English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

National guidelines support the discussion of cancer patients by multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTB). We researched whether early pre-diagnosis multidisciplinary tumor board discussions are associated with shorter times to staging in lung cancer.  Methods  We reviewed our institution’s lung cancer and MTB registries to retrospectively study if an early discussion at pre-diagnostic MTB (pd-MTB) influenced the timeliness of diagnostic evaluation. Over 14 months, 161 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer were included. Fifty-five patients were presented at pd-MTB while 106 (controls) patients were not. The primary outcome was the difference in the time interval from suspicious imaging (Ix) to completion of staging (Sx). Outcomes were adjusted for key confounders with a multiple regression analysis.  Results  For stages I, II, and III lung cancer, where time to therapy matters, early discussion of patients with nodules suspicious for malignancy at pd-MTB was associated with no time delays when compared to patients who were not discussed in pd-MTB. The mean time intervals for imaging to staging (with standard deviations) are 65 days in controls (sd = 42.67) and 75 days (sd = 58.27) in tumor board cases (p=0.39). Adjusting for confounders with a multiple regression analysis among all stages revealed a similar lack of difference in time intervals to diagnosis, staging, and therapy.  Conclusion  Our stage I-III lung cancer cases (pd-MTB) completed staging in a timely manner, similar to controls (no pd-MTB). The severity of illness at presentation and the availability of diagnostic services and others likely influence the results. Our manuscript shares important numerical data on timelines during cancer diagnosis and treatment. Using this data, prospective registries examining the process workflow may help standardize cancer quality goals and maximize referrals from primary-care/specialty providers. The key findings in our study create a paradigm for future studies to create and achieve “door-to-balloon” time targets for lung cancer care (akin to cardiac care) across different styles of tumor boards.

Pre-diagnosis Multidisciplinary Tumor Board and Time to Staging in Lung Cancer: The Case Western MetroHealth Experience