Multidisciplinary Care Outshines Serial Care in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Lung Cancer
In a prospective effectiveness trial, care delivered to patients with lung cancer using a multidisciplinary model was compared with care delivered at a traditional serial care model.
A prospective effectiveness trial (NCT02123797) that compared the care delivered to patients with lung cancer at a colocated multidisciplinary model with the care delivered at a traditional serial care model in a community-based health care system revealed significantly more staging and delivery of guideline-concordant treatment in the multidisciplinary model.
Smeltzer et al1 established a colocated multidisciplinary thoracic oncology clinic with a large community-based health care system within Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation in Memphis, Tennessee, and measured patient experience and outcomes of care within and outside this clinic. Care was provided and patients were evaluated jointly by a thoracic surgeon, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist, with active radiologist support.
Newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer were evaluated in the multidisciplinary clinic and hierarchically matched with patients who received care within the same health care system without evaluation in the clinic in a 1:2 ratio. Of the 1150 potentially eligible patients, 526 were enrolled in the trial: 178 in the multidisciplinary arm and 348 in the serial care arm.
Three patients who initially consented to be enrolled in the serial care arm crossed over to the multidisciplinary arm. The investigators noted that because this was not a randomized study and crossover occurred before treatment, these patients were analyzed in the multidisciplinary arm.
Patients received bimodality staging 90% of the time in the multidisciplinary arm compared with 77% in the serial care arm (P = .0004). The investigators also reported that trimodality staging in the multidisciplinary arm (56%) was significantly higher than in the serial care arm (38%; P < .0001). The investigators noted that multimodality staging has been associated with better OS in a population-based analysis.2
Sixty-one percent of patients treated in the multidisciplinary care clinic received invasive stage confirmation compared with 48% in the serial care clinic (odds ratio, 2.0; 94% CI, 1.4-3.1).
When investigators adjusted for matching strata, age, sex, and histology, patients who received multidisciplinary care were more likely to receive stage- appropriate treatment (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0; FIGURE1). Turning to overall survival (OS), the investigators reported a 3-year OS of 35% in the multidisciplinary arm (95% CI, 28%-42%) compared with 36% in the serial arm (95% CI, 31%-41%; P = .74).
Seventy-eight percent of patients (139 of 178) progressed or died in the multidisciplinary arm vs 79% (274 of 348) in the serial care arm.
The investigators noted a number of limitations with the study. For example, despite being the largest comparative effectiveness study of multidisciplinary care to date, patients were not randomly assigned. The serial care experience in the study may not be typical of serial care that is delivered in the greater health care system. Also, because the colocated clinic was set up in a hospital-based facility, some patients were unable to receive care in the multidisciplinary clinic because of out-of-network restrictions, so their multidisciplinary care providers enrolled them in the serial care arm. Finally, this single-institution study may not be generalizable to other settings.
The investigators anticipate reporting on patient and caregiver outcomes in the future. They concluded that although multidisciplinary lung cancer treatment is widely recommended, high-quality evidence remains difficult to obtain.
REFERENCES
Smeltzer MP, Ray MA, Faris NR, et al. Prospective comparative effectiveness trial of multidisciplinary lung cancer care within a community-based health care system. JCO Oncol Pract. 2023;19(1):e15-e24. doi:10.1200/OP.21.00815
Farjah F, Flum DR, Ramsey SD, Heagerty PJ, Symons RG, Wood DE. Multi-modality mediastinal staging for lung cancer among Medicare beneficiaries. J Thorac Oncol. 2009;4(3):355-363. doi:10.1097/JTO.0b013e318197f4d9
Kim Evaluates New Regimens for EGFR+ Lung Cancer
January 20th 2025During a Community Case Forum event in partnership with the Medical Oncology Association of Southern California, Edward S. Kim, MD, MBA, discussed the FLAURA2 and MARIPOSA trials of newer regimens for EGFR-positive lung cancer.
Read More
Roundtable Roundup: Lung Cancer Molecular Testing and ALK-Targeted Treatment
January 18th 2025In separate, live virtual events, Vincent K. Lam, MD, and Chul Kim, MD, MPH, discuss molecular assays and treatment options for a patient with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with participants.
Read More
Conservative Management Is on the Rise in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer
January 17th 2025In an interview with Peers & Perspectives in Oncology, Michael S. Leapman, MD, MHS, discusses the significance of a 10-year rise in active surveillance and watchful waiting in patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
Read More
What Is Dark Zone Lymphoma, and Is It Clinically Relevant?
January 16th 2025Dark zone lymphoma includes aggressive B-cell lymphomas with shared molecular features. While some respond to escalated treatment, others remain resistant, highlighting the need for targeted approaches to improve outcomes.
Read More
