Search

Purpose: The Hirsch index (h-index) has been shown to correlate with radiation oncology residents' having a first job in academics versus private practice, but it is limited by its inability to distinguish between the differing significance of coauthor roles in articles.Methods: A list of 2016 radiation oncology resident graduates and their postresidency career choices was compiled. The Scopus bibliometric citation database was then searched to collect h-index data for articles limited to first author only (hf) and first or second-author only (hs) for each resident.Results: Mean hf was 2.06 for all resident graduates, and mean hs was 2.77. Residents with PhDs had significantly higher hf (3.11 versus 1.76, P < .01) and hs (4.50 versus 2.28, P < .01). There was no statistically significant difference between male and female residents for hf (2.19 versus 1.61, P = .11) or hs (2.91 versus 2.25, P = .15). Residents choosing academia had higher hf (2.72 versus 1.44, P < .01) and hs (3.57 versus 2.01, P < 0.01) than those in private practice. Fewer than 20% of graduates with hf = 0 and only 10% of graduates with hs = 0 secured academic jobs.Conclusion: The average radiation oncology resident graduate has published a minimum of two first- and/or second-author articles cited at least twice. Graduates with PhDs and/or choosing academic careers were more likely to have higher hf and hs scores; there was no significant score difference by gender. Only 10% of graduates without any first- and/or second-author articles cited at least once secured academic jobs. These findings indicate that stratifying publications by first or second authorship when developing benchmarks for evaluating resident productivity and postresidency career type may be useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Publication metrics are useful in evaluating academic faculty for awarding grants, recruitment, and promotion. A new metric, the relative citation ratio (RCR), was recently released by the National Institutes of Health (NIH); however, no benchmark data yet exist. We sought to create benchmark data for physician faculty in academic radiation oncology (RO) and analyze correlations associated with increased academic productivity. Methods Citation database searches were performed for all US radiation oncologists affiliated with academic RO programs. Gender, NIH funding, career duration, academic rank, RCR, and weighted RCR were collected for each faculty. RCR and weighted RCR were calculated and compared between each subgroup of interest. RCR percentiles were also created for reference. Results A total of 1,299 RO physician faculty members from 75 institutions were included in the analysis. Overall, RO physician were very productive and influential with a mean RCR of 1.57 ± 1.53 SD and median RCR (interquartile range) of 1.32 (0.87-1.94). Academic rank, career duration, and NIH funding were associated with increased mean RCR and weighted RCR. Male gender and having a PhD were associated with an increased weighted RCR but not an increased mean RCR. Conclusions Current academic radiation oncologists have a high mean RCR value relative to the benchmark NIH RCR value of 1. All subgroups analyzed had an RCR value above 1 with professor or chair and previous NIH funding having the highest RCR and weighted RCR values overall. These data may be useful for self-evaluation of ROs as well as evaluation of faculty by institutional and departmental leaders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims Despite a paucity of women occupying leadership positions in academic medicine, studies have shown a higher ratio of female representation in the program director position compared with division chief in multiple specialties. This study aims to determine whether this trend exists in 3-year gastroenterology fellowships in the United States and to evaluate for any factors that may affect these differences. Methods In 2015, data were collected for the 163 U.S. gastroenterology fellowship programs including program director, associate program director, division chief, gender distribution, program size, academic center affiliation, and geographic region. Results A higher percentage of men than women held the role of program director (82% vs 18%), associate program director (72% vs 28%), and division chief (93% vs 7%). Women in program leadership held lower academic rank than their male counterparts ( P < .0001). The program director was more likely to be female if the division chief also was female ( P = .03). Programs with a higher number of trainees tended to be led by a female program director ( P = .06). Conclusions A gender disparity exists in all gastroenterology leadership roles, although the magnitude is smaller for program director and associate program director than the role of division chief. Further studies are needed to investigate the impact of this disparity on promotion and academic productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the quality of patient-clinician communication and shared decision making (SDM) when two disparate treatments for early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are