In partnership with the AMO-Multidisciplinary Oncology Care and Sociedade Brasileira de Oncologia Clinica (SBOC), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) held a Multidisciplinary Cancer Management Course in Brazil from November 22^nd to 23^rd. One hundred twenty-six participants attended MCMC Brazil, and 24 of these participants also completed a Train the Trainer session before the course (separate report available).

The MCMC is designed to improve the level of cancer care and promote a multidisciplinary approach to patient care in low-to-middle-income countries.  ASCO and the host organization tailor content to the practice environment and the needs of the audience, covering cancer types common to the country or region. The goal of the course was that the attendees be equipped to:
 

·         -Manage most prevalent types of tumors in the region—breast cancer and gastrointestinal cancer—using up-to-date practices.

·         -Work within a multidisciplinary team to deliver quality cancer care.

·         -Communicate effectively with patients and their families during the different steps of disease.

·         -Consult with specialists to determine best treatment approaches for patients and participate in tumor boards or informal case discussions.

A post-course evaluation was distributed on the final day to evaluate if MCMC Brazil attendees met the learning objectives. Respondents reported successfully learning the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care:

·         -92% said they learned new skills in the management of gastrointestinal cancer and breast cancer.

·         -98% of respondents said they understand better how multidisciplinary teams work together to deliver quality care.

·         -83% of respondents said they feel more confident in their ability to communicate with their patients

·         -Of those who do not currently participate in a tumor board, 90% of respondents reported they plan to consult with colleagues from other specialties to determine best treatment options.

Respondents reported that all of the sessions exceeded expectations, commenting that “all the lectures were excellent,” and “everything was well explained.” However, more students and nurses attended the course than expected. As a result, some participants wanted more information about oncology nursing and less technical information geared toward physicians. Finally, respondents suggested leaving more time for questions from the audience and more time for discussion with faculty members.

64 percent of respondents said they planned to make changes to their current practice or clinical research based on information learned at this course; most respondents did not anticipate any barriers to making these practice changes because they do not work with patients or they are still students. 18 percent of respondents said lack of time, lack of support from colleagues and/or administration, and lack of staff could be potential obstacles. The long-term impact of this course in terms of participants’ practice changes will be assessed with a follow-up survey 12 months after the course.