Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Practice US Medical PG questions for Multidisciplinary cancer care. These multiple choice questions (MCQs) cover important concepts and help you prepare for your exams.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 1: A research team develops a new monoclonal antibody checkpoint inhibitor for advanced melanoma that has shown promise in animal studies as well as high efficacy and low toxicity in early phase human clinical trials. The research team would now like to compare this drug to existing standard of care immunotherapy for advanced melanoma. The research team decides to conduct a non-randomized study where the novel drug will be offered to patients who are deemed to be at risk for toxicity with the current standard of care immunotherapy, while patients without such risk factors will receive the standard treatment. Which of the following best describes the level of evidence that this study can offer?
- A. Level 1
- B. Level 3 (Correct Answer)
- C. Level 5
- D. Level 4
- E. Level 2
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***Level 3***
- A **non-randomized controlled trial** like the one described, where patient assignment to treatment groups is based on specific characteristics (risk of toxicity), falls into Level 3 evidence.
- This level typically includes **non-randomized controlled trials** and **well-designed cohort studies** with comparison groups, which are prone to selection bias and confounding.
- The study compares two treatments but lacks randomization, making it Level 3 evidence.
*Level 1*
- Level 1 evidence is the **highest level of evidence**, derived from **systematic reviews and meta-analyses** of multiple well-designed randomized controlled trials or large, high-quality randomized controlled trials.
- The described study is explicitly stated as non-randomized, ruling out Level 1.
*Level 2*
- Level 2 evidence involves at least one **well-designed randomized controlled trial** (RCT) or **systematic reviews** of randomized trials.
- The current study is *non-randomized*, which means it cannot be classified as Level 2 evidence, as randomization is a key criterion for this level.
*Level 4*
- Level 4 evidence includes **case series**, **case-control studies**, and **poorly designed cohort or case-control studies**.
- While the study is non-randomized, it is a controlled comparative trial rather than a case series or retrospective case-control study, placing it at Level 3.
*Level 5*
- Level 5 evidence is the **lowest level of evidence**, typically consisting of **expert opinion** without explicit critical appraisal, or based on physiology, bench research, or animal studies.
- While the drug was initially tested in animal studies, the current human comparative study offers a higher level of evidence than expert opinion or preclinical data.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 2: An 83-year-old man presents to the gastroenterologist to follow-up on results from a biopsy of a pancreatic head mass, which the clinician was concerned could be pancreatic cancer. After welcoming the patient and his wife to the clinic, the physician begins to discuss the testing and leads into delivering the results, which showed metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Before she is able to disclose these findings, the patient stops her and exclaims, "Whatever it is, I don't want to know. Please just make me comfortable in my last months alive. I have made up my mind about this." Which of the following is the most appropriate response on the part of the physician?
- A. "If that is your definite wish, then I must honor it" (Correct Answer)
- B. "The cancer has spread to your liver"
- C. "As a physician, I am obligated to disclose these results to you"
- D. "If you don't know what condition you have, I will be unable to be your physician going forward"
- E. "Please, sir, I strongly urge you to reconsider your decision"
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***"If that is your definite wish, then I must honor it"***
- This response respects the patient's **autonomy** and right to refuse information, aligning with ethical principles of patient-centered care.
- The patient has clearly and articulately stated his desire not to know and wishes for **palliative care**, which the physician should respect.
- The patient appears to have **decision-making capacity** based on his clear communication of wishes.
*"The cancer has spread to your liver"*
- This statement violates the patient's explicit request not to be informed of his diagnosis, potentially causing distress and undermining trust.
- Disclosure of information against a patient's wishes is unethical when the patient has **decision-making capacity** and has clearly refused information.
*"As a physician, I am obligated to disclose these results to you"*
- While physicians have a general duty to inform, this is superseded by a **competent patient's right to refuse information**.
- No absolute obligation exists to force information upon a patient who explicitly states a desire not to know, especially when it concerns their own health information.
*"If you don't know what condition you have, I will be unable to be your physician going forward"*
- This response is coercive and threatening, attempting to strong-arm the patient into accepting information he has refused.
- A physician's role includes managing symptoms and providing comfort, even if the patient chooses not to know the full diagnostic details of their condition, particularly in a **palliative care** context.
- This statement could constitute **patient abandonment**, which is unethical.