discussed.Methods: We conducted a qualitative study to evaluate the experiences of 20 clinicians caring for patients with clinical Stage I NSCLC prior to treatment, focusing on communication practices. We used directed content analysis and a patient-centered communication theoretical model to guide understanding of communication strategies.Results: All clinicians expressed the importance of providing information, especially for mitigating patient worry, despite recognition that patients recall only a small amount of the information given. When patients expressed distress, clinicians exhibited empathy but preferred to provide more information in order to address patient concerns. Most clinicians reported practicing SDM, however, they also reported not clearly eliciting patient preferences and values, a key part of SDM.Conclusion: Communication with patients about treatment options for early stage NSCLC primary includes information giving. We found that only a few communication domains associated with SDM occurred regularly, and SDM may not be necessary in this clinical context.Practice Implications: Clinicians may need to incorporate nurse navigators or more written materials for effectively discussing potentially equivalent treatment options with their patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The aim of this study was to examine the experiences of radiation oncology applicants and to evaluate the prevalence of behaviors that may be in conflict with established ethical standards. Methods and Materials An anonymous survey was sent to all 2013 applicants to a single domestic radiation oncology residency program through the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP). Questions included demographics, survey of observed behaviors, and opinions regarding the interview and matching process. Descriptive statistics were presented. Characteristics and experiences of respondents who matched were compared with those who did not match. Results Questionnaires were returned by 87 of 171 applicants for a 51% response rate. Eighty-two questionnaires were complete and included for analysis. Seventy-eight respondents (95.1%) reported being asked at least 1 question in conflict with the NRMP code of conduct. When asked where else they were interviewing, 64% stated that this query made them uncomfortable. Forty-five respondents (54.9%) reported unsolicited post-interview contact by programs, and 31 (37.8%) felt pressured to give assurances. Fifteen respondents (18.3%) reported being told their rank position or that they were “ranked to match” prior to Match day, with 27% of those individuals indicating this information influenced how they ranked programs. Half of respondents felt applicants often made dishonest or misleading assurances, one-third reported that they believed their desired match outcome could be improved by deliberately misleading programs, and more than two-thirds felt their rank position could be improved by having faculty from their home institutions directly contact programs on their behalf. Conclusions Radiation oncology applicants report a high prevalence of behaviors in conflict with written NRMP policies. Post-interview communication should be discouraged in order to enhance fairness and support the professional development of future radiation oncologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess the optimal structure of an introductory curriculum (IC) for radiation oncology residents, including the perceived utility of a 2-day off-site "boot camp," and evaluate the success of a pilot introductory radiation oncology curriculum (IROC) based on these initial data.Methods and Materials: In the first phase, anonymous, web-based surveys were sent to US radiation oncology program directors and residents. Likert-type scores (1, not at all; 5, extremely) are reported as the median and interquartile range. Using the phase 1 results, IROC was developed, piloted, and evaluated.Results: Of the 89 program directors and 697 residents, 47 (53%) and 165 (24%) responded, respectively. Of the 89 program directors, 37 (79%) reported offering a formal IC. However, only 83 residents (50%) reported having a formal IC. Program directors reported resident preparation for clinical training as "moderate" (median 3, interquartile range 2-3) on entering residency and "moderate" (median 3, interquartile range 3-4) after IC completion (P = .03). However, residents only believed they were "slightly" prepared (median 2, interquartile range 1-2) on entering residency and "moderately" (median 3, interquartile range 2-3) prepared after IC completion (P < .01). Program directors believed an off-site boot camp would be of "moderate" utility (median 3, interquartile range 3-4) with participation limited by funding (57%). Residents without an IC reported that having an IC would be "quite" beneficial (median 4, interquartile range 3-5). Residents preferred instruction before the clinical training (49%) and over 1 week (40%). Both program directors and residents rated lectures on radiation emergencies and simulation highly. Using these data, IROC was developed and piloted