Cargando…
Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Molecular Tumour Boards (MTBs) were created with the purpose of supporting clinical decision-making within precision medicine. Though in use globally, reporting on these meetings often focuses on the small percentages of patients that receive treatment via this process and are less likel...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553981/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35941175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-022-01922-3 |
_version_ | 1784806594268102656 |
---|---|
author | Frost, Hannah Graham, Donna M. Carter, Louise O’Regan, Paul Landers, Dónal Freitas, André |
author_facet | Frost, Hannah Graham, Donna M. Carter, Louise O’Regan, Paul Landers, Dónal Freitas, André |
author_sort | Frost, Hannah |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Molecular Tumour Boards (MTBs) were created with the purpose of supporting clinical decision-making within precision medicine. Though in use globally, reporting on these meetings often focuses on the small percentages of patients that receive treatment via this process and are less likely to report on, and assess, patients who do not receive treatment. METHODS: A literature review was performed to understand patient attrition within MTBs and barriers to patients receiving treatment. A total of 51 papers were reviewed spanning a 6-year period from 11 different countries. RESULTS: In total, 20% of patients received treatment through the MTB process. Of those that did not receive treatment, the main reasons were no mutations identified (27%), no actionable mutations (22%) and clinical deterioration (15%). However, data were often incomplete due to inconsistent reporting of MTBs with only 55% reporting on patients having no mutations, 55% reporting on the presence of actionable mutations with no treatment options and 59% reporting on clinical deterioration. DISCUSSION: As patient attrition in MTBs is an issue which is very rarely alluded to in reporting, more transparent reporting is needed to understand barriers to treatment and integration of new technologies is required to process increasing omic and treatment data. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9553981 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95539812022-10-13 Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review Frost, Hannah Graham, Donna M. Carter, Louise O’Regan, Paul Landers, Dónal Freitas, André Br J Cancer Article BACKGROUND: Molecular Tumour Boards (MTBs) were created with the purpose of supporting clinical decision-making within precision medicine. Though in use globally, reporting on these meetings often focuses on the small percentages of patients that receive treatment via this process and are less likely to report on, and assess, patients who do not receive treatment. METHODS: A literature review was performed to understand patient attrition within MTBs and barriers to patients receiving treatment. A total of 51 papers were reviewed spanning a 6-year period from 11 different countries. RESULTS: In total, 20% of patients received treatment through the MTB process. Of those that did not receive treatment, the main reasons were no mutations identified (27%), no actionable mutations (22%) and clinical deterioration (15%). However, data were often incomplete due to inconsistent reporting of MTBs with only 55% reporting on patients having no mutations, 55% reporting on the presence of actionable mutations with no treatment options and 59% reporting on clinical deterioration. DISCUSSION: As patient attrition in MTBs is an issue which is very rarely alluded to in reporting, more transparent reporting is needed to understand barriers to treatment and integration of new technologies is required to process increasing omic and treatment data. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-08-08 2022-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9553981/ /pubmed/35941175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-022-01922-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Frost, Hannah Graham, Donna M. Carter, Louise O’Regan, Paul Landers, Dónal Freitas, André Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title | Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title_full | Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title_short | Patient attrition in Molecular Tumour Boards: a systematic review |
title_sort | patient attrition in molecular tumour boards: a systematic review |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9553981/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35941175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-022-01922-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT frosthannah patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview AT grahamdonnam patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview AT carterlouise patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview AT oreganpaul patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview AT landersdonal patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview AT freitasandre patientattritioninmoleculartumourboardsasystematicreview |