Leadership Experiences and Perceptions of Mid-Career to Senior Clinician-Scientists: A Qualitative Exploration.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to elucidate the experiences and perceptions of mid-career to senior clinician-scientists in academic medicine regarding pursuing, attaining, or rejecting leadership roles as well as their conceptualization of the influence of leadership in their broader career trajectories. METHOD: The authors conducted a qualitative analysis of in-depth, semistructured interviews conducted in 2022 with a diverse sample of clinician-scientists who received new National Institutes of Health K08 or K23 Career Development Awards between 2006 and 2009. A total of 859 of the 915 survey respondents (94%) were eligible to be recruited for the qualitative study. Qualitative analysis was informed by thematic analysis and used a social constructionist approach to understanding participants' conceptualizations of their experiences. Interview transcripts were coded using an iterative, inductive coding process. Themes were generated by reviewing coded data and identifying common patterns in participant narratives, affording particular attention to participants' discussion of the effect of race and/or gender on their leadership experiences. RESULTS: Sixty clinician-scientists participated in individual interviews. Five themes were generated surrounding participants' conceptualizations of their leadership experiences. Themes were (1) feeling unprepared for leadership roles, (2) reluctance and lack of intention in attaining leadership positions, (3) influence of networks on leadership access and decision-making, (4) impact-related benefits and downsides of leadership, and (5) confining ideas of who leaders are. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted the need for formal leadership training in academic medicine and the importance of mentorship and sponsorship in attaining and succeeding in leadership positions. Individuals from communities underrepresented in leadership positions faced additional challenges internalizing a leadership identity. Efforts to encourage current leaders to engage in intentional succession planning and development of faculty towards leadership roles, including expansion of institutional leadership development programs, are needed to promote equitable distribution of leadership opportunities.

Disease site specialization in the academic radiation oncology workforce: Evidence of gender differences.

PURPOSE: As some stakeholders within medicine seek to diversify and attain greater workforce equity, it is critical to understand gender-based divisions within specialization. Radiation oncology (RO) has one of the smallest proportions of woman representation of all specialties, and no prior studies have investigated gender differences in all the disease site specializations within RO. Thus, we analyzed the relationship between gender and disease site(s) treated in academic RO (ARO). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Faculty gender and disease site(s) treated by faculty from ARO departments were collected via publicly available department websites in January 2020. Chi-square analyses were conducted to assess differences between proportions of women faculty treating each disease site. RESULTS: Of 1,337 ARO faculty, 408 (30.5%) were identified as women. Breast, gynecology, and pediatrics had the largest proportions of women faculty (all>40%, P<0.001). A majority (53%, P<0.001) of women ARO faculty treated breast. Genitourinary (GU), thoracic, and head and neck had the smallest proportions of women faculty (all<25%, P<0.001). Women ARO faculty were twice as likely to treat breast and gynecological malignancies compared to men (risk ratio [RR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01 [1.75-2.50], P<0.001 and RR [CI]: 2.06 [1.72-2.79], P<0.001, respectively). Men ARO faculty were three times more likely to treat GU cancer as compared to women faculty (RR [CI]: 0.40 [0.34-0.48], P<0.001). There was no difference in the mean number of disease sites treated between women and men ARO faculty (2.63 vs. 2.53, P=0.29). CONCLUSION: Gender differences in disease site specialization were observed in ARO. Future research into the drivers of disease site selection should be explored.

Burnout Among Mid-Career Academic Medical Faculty.