with incoming residents at 4 institutions. After IROC, residents reported improvement in overall preparedness for clinical training (before: median 1, interquartile range 1-2; vs after: median 3, interquartile range 2-3; P < .01) and among specific practice domains.Conclusions: Beginning radiation oncology residents frequently lack structured introductory curricula but desire instruction before the clinical training with a focus on practical aspects (emergency management, contouring). Program directors recognize the value of both off-site and on-site boot camps. An on-site IC could mitigate funding barriers. A standardized IC, IROC, piloted at 4 programs, showed promising outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: A lack of diversity has been observed in radiation oncology (RO), with women and certain racial/ethnic groups underrepresented as trainees, faculty, and practicing physicians. We sought to gain a nuanced understanding of how to best promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) based on the insights of RO department chairs, with particular attention given to the experiences of the few women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) in these influential positions.Methods and Materials: From March to June 2016, we conducted telephone interviews with 24 RO department chairs (of 27 invited). Purposive sampling was used to invite all chairs who were women (n = 13) or URMs (n = 3) and 11 male chairs who were not URMs. Multiple analysts coded the verbatim transcripts.Results: Five themes were identified: (1) commitment to DEI promotes quality health care and innovation; (2) gaps remain despite some progress with promoting diversity in RO; (3) women and URM faculty continue to experience challenges in various career domains; (4) solutions to DEI issues would be facilitated by acknowledging realities of gender and race; and (5) expansion of the career pipeline is needed.Conclusions: The chairs' insights had policy-relevant implications. Bias training should broach tokenism, blindness, and intersectionality. Efforts to recruit and support diverse talent should be deliberate and proactive. Bridge programs could engage students before their application to medical school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report the toxicities and outcomes for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and accelerated hypofractionated radiation therapy (AHRT) in patients with Child-Pugh (CP) class A, B, or C and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score 1, 2, or 3 hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods and Materials: We retrospectively reviewed the data from 146 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who had undergone SBRT (50 Gy in 5 fractions) or AHRT (45 Gy in 18 fractions). The primary endpoint was liver toxicity, defined as an increase in the CP score of ≥2 within 6 months of radiation therapy. The secondary endpoints of ALBI change, overall survival, and local control were also calculated.Results: The median follow-up was 23 months (range 1-59). Most received SBRT (72%), and 28% received AHRT. Of all 146 patients, 45 (31%) had a CP score elevation of ≥2 within 6 months of radiation therapy (RT) (27 patients [28%] with baseline CP-A/B7 and 18 [35%] with baseline CP-B8/B9/C cirrhosis; P = .45). On multivariate analysis, neither baseline CP nor ALBI score was predictive of toxicity. No patient with a decline in liver functionality of CP ≥2 within 6 months of RT returned to baseline at later time points. Eleven grade 4 toxicities were observed. The mean change in the raw ALBI score at ∼6 months was similar for all baseline ALBI groups. Twenty-two patients underwent orthotopic liver transplantation after RT, 13 of whom had baseline CP-B8/B9/C liver functionality. For all patients, the 1- and 2-year treated-lesion local control was greater for SBRT than for AHRT (2-year 94% vs 65%, P < .0001).Conclusions: The tolerability of SBRT or AHRT as measured by a CP score decline of ≥2 within 6 months of RT was similar across baseline liver functionality groups. Compared with AHRT, SBRT was associated with superior local control. Because the true tolerability of limited-volume RT for patients with CP-B or CP-C cirrhosis is unknown, prospective trials validating its safety and efficacy are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess rates of burnout among US radiation oncology residents and evaluate program/resident factors associated with burnout.Methods and Materials: A nationwide survey was distributed to residents in all US radiation oncology programs. The survey included the Maslach Burnout Index-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS) as well as demographic and program-specific questions tailored to radiation oncology residents. Primary endpoints included rates of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment from MBI-HSS subscale scores. Binomial logistic models determined associations between various residency/resident characteristics and high burnout levels.Results: Overall, 232 of 733 residents (31.2%) responded, with 205 of 733 (27.9%) completing the