Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Brazilian Journal of Oncology 2024; 20: s00441791980
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791980
Review Article
Clinical Oncology

Second Opinion in Medical Oncology in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine

Auro del Giglio 
1   Centro Universitário FMABC, Santo André, SP, Brazil
,
Sergio Vicente Serrano 
2   Division of Sarcoma, Melanoma, and Central Nervous System Tumors, and Unknown Primary Site, Department of Clinical Oncology, Hospital de Amor de Barretos, Barretos, SP, Brazil
,
Mateus Uerlei Pereira da Costa 
3   Sociedade Brasileira de Oncologia Clínica, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations Funding The authors declare that they did not receive financial support from agencies in the public, private or non-profit sectors to conduct the present study.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

The present review explores the role and impact of second opinions in medical oncology, particularly considering the recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and telemedicine. A comprehensive literature search was conducted, and data from various studies were analyzed, highlighting why patients seek a second opinion, the rates of disagreement between the first and second opinions, and the potential barriers to obtaining a second opinion. The results showed that seeking a second opinion is common, with patients often seeking reassurance and a better understanding of their diagnosis and treatment options. However, there is limited evidence on the impact of second opinions on patient outcomes and the cost of care. Additionally, the introduction of Multidisciplinary Molecular Tumor Boards, AI, and telemedicine may improve decision-making and treatment strategies in the context of second opinions. Further research is needed to fully understand the role and implications of second opinions in medical oncology and how these recent technologies impact the second opinion process.

Keywords

referral and consultation - medical oncology - artificial intelligence - telemedicine - interdisciplinary communication

Authors' Contributions

AG: Collection and assembly of data, conception and design, data analysis and interpretation, final approval of the manuscript, manuscript writing, and provision of study materials or patients; SVS: collection and assembly of data, conception and design, final approval of the manuscript, and manuscript writing; and MUPC: data analysis and interpretation, final approval of the manuscript, and manuscript writing.


Clinical Trials

None.




Publication History

Received: 05 July 2024

Accepted: 16 August 2024

Article published online:
30 November 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

Bibliographical Record
Auro del Giglio, Sergio Vicente Serrano, Mateus Uerlei Pereira da Costa. Second Opinion in Medical Oncology in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine. Brazilian Journal of Oncology 2024; 20: s00441791980.
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791980
 