*"Please, sir, I strongly urge you to reconsider your decision"*
- While it's acceptable to ensure the patient fully understands the implications of their decision, a forceful "urge to reconsider" after a clear refusal can be seen as undermining their **autonomy**.
- The physician should confirm the patient's understanding and offer an opportunity to discuss it later if desired, rather than immediately pressuring them.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 3: A 72-year-old man is admitted to the hospital with productive cough and fever. A chest radiograph is obtained and shows lobar consolidation. The patient is diagnosed with pneumonia. He has a history of penicillin allergy. The attending physician orders IV levofloxacin as empiric therapy. On morning rounds the next day, the team discovers that the patient was administered ceftriaxone instead of levofloxacin. The patient has already received a full dose of ceftriaxone and had no signs of allergic reaction, and his pneumonia appears to be improving clinically. What is the most appropriate next step?
- A. Administer diphenhydramine as prophylaxis against allergic reaction
- B. Continue with ceftriaxone as empiric therapy
- C. Switch the patient to oral azithromycin in preparation for discharge and home therapy
- D. Switch the patient back to levofloxacin and discuss the error with the patient
- E. Continue with ceftriaxone and add azithromycin as inpatient empiric pneumonia therapy (Correct Answer)
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***Continue with ceftriaxone and add azithromycin as inpatient empiric pneumonia therapy***
- This is the **guideline-recommended approach** for hospitalized community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) according to ATS/IDSA guidelines.
- Ceftriaxone (beta-lactam) plus azithromycin (macrolide) provides **dual coverage** for typical bacteria (Streptococcus pneumoniae) and atypical organisms (Mycoplasma, Chlamydophila, Legionella).
- Since the patient has already tolerated ceftriaxone without allergic reaction despite penicillin allergy history, continuing it is safe, and **adding azithromycin completes appropriate empiric therapy** for a 72-year-old hospitalized patient.
- The cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins is low (1-3%), and the patient's tolerance of ceftriaxone confirms safety.
*Continue with ceftriaxone as empiric therapy*
- While the patient is improving on ceftriaxone and tolerated it without allergic reaction, **monotherapy with a beta-lactam alone is suboptimal** for hospitalized CAP.
- Guidelines recommend dual therapy (beta-lactam + macrolide) or fluoroquinolone monotherapy for hospitalized non-ICU patients to ensure adequate atypical coverage.
- Continuing ceftriaxone alone misses potential atypical pathogens that may be contributing to the pneumonia.
*Switch the patient to oral azithromycin in preparation for discharge and home therapy*
- It is **premature to switch to oral therapy** or consider discharge after only one day of treatment for a 72-year-old with pneumonia requiring hospitalization.
- The patient should remain on IV therapy until clinically stable (afebrile, hemodynamically stable, improving oxygenation) for an appropriate duration.
*Administer diphenhydramine as prophylaxis against allergic reaction*
- Since the patient has already tolerated a full dose of ceftriaxone without any allergic reaction, **prophylactic antihistamines are unnecessary**.
- The low cross-reactivity between penicillins and third-generation cephalosporins, combined with the successful first dose, indicates minimal risk.
*Switch the patient back to levofloxacin and discuss the error with the patient*
- Switching back to levofloxacin is **unnecessary and potentially disruptive** given that the patient is clinically improving on ceftriaxone and has demonstrated tolerance to it.
- While the original plan was levofloxacin (appropriate fluoroquinolone monotherapy), the inadvertent use of ceftriaxone has proven safe and provides an opportunity to implement the preferred dual-therapy regimen.
- While discussing medication errors is important for transparency, the immediate medical priority is optimizing pneumonia treatment.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 4: A 52-year-old man with stage IV melanoma comes to the physician with his wife for a routine follow-up examination. He was recently diagnosed with new bone and brain metastases despite receiving aggressive chemotherapy but has not disclosed this to his wife. He has given verbal consent to discuss his prognosis with his wife and asks the doctor to inform her of his condition because he does not wish to do so himself. She is tearful and has many questions about his condition. Which of the following would be the most appropriate statement by the physician to begin the interview with the patient's wife?
- A. Have you discussed a living will or goals of care together?
- B. We should talk about how we can manage his symptoms with additional chemotherapy.
- C. Why do you think your husband has not discussed his medical condition with you?
- D. What is your understanding of your husband's current condition? (Correct Answer)
- E. Your husband has end-stage cancer, and his prognosis is poor.
