PurposeMultidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) are universally recommended, but recent literature has challenged their efficiency.MethodsThe American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conducted a survey of a randomly selected cohort of international ASCO members. The survey was built on SurveyMonkey and was sent via e-mail to a sample of 5,357 members.ResultsIn all, 501 ASCO members practicing outside the United States responded, and 86% of them participated in MDTBs at their own institutions. Those who attended represented a variety of disciplines in 70% to 86% of all MDTBs. The majority of MDTBs held weekly specialty and/or general meetings. Eighty-nine percent of 409 respondents attended for advice on treatment decisions. Survey respondents reported changes of 1% to 25% in treatment plans for 44% to 49% of patients with breast cancer and in 47% to 50% of patients with colorectal cancer. They reported 25% to 50% changes in surgery type and/or treatment plans for 14% to 21% of patients with breast cancer and 12% to 18% of patients with colorectal cancer. Of the 430 respondents 96% said overall benefit to patients was worth the time and effort spent at MDTBs, and 96% said that MDTBs have teaching value. Mini tumor boards held with whatever types of specialists were available were considered valid. In all, 94.8% (425 of 448) said that MDTBs should be required in institutions in which patients with cancer are treated.ConclusionMDTBs are commonplace worldwide. A majority of respondents attend them to obtain recommendations, and they report changes in patient management. Change occurred more frequently with nonmedical oncologists and with physicians who had less than 15 years in practice. MDTBs helped practitioners make management decisions. Mini tumor boards may improve time efficiency and are favored when the full team is not available. Suggestions for improving MDTBs included making them more efficient, better selection and preparation of cases, choosing an effective team leader, and improving how time is used, but more research is needed on ways to improve the efficiency of MDTBs.

Key Words. Breast cancer x Young age x Family history x BRCA mutations x Haplotype x Lebanon x Arab countries ABSTRACT Purpose. Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in Lebanon and in Arab countries, with 50% of cases presenting before the age of 50 years. Methods. Between 2009 and 2012, 250 Lebanese women with breastcancer who were considered to be at high riskof carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations because of presentation at young age and/or positive family history (FH) of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited. Clinical data were analyzed statistically. Coding exons and intron-exon boundaries of BRCA1 and BRCA2 were sequenced from peripheral blood DNA. All patients were tested for BRCA1 rearrangements using multiplex ligationdependent probe amplification (MLPA). BRCA2 MLPA was done in selected cases. Results. Overall, 14 of 250 patients (5.6%) carried a deleterious BRCA mutation (7 BRCA1, 7 BRCA2) and 31 (12.4%) carried a variant of uncertain significance. Eight of 74 patients (10.8%) aged #40 years with positive FH and only 1 of 74 patients (1.4%) aged #40 years without FH had a mutated BRCA. Four of 75 patients (5.3%) aged 41-50 years with FH had a deleterious mutation. Only 1 of 27 patients aged .50 years at diagnosis had a BRCA mutation. All seven patients with BRCA1 mutations had grade 3 infiltrating ductal carcinoma and triple-negative breast cancer. Nine BRCA1 and 17 BRCA2 common haplotypes were observed. Conclusion. Prevalence ofdeleterious BRCA mutations is lower than expected and does not support the hypothesis that BRCA mutations alone cause the observed high percentage of breast cancer in young women of Lebanese and Arab descent. Studies to search for other genetic mutations are recommended. The Oncologist 2015;20:357-364Implications for Practice: This study provides new data to support discussion and referral of patients of Lebanese and Arab ancestry with high-genetic-risk breast cancer for BRCA counseling and testing.The probability of carrying a deleterious BRCA mutation in this population seems low at 5.6%.The absence of family history in patients aged #40 years reduces the possibility of BRCA mutations to only 1.4%. Young age combined with a positive family history raises the prevalence to 10.8% and increases the yield of testing. Further clarification of the 12.4% of cases with variants of uncertain significance and searches for alternative gene mutations are needed. This study adds missing information to the international BRCA population maps.

PurposeMultidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) have become commonplace. The use, attendance, and function of MTBs need continued assessment and improvement.MethodsWe prospectively recorded and assessed all cases presented at MTBs between October 2013 and December 2014. Data were collected before and during each MTB. Data were analyzed using SPSS for Windows version 23 (SPSS, Chicago, IL).ResultsFive hundred three cases were presented: 234 cases (46%) at GI cancer MTBs, 149 cases (29.6%) at breast cancer MTBs, 69 cases (13.7%) at thoracic/head and neck cancer MTBs, and 51 cases (10.7%) at neuro-oncology MTBs. A total of 86.7% of MTB cases were presented to make plans for management. Plans for upfront management were made in 67% of the breast cancer cases, 63% of GI cases, 59% of thoracic/head and neck cases, and 49% of neuro-oncology cases. Three hundred ninety-four cases (78.3%) were presented by medical oncologists, whereas only 74 cases (14.7%) were presented by surgeons, and 10 cases (2%) were presented by radiation oncologists. The majority of MTBs, with the exception of the neurosurgery MTBs, were led by medical oncologists. Surgeons presented the least number of cases but attended the most, and their contributions to discussions and decision making were essential.ConclusionMTBs enhance the multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer. Upfront multidisciplinary decision making should be considered as an indicator of benefit from MTBs, in addition to changes in management plans made at MTBs. Increasing the contributions of surgeons to MTBs should include bringing more of their own cases for discussion.