Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer: Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel

Savtaj S. Brar, Alyson L. Mahar, Lucy K. Helyer, Carol Swallow, Calvin Law, Lawrence Paszat, Rajini Seevaratnam, Roberta Cardoso, Robin McLeod, Matthew Dixon, Lavanya Yohanathan, Laercio G. Lourenco, Alina Bocicariu, Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Ian Chau, Neal Church, Daniel Coit, Christopher H. Crane, Craig Earle, Paul MansfieldNorman Marcon, Thomas Miner, Sung Hoon Noh, Geoff Porter, Mitchell C. Posner, Vivek Prachand, Takeshi Sano, Cornelis Van De Velde, Sandra Wong, Natalie G. Coburn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

IMPORTANCE There is growing interest in reducing the variations and deficiencies in the multidisciplinary management of gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE To define optimal treatment strategies for gastric adenocarcinoma (GC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method involving a multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians from 6 countries. INTERVENTIONS Gastrectomy, perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiation, surveillance endoscopy, and best supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Panelists scored 416 scenarios regarding treatment scenarios for appropriateness from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 9 (highly appropriate). Median appropriateness scores from 1 to 3 were considered inappropriate; 4 to 6, uncertain; and 7 to 9, appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 of 16 panelists scored the scenario similarly. Appropriate scenarios agreed on were subsequently scored for necessity. RESULTS For patients with T1N0 disease, surgery alone was considered appropriate, while there was no agreement over surgery alone for patients T2N0 disease. Perioperative chemotherapy was appropriate for patients who had T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 GC without major symptoms. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was classified as appropriate for T1-2N1-3 or T3-4 proximal GC and necessary for T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 distal GC. There was no agreement regarding surveillance imaging and endoscopy following gastrectomy. Surveillance endoscopy was deemed to be appropriate after endoscopic resection. For patients with metastatic GC, surgical resection was considered inappropriate for those with no major symptoms, unless the disease was limited to positive cytology alone, in which case there was disagreement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with GC being treated with curative intent should be considered for multimodal treatment. For patients with incurable disease, surgical interventions should be considered only for the management of major bleeding or obstruction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18-25
Number of pages8
JournalJAMA Surgery
Volume149
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Stomach Neoplasms
Stomach
Adenocarcinoma
Endoscopy
Gastrectomy
Therapeutics
Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy
Combined Modality Therapy
Adjuvant Chemotherapy
Cell Biology
Hemorrhage
Physicians
Drug Therapy
3-monoiodothyronine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Brar, S. S., Mahar, A. L., Helyer, L. K., Swallow, C., Law, C., Paszat, L., ... Coburn, N. G. (2014). Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer: Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel. JAMA Surgery, 149(1), 18-25. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3959

Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel. / Brar, Savtaj S.; Mahar, Alyson L.; Helyer, Lucy K.; Swallow, Carol; Law, Calvin; Paszat, Lawrence; Seevaratnam, Rajini; Cardoso, Roberta; McLeod, Robin; Dixon, Matthew; Yohanathan, Lavanya; Lourenco, Laercio G.; Bocicariu, Alina; Bekaii-Saab, Tanios; Chau, Ian; Church, Neal; Coit, Daniel; Crane, Christopher H.; Earle, Craig; Mansfield, Paul; Marcon, Norman; Miner, Thomas; Noh, Sung Hoon; Porter, Geoff; Posner, Mitchell C.; Prachand, Vivek; Sano, Takeshi; Van De Velde, Cornelis; Wong, Sandra; Coburn, Natalie G.

In: JAMA Surgery, Vol. 149, No. 1, 01.01.2014, p. 18-25.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Brar, SS, Mahar, AL, Helyer, LK, Swallow, C, Law, C, Paszat, L, Seevaratnam, R, Cardoso, R, McLeod, R, Dixon, M, Yohanathan, L, Lourenco, LG, Bocicariu, A, Bekaii-Saab, T, Chau, I, Church, N, Coit, D, Crane, CH, Earle, C, Mansfield, P, Marcon, N, Miner, T, Noh, SH, Porter, G, Posner, MC, Prachand, V, Sano, T, Van De Velde, C, Wong, S & Coburn, NG 2014, 'Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer: Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel', JAMA Surgery, vol. 149, no. 1, pp. 18-25. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3959
Brar, Savtaj S. ; Mahar, Alyson L. ; Helyer, Lucy K. ; Swallow, Carol ; Law, Calvin ; Paszat, Lawrence ; Seevaratnam, Rajini ; Cardoso, Roberta ; McLeod, Robin ; Dixon, Matthew ; Yohanathan, Lavanya ; Lourenco, Laercio G. ; Bocicariu, Alina ; Bekaii-Saab, Tanios ; Chau, Ian ; Church, Neal ; Coit, Daniel ; Crane, Christopher H. ; Earle, Craig ; Mansfield, Paul ; Marcon, Norman ; Miner, Thomas ; Noh, Sung Hoon ; Porter, Geoff ; Posner, Mitchell C. ; Prachand, Vivek ; Sano, Takeshi ; Van De Velde, Cornelis ; Wong, Sandra ; Coburn, Natalie G. / Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel. In: JAMA Surgery. 2014 ; Vol. 149, No. 1. pp. 18-25.
@article{5f086925c8684e5fbb712bc17acf882b,
title = "Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer: Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel",
abstract = "IMPORTANCE There is growing interest in reducing the variations and deficiencies in the multidisciplinary management of gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE To define optimal treatment strategies for gastric adenocarcinoma (GC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method involving a multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians from 6 countries. INTERVENTIONS Gastrectomy, perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiation, surveillance endoscopy, and best supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Panelists scored 416 scenarios regarding treatment scenarios for appropriateness from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 9 (highly appropriate). Median appropriateness scores from 1 to 3 were considered inappropriate; 4 to 6, uncertain; and 7 to 9, appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 of 16 panelists scored the scenario similarly. Appropriate scenarios agreed on were subsequently scored for necessity. RESULTS For patients with T1N0 disease, surgery alone was considered appropriate, while there was no agreement over surgery alone for patients T2N0 disease. Perioperative chemotherapy was appropriate for patients who had T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 GC without major symptoms. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was classified as appropriate for T1-2N1-3 or T3-4 proximal GC and necessary for T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 distal GC. There was no agreement regarding surveillance imaging and endoscopy following gastrectomy. Surveillance endoscopy was deemed to be appropriate after endoscopic resection. For patients with metastatic GC, surgical resection was considered inappropriate for those with no major symptoms, unless the disease was limited to positive cytology alone, in which case there was disagreement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with GC being treated with curative intent should be considered for multimodal treatment. For patients with incurable disease, surgical interventions should be considered only for the management of major bleeding or obstruction.",
author = "Brar, {Savtaj S.} and Mahar, {Alyson L.} and Helyer, {Lucy K.} and Carol Swallow and Calvin Law and Lawrence Paszat and Rajini Seevaratnam and Roberta Cardoso and Robin McLeod and Matthew Dixon and Lavanya Yohanathan and Lourenco, {Laercio G.} and Alina Bocicariu and Tanios Bekaii-Saab and Ian Chau and Neal Church and Daniel Coit and Crane, {Christopher H.} and Craig Earle and Paul Mansfield and Norman Marcon and Thomas Miner and Noh, {Sung Hoon} and Geoff Porter and Posner, {Mitchell C.} and Vivek Prachand and Takeshi Sano and {Van De Velde}, Cornelis and Sandra Wong and Coburn, {Natalie G.}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3959",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "149",
pages = "18--25",
journal = "JAMA Surgery",
issn = "2168-6254",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Processes of care in the multidisciplinary treatment of gastric cancer

T2 - Results of a RAND/UCLA expert panel

AU - Brar, Savtaj S.

AU - Mahar, Alyson L.

AU - Helyer, Lucy K.

AU - Swallow, Carol

AU - Law, Calvin

AU - Paszat, Lawrence

AU - Seevaratnam, Rajini

AU - Cardoso, Roberta

AU - McLeod, Robin

AU - Dixon, Matthew

AU - Yohanathan, Lavanya

AU - Lourenco, Laercio G.

