Research Publication Rates Are Age- and Era-Dependent for Radiation Oncologists From Highly Ranked NCI-Designated Cancer Centers.

PURPOSE: Quantitative bibliometrics are increasingly used to evaluate faculty research productivity. This study benchmarks publication rates for radiation oncologists from highly ranked National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers and reveals how productivity changes over the arc of a career and of the field over time. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Peer-reviewed articles from 1970 to 2022 were obtained using Scopus for the 348 radiation oncologists listed as faculty for the top 10 cancer hospitals ranked by US News and World Report in 2022. Bibliometrics were analyzed for authorships (A˙), authorships where the individual was first or last author (F˙L), the monograph equivalent of authorships (M˙E), h-index, and ha-index (an analog to h-index using M˙E in place of publications). Career start was defined as the year of first publication. Bibliometric inflation was explored by analyzing authorship and bibliometric changes between 1990 and 2022. RESULTS: Publication rates peak, with as much as a 500% increase, 20 to 25 years from the start of a career before declining until retirement. At career ages of 1, 10, 20, and 30 years, the median bibliometrics were A˙ = (1.5, 4.1, 6.5, 7.0) year-1, F˙L = (0.5, 0.9, 1.2, 0.6) year-1, M˙E= (0.2, 0.5, 0.7, 0.8) year-1, h-index = (1, 12, 22, 47), and ha-index = (0.4, 4.4, 6.9, 18.4). With regards to authorship patterns across eras, the median number of authors listed per paper increased by 240% between 1990 and 2022. Meanwhile, research productivity per individual as measured by F˙L and M˙E was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The research publication rates of the median radiation oncologist change substantially over the course of their career. Productivity improves steadily for more than 2 decades before peaking and declining. The culture of authorship has also changed between 1990 and 2022. The number of authors listed per paper has trended upwards, which has an inflationary effect on the number of authorships and h-index. Meanwhile, the rate of manuscripts published per faculty has not changed.

Evaluation of high-fidelity simulation training in radiation oncology using an outcomes logic model.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and educational value of high-fidelity, interprofessional team-based simulation in radiation oncology. METHODS: The simulation event was conducted in a radiation oncology department during a non-clinical day. It involved 5 simulation scenarios that were run over three 105 minute timeslots in a single day. High-acuity, low-frequency clinical situations were selected and included HDR brachytherapy emergency, 4D CT artifact management, pediatric emergency clinical mark-up, electron scalp trial set-up and a cone beam CT misregistration incident. A purposive sample of a minimum of 20 trainees was required to assess recruitment feasibility. A faculty radiation oncologist (RO), medical physicist (MP) or radiation therapist (RTT), facilitated each case. Participants completed a pre event survey of demographic data and motivation for participation. A post event survey collected perceptions of familiarity with the clinical content, comfort with interprofessional practice, and event satisfaction, scored on a 1-10 scale in terms of clinical knowledge, clinical decision making, clinical skills, exposure to other trainees and interprofessional communication. Means and standard deviations were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty-one trainees participated including 6 ROs (29%), 6 MPs (29%), and 9 RTTs (43%). All 12 cases (100%) were completed within the allocated 105 minutes. Nine faculty facilitators, (3MP, 2 RO, 4 RTTs) were required for 405 minutes each. Additional costs associated with this event were 154 hours to build the high fidelity scenarios, 2 standardized patients (SPs) for a total of 15.5 hours, and consumables.The mean (±SD) educational value score reported by participants with respect to clinical knowledge was 8.9 (1.1), clinical decision making 8.9 (1.3), clinical skills 8.9 (1.1), exposure to other trainees 9.1 (2.3) and interprofessional communication 9.1 (1.0). Fifteen (71%) participants reported the cases were of an appropriate complexity. The importance of further simulation events was rated highly at 9.1/10. CONCLUSIONS: High-fidelity simulation training is feasible and effective in a radiation oncology context. However, such educational activities require significant resources, including personnel and equipment.

Tumor regression and positional changes in non-small cell lung cancer during radical radiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: We have used respiratory-correlated cone beam computed tomography (rcCBCT) imaging to study the volumetric and positional changes that occur throughout the course of radical radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Tumor volumes and centers of mass were recorded and analyzed on weekly serial rcCBCT images of NSCLC patients treated with radical radiotherapy to a dose ≥45 Gy with concurrent chemotherapy. RESULTS: Sixty patients with locally advanced NSCLC were included; in 31 patients, the primary tumor was peripheral and thus suitable for contouring. There was a mean percent decrease of 40.2% by fraction 15 and 51.1% by treatment completion. Among all 60 patients, 19 patients (32%) had more than 30% regression by fraction 15 and 25 patients (81%) by treatment completion. Statistically significant tumor migration in at least one direction between the first and the last 2 weeks was demonstrated in 14 of 27 patients. Clinically relevant changes (atelectasis and effusions) were noted in 11 of 29 visually assessed patients. CONCLUSIONS: Current rcCBCT image quality allows assessment of tumors located more peripherally. Significant tumor regression was documented in the majority of patients. In view of these observations, the suitability of adaptive radiotherapy in radical lung cancer treatment should be further investigated.

Quality assurance for the geometric accuracy of cone-beam CT guidance in radiation therapy.

The introduction of volumetric X-ray image-guided radiotherapy systems allows improved management of geometric variations in patient setup and internal organ motion. As these systems become a routine clinical modality, we propose a daily quality assurance (QA) program for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) integrated with a linear accelerator. The image-guided system used in this work combines a linear accelerator with conventional X-ray tube and an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector mounted orthogonally from the accelerator central beam axis. This article focuses on daily QA protocols germane to geometric accuracy of the CBCT systems and proposes tolerance levels on the basis of more than 3 years of experience with seven CBCT systems used in our clinic. Monthly geometric calibration tests demonstrate the long-term stability of the flex movements, which are reproducible within +/-0.5 mm (95% confidence interval). The daily QA procedure demonstrates that, for rigid phantoms, the accuracy of the image-guided process can be within 1 mm on average, with a 99% confidence interval of +/-2 mm.