Importance: Studies reveal that most physicians report symptoms of burnout. Less is known about burnout in mid-career medical faculty specifically. Objective: To characterize burnout and its risk factors, particularly differences by gender, among mid-career medical faculty. Design, Setting, and Participants: Between August 2021 and August 2022, a survey was sent to 1430 individuals who received new National Institutes of Health K08 and K23 career development awards from 2006 to 2009. Data were analyzed between June and October 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Personal and work-related burnout as evaluated using the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI). The CBI score ranges from 0 to 100, with a score of 50 or higher indicating a high degree of burnout. Multivariable models were used to investigate associations between burnout and participant characteristics, including race and ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity, academic rank, work climate, experiences of workplace sexual harassment, sleep hours, work and domestic caregiving time, and time allocation changes in work and domestic work hours compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic. Work climate was evaluated by a general climate elements scale assessing elements such as friendliness, respect, and collegiality, and a diversity, equity, and inclusion climate elements scale assessing elements such as homogeneity, sexism, and homophobia; higher scores indicated a more favorable view of the climate. Results: In all, 1430 surveys were sent, 926 candidates responded (65% response rate), and the analytic cohort was limited to the 841 respondents who were still in academic medicine (50.7% men). Burnout was significantly more common for women than men (mean [SD] CBI personal scores, 46.6 [19.4] vs 37.5 [17.2]; P < .001; mean [SD] CBI work-related scores, 43.7 [20.4] vs 34.6 [19.7]; P < .001). In multivariable models, personal burnout was significantly more likely for women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.29 [95% CI, 1.54-3.41]; P < .001) and with more weekly hours of patient care (AOR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.00-1.15] for each 5-hour increase; P = .04). Personal burnout was less likely with more nightly sleep hours (AOR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.56-0.81] for each 1-hour increase; P < .001) and with an improved general work climate rating (AOR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.48-0.85] for each 1-point increase in general work climate scale score; P = .002). Work-related burnout was also significantly more likely for women than men (AOR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.17-2.69]; P = .007). Greater work-related burnout was associated with an increase of 8 or more work hours per week compared with before the COVID-19 pandemic (AOR, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.13-3.08]; P = .01), more weekly hours of patient care (AOR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.03-1.19] for each 5-hour increase; P = .007), and a workplace sexual harassment experience in the past 2 years (AOR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.11-2.62]; P = .01). Work-related burnout was significantly less likely with more nightly sleep hours (AOR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66-0.96] for each 1-hour increase; P = .02) and with an improved general work climate rating (AOR, 0.49; [95% CI, 0.36-0.65] for each 1-point increase in general work climate scale score; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This survey study of K grant awardees revealed substantial rates of burnout among mid-career medical faculty, and burnout rates differed by gender. Evidence-based interventions are needed to realize the benefits of workforce diversity and vitality.

Screening for Financial Toxicity Among Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the pervasiveness and adverse impacts of financial toxicity (FT) in cancer care, there are no definitive measures for FT screening that have been widely integrated into clinical practice. The aim of this review is to evaluate current methods of assessing FT among patients with cancer and confirm factors associated with higher risk of FT. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We included peer-reviewed studies that cross-sectionally, longitudinally, or prospectively measured the self-reported financial impact of patients undergoing cancer care in the United States. RESULTS: Out of 1,085 identified studies, 51 met final inclusion criteria. Outcomes evaluated included FT measures or tools, time and setting of screening, FT prevalence, and sociodemographic or clinical patient-level associated factors. Our findings demonstrate that there is wide variability in FT screening practices including in the timing (diagnosis versus treatment versus survivorship), setting (clinic-based, online, telephone or mail), tools used (21 unique tools, 7 previously validated), and interpretations of screening results (varying FT score cutoffs defining high versus low FT). Younger age, lower income, lower education, non-White race, employment status change, advanced cancer stage, and systemic or radiation therapy were among factors associated with worse FT across the studies. DISCUSSION: FT screening remains heterogenous within the United States. With the ever-escalating cost of cancer care, and the strong association between FT and poor patient outcomes, universal and routine FT screening is imperative in cancer care. Further research and multifaceted interventions identifying best practices for FT screening are needed.

