Multidisciplinary molecular decision-making
A molecular tumour board brings several kinds of expertise to the same set of results, and produces a structured record of what was concluded — and of what was not.
From submission to decision summary
Nine stages from the referring clinician's question to a structured record they can act on.
-
Case submission
The referring clinician submits the clinical question with the supporting documentation.
-
Clinical review
Disease course, treatment history and current status are established as a coherent narrative.
-
Pathology review
The tissue diagnosis is examined, including whether it is secure and whether review is warranted.
-
Molecular review
Findings are assessed individually, with assay coverage and limitations made explicit.
-
Computational analysis
Annotation, tiering and any further analysis the case requires.
-
Evidence synthesis
The literature and trial landscape assembled for this specific configuration.
-
Tumour board discussion
Multidisciplinary discussion of what the assembled information supports.
-
Structured decision summary
A written record of findings, evidence tiers, actionability, uncertainties and open questions.
-
Return to referring clinician
The summary supports the referring clinician’s decision-making. It does not replace it.
What the summary contains
The value of a tumour board sits as much in what it records as in what it concludes. A summary that captures only the conclusion loses the part a later reviewer most needs.
Evidence tiers
Each finding is placed on an explicit evidence scale, from randomised trial data through single-arm and observational evidence to preclinical work. The tier is stated rather than implied.
Actionability categories
Findings are categorised by whether they carry a therapeutic, diagnostic or prognostic implication, and whether that implication holds in this disease specifically.
Areas of uncertainty
What the board could not resolve, and why. Cases arrive at a board because they are uncertain; a record capturing only conclusions loses the part that most needs preserving.
Suggested next questions
What further information would change the assessment — additional testing, pathology review, or a specific clarification from the reporting laboratory.
Submit a case for molecular review
Remote participation is available, including for institutions without an established board of their own.