Analysis of 105.000 patients with cancer: have they been discussed in oncologic multidisciplinary team meetings? A nationwide population-based study in the Netherlands

For optimal oncological care, it is recommended to discuss every patient with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM). This is a time consuming and expensive practice, leading to a growing demand to change the current workflow. We aimed to investigate the number of patients discussed in MDTMs and to identify characteristics associated with not being discussed. Data of patients with a newly diagnosed solid malignant tumour in 2015 and 2016 were analysed through the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). We clustered tumour types in groups that were frequently discussed within a tumour-specific MDTM. Tumour types without information about MDTMs in the NCR were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to analyse factors associated with not being discussed. Out of 105.305 patients with cancer, 91% were discussed in a MDTM, varying from 74% to 99% between the different tumour groups. Significantly less frequently discussed were patients aged ≥75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.6–0.7), patients diagnosed with disease stage I (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.5–0.6), IV (OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.4–0.4) or unknown (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.2–0.2) and patients who received no treatment (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.3–0.3). Patients who received a multidisciplinary treatment were more likely to be discussed in contrary to a monodisciplinary treatment (OR = 4.6, 95% CI = 4.2–5.1). In general, most patients with cancer were actually discussed in a MDTM, although differences were observed between tumour groups. Factors associated with not being discussed may, at least partially, reflect the absence of a multidisciplinary question. These results form a starting point for debate on a more durable and efficient new MDTM strategy. •Of 105.305 patients with cancer, 91% is discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting.•Lower discussion rates were found for higher age and disease stages I, IV or unknown.•A multidisciplinary question seems an important reason to discuss a patient.