Validation of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Comprehensive Nodal Irradiation in the RadComp Trial.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to evaluate the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures used in the ongoing RadComp pragmatic randomized clinical trial (PRCT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The deidentified and blinded data set included 774 English-speaking female participants who completed their 6-month posttreatment assessment. Eleven PRO measures were evaluated, including the Trial Outcome Index from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes, the BREAST-Q, and selected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures. PROs were measured at 3 timepoints: baseline, completion of radiation therapy (RT), and 6 months post-RT. Ten variables were used as validity anchors. Pearson or Spearman correlations were calculated between PROs and convergent validity indicators. Mean PRO differences between clinically distinct categories were compared with analysis of variance methods (known-groups validity). PRO change scores were mapped to change in other variables (sensitivity to change). RESULTS: Most correlations between PROs and validity indicators were large (≥0.5). Mean score for Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes was higher (better) for those with a lumpectomy compared with those with a mastectomy (P < .001). Mean scores for the FACT-B Trial Outcome Index and for PROMIS Fatigue and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities were better for those with good baseline performance status compared with those with poorer baseline performance status (P < .05). At completion of RT and post-RT, mean scores for Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcomes and BREAST-Q Radiation were significantly different (P < .001) across categories for all Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy -Treatment Satisfaction - General items. There were medium-sized correlations between change scores for FACT-B Trial Outcome Index, Fatigue, Anxiety, and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and change scores in the Visual Analog Scale. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer receiving radiation in the RadComp PRCT, our findings demonstrate high reliability and validity for important PRO measures, supporting their psychometric strength and usefulness to reflect the effect of RT on health-related quality of life.

Professional Experiences and Career Trajectories of Mid- to Senior-Career Women Clinician-Scientists: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: Despite increasing evidence and recognition of persistent gender disparities in academic medicine, qualitative data detailing the association of gender-based experiences with career progression remain sparse, particularly at the mid- to senior-career stage. Objective: To investigate the role gender has played in everyday professional experiences of mid- to senior-career women clinician-scientists and their perceptions of gender-related barriers experienced across their careers. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, a total of 60 of 159 invited clinician-scientists who received National Institutes of Health K08 or K23 awards between 2006 and 2009 and responded to a survey in 2021 agreed to participate. Invitees were selected using random, purposive sampling to support sample heterogeneity. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted January to May 2022. For this study, interviews from 31 women were analyzed using the framework approach to thematic analysis. Data analyses were performed between August and October 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Descriptive themes of participant experiences of gender and gender-based barriers in academic medicine. Results: A total of 31 women clinician-scientists (8 identifying as Asian [25.8%], 14 identifying as White [45.2%], and 9 identifying as members of a minority group underrepresented in medicine [29.0%]; 14 aged 40-49 years [45.2%] and 14 aged 50-59 years [45.2%]) were included. Among them, 17 participants (54.8%) had children who required adult supervision or care, 7 participants (22.6%) had children who did not require supervision or care, and 6 participants (19.4%) did not have children. There were 4 dominant themes identified within participant experiences in academic medicine: the mental burden of gendered expectations at work and home, inequitable treatment of women in bureaucratic processes, subtle and less subtle professional exclusion of women, and value of communities built on shared identities, experiences, and solidarity. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that women perceived the institution of academic medicine as a male-centric system misaligned with the needs of women, with associated feelings of exclusion, disillusionment, and loss of trust in their institutions. Findings suggest that the confluence of domestic obligations and unaccommodating institutional environments may make it difficult for women clinician-scientists to achieve established timelines of career progression and productivity; these findings may have long-term implications for the well-being and retention of women in academic medicine.

National science foundation grant awardees' perspectives on Article X and sexual harassment in science.

Federal scientific agencies seek to make an impact on the continued prevalence of sexual harassment in the scientific academic community beyond institutional self-regulation. The National Science Foundation's Article X, released in 2018, is one of the most significant and ambitious federal policy initiatives to address sexual harassment. The present article presents the results of the first study to examine scientists' knowledge and attitudes about this important recent policy. We found, although overall knowledge about Article X was fairly low, the majority of participants responded positively to it. Crucially, impressions of the policy varied based on past experience and demographic factors. Individuals who had experienced harassment in the past year were less likely to believe the policy would help reduce sexual harassment in the sciences compared to those who had not experienced harassment (OR = 0.47, 95% CI:0.23-0.97, p = .034) and had greater odds of endorsing that the policy failed to go far enough (OR = 2.77, 95% CI:1.15-6.66, p = .023). Associations between demographic factors and views of the policy were less pronounced, but it is notable that, compared to their White counterparts, Black participants were more likely to believe the policy went too far (OR = 5.87, 95% CI:1.04-33.17, p = .045). Additionally, concerns were raised about the institutional enforcement of these policies and the existence of sufficient protections for survivors. Our work has implications for NSF's continued evaluation of the efficacy of this program as well as for other federal agencies implementing or considering similar policies.

