Effect of COVID-19 on Gynecologic Oncology Care: A Survey of Practicing Gynecologic Radiation Oncologists in the United States.

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed demands and limitations on the delivery of health care. We sought to assess the effect of COVID-19 on the delivery of gynecologic oncologic care from the perspective of practicing radiation oncologists in the United States. Methods and Materials: An anonymous online survey was created and distributed to preidentified radiation oncologists in the United States with clinical expertise in the management of gynecologic patients. The survey consisted of demographic questions followed by directed questions to assess specific patterns of care related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of 47 of 96 invited radiation oncologists responded to the survey for a response rate of 49%. Fifty-six percent of respondents reported an increase in locally advanced cervical cancer with no similar increase for endometrial, vulvar, or vaginal patients. Most respondents (66%) reported a pause in surgical management, with a duration of 1 to 3 months being most common (61%). There was a reported increased use of shorter brachytherapy regimens during the pandemic. Most providers (61%) reported caring for at least 1 patient with a positive COVID-19 test. A pause or delay in treatment due to COVID-19 positivity was reported by 45% of respondents, with 55% reporting that patients chose to delay their own care because of COVID-19-related concerns. Total treatment times >8 weeks for patients with cervical cancer were observed by 33% of respondents, but occurred in >25% of patients. Conclusions: Data from this prospectively collected anonymous survey of practice patterns among radiation oncologists reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in delays initiating care, truncated brachytherapy treatment courses, and a reported increase in locally advanced cervical cancer cases at presentation. These data can be used as a means of self-assessment to ensure appropriate decision making for gynecologic patients during the endemic phase of COVID-19.

Development of a United States Radiation Oncology Curricular Framework: A Stakeholder Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: A United States (US) radiation oncology curriculum, developed using best practices for curriculum inquiry, is needed to guide residency education and qualifying examinations. Competency-based training, including entrustable professional activities (EPAs), provides an outcomes-based approach to modern graduate medical education. This study aimed to define US radiation oncology EPAs and curricular content domains using a deliberative process with input from multiple stakeholder groups. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group Core Curriculum Project Leadership Committee developed initial content domains and EPAs. Following recruitment of stakeholders, a Delphi process was used to achieve consensus. In the first round, content domains and EPAs were reviewed for inclusion and exclusion, clarity, time allocation (content domains), and level of training (EPAs). Participants submitted additional content domains and EPAs for consideration. Any content domains or EPAs 1 standard deviation below the median for inclusion and exclusion underwent Leadership Committee review. All participants completing the first Delphi round were invited to the second round. Percent curriculum time allocated for content domains and a single subdomain were finalized. New EPAs or EPAs undergoing major revisions were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 186 participants representing diverse stakeholder groups participated. One hundred fourteen completed the first Delphi round (61.3%). Of 114 invited, 77 participants completed the second round of the Delphi process (67.5%). Overall, 6 of 9 content domains met consensus, 1 content domain was removed, and 2 content domains were combined. Four subdomains of a single content domain were reviewed and met consensus. Consensus on percent time allocated per content domain and subdomain was reached. Of 55 initial EPAs, 52 final EPAs met consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Deliberative curriculum inquiry was successfully used to develop a consensus on US radiation oncology content domains and EPAs. These data can guide the allocation of educational time in training programs, help inform weighting for qualifying examinations, and help guide clinical training and resident assessment.

Prospective Study of PET/MRI Tumor Response During Chemoradiotherapy for Patients With Low-risk and Intermediate-risk p16-positive Oropharynx Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine tumor response with positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during chemoradiotherapy as a predictor of outcome in patients with p16-positive oropharynx cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with p16-positive oropharynx cancer were treated with chemoradiotherapy. Low-risk (LR) disease was defined as T1-T3 and N0-2b and ≤10 pack-years and intermediate-risk (IR) disease as T4 or N2c-3 or >10 pack-years. Patients underwent a PET/MRI scan pretreatment and at fraction 10. Change in value of imaging means were analyzed by analysis of variance. K-means clustering with Euclidean distance functions were used for patient clustering. Silhouette width was used to determine the optimal number of clusters. Linear regression was performed on all radiographic metrics using patient and disease characteristics. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled with 7 LR and 11 IR patients available for analysis. Pretreatment imaging characteristics between LR and IR patients were similar. Patients with LR disease exhibited a larger reduction in maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) compared with IR patients (P<0.05). Cluster analysis defined 2 cohorts that exhibited a similar intratreatment response. Cluster 1 contained 7 of 7 LR patients and 8 of 11 IR patients. Cluster 2 contained 3 of 11 IR patients. Cluster 2 exhibited significant differences compared with cluster 1 in the change in primary tumor peak SUV and largest lymph node median SUV. CONCLUSIONS: We identified that IR p16-positive oropharynx cancers exhibit heterogeneity in their PET/MRI response to chemoradiotherapy. These data support further study of intratreatment imaging response as a potential mechanism to identify patients with IR oropharynx cancer suitable for treatment deintensification.

