One of the priorities of the “Plan against the Cancer” in France is to ensure the discussion of all cancer cases in a multidisciplinary meeting staff (RCP). The multidisciplinary collaboration is proposed to guarantee a discussion between specialists in every cases, particularly in complex cases. The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic decision taken in four RCP in Paris Île-de-France academic centres for three identical cases.
Three cases of urological oncology (prostate cancer [PCa], renal cell carcinoma [RCC] and bladder tumour) were selected by a single urologist, not involved in further discussion. These cases were blindly presented in four academic urology department from Paris: Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Mondor Hospital, the Georges-Pompidou European Hospital and Foch Hospital.
The four centres met the criteria of quality of RCP in terms of multidisciplinarity, frequency and standardization. The therapeutic suggestions were similar in the RCC cases, there were differences in the surgical approaches and preoperative work-up in the PCa case and, lastly, the proposals were different for the bladder cancer case.
The decisions relies on clinical data and preoperative work-up but also on the experience and habits of the centre of excellence. For complex cases that does not fit with current guidelines, the panel discussion can lead to different therapeutic options from a centre to another and is largely influenced by the local organisation of the RCP.