The Disproportionate Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Time Allocation of Recipients of NIH Career Development Awards Who Are Women or Caregivers of Dependents.

PURPOSE: To understand time allocation of a national medical faculty cohort 1.5-2 years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, compared to before. METHOD: From August 2021-April 2022, the authors conducted a retrospective survey of 1,430 clinician-researchers who received National Institutes of Health career-development awards between 2006-2009 asking about domestic and professional time allocation pre-pandemic and at the time of surveys (TOS). Of 915 respondents (64%), the 830 who remained in academic positions constituted the analytic sample. Multivariable regression models identified demographic factors associated with each time outcome and change in time between pre-pandemic and TOS, and having experienced ≥8-hour increase of total self-reported weekly professional work hours and domestic labor hours. RESULTS: Median self-reported weekly professional work hours were 55 hours/week pre- pandemic and 60 at TOS. On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of self-reported weekly professional work hours at TOS were having a non-child other dependent (+2.6 hours, P = .03), academic rank (associate -3.1 hours, assistant -9.0 hours; P < .001), and specialty (P < .001). Average self-reported TOS weekly domestic-labor hours were 23.1 among men and 30.2 among women (P < .001). Predictors of total self-reported TOS weekly domestic hours were being a woman (+5.6 hours; P < .001) and having children requiring supervision (+10.2 hours; P < .001). Overall, 9.3% of men (42/450) and 21.6% of women (88/407) experienced a ≥ 8 hour increase in domestic labor (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, women had higher odds of substantial domestic-labor increase (OR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.47, 3.68), as did those with children requiring supervision (OR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.25, 2.98) or other dependents (OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.98). CONCLUSIONS: This study illuminates demands on women and faculty with dependents during the COVID-19 pandemic and suggests increased flexibility and resources are of heightened importance.

Financial Toxicity in Breast Reconstruction: The Role of the Surgeon-Patient Cost-of-Care Discussion.

The financial burden of breast cancer treatment and reconstruction is a significant concern for patients. Patient desire for preoperative cost-of-care counseling while navigating the reconstructive process remains unknown. A cross-sectional survey of women from the Love Research Army was conducted. An electronic survey was distributed to women over 18 years of age and at least 1 year after postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Descriptive statistics and multivariable modeling were used to determine desire for and occurrence of cost-of-care discussions, and factors associated with preference for such discussions. Secondary outcomes included the association of financial toxicity with desire for cost discussions. Among 839 women who responded, 620 women (74.1%) did not speak to their plastic surgeon and 480 (57.4%) did not speak to a staff member regarding costs of breast reconstruction. Of the 550 women who reported it would have been helpful to discuss costs, 315 (57.3%) were not engaged in a financial conversation initiated by a health care provider. A greater proportion of women who reported financial toxicity, compared to those who did not, would have preferred to discuss costs with their plastic surgeon (65.2% vs. 43.5%, p < 0.001) or a staff member (75.5% vs. 59.3%, p < 0.001). Among women with financial toxicity, those who had some form of insurance (private, Medicaid, Medicare, "other") were significantly more likely to prefer a cost-of-care discussion ( p < 0.001, p = 0.02, p = 0.05, p = 0.01). Financial discussions about the potential costs of breast reconstruction seldom occurred in this national cohort. Given the reported preference and unmet need for financial discussions by a majority of women, better cost transparency and communication is needed.

Out-of-Pocket Cost Modeling of Adjuvant Antiestrogen and Radiation Therapy After Lumpectomy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer Across Medicaid and Medicare Plans.