MBI-HSS. High levels of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were reported in 28.3% and 17.1%, respectively; 33.1% experienced a high burnout level on at least 1 of these 2 MBI-HSS subscales. Low rates of personal accomplishment occurred in 12% of residents. Twelve residents (5.9%) reported feeling "at the end of my rope" on a weekly basis or more. On multivariable analysis there was a statistically significant inverse association between perceived adequacy of work-life balance (odds ratio 0.37; 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.83) and burnout.Conclusions: Approximately one-third of radiation oncology residents have high levels of burnout symptoms, consistent with previous oncology literature, but lower levels than those among physicians and residents of other specialties. Particularly concerning was that more than 1 in 20 felt "at the end of my rope" on a weekly basis or more. Targeted interventions to identify symptoms of burnout among radiation oncology residents may help to prevent the negative downstream consequences of this syndrome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To quantify and determine the relationship between oncology departmental/division heads and private industry vis-à-vis potential financial conflict of interests (FCOIs) as publicly reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database.Methods and Materials: We extracted the names of the chairs/chiefs in medical oncology (MO) and chairs of radiation oncology (RO) for 81 different institutions with both RO and MO training programs as reported by the Association of American Medical Colleges. For each leader, the amount of consulting fees and research payments received in 2015 was determined. Logistic modeling was used to assess associations between the 2 endpoints of receiving a consulting fee and receiving a research payment with various institution-specific and practitioner-specific variables included as covariates: specialty, sex, National Cancer Institute designation, PhD status, and geographic region.Results: The majority of leaders in MO were reported to have received consulting fees or research payments (69.5%) compared with a minority of RO chairs (27.2%). Among those receiving payments, the average (range) consulting fee was $13,413 ($200-$70,423) for MO leaders and $6463 ($837-$16,205) for RO chairs; the average research payment for MO leaders receiving payments was $240,446 ($156-$1,234,762) and $295,089 ($160-$1,219,564) for RO chairs. On multivariable regression when the endpoint was receipt of a research payment, those receiving a consulting fee (odds ratio [OR]: 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.22-13.65) and MO leaders (OR: 5.54; 95% CI: 2.62-12.18) were more likely to receive research payments. Examination of the receipt of consulting fees as the endpoint showed that those receiving a research payment (OR: 5.41; 95% CI: 2.23-13.99) and MO leaders (OR: 3.06; 95% CI: 1.21-8.13) were more likely to receive a consulting fee.Conclusion: Leaders in academic oncology receive consulting or research payments from industry. Relationships between oncology leaders and industry can be beneficial, but guidance is needed to develop consistent institutional policies to manage FCOIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To evaluate tumor vasculature with optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) in malignant iris melanomas and benign iris lesions. Design Cross-sectional observational clinical study. Participants Patients with iris lesions and healthy volunteers. Methods Eyes were imaged using OCTA systems operating at 1050- and 840-nm wavelengths. Three-dimensional OCTA scans were acquired. Iris melanoma patients treated with radiation therapy were imaged again after I-125 plaque brachytherapy at 6 and 18 months. Main Outcome Measures OCT and OCTA images, qualitative evaluation of iris and tumor vasculature, and quantitative vessel density. Results One eye each of 8 normal volunteers and 9 patients with iris melanomas or benign iris lesions, including freckles, nevi, and an iris pigment epithelial (IPE) cyst, were imaged. The normal iris has radially oriented vessels within the stroma on OCTA. Penetration of flow signal in normal iris depended on iris color, with best penetration seen in light to moderately pigmented irides. Iris melanomas demonstrated tortuous and disorganized intratumoral vasculature. In 2 eyes with nevi there was no increased vascularity; in another, fine vascular loops were noted near an area of ectropion uveae. Iris freckles and the IPE cyst did not have intrinsic vascularity. The vessel density was significantly higher within iris melanomas (34.5%±9.8%, P < 0.05) than in benign iris nevi (8.0%±1.4%) or normal irides (8.0%±1.2%). Tumor regression after radiation therapy for melanomas was associated with decreased vessel density. OCTA at 1050 nm provided better visualization of tumor vasculature and penetration through thicker tumors than at 840 nm. But in very thick tumors and highly pigmented lesions even 1050-nm OCTA could not visualize their full thickness. Interpretable OCTA images