AU - Bocicariu, Alina

AU - Bekaii-Saab, Tanios

AU - Chau, Ian

AU - Church, Neal

AU - Coit, Daniel

AU - Crane, Christopher H.

AU - Earle, Craig

AU - Mansfield, Paul

AU - Marcon, Norman

AU - Miner, Thomas

AU - Noh, Sung Hoon

AU - Porter, Geoff

AU - Posner, Mitchell C.

AU - Prachand, Vivek

AU - Sano, Takeshi

AU - Van De Velde, Cornelis

AU - Wong, Sandra

AU - Coburn, Natalie G.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - IMPORTANCE There is growing interest in reducing the variations and deficiencies in the multidisciplinary management of gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE To define optimal treatment strategies for gastric adenocarcinoma (GC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method involving a multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians from 6 countries. INTERVENTIONS Gastrectomy, perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiation, surveillance endoscopy, and best supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Panelists scored 416 scenarios regarding treatment scenarios for appropriateness from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 9 (highly appropriate). Median appropriateness scores from 1 to 3 were considered inappropriate; 4 to 6, uncertain; and 7 to 9, appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 of 16 panelists scored the scenario similarly. Appropriate scenarios agreed on were subsequently scored for necessity. RESULTS For patients with T1N0 disease, surgery alone was considered appropriate, while there was no agreement over surgery alone for patients T2N0 disease. Perioperative chemotherapy was appropriate for patients who had T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 GC without major symptoms. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was classified as appropriate for T1-2N1-3 or T3-4 proximal GC and necessary for T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 distal GC. There was no agreement regarding surveillance imaging and endoscopy following gastrectomy. Surveillance endoscopy was deemed to be appropriate after endoscopic resection. For patients with metastatic GC, surgical resection was considered inappropriate for those with no major symptoms, unless the disease was limited to positive cytology alone, in which case there was disagreement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with GC being treated with curative intent should be considered for multimodal treatment. For patients with incurable disease, surgical interventions should be considered only for the management of major bleeding or obstruction.

AB - IMPORTANCE There is growing interest in reducing the variations and deficiencies in the multidisciplinary management of gastric cancer. OBJECTIVE To define optimal treatment strategies for gastric adenocarcinoma (GC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method involving a multidisciplinary expert panel of 16 physicians from 6 countries. INTERVENTIONS Gastrectomy, perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiation, surveillance endoscopy, and best supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Panelists scored 416 scenarios regarding treatment scenarios for appropriateness from 1 (highly inappropriate) to 9 (highly appropriate). Median appropriateness scores from 1 to 3 were considered inappropriate; 4 to 6, uncertain; and 7 to 9, appropriate. Agreement was reached when 12 of 16 panelists scored the scenario similarly. Appropriate scenarios agreed on were subsequently scored for necessity. RESULTS For patients with T1N0 disease, surgery alone was considered appropriate, while there was no agreement over surgery alone for patients T2N0 disease. Perioperative chemotherapy was appropriate for patients who had T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 GC without major symptoms. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was classified as appropriate for T1-2N1-3 or T3-4 proximal GC and necessary for T1-2N2-3 or T3-4 distal GC. There was no agreement regarding surveillance imaging and endoscopy following gastrectomy. Surveillance endoscopy was deemed to be appropriate after endoscopic resection. For patients with metastatic GC, surgical resection was considered inappropriate for those with no major symptoms, unless the disease was limited to positive cytology alone, in which case there was disagreement. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with GC being treated with curative intent should be considered for multimodal treatment. For patients with incurable disease, surgical interventions should be considered only for the management of major bleeding or obstruction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892681723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892681723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3959

DO - 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3959

M3 - Article

C2 - 24225775

AN - SCOPUS:84892681723

VL - 149

SP - 18

EP - 25

JO - JAMA Surgery

JF - JAMA Surgery

SN - 2168-6254

IS - 1

ER -