PURPOSE: The optimal adjuvant therapy (antiestrogen therapy [ET] + radiation therapy or ET alone, or in some reports radiation therapy alone) in older women with early-stage breast cancer has been highly debated. However, granular details on the role of insurance in the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving ET with or without radiation therapy are lacking. This project disaggregates out-of-pocket costs by insurance plans to increase treatment cost transparency. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Several radiation therapy schedules are accepted standards as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For our financial estimate model, we used the 5-fraction and 15-fraction radiation therapy and ET prescribed over a 5-year duration. The total aggregate out-of-pocket costs were determined from the sum of treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance based on Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D Rx plans. The model assumes a Medicare- and/or Medicaid-eligible patient ≥70 years of age with node-negative, early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Patient out-of-pocket costs were estimated from publicly available insurance data from plan-specific benefit coverage materials using a 5-year time horizon. RESULTS: Original Medicare beneficiaries face a total out-of-pocket treatment charge of $2738.52 for ET alone, $2221.26 for 5-fraction radiation therapy alone, $2573.92 for 15-fraction radiation therapy alone, $3361.26 for combined ET+ 5-fraction radiation therapy, and $3713.92 for combined ET + 15-fraction radiation therapy. Medigap Plan G beneficiaries have an out-of-pocket charge of $1130.00 with radiation therapy alone and face an out-of-pocket of $2270.00 for ET alone and combined ET+ radiation therapy. For Medicaid beneficiaries, all treatments approved by Medicaid are covered without limit, resulting in no out-of-pocket expense for either adjuvant treatment option. CONCLUSIONS: This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data), by estimating expenses within Medicare and Medicaid plans, provides a level of transparency to patient cost. With knowledge of the costs borne by patients themselves, treatment decisions informed by patients' individual priorities and preferences may be further enhanced.

Are We Missing Acute Toxicities Associated With Hypofractionated Breast Irradiation? A Report From a Large Multicenter Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The efficacy and long-term safety of hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HF-WBI) have been established through multiple randomized trials, yet data about acute toxicities remain more limited. Since 2013, our group has prospectively collected acute toxicity data from weekly treatment evaluations and additional assessment after completion. In 2016, we intentionally shifted the posttreatment assessment follow-up visit from 1 month to 2 weeks to evaluate for missed acute toxicity occurring in that immediate posttreatment window. Here, we report whether 2-week follow-up has resulted in increased detection of acute toxicities compared with 4-week follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We prospectively compared acute toxicity for patients treated with HF-WBI between January 1, 2013, and August 31, 2015 (4 week follow-up cohort) to patients treated between January 1, 2016, and August 31, 2018 (2 week follow-up cohort). Analyses included a multivariable model that adjusted for other factors known to correlate with toxicity. We prospectively defined acute toxicity as maximum breast pain (moderate or severe rating) and/or occurrence of moist desquamation reported 7 days before the completion of radiation therapy (RT) until 42 days after completion. RESULTS: A total of 2689 patients who received postlumpectomy radiation and boost were analyzed; 1862 patients in the 2-week follow-up cohort and 827 in the 4-week follow-up cohort. All acute toxicity measures assessed were statistically similar between follow-up cohorts when compared in an unadjusted fashion. Overall acute composite toxicity was 26.4% and 27.7% for patients in the 4-week follow-up and 2-week follow-up cohorts, respectively. Overall acute composite toxicity remained similar between follow-up cohorts in a multivariable, adjusted model and was significantly related to patient's age, body mass index, smoking status, and treatment technique (intensity-modulated RT vs 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy) but not follow-up cohort. CONCLUSIONS: An earlier posttreatment follow-up for HF-WBI patients did not reveal a significant increased incidence of acute toxicities at 2 weeks compared with 4 weeks. This study provides physicians and patients with additional data on the safety and tolerability of HF-WBI for early stage breast cancer.

Gender Differences in Faculty Perceptions of Mentorship and Sponsorship.

This survey study examines gender differences in mid- to senior-career faculty experiences of receiving and providing mentorship and sponsorship during early career development.

