The Emerging Boon of Information and Communication Technology in Multidisciplinary Cancer Care: A Force Multiplier With a Human Touch

Self Cite

Objective To decrease radiotherapy treatment time (RTT), measured from the day of initiation of radiotherapy to the day of its completion, specific strategies were initiated in early 2020 in the only academic safety-net medical center in a rural, resource-lean state. The factors that can succeed and those that need further improvements were analyzed in this initial assessment phase of our efforts to shorten the RTT. Methods This is an analysis of 28 cervix cancer patients treated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided brachytherapy (February 2020-November 2021). The relationship between independent and dependent variable were analyzed by simple linear regression, and p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. SPSS software version 28.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results Two RTT groups (≤ 60 (32.1%) vs . > 60 days {67.9%}) with median RTT of 68 days (range, 51 to 106 days) were analyzed. Caucasians represented 66.7% of the RTT ≤ 60 days group. Four ‘issues’ were identified that increased the RTT: non-compliance, learning curve (early days of implementation of MRI-guided brachytherapy in the department), stage IV comorbidities, and with more than one issue mentioned; 77.8% with no issues had ≤ 60 days RTT vs . 26.3% for the > 60 days group. The breakdown of the no-issues factor by calendar year showed the RTT of ≤ 60 days was achieved higher in 2021 (85.7% vs. 20.0%; p=0.023) compared to 2020. For this entire cohort, the RTT of ≤ 60 days was achieved higher in 2021 (50.0% vs. 8.3%; p=0.019) compared to 2020. Data also showed improvement in RTT of ≤ 60 days for every sequential six months. ‘Non-compliance’ and ‘learning curve’ were the most important factors among patients having the longest RTTs. Conclusion The RTT can be further decreased. As a result of this preliminary analysis of the our strategic planning approach of ‘circular’ “See it,” “Own it,” “Solve it,” and “Do it” and go back to the first step again, we plan to implement the following strategies in the immediate future to shorten the RTTs further and, in turn, improve our overall outcomes (local/regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival): (a) Interdigitate MRI-guided brachytherapy during external beam radiotherapy (EBRT); patients who can not get the interdigitated brachytherapy procedures performed during the course of EBRT for any reason will receive two brachytherapy procedures per week; (c) attempt to add a cervix cancer care navigator to our staff to help patients having social issues, thus leading to compliance problems; (d) finally, in a year or two after these new strategic implementations, the RTT data will be reanalyzed.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Influence of Patient and System Factors on the Radiotherapy Treatment Time in the Treatment of Non-metastatic Cervical Cancer Patients in a Rural and Resource-Lean State’s Safety-Net Hospital: Benefits of Strategic Planning

Vijayakumar¹,

Nittala²,

Duggar³

et al. 2023

Self Cite

“…The use of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) in patient care and treatment decision-making is not a recent development in the oncological healthcare setting [1]. MDTs help in improving team-based cancer care, as advances in individual specialties occur, rapid sharing of the expertise to improve outcomes becomes possible [2]. However, involving patients/families in extensive discussion during MDT meetings is a more recent phenomenon to address patients' needs; secure coordination among professionals to prevent clinical errors; potentially improve outcomes such as survival, local control, and quality of life; and enhance patients' social and psychological well-being for treatment and decision-making in difficult cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients and Families’ Participation in Multidisciplinary Tumor Conferences Improves Patient and Family-Focused Cancer Care: Lessons Learned From a Debate on the Role of Radiation Therapy in Primary Mediastinal Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Ahmed¹,