were obtained in 82% of participants in whom imaging was attempted. Conclusions This is the first demonstration of OCTA in iris tumors. OCTA may provide a dye-free, no-injection, cost-effective method for monitoring a variety of tumors, including iris melanocytic lesions, for growth and vascularity. This could be helpful in evaluating tumors for malignant transformation and response to treatment. Penetration of the OCT beam remains a limitation for highly pigmented tumors, as does the inability to image the entire iris in a single field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To characterize applicant interview experiences at radiation oncology residency programs during the 2016 match cycle and to assess applicant opinions regarding postinterview communication (PIC) after recent attention to gamesmanship noted in prior match cycles.Methods and Materials: An anonymous, institutional review board-approved, 29-question survey was deployed following the rank order list deadline to all 2016 radiation oncology residency applicants applying to a single institution.Results: Complete surveys were returned by 118 of 210 applicants, for a 56% response rate. Regarding possible match violation questions, 84% of respondents were asked at least once about where else they were interviewing (occurred at a median of 20% of program interviews); 51% were asked about marital status (6% of interviews); and 22% were asked about plans to have children (1% of interviews). Eighty-three percent of applicants wrote thank-you notes, with 55% reporting fear of being viewed unfavorably if such notes were not communicated. Sixty percent of applicants informed a program that they had ranked a program highly; 53% felt this PIC strategy would improve their standing on the rank order list, yet 46% reported feeling distressed by this obligation. A majority of applicants stated that they would feel relieved if programs explicitly discouraged PIC (89%) and that it would be preferable if programs prohibited applicants from notifying the program of their rank position (66%).Conclusions: Potential match violations occur at a high rate but are experienced at a minority of interviews. Postinterview communication occurs frequently, with applicants reporting resultant distress. Respondents stated that active discouragement of both thank-you notes/e-mails and applicants' notification to programs of their ranking would be preferred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To survey image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) practice patterns, as well as IGRT's impact on clinical workflow and planning treatment volumes (PTVs).Methods and Materials: A sample of 5979 treatment site-specific surveys was e-mailed to the membership of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), with questions pertaining to IGRT modality/frequency, PTV expansions, method of image verification, and perceived utility/value of IGRT. On-line image verification was defined as images obtained and reviewed by the physician before treatment. Off-line image verification was defined as images obtained before treatment and then reviewed by the physician before the next treatment.Results: Of 601 evaluable responses, 95% reported IGRT capabilities other than portal imaging. The majority (92%) used volumetric imaging (cone-beam CT [CBCT] or megavoltage CT), with volumetric imaging being the most commonly used modality for all sites except breast. The majority of respondents obtained daily CBCTs for head and neck intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), lung 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or IMRT, anus or pelvis IMRT, prostate IMRT, and prostatic fossa IMRT. For all sites, on-line image verification was most frequently performed during the first few fractions only. No association was seen between IGRT frequency or CBCT utilization and clinical treatment volume to PTV expansions. Of the 208 academic radiation oncologists who reported working with residents, only 41% reported trainee involvement in IGRT verification processes.Conclusion: Consensus guidelines, further evidence-based approaches for PTV margin selection, and greater resident involvement are needed for standardized use of IGRT practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate stressors among radiation oncology residency program directors (PDs) and determine the prevalence and indicators of burnout.Methods and Materials: An anonymous, online, cross-sectional survey was offered to PDs of US radiation oncology programs in the fall of 2014. Survey content examined individual and program demographics, perceptions surrounding the role of PD, and commonly encountered stressors. Burnout was assessed using the validated Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey.Results: In total, 47 of 88 PDs (53%) responded to the survey. Although 78% of respondents reported feeling "satisfied" or "highly satisfied" with their current role, 85% planned to remain as PD for <5 years. The most commonly cited stressors were satisfying Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education/Residency Review Committee