Prehabilitation in radiation therapy: a scoping review.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Radiation therapy (RT) is a central component of cancer treatment with survival and long-term quality-of-life benefits across a spectrum of oncologic diagnoses. However, RT has been associated with varying levels of fatigue, pain, weight loss, and changes in mental health both during and post-treatment. Prehabilitation aims to optimize health prior to anti-neoplastic therapy in order to reduce side effects, increase adherence to treatment, expedite post-treatment recovery, and improve long-term outcomes. Though prehabilitation has been studied in those undergoing cancer-related surgery, literature on prehabilitation in individuals undergoing RT has not been comprehensively explored. Thus, this scoping review aims to summarize the existing literature focused on prehabilitation interventions for patients receiving RT. MATERIALS/METHODS: The PRISMA-ScR checklist for conducting scoping reviews was adopted to identify and evaluate studies investigating the efficacy of prehabilitation before and during RT for cancer over the past 21 years (10/2002-10/2022). A search of prehabilitation and RT was performed to identify studies investigating prehabilitation interventions in adult cancer patients undergoing RT. RESULTS: A total of 30 articles met inclusion criteria, yielding 3657 total participants. Eighteen (60%) studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sample sizes ranging from 21 to 221. The most commonly studied populations were patients with head and neck cancer, followed by rectal, breast, and lung cancer. A majority (80%) of studies evaluated one prehabilitation intervention (i.e., unimodal). Targeted physical exercises were the most common intervention, followed by general physical exercises and technology/apps. Adherence/feasibility was the most common primary outcome, representing 30% of studies. All studies reported data on sex, and 5 (17%) reported data on race and/or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation interventions have been successfully implemented in patients with cancer undergoing surgical treatment. Based on limited current literature, prehabilitation appears to have a promising effect in reducing morbidity in adult cancer patients requiring RT. Though our review identified many RCTs, they were frequently small sample trials with primary outcomes focused on feasibility, rather than functional status or quality of life. Thus, there is a need for adequately powered, randomized controlled intervention trials to investigate the efficacy of prehabilitation and maximize the treatment outcomes for patients undergoing RT.

Omission of Radiotherapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Women With Breast Cancer With Low Clinical and Genomic Risk: 5-Year Outcomes of IDEA.

PURPOSE: Multiple studies have shown a low risk of ipsilateral breast events (IBEs) or other recurrences for selected patients age 65-70 years or older with stage I breast cancers treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and endocrine therapy (ET) without adjuvant radiotherapy. We sought to evaluate whether younger postmenopausal patients could also be successfully treated without radiation therapy, adding a genomic assay to classic selection factors. METHODS: Postmenopausal patients age 50-69 years with pT1N0 unifocal invasive breast cancer with margins ≥2 mm after BCS whose tumors were estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-positive, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative with Oncotype DX 21-gene recurrence score ≤18 were prospectively enrolled in a single-arm trial of radiotherapy omission if they consented to take at least 5 years of ET. The primary end point was the rate of locoregional recurrence 5 years after BCS. RESULTS: Between June 2015 and October 2018, 200 eligible patients were enrolled. Among the 186 patients with clinical follow-up of at least 56 months, overall and breast cancer-specific survival rates at 5 years were both 100%. The 5-year freedom from any recurrence was 99% (95% CI, 96 to 100). Crude rates of IBEs for the entire follow-up period for patients age 50-59 years and age 60-69 years were 3.3% (2/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively; crude rates of overall recurrence were 5.0% (3/60) and 3.6% (5/140), respectively. CONCLUSION: This trial achieved a very low risk of recurrence using a genomic assay in combination with classic clinical and biologic features for treatment selection, including postmenopausal patients younger than 60 years. Long-term follow-up of this trial and others will help determine whether the option of avoiding initial radiotherapy can be offered to a broader group of women than current guidelines recommend.

Can I Leave? Perspectives on Parental Leave and Parenthood in Medical Training Among Program Directors and Trainees in Oncologic Specialties.

Purpose: Peak fertility commonly occurs during medical training, and delaying parenthood can complicate pregnancies. Trainee parental leave policies are varied and lack transparency. Research on the impacts of parenthood on trainee education is limited. Methods: A Qualtrics-based survey was distributed via e-mail/social media to program directors (PDs) within oncologic specialties with a request to forward a parallel survey to trainees. Questions assessed awareness of parental leave policies, supportiveness of parenthood, and impacts on trainee education. Statistical analyses included descriptive frequencies and bivariable comparisons by key groups. Results: A total of 195 PDs and 286 trainees responded. Twelve percent and 29% of PDs were unsure of maternity/paternity leave options, respectively. PDs felt they were more supportive of trainee parenthood than trainees perceived they were. Thirty-nine percent of nonparent trainees (NPTs) would have children already if not in medicine, and >80% of women trainees were concerned about declining fertility. Perceived impacts of parenthood on trainee overall education and academic productivity were more negative for women trainees when rated by PDs and NPTs; however, men/women parents self-reported equal impacts. Leave burden was perceived as higher for women trainees. Conclusions: A significant portion of PDs lack awareness of parental leave policies, highlighting needs for increased transparency. Trainees' perception of PD support for parenthood is less than PD self-reported support. Alongside significant rates of delayed parenthood and fertility concerns, this poses a problem for trainees seeking to start a family, particularly women who are perceived more negatively. Further work is needed to create a supportive culture for trainee parenthood.

