Enhancing network integration and quality through implementation of a general medical oncology tumor board and disease management group.

493 Background: The acquisition of general medical oncology practices presents integration challenges that may hinder quality and access to specialized comprehensive cancer care. General medical oncologists—who comprise approximately 34% of the national oncology workforce—often manage a wide range of tumor types in community-based settings. This initiative aimed to promote clinical integration, multidisciplinary collaboration, and consistent care quality across oncology practices acquired by an integrated health system through the creation of a generalist disease management group (DMG) and associated tumor board. Methods: Twenty-seven generalist medical oncology faculty were invited via institutional email to participate in the new DMG. A generalist division director was appointed to oversee the initiative and facilitate a weekly multidisciplinary tumor board. Each session included participation from medical oncology disease-specific experts, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, radiologists, clinical trials specialists, and molecular oncologists. Over an 18-week period, 145 patient cases were reviewed. Subsequently, an anonymous survey was distributed to DMG members to evaluate self-reported improvements in care quality, practice integration into the health system, and patient access to clinical trials. Results: The survey achieved an 81% response rate (n=22). Of respondents, 91% agreed that the DMG improved the quality of care they deliver. 82% agree that the DMG has provided insights that changed their treatment plan. 55% agree that the DMG made it more likely for them to retain patients for cancer treatment. In terms of integration, 95% agreed that the tumor board provided insights into unknown cancer-related services and 86% agree that the DMG increased their likelihood to refer patients for cancer-related services within the health system. Lastly, in terms of clinical trial access, 95% agreed that the DMG increased their awareness of available clinical trials and 86% agreed that the tumor board increased their likelihood of referring a patient for trial evaluation. Conclusions: Implementation of a generalist DMG and multidisciplinary tumor board was feasible, enhanced network integration, and improved both provider collaboration and patient access to institutional oncology resources. This model offers a scalable framework for engaging general medical oncologists in system-level care standardization. Future expansion to include additional specialties, such as pathology, and further integration with community oncology practices may amplify its impact.