Impact of the Interdisciplinary Tumor Board of the Cooperative Ewing Sarcoma Study Group on local therapy and overall survival of Ewing sarcoma patients after induction therapy
Justus Kreyer
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorAndreas Ranft
Department of Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorBeate Timmermann
Particle Therapy Clinic at West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorHeribert Juergens
Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorSusanne Jung
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorKarsten Wiebe
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorTobias Boelling
Department Osnabrueck, Center for Radiotherapy Rheine-Osnabrueck, Osnabrueck, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorAndreas Schuck
Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorVolker Vieth
Department of Clinical Radiology, Klinikum Ibbenbüren, Ibbenbüren, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorArne Streitbuerger
Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorJendrik Hardes
Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorMelina Heinemann
Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Uta Dirksen
Department of Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Correspondence
Uta Dirksen, Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre; German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122 Essen, Germany.
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorJustus Kreyer
Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorAndreas Ranft
Department of Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorBeate Timmermann
Particle Therapy Clinic at West German Proton Therapy Centre Essen, University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorHeribert Juergens
Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorSusanne Jung
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorKarsten Wiebe
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorTobias Boelling
Department Osnabrueck, Center for Radiotherapy Rheine-Osnabrueck, Osnabrueck, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorAndreas Schuck
Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Klinikum Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorVolker Vieth
Department of Clinical Radiology, Klinikum Ibbenbüren, Ibbenbüren, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorArne Streitbuerger
Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorJendrik Hardes
Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorMelina Heinemann
Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Uta Dirksen
Department of Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
Correspondence
Uta Dirksen, Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre; German Cancer Research Centre, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122 Essen, Germany.
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Background
The Interdisciplinary Tumor Board (ITB) of the Cooperative Ewing Sarcoma Study (CESS) Group was investigated to assess its impact on the overall survival (OAS) of Ewing sarcoma (EwS) patients. The ITB functions as a reference center for the international institutions participating in the clinical trials of the CESS group, but is also available internationally to patients who have not been treated within an appropriate clinical trial. The value of tumor boards in terms of benefit for the patients and the health care system in general is not well documented and is also the subject of controversial discussions. A review of the representative literature is included.
Methods
Data were analyzed from 481 patients who had been registered into the European Ewing Tumor Working Initiative of National Groups (EURO E.W.I.N.G.-99) clinical trial via the CESS data center between 2006 and 2009; this included 331 patients with localized disease and another 150 individuals with metastases at diagnosis. Median follow-up time was 3.2 years.
Results
Improved OAS was observed for patients with metastases who had received recommendations from the ITB compared with those who had not received recommendations. In patients with localized disease, a recommendation from the ITB had no influence on OAS.
Conclusion
As a reference center for a rare disease, recommendations from our ITB impacted local therapy and led to higher OAS in patients with metastatic disease. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis that examines the value of a reference tumor board on a rare disease.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.
REFERENCES
- 1Kaatsch P, Spix C. German childhood cancer registry—Annual Report 2015 (1980–2014). Institute of Medical Biostatistics. Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI) at the University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz. 2015.
- 2Bacci G, Forni C, Longhi A, et al. Long-term outcome for patients with non-metastatic Ewing's sarcoma treated with adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapies. 402 patients treated at Rizzoli between 1972 and 1992. Eur J Cancer. 2004; 40: 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2003.08.022. 1.
- 3Jurgens H, Exner U, Gadner H, et al. Multidisciplinary treatment of primary Ewing's sarcoma of bone. A 6-year experience of a European cooperative trial. Cancer. 1988; 61: 23–32.
10.1002/1097-0142(19880101)61:1<23::AID-CNCR2820610106>3.0.CO;2-M CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 4Paulussen M, Ahrens S, Dunst J, et al. Localized Ewing tumor of bone: final results of the cooperative Ewing's sarcoma study CESS 86. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 1818–1829.
- 5Le Deley MC, Paulussen M, Lewis I, et al. Cyclophosphamide compared with ifosfamide in consolidation treatment of standard-risk Ewing sarcoma: results of the randomized noninferiority Euro-EWING99-R1 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014; 32: 2440–2448. https://doi.org/JCO.2013.54.4833 [pii].
- 6Ladenstein R, Potschger U, Le Deley MC, et al. Primary disseminated multifocal Ewing sarcoma: results of the euro-EWING 99 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 3284–3291. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.9864.
- 7Haeusler J, Ranft A, Boelling T, et al. The value of local treatment in patients with primary, disseminated, multifocal Ewing sarcoma (PDMES). Cancer. 2010; 116: 443–450. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24740.
- 8Paulussen M, Ahrens S, Burdach S, et al. Primary metastatic (stage IV) Ewing tumor: survival analysis of 171 patients from the EICESS studies. European intergroup cooperative Ewing sarcoma studies. Ann Oncol. 1998 Mar; 9: 275–281.
- 9Liu AK, Stinauer M, Albano E, Greffe B, Tello T, Maloney K. Local control of metastatic sites with radiation therapy in metastatic Ewing sarcoma and rhabdomyosarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2011; 57: 169–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.23063.
- 10Jurgens H, Craft A, Oberlin O, et al. European Ewing tumour working initiative of national groups. Ewing tumour studies 1999 study manual. 2006. EURO-E.W.I.N.G. 99. Study Manual Amended Version 14th Muenster: EURO-E W I N G 99, 2006.
- 11Pieper S, Ranft A, Braun-Munzinger G, Jurgens H, Paulussen M, Dirksen U. Ewing's tumors over the age of 40: a retrospective analysis of 47 patients treated according to the international clinical trials EICESS 92 and EURO-E. Onkologie. 2008 Dec; 31: 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1159/000165361. W.I.N.G. 99.
