Inter-rater variability in multidisciplinary team meetings of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer on staging, resectability and treatment recommendation: national retrospective multicentre study.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrae140
Christine Jestin Hannan, Solange León Risso, Mats Lindblad, Louiza Loizou, Eva Szabo, David Edholm, Wolf Claus Bartholomä, Oscar Åkesson, Fredrik Lindberg, Sara Strandberg, Gustav Linder, Jakob Hedberg
{"title":"Inter-rater variability in multidisciplinary team meetings of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer on staging, resectability and treatment recommendation: national retrospective multicentre study.","authors":"Christine Jestin Hannan, Solange León Risso, Mats Lindblad, Louiza Loizou, Eva Szabo, David Edholm, Wolf Claus Bartholomä, Oscar Åkesson, Fredrik Lindberg, Sara Strandberg, Gustav Linder, Jakob Hedberg","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrae140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are differences in oesophageal cancer care across Sweden. According to national guidelines, all patients should be offered equal care, planned and administrated by regional multidisciplinary team meetings. The aim of the study was to investigate differences between regional multidisciplinary team meetings in Sweden regarding clinical staging and treatment recommendations for oesophageal cancer patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All six Swedish regional multidisciplinary teams were each invited to retrospectively include ten consecutive oesophageal cancer cases. After anonymization, radiological investigations were presented, along with the original case-specific medical history, anew at the participating regional multidisciplinary team meetings. Estimation of clinical tumour node metastasis (TNM) classification and treatment recommendation (curative, palliative or best supportive care) were compared between multidisciplinary team meetings as well as with original assessments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five multidisciplinary teams participated and contributed a total of 50 cases presented to each multidisciplinary team. In estimations of cT-stage, the multidisciplinary teams were in total agreement in only eight of 50 cases (16%). For cN-stage, total agreement was seen in 17 of 50 cases (34%) and for cM-stage there was agreement in 34 cases (68%). For cT-stage, the overall summarized κ value was 0.57. For N-stage and M-stage the κ values were 0.66 and 0.78 respectively. Differences in appraisal were not associated with usage of positron emission tomography-computed tomography. In 15 of 50 cases (30%) the multidisciplinary teams disagreed on curative or palliative treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study shows differences in assessment of clinical TNM classification and treatment recommendations made at regional multidisciplinary team meetings. Increased interrater agreement on clinical TNM classification and management plans are essential to achieve more equal care for oesophageal cancer patients in Sweden.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"8 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11630030/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrae140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are differences in oesophageal cancer care across Sweden. According to national guidelines, all patients should be offered equal care, planned and administrated by regional multidisciplinary team meetings. The aim of the study was to investigate differences between regional multidisciplinary team meetings in Sweden regarding clinical staging and treatment recommendations for oesophageal cancer patients.

Methods: All six Swedish regional multidisciplinary teams were each invited to retrospectively include ten consecutive oesophageal cancer cases. After anonymization, radiological investigations were presented, along with the original case-specific medical history, anew at the participating regional multidisciplinary team meetings. Estimation of clinical tumour node metastasis (TNM) classification and treatment recommendation (curative, palliative or best supportive care) were compared between multidisciplinary team meetings as well as with original assessments.

Results: Five multidisciplinary teams participated and contributed a total of 50 cases presented to each multidisciplinary team. In estimations of cT-stage, the multidisciplinary teams were in total agreement in only eight of 50 cases (16%). For cN-stage, total agreement was seen in 17 of 50 cases (34%) and for cM-stage there was agreement in 34 cases (68%). For cT-stage, the overall summarized κ value was 0.57. For N-stage and M-stage the κ values were 0.66 and 0.78 respectively. Differences in appraisal were not associated with usage of positron emission tomography-computed tomography. In 15 of 50 cases (30%) the multidisciplinary teams disagreed on curative or palliative treatment.

Conclusion: The study shows differences in assessment of clinical TNM classification and treatment recommendations made at regional multidisciplinary team meetings. Increased interrater agreement on clinical TNM classification and management plans are essential to achieve more equal care for oesophageal cancer patients in Sweden.

食管癌和胃-食管癌多学科小组会议在分期、可切除性和治疗建议方面的差异:国家回顾性多中心研究。
背景:瑞典各地食管癌护理存在差异。根据国家指南,应向所有患者提供平等的护理,由区域多学科小组会议规划和管理。该研究的目的是调查瑞典地区多学科小组会议在食管癌患者临床分期和治疗建议方面的差异。方法:瑞典所有6个区域多学科小组均被邀请对10例连续食管癌病例进行回顾性研究。匿名化后,在参与的区域多学科小组会议上,重新提交了放射学调查报告,以及原始病例特异性病史。比较多学科小组会议和原始评估对临床肿瘤淋巴结转移(TNM)分类和治疗建议(治愈、姑息或最佳支持治疗)的估计。结果:5个多学科小组参与,每个多学科小组共提交病例50例。在估计ct分期时,多学科小组在50例中只有8例(16%)完全一致。对于cn期,50例患者中有17例(34%)完全一致,而对于cm期,34例(68%)完全一致。对于ct期,总汇总κ值为0.57。n期和m期的κ值分别为0.66和0.78。评估的差异与正电子发射断层扫描-计算机断层扫描的使用无关。在50个病例中有15个(30%)多学科小组对治愈或姑息治疗意见不一。结论:本研究显示区域性多学科小组会议对临床TNM分类和治疗建议的评估存在差异。在瑞典,在临床TNM分类和管理计划上增加医师间的共识对于实现食管癌患者更平等的护理至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信