langer B, et al. Multidisciplinary cancer conferences: a systematic review and development of practice standards. Eur J Cancer 2007;43:1002–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Newman EA, Guest AB, Helvie MA, et al. Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board. Cancer 2006;107:2346–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chang JH, Vines E, Bertsch H, et al. The impact of a multidisciplinary breast cancer center on recommendations for patient management: the University of Pennsylvania experience. Cancer 2001;91:1231–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ujiki MB, Talamonti MS. Guidelines for the surgical management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Semin Oncol 2007;34:311–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Abbruzzese JL, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions, management, and role of preoperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006;13:1035–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crane CH, Varadhachary G, Wolff RA, et al. The argument for pre-operative chemoradiation for localized, radiographically resectable pancreatic cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006;20:365–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Crane C, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol 2005;8:377–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Novick SL, Fishman EK. Three-dimensional CT angiography of pancreatic carcinoma: role in staging extent of disease. Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:139–43Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    House MG, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, et al. Predicting resectability of periampullary cancer with three-dimensional computed tomography. J Gastrointest Surg 2004;8:280–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klein AP, Brune KA, Petersen GM, et al. Prospective risk of pancreatic cancer in familial pancreatic cancer kindreds. Cancer Res 2004;64:2634–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tseng JF, Raut CP, Lee JE, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection: margin status and survival duration. J Gastrointest Surg 2004;8:935–49; discussion 949–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with en bloc portal vein resection for pancreatic carcinoma with suspected portal vein involvement. World J Surg 2004;28:602–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harrison LE, Klimstra DS, Brennan MF. Isolated portal vein involvement in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A contraindication for resection? Ann Surg 1996;224:342–7; discussion 347–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bluemke DA, Cameron JL, Hruban RH, et al. Potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: spiral CT assessment with surgical and pathologic correlation. Radiology 1995;197:381–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fishman EK, Horton KM. Imaging pancreatic cancer: the role of multidetector CT with three-dimensional CT angiography. Pancreatology 2001;1:610–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schima W, Ba-Ssalamah A, Kolblinger C, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Eur Radiol 2007;17:638–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bartolozzi C, Donati F, Cioni D, et al. Detection of colorectal liver metastases: a prospective multicenter trial comparing unenhanced MRI, MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, and spiral CT. Eur Radiol 2004;14:14–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Balci NC, Semelka RC. Radiologic diagnosis and staging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Eur J Radiol 2001;38:105–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weg N, Scheer MR, Gabor MP. Liver lesions: improved detection with dual-detector-array CT and routine 2.5-mm thin collimation. Radiology 1998;209:417–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kopka L, Grabbe E. Biphasic liver diagnosis with multiplanar-detector spiral CT. Radiologe 1999;39:971–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kopp AF, Heuschmid M, Claussen CD. Multidetector helical CT of the liver for tumor detection and characterization. Eur Radiol 2002;12:745–752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Graf O, Boland GW, Warshaw AL, et al. Arterial versus portal venous helical CT for revealing pancreatic adenocarcinoma: conspicuity of tumor and critical vascular anatomy. Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:119–23Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    McCarthy MJ, Evans J, Sagar G, et al. Prediction of resectability of pancreatic malignancy by computed tomography. Br J Surg 1998;85:320–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fishman EK, Wyatt SH, Ney DR, et al. Spiral CT of the pancreas with multiplanar display. Am J Roentgenol 1992;159:1209–15Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nakagohri T, Kinoshita T, Konishi M, et al. Survival benefits of portal vein resection for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg 2003;186:149–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weitz J, Kienle P, Schmidt J, et al. Portal vein resection for advanced pancreatic head cancer. J Am Coll Surg 2007;204:712–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Metz DC. Diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Semin Gastrointest Dis 1995;6:67–78PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Norton JA. Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas and duodenum. Curr Probl Surg 1994;31:77–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Teh SH, Deveney C, Sheppard BC. Aggressive pancreatic resection for primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor: is it justifiable? Am J Surg 2007;193:610–3; discussion 613PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Norton JA, Kivlen M, Li M, et al. Morbidity and mortality of aggressive resection in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors. Arch Surg 2003;138:859–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer 1999;86:2426–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tomaszewski JE, LiVolsi VA. Mandatory second opinion of pathologic slides: is it necessary? Cancer 1999;86:2198–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA 2004;291:2720–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ford BM, Evans JS, Stoffel EM, et al. Factors associated with enrollment in cancer genetics research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1355–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Townsley CA, Selby R, Siu LL. Systematic review of barriers to the recruitment of older patients with cancer onto clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:3112–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy M. Pawlik
    • 1
  • Daniel Laheru
    • 2
  • Ralph H. Hruban
    • 3
  • JoAnn Coleman
    • 4
  • Christopher L. Wolfgang
    • 1
  • Kurt Campbell
    • 1
  • Syed Ali
    • 3
  • Elliot K. Fishman
    • 5
  • Richard D. Schulick
    • 1
  • Joseph M. Herman
    • 4
    • 6
  • the Johns Hopkins Multidisciplinary Pancreas Clinic Team
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryThe Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of OncologyThe Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of PathologyThe Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation SciencesThe Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyThe Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  6. 6.Department of Radiation Oncology & Molecular Radiation SciencesMultidisciplinary Pancreatic Cancer ClinicBaltimoreUSA
  7. 7.BaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations