Virtual multi-institutional tumor board: a strategy for personalized diagnoses and management of rare CNS tumors

James L. Rogers, Thomas Wall, Alvina A. Acquaye-Mallory, Lisa Boris, Yeonju Kim, Kenneth Aldape, Martha M. Quezado, John A. Butman, James G. Smirniotopoulos, Huma Chaudhry, Christina I. Tsien, Prashant Chittiboina, Kareem Zaghloul, Orwa Aboud, Nicholas G. Avgeropoulos, Eric C. Burton, David M. Cachia, Karan S. Dixit, Jan Drappatz, Erin M. DunbarPeter Forsyth, Edina Komlodi-Pasztor, Jacob Mandel, Byram H. Ozer, Eudocia Q. Lee, Surabhi Ranjan, Rimas V. Lukas, Margarita Raygada, Michael E. Salacz, Matthew A. Smith-Cohn, James Snyder, Ariane Soldatos, Brett J. Theeler, Brigitte C. Widemann, Kevin A. Camphausen, John D. Heiss, Terri S. Armstrong, Mark R. Gilbert, Marta Penas-Prado

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) integrate clinical, molecular, and radiological information and facilitate coordination of neuro-oncology care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, our MTB transitioned to a virtual and multi-institutional format. We hypothesized that this expansion would allow expert review of challenging neuro-oncology cases and contribute to the care of patients with limited access to specialized centers. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records from virtual MTBs held between 04/2020–03/2021. Data collected included measures of potential clinical impact, including referrals to observational or therapeutic studies, referrals for specialized neuropathology analysis, and whether molecular findings led to a change in diagnosis and/or guided management suggestions. Results: During 25 meetings, 32 presenters discussed 44 cases. Approximately half (n = 20; 48%) involved a rare central nervous system (CNS) tumor. In 21% (n = 9) the diagnosis was changed or refined based on molecular profiling obtained at the NIH and in 36% (n = 15) molecular findings guided management. Clinical trial suggestions were offered to 31% (n = 13), enrollment in the observational NCI Natural History Study to 21% (n = 9), neuropathology review and molecular testing at the NIH to 17% (n = 7), and all received management suggestions. Conclusion: Virtual multi-institutional MTBs enable remote expert review of CNS tumors. We propose them as a strategy to facilitate expert opinions from specialized centers, especially for rare CNS tumors, helping mitigate geographic barriers to patient care and serving as a pre-screening tool for studies. Advanced molecular testing is key to obtaining a precise diagnosis, discovering potentially actionable targets, and guiding management.
Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)349-359
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Neuro-Oncology
Volume167
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2024

Keywords

  • Barriers to healthcare access
  • Collaborative practice
  • Multidisciplinary tumor boards
  • National Cancer Institute-Comprehensive Oncology Network Evaluating Rare CNS Tumors (NCI-CONNECT)
  • Rare CNS tumors

Cite this