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***What is your understanding of your husband's current condition?***
- This statement initiates the conversation by **assessing the wife's current knowledge** and emotional state, which is crucial for delivering sensitive and appropriate information.
- It allows the physician to tailor the discussion to her specific understanding and concerns, ensuring that information is delivered compassionately and effectively.
*Have you discussed a living will or goals of care together?*
- This question is too abrupt and **premature** as an opening, as the wife is clearly distressed and unaware of the full severity of her husband's condition.
- Discussions about end-of-life planning should only occur after the patient's wife has a clear understanding of the diagnosis and prognosis, and has processed this information.
*Your husband has end-stage cancer, and his prognosis is poor.*
- While factual, this statement is **too blunt and lacks empathy** for an opening, especially given the wife's emotional state and lack of prior knowledge.
- Delivering such devastating news directly without first assessing her understanding or providing context can be traumatic and impede effective communication.
*We should talk about how we can manage his symptoms with additional chemotherapy.*
- This statement implies a focus on further aggressive treatment which may not be appropriate given the **new bone and brain metastases** and aggressive prior chemotherapy, suggesting a limited benefit of more chemotherapy.
- It also **diverts from the primary need to discuss the overall prognosis** and the patient's rapidly declining condition, which the doctor has been asked to convey.
*Why do you think your husband has not discussed his medical condition with you?*
- This question is **accusatory** and places blame on either the patient or the wife, which is inappropriate and unhelpful in a sensitive medical discussion.
- It shifts the focus away from providing medical information and empathy towards a speculative and potentially confrontational topic.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 5: An epidemiologist is evaluating the efficacy of Noxbinle in preventing HCC deaths at the population level. A clinical trial shows that over 5 years, the mortality rate from HCC was 25% in the control group and 15% in patients treated with Noxbinle 100 mg daily. Based on this data, how many patients need to be treated with Noxbinle 100 mg to prevent, on average, one death from HCC?
- A. 20
- B. 73
- C. 10 (Correct Answer)
- D. 50
- E. 100
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***10***
- The **number needed to treat (NNT)** is calculated by first finding the **absolute risk reduction (ARR)**.
- **ARR** = Risk in control group - Risk in treatment group = 25% - 15% = **10%** (or 0.10).
- **NNT = 1 / ARR** = 1 / 0.10 = **10 patients**.
- This means that **10 patients must be treated with Noxbinle to prevent one death from HCC** over 5 years.
*20*
- This would result from an ARR of 5% (1/0.05 = 20), which is not supported by the data.
- May arise from miscalculating the risk difference or incorrectly halving the actual ARR.
*73*
- This value does not correspond to any standard calculation of NNT from the given mortality rates.
- May result from confusion with other epidemiological measures or calculation error.
*50*
- This would correspond to an ARR of 2% (1/0.02 = 50), which significantly underestimates the actual risk reduction.
- Could result from incorrectly calculating the difference as a proportion rather than absolute percentage points.
*100*
- This would correspond to an ARR of 1% (1/0.01 = 100), grossly underestimating the treatment benefit.
- May result from confusing ARR with relative risk reduction or other calculation errors.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 6: Following a motor vehicle accident, a 63-year-old man is scheduled for surgery. The emergency physician notes a posture abnormality in the distal left lower limb and a fracture-dislocation of the right hip and acetabulum based on the radiology report. The senior orthopedic resident mistakenly notes a fracture dislocation of the left hip and marks the left hip as the site of surgery. The examination by the surgeon in the operating room shows an externally rotated and shortened left lower limb. The surgeon inserts a pin in the left tibia but erroneously operates on the left hip. A review of postoperative imaging leads to a second surgery on the fracture-dislocation of the right hip. Rather than the surgeon alone, the surgical team and the hospital system are held accountable for not implementing the mandatory protocol of preincision 'time-out' and compliance monitoring. Which of the following best describes this systems-based approach to understanding how medical errors occur?
- A. Root cause analysis
- B. Primordial prevention
- C. Sentinel event
- D. Closed-loop communication
- E. Swiss-cheese model (Correct Answer)
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***Swiss-cheese model***
- The scenario describes multiple layers of failure (the resident's error, the surgeon's error, lack of "time-out" protocol adherence) leading to a major accident, aligning with the **Swiss-cheese model** of accident causation.
- This model emphasizes that medical errors result from the **alignment of multiple latent failures** and active failures in a system, rather than a single individual's mistake.
