Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36737878›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Clinical value of second opinions in oncology: A retrospective review of changes in diagnosis and treatment recommendations.

Allison Lipitz-Snyderman, Susan Chimonas, Sham Mailankody, Michelle Kim, Nicholas Silva, Anuja Kriplani, Leonard B Saltz, Smita Sihag, Carlyn Rose Tan, Maria Widmar and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Two Heads Are Better Than One: Second Opinions and Collaborations in Oncology.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Allison Lipitz-SnydermanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2423-2220
Susan ChimonasDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7742-5950
Sham MailankodyDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2815-9561
Michelle KimStrategy and Innovation, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Nicholas SilvaStrategy and Innovation, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Anuja KriplaniDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-2608-8784
Leonard B SaltzDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8353-4670
Smita SihagDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5041-3941
Carlyn Rose TanDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7922-2594
Maria WidmarDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1145-8370
Marjorie ZaudererDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6109-5790
Saul WeingartRhode Island Hospital and Hasbro Children's Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3262-9957
Wendy PerchickStrategy and Innovation, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Benjamin R RomanStrategy and Innovation, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0947-538X

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundData on the clinical value of second opinions in oncology are limited. We examined diagnostic and treatment changes resulting from second opinions and the expected impact on morbidity and prognosis.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients presenting in 2018 to a high-volume cancer center for second opinions about newly diagnosed colorectal, head and neck, lung, and myeloma cancers or abnormal results. Two sub-specialty physicians from each cancer type reviewed 30 medical records (120 total) using a process and detailed data collection guide meant to mitigate institutional bias. The primary outcome measure was the rate of treatment changes that were "clinically meaningful", i.e., expected to impact morbidity and/or prognosis. Among those with treatment changes, another outcome measure was the rate of clinically meaningful diagnostic changes that led to treatment change.

resultsOf 120 cases, forty-two had clinically meaningful changes in treatment with positive expected outcomes (7 colorectal, 17 head and neck, 11 lung, 7 myeloma; 23-57%). Two patients had negative expected outcomes from having sought a second opinion, with worse short-term morbidity and unchanged long-term morbidity and prognosis. All those with positive expected outcomes had improved expected morbidity (short- and/or long-term); 11 (0-23%) also had improved expected prognosis. Nine involved a shift from treatment to observation; 21 involved eliminating or reducing the extent of surgery, compared to 6 adding surgery or increasing its extent. Of the 42 with treatment changes, 13 were due to clinically meaningful diagnostic changes (1 colorectal, 5 head and neck, 3 lung, 4 myeloma; 3%-17%) .

conclusionsSecond-opinion consultations sometimes add clinical value by improving expected prognoses; more often, they offer treatment de-escalations, with corresponding reductions in expected short- and/or long-term morbidity. Future research could identify subgroups of patients most likely to benefit from second opinions.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsMultiple MyelomaHumansPrognosisReferral and ConsultationRetrospective Studiesdiagnostic changemorbidity and prognosisoncologysecond opiniontreatment change

Identifiers

PMID36737878
PMCPMC10134380

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.