  • References

  • 1 Tattersall MHN, Dear RF, Jansen J. et al. Second opinions in oncology: the experiences of patients attending the Sydney Cancer Centre. Med J Aust 2009; 191 (04) 209-212 . PMID: 19705981
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Olver I, Carey M, Bryant J, Boyes A, Evans T, Sanson-Fisher R. Second opinions in medical oncology. BMC Palliat Care 2020; 19 (01) 112 . PMID: 32693836; PMCID: PMC7374890
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Fuchs T, Hanaya H, Seilacher E. et al. Information Deficits and Second Opinion Seeking - A Survey on Cancer Patients. Cancer Invest 2017; 35 (01) 62-69
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Loehberg CR, Meyer J, Häberle L. et al. Analysis of motives and patient satisfaction in oncological second opinions provided by a certified university breast and gynecological cancer center. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2020; 301 (05) 1299-1306
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Philip J, Gold M, Schwarz M, Komesaroff P. Second medical opinions: the views of oncology patients and their physicians. Support Care Cancer 2010; 18 (09) 1199-1205
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 6 Kurian AW, Friese CR, Bondarenko I. et al. Second Opinions From Medical Oncologists for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Prevalence, Correlates, and Consequences. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3 (03) 391-397
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Sikora K. Second opinions for patients with cancer. BMJ 1995; 311 (7014) 1179-1180
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Cecon N, Hillen MA, Pfaff H, Dresen A, Groß SE. Why do newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seek a second opinion? - Second opinion seeking and its association with the physician-patient relationship. Patient Educ Couns 2019; 102 (05) 998-1004
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Mellink WA, Henzen-Logmans SC, Bongaerts AH, Ooijen BV, Rodenburg CJ, Wiggers TH. Discrepancy between second and first opinion in surgical oncological patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006; 32 (01) 108-112
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Schook RM, ter Avest MJ, van Setten CH, de Man FF, Smit EF, Postmus PE. Lung Cancer Patients Benefit from Second Opinions by Improvement of Diagnosis and Therapy. Cancer Clin Oncol 2014; 3 (01) 43-57
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Lipitz-Snyderman A, Chimonas S, Mailankody S. et al. Clinical value of second opinions in oncology: A retrospective review of changes in diagnosis and treatment recommendations. Cancer Med 2023; 12 (07) 8063-8072
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Chang HR, Yang MC, Chung KP. Can cancer patients seeking a second opinion get better care?. Am J Manag Care 2013; 19 (05) 380-387
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Tattersall MH. Can a second medical opinion in a patient with cancer be truly independent?. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2011; 7 (01) 1-3
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 14 Orgerie MB, Duchange N, Pélicier N. et al. La réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire en cancérologie ne modifie pas la relation entre le médecin et son patient. . [Multidisciplinary meetings in oncology do not impact the physician-patient relationship] Presse Med 2012; 41 (3 pt 1): e87-94 . French. . Epub 2011 Nov 12. PMID: 22079306 PubMed
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Peier-Ruser KS, von Greyerz S. Why Do Cancer Patients Have Difficulties Evaluating the Need for a Second Opinion and What Is Needed to Lower the Barrier? A Qualitative Study. Oncol Res Treat 2018; 41 (12) 769-773
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Tattersall MH, Griffin A, Dunn SM, Monaghan H, Scatchard K, Butow PN. Writing to referring doctors after a new patient consultation. What is wanted and what was contained in letters from one medical oncologist?. Aust N Z J Med 1995; 25 (05) 479-482
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Knox R, Butow PN, Devine R, Tattersall MH. Audiotapes of oncology consultations: only for the first consultation?. Ann Oncol 2002; 13 (04) 622-627
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Stockler M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH. The take-home message: doctors' views on letters and tapes after a cancer consultation. Ann Oncol 1993; 4 (07) 549-552
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Links M, Aghmesheh M. Second opinions: agendas and ego. Acta Oncol 2009; 48 (08) 1210-1213
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Mano MS, Çitaku FT, Barach P. Implementing multidisciplinary tumor boards in oncology: a narrative review. Future Oncol 2022; 18 (03) 375-384
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Sunami K, Naito Y, Saigusa Y. et al. A Learning Program for Treatment Recommendations by Molecular Tumor Boards and Artificial Intelligence. JAMA Oncol 2024; 10 (01) 95-102
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Garcia D, Spruill LS, Irshad A, Wood J, Kepecs D, Klauber-DeMore N. The Value of a Second Opinion for Breast Cancer Patients Referred to a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Center with a Multidisciplinary Breast Tumor Board. Ann Surg Oncol 2018; 25 (10) 2953-2957
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Fultinavičiūtė U. It's a match! Connecting patients to clinical trials with AI [Internet]. Clinical Trials Arena. 2023 May [access in 2024 Apr 18]. Available from: https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/features/clinical-trial-matching-ai/
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Sorin V, Klang E, Sklair-Levy M. et al. Large language model (ChatGPT) as a support tool for breast tumor board. NPJ Breast Cancer 2023; 9 (01) 44
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Katz AJ, Haynes K, Du S, Barron J, Kubik R, Chen RC. Evaluation of Telemedicine Use Among US Patients With Newly Diagnosed Cancer by Socioeconomic Status. JAMA Oncol 2022; 8 (01) 161-163
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Shah AP, Shi S, Shah S. Characterization of remote second-opinion oncology patients and associated changes in management. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40 (16) e18563-e18563
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Mao A, Meng Y, Wang Q. et al. Outcome Assessment for a Telemedicine-Based Second Opinion Program for Midwest China. Inquiry 2020; 57: 46958020968788
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 28 Knudsen KE, Willman C, Winn R. Optimizing the Use of Telemedicine in Oncology Care: Postpandemic Opportunities. Clin Cancer Res 2021; 27 (04) 933-936
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Maruzzo M, La Verde N, Russo A. et al. Second medical opinion in oncological setting. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2021; 160: 103282
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 30 Cortes J, Perez-García JM, Llombart-Cussac A. et al. Enhancing global access to cancer medicines. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70 (02) 105-124
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 31 Shah SC, Kayamba V, Peek Jr RM, Heimburger D. Cancer Control in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Is It Time to Consider Screening?. J Glob Oncol 2019; 5: 1-8
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 32 Jolly S, Uppal S, Bhatla N, Johnston C, Maturen K. Improving Global Outcomes in Cervical Cancer: The Time Has Come for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging to Formally Incorporate Advanced Imaging. J Glob Oncol 2018; 4: 1-6
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 33 Thiagarajan S, Poojari V, Tuljapurkar V. et al. National Cancer Grid Virtual Tumor Boards of Head and Neck Cancers: An Innovative Approach to Multidisciplinary Care. JCO Glob Oncol 2023; 9: e2200348
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 34 Oliveira LF, Barbosa Ade S, Alencar Ide C, Mendes Cde M, Chaves TVS, Sampaio Jda S. Câncer de mama no estado do Piauí: do diagnóstico ao tratamento. Res Soc Dev 2023; 12 (05) e3812541455
    Search in Google Scholar