*Root cause analysis*
- While a **root cause analysis** would be performed *after* an event to understand "why" it occurred, the question asks for the approach that *describes* how errors can occur from system failures, which is the Swiss-cheese model.
- This is a retrospective problem-solving method to identify the **fundamental causes of an undesirable event**, not a model for understanding error propagation.
*Primordial prevention*
- **Primordial prevention** aims to prevent risk factors for disease from ever developing, often through societal and environmental interventions.
- This concept is focused on **public health and preventing disease onset**, not on preventing surgical errors within a healthcare system.
*Sentinel event*
- A **sentinel event** is an unexpected occurrence involving death or serious physical or psychological injury, or the risk thereof. The incorrect surgery is indeed a sentinel event.
- However, "sentinel event" refers to the *outcome* itself, not the *model* used to understand how multiple systemic failures lead to such an event.
*Closed-loop communication*
- **Closed-loop communication** is a technique used to avoid misunderstandings, where the sender states a message, and the receiver repeats it back to confirm understanding.
- While the *lack* of this communication might have contributed to the error, the question specifically asks for the model that describes how multiple systemic failures, like the missed "time-out," lead to the overall mistake.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 7: A 65-year-old man is admitted to the hospital because of a 1-month history of fatigue, intermittent fever, and weakness. Results from a peripheral blood smear taken during his evaluation are indicative of possible acute myeloid leukemia. Bone marrow aspiration and subsequent cytogenetic studies confirm the diagnosis. The physician sets aside an appointed time-slot and arranges a meeting in a quiet office to inform him about the diagnosis and discuss his options. He has been encouraged to bring someone along to the appointment if he wanted. He comes to your office at the appointed time with his daughter. He appears relaxed, with a full range of affect. Which of the following is the most appropriate opening statement in this situation?
- A. Your lab reports show that you have an acute myeloid leukemia
- B. What is your understanding of the reasons we did bone marrow aspiration and cytogenetic studies? (Correct Answer)
- C. You must be curious and maybe even anxious about the results of your tests.
- D. I may need to refer you to a blood cancer specialist because of your diagnosis. You may need chemotherapy or radiotherapy, which we are not equipped for.
- E. Would you like to know all the details of your diagnosis, or would you prefer I just explain to you what our options are?
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***"What is your understanding of the reasons we did bone marrow aspiration and cytogenetic studies?"***
- This **open-ended question** allows the patient to express their current knowledge and perceptions, which helps the physician tailor the discussion.
- It establishes a **patient-centered approach**, respecting the patient's existing understanding and preparing them for further information.
*"You must be curious and maybe even anxious about the results of your tests."*
- While empathic, this statement makes an **assumption about the patient's feelings** rather than inviting them to share their own.
- It is often better to ask directly or use more open-ended questions that allow the patient to express their true emotions, especially given their **relaxed demeanor**.
*"I may need to refer you to a blood cancer specialist because of your diagnosis. You may need chemotherapy or radiotherapy, which we are not equipped for.”"*
- This statement immediately introduces **overwhelming and potentially alarming information** (referral, chemotherapy, radiotherapy) without first establishing the diagnosis or assessing the patient's readiness to receive it.
- It prematurely jumps to treatment and logistics, potentially causing **unnecessary distress** before the patient has processed the core diagnosis.
*"Would you like to know all the details of your diagnosis, or would you prefer I just explain to you what our options are?""*
- While it attempts to assess the patient's preference for information, this question is a **closed-ended "either/or" choice** that might limit the patient's ability to express nuanced needs.
- It also prematurely introduces the idea of "options" without first explaining the diagnosis in an understandable context.
*"Your lab reports show that you have an acute myeloid leukemia"*
- This is a **direct and blunt delivery of a serious diagnosis** without any preparatory context or assessment of the patient's existing knowledge or emotional state.
- Delivering such news abruptly can be shocking and overwhelming, potentially **hindering effective communication** and rapport building.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 8: A 64-year-old woman presents to the physician’s office to find out the results of her recent abdominal CT. She had been complaining of fatigue, weight loss, and jaundice for 6 months prior to seeing the physician. The patient has a significant medical history of hypothyroidism, generalized anxiety disorder, and hyperlipidemia. She takes levothyroxine, sertraline, and atorvastatin. The vital signs are stable today. On physical examination, her skin shows slight jaundice, but no scleral icterus is present. The palpation of the abdomen reveals no tenderness, guarding, or masses. The CT results shows a 3 x 3 cm mass located at the head of the pancreas. Which of the following choices is most appropriate for delivering bad news to the patient?