- 12Keating NL, Landrum MB, Lamont EB, Bozeman SR, Shulman LN, McNeil BJ. Tumor boards and the quality of cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djs502.
- 13El Saghir NS, Assi HA, Khoury KE, El Zawawy AM, Abbas JA, Eid TA. Re: tumor boards and the quality of cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 1839. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt312.2013 Dec 4.
- 14Devitt B, Philip J, McLachlan SA. Re: tumor boards and the quality of cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 1838. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt311.
- 15Krasna M, Freeman RK, Petrelli NJ. Re: tumor boards and the quality of cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 1839–1840. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt313.
- 16Keating NL. Response. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 1840–1841. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt314.
- 17Blayney DW. Tumor boards (team huddles) aren't enough to reach the goal. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105: 82–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djs523.
- 18Fleissig A, Jenkins V, Catt S, Fallowfield L. Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care: are they effective in the UK? Lancet Oncol. 2006; 7: 935–943. https://doi.org/S1470-2045(06)70940-8 [pii].
- 19Allen TC, Liang BA. Innovation: tumour board–introducing real time to oncology management. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013; 10: 552–554. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.159.
- 20Boxer MM, Vinod SK, Shafiq J, Duggan KJ. Do multidisciplinary team meetings make a difference in the management of lung cancer? Cancer. 2011; 117: 5112–5120. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26149.
- 21Juergens C, Weston C, Lewis I, et al. Safety assessment of intensive induction with vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (VIDE) in the treatment of Ewing tumors in the EURO-E. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2006; 47: 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.20820. W.I.N.G. 99 clinical trial.
- 22Basharkhah A, Pansy J, Urban C, Hollwarth ME. Outcomes after interdisciplinary management of 7 patients with askin tumor. Pediatr Surg Int. 2013; 29: 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-013-3272-1.
- 23Bolling T, Hardes J, Dirksen U. Management of bone tumours in paediatric oncology. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2013; 25: 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2012.07.010.
- 24Patkar V, Acosta D, Davidson T, Jones A, Fox J, Keshtgar M. Cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: evidence, challenges, and the role of clinical decision support technology. Int J Breast Cancer. 2011; 2011: 831605. https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/831605.
- 25MacDermid E, Hooton G, MacDonald M, et al. Improving patient survival with the colorectal cancer multi-disciplinary team. Colorectal Dis. 2009; 11: 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2008.01580.x.
- 26Chang TT, Sawhney R, Monto A, et al. Implementation of a multidisciplinary treatment team for hepatocellular cancer at a veterans affairs medical center improves survival. HPB (Oxford). 2008; 10: 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/13651820802356572.
- 27Du CZ, Li J, Cai Y, Sun YS, Xue WC, Gu J. Effect of multidisciplinary team treatment on outcomes of patients with gastrointestinal malignancy. World J Gastroenterol. 2011; 17: 2013–2018. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i15.2013.
- 28Lordan JT, Karanjia ND, Quiney N, Fawcett WJ, Worthington TR. A 10-year study of outcome following hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases – the effect of evaluation in a multidisciplinary team setting. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009; 35: 302–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2008.01.028.
- 29Hazin R, Qaddoumi I. Teleoncology: current and future applications for improving cancer care globally. Lancet Oncol. 2010; 11: 204–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70288-8 [doi].
- 30El Saghir NS, Adebamowo CA, Anderson BO, et al. Breast cancer management in low resource countries (LRCs): consensus statement from the breast health global initiative. Breast. 2011; 2: S3–S11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2011.02.006.
- 31El Saghir NS, Keating NL, Carlson RW, Khoury KE, Fallowfield L. Tumor boards: optimizing the structure and improving efficiency of multidisciplinary management of patients with cancer worldwide. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book; 2014: e461–e466.
- 32Forrest LM, McMillan DC, McArdle CS, Dunlop DJ. An evaluation of the impact of a multidisciplinary team, in a single centre, on treatment and survival in patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005; 93: 977–978. https://doi.org/6602825 [pii].
- 33Bydder S, Nowak A, Marion K, Phillips M, Atun R. The impact of case discussion at a multidisciplinary team meeting on the treatment and survival of patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. Intern Med J. 2009; 39: 838–841. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.02019.x.
- 34Friedland PL, Bozic B, Dewar J, Kuan R, Meyer C, Phillips M. Impact of multidisciplinary team management in head and neck cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2011; 104: 1246–1248. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.92.
- 35Hong NJ, Wright FC, Gagliardi AR, Paszat LF. Examining the potential relationship between multidisciplinary cancer care and patient survival: an international literature review. J Surg Oncol. 2010; 102: 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21589.
- 36Coory M, Gkolia P, Yang IA, Bowman RV, Fong KM. Systematic review of multidisciplinary teams in the management of lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2008; 60: 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.01.008.
- 37Houssami N, Sainsbury R. Breast cancer: multidisciplinary care and clinical outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2006; 42: 2480–2491. https://doi.org/S0959-8049(06)00524-7 [pii].
- 38Brar SS, Hong NL, Wright FC. Multidisciplinary cancer care: does it improve outcomes? J Surg Oncol. 2014; 110: 494–499. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.23700.
- 39Wright FC, De Vito C, Langer B, Hunter A. Expert panel on multidisciplinary cancer conference standards. Eur J Cancer. 2007; 43: 1002–1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2007.01.025. Multidisciplinary cancer conferences: A systematic review and development of practice standards.
- 40Lamb BW, Brown KF, Nagpal K, Vincent C, Green JS, Sevdalis N. Quality of care management decisions by multidisciplinary cancer teams: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18: 2116–2125. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1675-6.