Nittala²,

Kosalram³

et al. 2023

Self Cite

Incorporation of patients' preferences often leads to improved outcomes when included in the multidisciplinary tumor conference/board (MTC). However, patients' wishes are not included or considered in the MTC decision-making. We need better strategies and approaches for patient-inclusive, shared decision-making. When finding ourselves at a crossroads regarding the next step in a patient's treatment, we saw a unique opportunity for an MTC with the patient and her husband in attendance. The results of a full literature review regarding the role of consolidative radiation therapy (RT) in a patient with primary (thymic) B-cell lymphoma after completion of chemotherapy and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) scan with a Deauville score of 4 were presented in a creative, engaging debate-style forum with visual aids. The patient and her husband were able to follow the discussion and, in the end, a consensus recommendation, heavily focused on the patient's preferences, was offered and adopted, which ultimately resulted in the avoidance of excess treatment and likely improved her long-term quality of life outcome. These collaborative and innovative interactions benefit not only our patients but enrich our lives too as healthcare providers and strengthen us as a cancer care team in terms of understanding diversity in decision-making processes.

“…In this scientific art of making clinical decisions for our patients, one often has to weigh (a) the scientific evidence; (b) the statistical versus the actual, practical real-world clinical impact of studies; (c) the individual patients and his/her family’s circumstances and choices; (d) geography and infrastructure options available for the patient and the facility; and, finally, (e) cost-benefit and risk-benefit considerations. Furthermore, the importance of patient and family-focused care and fully involving patients and families in decision-making in the process is gaining momentum [ 2 ] in this age of expanding information technology use in health care [ 3 ], extended use of telemedicine, and considering public health perspectives including methods to overcome disparities in healthcare delivery to rural and socioeconomically deprived populations (RSEDPs).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Real World and Public Health Perspectives of Intraoperative Radiotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Analysis Beyond the Statistical Facts

Vijayakumar¹,

Nittala²,

Buddala³

et al. 2023

Self Cite

Breast conservation therapy (BCT) (usually a lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (RT)) has become a standard alternative to radical mastectomy in early-stage breast cancers with equal, if not higher, survival rates. The established standard of the RT component of the BCT had been about six weeks of Monday through Friday external beam RT to the whole breast (WBRT). Recent clinical trials have shown that partial breast radiation therapy (PBRT) to the region surrounding the lumpectomy cavity with shorter courses can result in equal local control, survival, and slightly improved cosmetic outcomes. Intraoperative RT (IORT) wherein RT is administered at the time of operation for BCT to the lumpectomy cavity as a single-fraction RT is also considered PBRT. The advantage of IORT is that weeks of RT are avoided. However, the role of IORT as part of BCT has been controversial. The extreme views go from “I will not recommend to anyone” to “I can recommend to all early-stage favorable patients.” These divergent views are due to difficulty in interpreting the clinical trial results. There are two modalities of delivering IORT, namely, the use of low-energy 50 kV beams or electron beams. There are several retrospective, prospective, and two randomized clinical trials comparing IORT versus WBRT. Yet, the opinions are divided. In this paper, we try to bring clarity and consensus from a highly broad-based multidisciplinary team approach. The multidisciplinary team included breast surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical physicists, biostatisticians, public health experts, nurse practitioners, and medical oncologists. We show that there is a need to more carefully interpret and differentiate the data based on electron versus low-dose X-ray modalities; the randomized study results have to be extremely carefully dissected from biostatistical points of view; the importance of the involvement of patients and families in the decision making in a very transparent and informed manner needs to be emphasized; and the compromise some women may be willing to accept between 2-4% potential increase in local recurrence (as interpreted by some of the investigators in IORT randomized studies) versus mastectomy. We conclude that, ultimately, the choice should be that of women with detailed facts of the pros and cons of all options being presented to them from the angle of patient/family-focused care. Although the guidelines of various professional societies can be helpful, they are only guidelines. The participation of women in IORT clinical trials is still needed, and as genome-based and omics -based fine-tuning of prognostic fingerprints evolve, the current guidelines need to be revisited. Finally, the use of IORT can help rural, socioeconomically, and infrastructure-deprived populations and geographic regions as the convenience of single-fraction RT and the possibility of breast preservation are likely to encourage more women to choose BCT than mastectomy. This option can also likely lead to more wom...