The central urology multidisciplinary team - is it time to change the referral criteria? An audit of practice in a district general hospital in London.

INTRODUCTION All cancer patients are discussed in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs). Certain patients are referred to the Central MDT based on specific national criteria. We wanted to see whether the Central MDT aided in the decision-making process above that of the Local MDT alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS All MDT forms (local and central) for 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS A total of 217 patients were reviewed at the Local MDT. Of these 217 cases, 102 (47.0%) cases were referred to the Central MDT and 15 of the 102 (14.7%) cases were awaiting investigations at the time of the Local MDT and were, there fore, excluded. For the prostate cancer cases ( n = 67), the Central MDT did not change outright the Local MDT decision in any case, but in 6 of 67 (9.0%), advised/excluded patients from clinical trials. For bladder cancer cases ( n = 19), 4 of 19 (21.0%) patients had their management changed by the Central MDT. The one kidney cancer case had its Local MDT decision changed by the Central MDT. CONCLUSIONS This audit suggests that the Central MDT plays a useful role in the decision-making process for bladder and kidney cancers, and helps determine eligibility for clinical trials in metastatic prostate cancer patients. Its value over the Local MDT alone in the decision-making process for non-metastatic prostate cancer is questionable.