Why an Increasing Number of Unmatched Residency Positions in Radiation Oncology? A Survey of Fourth-Year Medical Students.

PURPOSE: The number of US fourth-year medical students applying to radiation oncology has decreased during the past few years. We conducted a survey of fourth-year medical students to examine factors that may be influencing the decision to pursue radiation oncology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous online survey was sent to medical students at 9 participating US medical schools. RESULTS: A total of 232 medical students completed the survey. Of the 153 students who stated they were never interested in radiation oncology, 77 (50%) reported never having been exposed to the specialty as their reason for not pursuing radiation oncology. The job market was the most commonly cited factor among students who said they were once interested in but ultimately chose not to pursue radiation oncology. Conversely, the recent low pass rates for board examinations and a perception of a lack of diversity within radiation oncology had the least influence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite discussion of potential measures to address this disquieting trend, there have been minimal formal attempts to characterize and address potential causes of a decreasing interest in radiation oncology. This study's data are consistent with previous research regarding the trend of decreased medical student interest in radiation oncology and may be used as part of ongoing introspective assessment to inform future change within radiation oncology.

Comfort Level of US Radiation Oncology Graduates: Assessment of Transition to Independent Clinical Practice.

Radiation training programs are designed to prepare graduates for independent practice, with metrics in place to assess appropriateness of clinical decision-making. Here, we investigated the self-assessed preparedness of US graduates during the transition to independent practice.An anonymous, Internet-based survey was distributed to recent graduates of radiation oncology residencies (2016-2017). A Likert scale was used to assess comfort with various aspects of practice, as well as "time" to development of comfort in independent practice.Responses were obtained from 70/210 (33%), the majority reported training in programs with 5-8 residents (n = 35). Most (77%) reported designing between 500 and 900 treatment plans during training (n = 54). Only 41% of respondents reported the opportunity to review treatment plans and make decisions about safety/adequacy without attending input > 50% of the time (n = 29). Thirty percent of residents reported being responsible for seeing/managing on-treatment visits (OTVs) ≤ 75% of the time. Aspects with which practitioners reported the least comfort were understanding of billing/application to practice (2.43, IQR 2-3), orthovoltage (superficial radiation) setup and field design (2.57, IQR 1-4), and planning/delivery of prostate implants (2.82, IQR 2-4). Increased mean comfort levels were reported by those designing > 700 treatment plans in training as well as those reporting an opportunity to evaluate plans and make clinical decisions prior to attending input > 50% of the time during residency. Comfort with the delivery of stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) correlated with caseload for liver, spine, prostate, and CNS disease sites but not lung.Variations in training experiences exist across institutions. Here, a lower than expected number of residents reported seeing/managing OTVs as well as reviewing treatment plans prior to attending input during training. Overall comfort was correlated with case volume and opportunities to independently review treatment plans prior to attending input. These data highlight areas of opportunity for improving resident education with implications for ease of transition to independent clinical practice.

Nonclinical Time in U.S. Radiation Oncology Residency Programs: Number of Months and Resident Opinion of Value.

