Multidisciplinary clinics can improve quality of care for prostate cancer patients
One-day multidisciplinary clinics at community centers can improve the quality of care for prostate cancer patients, according to a new study published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology.
“The multitude of treatment options in prostate cancer can be difficult for both patients and health care providers to effectively navigate,” wrote author Rachit Kumar, MD, with the division of radiation oncology at Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center in Gilbert, Arizona, and colleagues. “In addition, physician bias by specialization exists and can influence treatment recommendations and may lead to decreased adherence to national guidelines. MDCs, typically at large academic centers, are one strategy that have been implemented to improve management of many cancers.”
The MDC was held at a single community cancer center and included one urologist and one radiation oncologist. Kumar et al. compared treatment recommendations received by prostate cancer patients both before being evaluated at the one-day MDC and after the evaluation.
Overall, 63 percent of low-risk patients changed their treatment decision from the initial recommendation after the MD evaluation. Also, 63 percent of intermediate-risk patients and 58 percent of high-risk patients changed treatment recommendations after the evaluation.
“The results of our study clearly demonstrate that a community center prostate cancer MDC can alter treatment recommendations and improve adherence to national guidelines,” the authors wrote.
Kumar and colleagues added that helping patients adhere to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines could have a direct impact on mortality rates.
“Although this retrospective analysis was not focused on survival, it is reasonable to believe that with more than 60 percent of patients seen in our one-day prostate MDC changing their treatment recommendations to align with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, overall survival may be improved,” they wrote.
One limitation of the study was that incoming treatment recommendations were provided by the patients and “may not be consistent with exact recommendations given to the patient upon initial diagnosis.” However, the authors noted that patient records were closely reviewed and responses were verified.
Michael has more than 18 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.