- A. Refer the patient to an oncologist without informing the patient of their cancer
- B. Ask that a spouse or close relative come to the appointment, explain to them the bad news, and see if they will tell the patient since they have a closer relationship
- C. Set aside an appropriate amount of time in your schedule, and ensure you will not have any interruptions as you explain the bad news to the patient (Correct Answer)
- D. Call the patient over the phone to break the bad news, and tell them they can make an office visit if they prefer
- E. Train one of the nursing staff employees on this matter, and delegate this duty as one of their job responsibilities
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***Set aside an appropriate amount of time in your schedule, and ensure you will not have any interruptions as you explain the bad news to the patient***
- Delivering bad news requires a **dedicated, uninterrupted environment** to allow for clear communication, emotional support, and time for the patient to process the information and ask questions.
- Adequate time ensures that the physician can address immediate concerns, explore the patient's understanding, and collaboratively plan the next steps, fostering **trust and patient-centered care**.
*Refer the patient to an oncologist without informing the patient of their cancer*
- This approach violates the principle of **patient autonomy** and the ethical obligation to provide complete and accurate information about their diagnosis.
- Patients have a right to know their medical status and actively participate in decisions regarding their care, which includes being informed of a **cancer diagnosis**.
*Ask that a spouse or close relative come to the appointment, explain to them the bad news, and see if they will tell the patient since they have a closer relationship*
- While involving family is important for support, the **primary responsibility** to deliver difficult medical news rests with the physician directly to the patient.
- This avoids potential miscommunication, ensures the patient receives accurate information from the medical professional, and respects the patient's individual right to hear their diagnosis without an intermediary.
*Call the patient over the phone to break the bad news, and tell them they can make an office visit if they prefer*
- Delivering significant bad news, especially a potential cancer diagnosis, over the phone is generally **inappropriate and insensitive**, as it lacks the personal presence and immediate support needed.
- A phone call does not allow for non-verbal cues, immediate emotional support, or a comprehensive discussion of complex medical information, making an **in-person consultation preferential**.
*Train one of the nursing staff employees on this matter, and delegate this duty as one of their job responsibilities*
- Delivering a new and serious medical diagnosis, such as cancer, is primarily the **responsibility of the treating physician** due to the complexity of the information and the need for medical expertise.
- While nurses play a crucial role in patient education and support, conveying initial diagnoses of this gravity falls outside their typical scope of practice and could erode **patient trust**.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 9: A 47-year-old woman comes to the physician for a mass in her left breast she noticed 2 days ago during breast self-examination. She has hypothyroidism treated with levothyroxine. There is no family history of breast cancer. Examination shows large, moderately ptotic breasts. The mass in her left breast is small (approximately 1 cm x 0.5 cm), firm, mobile, and painless. It is located 4 cm from her nipple-areolar complex at the 7 o'clock position. There are no changes in the skin or nipple, and there is no palpable axillary adenopathy. No masses are palpable in her right breast. A urine pregnancy test is negative. Mammogram showed a soft tissue mass with poorly defined margins. Core needle biopsy confirms a low-grade infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The pathological specimen is positive for estrogen receptors and negative for progesterone and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) receptors. Staging shows no distant metastatic disease. Which of the following is the most appropriate next step in management?
- A. Lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy followed by hormone therapy
- B. Nipple-sparing mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection followed by hormone therapy
- C. Nipple-sparing mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection, followed by radiation and hormone therapy
- D. Radical mastectomy followed by hormone therapy
- E. Lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy, followed by radiation and hormone therapy (Correct Answer)
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: **Lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy, followed by radiation and hormone therapy**
- The patient has **early-stage (T1N0M0) estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative invasive ductal carcinoma** suitable for **breast-conserving surgery (lumpectomy)**.
- **Lumpectomy** must be followed by **radiation therapy** to the remaining breast tissue to reduce the risk of local recurrence, and **endocrine therapy** (due to ER positivity) is indicated to reduce systemic recurrence risk.
- **Sentinel lymph node biopsy** is performed to stage the axilla; if positive, an axillary lymph node dissection may be indicated. However, in this case, the mass is small, and there is no palpable axillary adenopathy, making sentinel lymph node biopsy the appropriate initial step.
*Lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy followed by hormone therapy*
- While **lumpectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy** and **hormone therapy** are part of the appropriate management, **radiation therapy** to the conserved breast is a critical component that is missing from this option.
- Omitting **radiation therapy** after lumpectomy for invasive breast cancer significantly increases the risk of local recurrence.
*Nipple-sparing mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection followed by hormone therapy*
- A **nipple-sparing mastectomy** is a more aggressive surgical approach than typically required for a **small, early-stage tumor** like this, which is amenable to breast-conserving surgery.
- **Axillary lymph node dissection** is usually reserved for cases with clinically positive lymph nodes or a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy, not as an initial step when there is no palpable axillary adenopathy.
*Nipple-sparing mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection, followed by radiation and hormone therapy*
- This option involves an **unnecessarily extensive surgical procedure (nipple-sparing mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection)** for a **small (1cm x 0.5cm) early-stage tumor** that can be managed with breast-conserving therapy.
- While radiation and hormone therapy are relevant, the initial surgical choice is too aggressive given the clinical presentation.
*Radical mastectomy followed by hormone therapy*
- **Radical mastectomy** (which includes removal of the breast, underlying chest muscle, and axillary lymph nodes) is rarely performed today due to its significant morbidity and is not indicated for this **early-stage tumor**.
- **Modified radical mastectomy**, which removes the breast and axillary lymph nodes while preserving the chest muscle, is typically only considered if breast-conserving surgery is not feasible or desired, and **hormone therapy** would be indicated, but **radiation** may also be needed depending on other factors.
Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG Question 10: A 38-year-old woman with BRCA1 mutation and strong family history of breast and ovarian cancer (mother and sister both affected) undergoes bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Final pathology unexpectedly reveals a 0.6 cm focus of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in the right breast, high-grade, with clear margins. She has not yet undergone risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. She desires breast reconstruction. Evaluate the comprehensive management strategy.
- A. No additional breast surgery needed; proceed with immediate reconstruction and discuss oophorectomy timing (Correct Answer)
- B. Radiation therapy to mastectomy site; delayed reconstruction; oophorectomy after radiation
- C. Observation of surgical site; proceed with reconstruction; defer oophorectomy until age 40
- D. Re-excision to wider margins; delayed reconstruction after confirming no invasion; immediate oophorectomy
- E. Genetic counseling; additional oncologic surgery consultation; defer all additional procedures
Multidisciplinary cancer care Explanation: ***No additional breast surgery needed; proceed with immediate reconstruction and discuss oophorectomy timing***
- A **prophylactic mastectomy** effectively treats incidental **DCIS** when margins are clear, as the entire target tissue has been removed, eliminating the need for further excision.
- For **BRCA1 mutation** carriers, **risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO)** is a high priority usually recommended between ages 35-40, making its discussion essential in her comprehensive care.
*Radiation therapy to mastectomy site; delayed reconstruction; oophorectomy after radiation*
- **Radiation therapy** is not standard practice following a total mastectomy for **DCIS**, even in high-risk mutation carriers, if the margins are clear.
- **Delayed reconstruction** unnecessarily postpones the patient's aesthetic recovery without providing any oncologic benefit in the setting of non-invasive **DCIS**.
*Observation of surgical site; proceed with reconstruction; defer oophorectomy until age 40*
- While reconstruction is appropriate, deferring the discussion of **oophorectomy** until age 40 is risky for **BRCA1** patients, where the cancer risk rises significantly after age 35.
- **Risk management** for BRCA1 carriers must prioritize the **ovaries and fallopian tubes**, as there are no effective screening methods for ovarian cancer compared to breast cancer.
*Re-excision to wider margins; delayed reconstruction after confirming no invasion; immediate oophorectomy*
- **Re-excision** is impossible and unnecessary because a **total mastectomy** has already removed the breast envelope and the primary site of the DCIS.
- Incidental **DCIS** does not preclude **immediate reconstruction**, and forcing a delay would result in more complex secondary surgeries without improving survival.
*Genetic counseling; additional oncologic surgery consultation; defer all additional procedures*
- **Genetic counseling** has already occurred given the documented **BRCA1 mutation** status; repeating it delays necessary clinical intervention.
- Deferring all additional procedures is inappropriate because the patient is in the optimal window for **prophylactic oophorectomy** and desires reconstruction.
More Multidisciplinary cancer care US Medical PG questions available in the OnCourse app. Practice MCQs, flashcards, and get detailed explanations.
