The Blue Ribbon Committee II Report and Recommendations on Surgical Education and Training in the United States: 2024.

OBJECTIVE: An expert panel made recommendations to optimize surgical education and training based on the effects of contemporary challenges. BACKGROUND: The inaugural Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC I) proposed sweeping recommendations for surgical education and training in 2004. In light of those findings, a second BRC (BRC II) was convened to make recommendations to optimize surgical training considering the current landscape in medical education. METHODS: BRC II was a panel of 67 experts selected on the basis of experience and leadership in surgical education and training. It was organized into subcommittees which met virtually over the course of a year. They developed recommendations, along with the Steering Committee, based on areas of focus and then presented them to the entire BRC II. The Delphi Method was chosen to obtain consensus, defined as>80% agreement amongst the panel. Cronbach alpha was computed to assess the internal consistency of three Delphi rounds. RESULTS: Of 50 recommendations, 31 obtained consensus in the following aspects of surgical training (# consensus recommendation /# proposed): Workforce (1/5), Medical Student Education (3/8), Work Life Integration (4/6), Resident Education (5/7), Goals, Structure and Financing of Training (5/8), Education Support and Faculty Development (5/6), Research Training (7/9), and Educational Technology and Assessment (1/1). The internal consistency was good in Rounds 1 and 2 and acceptable in Round 3. CONCLUSIONS: BRC II used the Delphi approach to identify and recommend 31 priorities for surgical education in 2024. We advise establishing a multidisciplinary surgical educational group to oversee, monitor and facilitate implementation of these recommendations.

Effectiveness of the uChicago Health Inequity Classification System on surgical morbidity and mortality conference: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Across surgery, marginalized individuals experience worse postoperative outcomes. These disparities stem from the interplay between multiple factors. METHODS: We introduced a novel framework to assess the role of barriers to access and bias in surgical complications (the uChicago Health Inequity Classification System, CHI-CS) in the setting of morbidity and mortality conference and assessed impact through pre and post implementation surveys. RESULTS: Access and bias were related to surgical complications in 14 â€‹% of cases. 97 â€‹% reported enhanced M&M presentations with the grading system, and 47 â€‹% reported a change in decision-making or practice style. Although post-implementation response rate was low, there were improvements in self-reported confidence and comfort in recognizing and discussing these issues. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the CHI-CS framework to discuss bias and access to care positively impacted the way providers view, discuss, and process health inequities.

Neoadjuvant Trebananib plus Paclitaxel-based Chemotherapy for Stage II/III Breast Cancer in the Adaptively Randomized I-SPY2 Trial-Efficacy and Biomarker Discovery.

PURPOSE: The neutralizing peptibody trebananib prevents angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 from binding with Tie2 receptors, inhibiting angiogenesis and proliferation. Trebananib was combined with paclitaxel±trastuzumab in the I-SPY2 breast cancer trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: I-SPY2, a phase II neoadjuvant trial, adaptively randomizes patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer to one of several experimental therapies or control based on receptor subtypes as defined by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status and MammaPrint risk (MP1, MP2). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). A therapy "graduates" if/when it achieves 85% Bayesian probability of success in a phase III trial within a given subtype. Patients received weekly paclitaxel (plus trastuzumab if HER2-positive) without (control) or with weekly intravenous trebananib, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and surgery. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction. RESULTS: There were 134 participants randomized to trebananib and 133 to control. Although trebananib did not graduate in any signature [phase III probabilities: Hazard ratio (HR)-negative (78%), HR-negative/HER2-positive (74%), HR-negative/HER2-negative (77%), and MP2 (79%)], it demonstrated high probability of superior pCR rates over control (92%-99%) among these subtypes. Trebananib improved 3-year event-free survival (HR 0.67), with no significant increase in adverse events. Activation levels of the Tie2 receptor and downstream signaling partners predicted trebananib response in HER2-positive disease; high expression of a CD8 T-cell gene signature predicted response in HR-negative/HER2-negative disease. CONCLUSIONS: The angiopoietin (Ang)/Tie2 axis inhibitor trebananib combined with standard neoadjuvant therapy increased estimated pCR rates across HR-negative and MP2 subtypes, with probabilities of superiority >90%. Further study of Ang/Tie2 receptor axis inhibitors in validated, biomarker-predicted sensitive subtypes is warranted.

Use of Open Science Practices in Surgical Journals.

This cross-sectional study assesses the level of adoption of 5 new tools that promote high quality and transparency in surgical research.