requirements (47%), administrative duties (30%) and resident morale (28%). Three-quarters of respondents were satisfied that they became PDs. Overall, 11% of respondents met criteria for low burnout, 83% for moderate burnout, and 6% for high burnout. Not having served as a PD at a prior institution correlated with high depersonalization (OR 6.75, P=.04) and overall burnout (odds ratio [OR], 15.6; P=.04). Having more years on faculty prior to becoming PD correlated with less emotional exhaustion (OR, 0.44, P=.05) and depersonalization (OR, 0.20, P=.04). Finally, having dedicated time for PD duties correlated with less emotional exhaustion (OR, 0.27, P=.04).Conclusions: Moderate levels of burnout are common in U.S. radiation oncology PDs with regulatory stressors being common. Despite this, many PDs are fulfilled with their role. Longitudinal studies assessing dynamic external factors and their influence on PD burnout would be beneficial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess h-index data and their association with radiation oncology resident choice of academic versus private-practice career, using a recent resident graduating class.Methods and Materials: A list of 2016 radiation oncology resident graduates (163 residents from 76 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-certified programs) and their postresidency career choice (academic vs private practice) was compiled. The Scopus bibliometric citation database was then searched to collect h-index data for each resident. Demographics included in analyses were gender and PhD degree status.Results: Mean h-index score for all resident graduates was 4.15. Residents with a PhD had significantly higher h-index scores (6.75 vs 3.42; P < .01), whereas there was no statistically significant difference in h-index scores between male and female residents (4.38 vs 3.36; P = .06). With regard to career choice, residents choosing academic careers had higher h-index scores than those choosing private practice (5.41 vs 2.96; P < .01). There was no significant difference in mean h-index scores between male and female residents regardless of private-practice (3.15 vs 2.19; P = .25) or academic (5.80 vs 4.30; P = .13) career choice.Conclusions: The average radiation oncology resident graduate published a minimum of 4 manuscripts cited at least 4 times. Graduates with a PhD are significantly more likely to have higher h-index scores, as are residents who choose academic over private-practice careers. There is no significant difference in h-index score between male and female residents, regardless of career choice. These results offer up-to-date benchmarks for evaluating radiation oncology resident productivity and have potential utility in predicting postresidency career choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Objective(s) Current guidelines for esophageal cancer contouring are derived from traditional 2-dimensional fields based on bony landmarks, and they do not provide sufficient anatomic detail to ensure consistent contouring for more conformal radiation therapy techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Therefore, we convened an expert panel with the specific aim to derive contouring guidelines and generate an atlas for the clinical target volume (CTV) in esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Methods and Materials Eight expert academically based gastrointestinal radiation oncologists participated. Three sample cases were chosen: a GEJ cancer, a distal esophageal cancer, and a mid-upper esophageal cancer. Uniform computed tomographic (CT) simulation datasets and accompanying diagnostic positron emission tomographic/CT images were distributed to each expert, and the expert was instructed to generate gross tumor volume (GTV) and CTV contours for each case. All contours were aggregated and subjected to quantitative analysis to assess the degree of concordance between experts and to generate draft consensus contours. The panel then refined these contours to generate the contouring atlas. Results The κ statistics indicated substantial agreement between panelists for each of the 3 test cases. A consensus CTV atlas was generated for the 3 test cases, each representing common anatomic presentations of esophageal cancer. The panel agreed on guidelines and principles to facilitate the generalizability of the atlas to individual cases. Conclusions This expert panel successfully reached agreement on contouring guidelines for esophageal and GEJ IMRT and generated a reference CTV atlas. This atlas will serve as a reference for IMRT contours for clinical practice and prospective trial design. Subsequent patterns of failure analyses of clinical datasets using these guidelines may require modification in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Medical training spans nearly a decade, during which many physicians traditionally begin families. Although childrearing responsibilities are shared by men and women in the modern era, differences in time allocated to child care by sex and its potential impact on residency experience merit discussion. Methods and Materials An anonymous, voluntary, 