Abstract 209P
Background
Treatment decisions in HCC are more complex than in many other solid tumors due to tumor heterogeneity, underlying liver disease, and an evolution of treatment paradigms across all disease stages. This complexity requires expertise from multiple specialists to ensure the best possible patient care and outcome. MDTs (also called tumor boards) have been established in cancer centers around the globe, to discuss patients’ clinical presentation and diagnosis, and agree on an optimal treatment plan. Despite this objective, variations in the organization and scope of MDTs in HCC exist, resulting in differences in efficiency and effectiveness, including patient outcomes. The MDT Aid Program (MAP) in HCC is designed to gather insights into the challenges, best practices, similarities, and differences of the HCC MDT setup and processes globally, to identify recommendations for improvement.
Methods
A framework and maturity model were developed for HCC through literature review, initial discussions with specialists, and a previous analogous effort in lung cancer MDTs. Countries included in this work were US, Canada, UK, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Portugal and Denmark. Geographic distinctions specific to HCC MDTs were then analysed.
Results
There is acknowledgment of the growing importance of MDTs in HCC, but at the same time we have identified multiple complexities in organizing it optimally: composition and leadership of the MDTs, accreditation, mandate of the MDTs, incentives and reimbursement for MDT attendance, cross-institutional patient referral to MDT care, proportion of patients discussed by the MDT, MDT support staff, co-location of MDT members, utilization of digital tools, and use of in-person, hybrid, or virtual meetings.
Conclusions
While a multidisciplinary approach is key to patient care and outcomes, there is high variability in how it is implemented, resulting in high heterogeneity in MDTs. Recommendations for MDT improvement and standardization across centers must consider these differences to mitigate biases and provide effective guidance. To our knowledge, this is the first time that a global, comprehensive MDT best practice survey in HCC has been conducted.
Legal entity responsible for the study
AstraZeneca.
Funding
AstraZeneca.
Disclosure
C. Schnatwinkel: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: AstraZeneca, Ipsen. W. Vereecken: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: AstraZeneca, Merck. S. Rohr: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Johnson & Johnson. M.T. Campos Partera: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: AstraZeneca. A. Moucquot: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Pfizer, Moderna. H. Naqvi: Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: AstraZeneca, Roche, Pfizer, Lily, GE, IBM. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.