Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands: Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations

Abstract Background Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registratio... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Koopman, Bart
Groen, Harry J.M.
Ligtenberg, Marjolijn J.L.
Grünberg, Katrien
Monkhorst, Kim
Langen, Adrianus J.
Boelens, Mirjam C.
Paats, Marthe S.
Thüsen, Jan H.
Dinjens, Winand N.M.
Solleveld, Nienke
Wezel, Tom
Gelderblom, Hans
Hendriks, Lizza E.
Speel, Ernst-Jan M.
Theunissen, Tom E.
Kroeze, Leonie I.
Mehra, Niven
Piet, Berber
Wekken, Anthonie J.
Elst, Arja
Timens, Wim
Willems, Stefan M.
Meijers, Ruud W.J.
Leng, Wendy W.J.
Lindert, Anne S.R.
Radonic, Teodora
Hashemi, Sayed M.S.
Heideman, Daniëlle A.M.
Schuuring, Ed
Kempen, Léon C.
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2020
Reihe/Periodikum: The Oncologist ; volume 26, issue 8, page e1347-e1358 ; ISSN 1083-7159 1549-490X
Verlag/Hrsg.: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Schlagwörter: Cancer Research / Oncology
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-26833408
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13580

Abstract Background Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. Results Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type–specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). Conclusion MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a “Dutch MTB model” for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. Implications for Practice Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board ...