102-item survey was distributed to 540 current radiation oncology residents and 2014 graduates that asked about marital and parental status, pregnancy during residency, publication productivity, career aspirations, and experiences working with pregnant co-residents. Respondents with children were asked about childcare arrangements, and women who were pregnant during residency were asked about radiation safety, maternity leave, and breastfeeding experiences. Results A total of 190 respondents completed the survey, 107 men (56.3%) and 84 women (43.7%). Ninety-seven respondents (51.1%) were parents, and 84 (44.2%) reported a pregnancy during residency. Respondents with children more often were male (65% vs 47.3%; P =.014), in a higher level of training (79.3% vs 54.8% were PGY4 or higher; P =.001), were older (median age of 32, interquartile range [IQR]:31-35] vs age 30 [IQR: 29-33]; P <.001), had a PhD (33% vs 19.3%, respectively; P =.033), were married (99% vs 43%, respectively; P <.001), and had a partner who did not work (24.7% vs 1.9%, respectively; <.001). There were no differences in the number of manuscripts published or the number of residents who expressed likelihood of pursing an academic career by parental status. Among parents, men more frequently had partners who did not work (38.1% vs 0%, respectively; P <.001) and reported that their partner performed a greater percentage of childcare duties (70% [IQR: 60%-80%] vs 35% [IQR: 20%-50%], respectively; P <.001). Conclusions Pregnancy and parenthood are common during residency. Female residents are frequently responsible for more childcare duties than males but have similar research productivity and career aspirations. Further investigation is critical to elucidate gender disparities in parenthood and career development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our purpose was to assess comparative female representation trends for trainees and full-time faculty in the academic radiation oncology and hematology oncology workforce of the United States over 3 decades.Methods and Materials: Simple linear regression models with year as the independent variable were used to determine changes in female percentage representation per year and associated 95% confidence intervals for trainees and full-time faculty in each specialty.Results: Peak representation was 48.4% (801/1654) in 2013 for hematology oncology trainees, 39.0% (585/1499) in 2014 for hematology oncology full-time faculty, 34.8% (202/581) in 2007 for radiation oncology trainees, and 27.7% (439/1584) in 2015 for radiation oncology full-time faculty. Representation significantly increased for trainees and full-time faculty in both specialties at approximately 1% per year for hematology oncology trainees and full-time faculty and 0.3% per year for radiation oncology trainees and full-time faculty. Compared with radiation oncology, the rates were 3.84 and 2.94 times greater for hematology oncology trainees and full-time faculty, respectively.Conclusion: Despite increased female trainee and full-time faculty representation over time in the academic oncology physician workforce, radiation oncology is lagging behind hematology oncology, with trainees declining in recent years in radiation oncology; this suggests a de facto ceiling in female representation. Whether such issues as delayed or insufficient exposure, inadequate mentorship, or specialty competitiveness disparately affect female representation in radiation oncology compared to hematology oncology are underexplored and require continued investigation to ensure that the future oncologic physician workforce reflects the diversity of the population it serves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The aim of this study is to ascertain the subsequent radiobiological impact of using a consensus guideline target volume delineation atlas. Materials and methods Using a representative case and target volume delineation instructions derived from a proposed IMRT rectal cancer clinical trial, gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical/planning target volumes (CTV/PTV) were contoured by 13 physician observers (Phase 1). The observers were then randomly assigned to follow (atlas) or not-follow (control) a consensus guideline/atlas for anorectal cancers, and instructed to re-contour the same case (Phase 2). Results The atlas group was found to have increased tumor control probability (TCP) after the atlas intervention for both the CTV ( p < 0.0001) and PTV1 ( p = 0.0011) with decreasing normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for small intestine, while the control group did not. Additionally, the atlas group had reduced variance in TCP for all target volumes and reduced variance in NTCP for the bowel. In Phase 2, the atlas group had increased TCP relative to the control for CTV ( p = 0.03). Conclusions Visual atlas and consensus treatment guideline usage in the development of rectal cancer IMRT treatment plans reduced the inter-observer radiobiological variation, with clinically relevant TCP alteration for CTV and PTV volumes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]