Pectoralis Muscle Dosimetry and Posttreatment Rehabilitation Utilization for Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Up to 50% of women treated for localized breast cancer will experience some degree of arm or shoulder morbidity. Although radiation is thought to contribute to this morbidity, the mechanism remains unclear. Prior studies have shown biologic and radiographic changes in the pectoralis muscles after radiation. This study thus aimed to investigate the relationship between radiation to the pectoralis muscles and referrals for rehabilitation services posttreatment for arm and shoulder morbidity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective 1:1 matched case-control study was conducted for patients with breast cancer who were and were not referred for breast or shoulder rehabilitation services between 2014 and 2019 at a single academic institution. Patients were included if they had a lumpectomy and adjuvant radiation. Patients who underwent an axillary lymph node dissection were excluded. Cohorts were matched based on age, axillary surgery, and use of radiation boost. Muscle doses were converted to equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions assuming an α:ß ratio of 2.5 and were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In our cohort of 50 patients of a median age 60 years (interquartile range, 53-68 years), 36 patients (72%) underwent a sentinel lymph node biopsy in addition to a lumpectomy. Although pectoralis muscle doses were generally higher in those receiving rehabilitation services, this was not statistically significant. Pectoralis major V20-40 Gy reached borderline significance, as did pectoralis major mean dose (17.69 vs 20.89 Gy; P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: In this limited cohort of patients, we could not definitively conclude a relationship between pectoralis muscle doses and use of rehabilitation services. Given the borderline significant findings, this should be further investigated in a larger cohort.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Long-Term Adverse Radiation Therapy Effects Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: Breast and skin changes are underrecognized side effects of radiation therapy for breast cancer, which may have long-term implications for quality of life (QOL). Racial and ethnic disparities in breast cancer outcomes, including long-term QOL differences after breast radiation therapy, are poorly understood. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of patients from the Texas Cancer Registry who received diagnoses of stage 0-II breast cancer from 2009 to 2014 and treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy; 2770 patients were sampled and 631 responded (23%). The BREAST-Q Adverse Effects of Radiation overall score and subindices measured the effect of radiation therapy on breast tissue. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations of demographic and treatment characteristics with outcomes. RESULTS: The median age was 57 years (IQR, 48-65), median time from diagnosis to survey response 9 years (IQR, 7-10), and the cohort included 62 Asian American or Pacific Islander (9.8%), 11 American Indian or Alaskan Native (AIAN) (1.7%), 161 Black (25.5%), 144 Hispanic (22.8%), and 253 White (40.1%) patients. Mean BREAST-Q Adverse Effects of Radiation score was worse for AIAN patients (-22.2; 95% CI, -39.9 to -4.6; P = .01), Black patients (-10.8; 95% CI, -16.1 to -5.5; P < .001), and Hispanic patients (-7.8; 95% CI, -13.0 to -2.5; P = .004) compared with White patients, age <50 compared with ≥65 (effect size -8.6; 95% CI, -14.0 to -3.2; P = .002), less than a college education (-5.8; 95% CI, -10.0 to -1.6; P = .01), bra cup size of D/E versus A/B (-5.3; 95% CI, -9.9 to -0.65; P = .03), and current smokers (-11.3; 95% CI, -18.3 to -4.2; P = .002). AIAN, Black, and Hispanic patients reported worse changes in skin pigmentation, telangiectasias, dryness, soreness, and/or irritation compared with White patients. CONCLUSIONS: AIAN, Black, and Hispanic patients reported substantially worse long-term breast and skin QOL outcomes after radiation therapy. Additional work is needed to understand these differences and how to alleviate them.