PURPOSE: Data regarding the amount and use of nonclinical time (NCT) in radiation oncology residency programs are scarce. We surveyed every U.S. radiation oncology residency program to obtain benchmark data to inform decisions about optimal program structure. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous, web-based survey was distributed to postgraduate year 5 residents at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology training programs. The survey included 33 yes/no, Likert-scale, and free-response questions. Program data were analyzed for all programs, including those considered "top 10" per Doximity and those "not top 10." Likert-scale responses were dichotomized as "not as satisfied" (1, 2, 3) or "very satisfied" (4, 5). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six residents (69%) completed the survey. Program-specific data were obtained for 100% of programs (n = 82). Almost all training programs (98%) provide residents with protected NCT. Including programs with no NCT, the median NCT is 10 months in all programs. The median NCT is 12 months in "top 10" programs and 9 months in "not top 10" programs (P < .01). Most programs (68%) reported >6 months of NCT. The proportion of residents wanting more NCT decreased as the amount of NCT increased (73%, 52%, and 19% for 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 months, respectively; P < .01). The proportion of residents who were very satisfied with NCT flexibility increased with more NCT (64%, 79%, and 94% for 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 months, respectively; P < .01), as did the proportion of residents who were very satisfied with accomplishments during NCT (35%, 53%, and 72% for 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 months, respectively; P < .01). When asked whether residents would theoretically give up some NCT to shorten residency, the proportion of residents willing to shorten their residencies decreased as the amount of NCT increased (65%, 47%, and 33% for 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12 months respectively; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Programs should maintain an emphasis on NCT and implement measures to ensure meaningful resident experiences.

Regional Influence of Radiation Oncology Residency Training on Job Securement over Two Time Periods.

Purpose Recent reports have noted conflicting predictions regarding the future of the radiation oncology job market. Residents and practicing radiation oncologists (ROs) report perceptions of an increasingly saturated market. An important factor contributing to the job landscape is the potential geographic maldistribution of ROs in the United States. Given the importance of the evolving job market and appropriate supply and demand for future ROs, this study investigated whether residency training region influences employment region and whether "portability" of residency training has changed over time from 2003-2015. Methods Radiation oncology residency graduates were identified from Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) directories from 2003-2012. This information was cross-referenced with the American Society of Radiation Oncology directory to determine current employment location. The region of residency training and employment were categorized into four regions per the US Census Bureau: Northeast (NE), South (S), Midwest (MW), and West (W). The change in "portability" of residency training over time was determined from the results of an anonymous internet-based survey which provided information on year of graduation and location of first job. "Portability" was defined as the rate at which a trainee in one region could find employment in another region. From the survey, two cohorts were identified: early (graduated from 2003-2006) and late (graduated from 2012-2015). Results Current employment location was available for 817/1168 (70%) residents identified in the ARRO directories from 2003-2012. The percentages of residents who trained in the NE, S, MW, and W were 29%, 28%, 27%, and 15%, respectively. The percentages of residents with current employment in the NE, S, MW, and W were 20%, 34%, 22%, and 24%, respectively. Residents were more likely to remain employed in the region in which they trained (p < 0.05), with 58% having current employment in the region of their training. Residency graduation year and location of first job (in the United States) were available for 139/198 (70%) survey respondents. Portability of residency training did not significantly change from 2003-2012 with 49% of the early cohort securing their first job in the region in which they trained compared to 57% of the late cohort (p = 0.39). Conclusions This study suggests that recent residents are not moving to different geographic regions at an increased rate than previous and that residents are more likely to find employment in the region in which they trained.

Student Perspectives on Oncology Curricula at United States Medical Schools.

Delivering a cohesive oncology curriculum to medical students is challenging due to oncology's multidisciplinary nature, predominantly outpatient clinical setting, and lack of data describing effective approaches to teaching it. We sought to better characterize approaches to oncology education at US medical schools by surveying third and fourth year medical students who serve on their institution's curriculum committee. We received responses from students at 19 schools (15.2% response rate). Key findings included the following: (1) an under-emphasis of cancer in the curriculum relative to other common diseases; (2) imbalanced involvement of different clinical subspecialists as educators; (3) infrequent requirements for students to rotate through non-surgical oncologic clerkships; and (4) students are less confident in their knowledge of cancer treatment compared to basic science/natural history or workup/diagnosis. Based on these findings, we provide several recommendations to achieve robust multidisciplinary curriculum design and implementation that better balances the clinical and classroom aspects of oncology education.

A New Era of Image Guidance with Magnetic Resonance-guided Radiation Therapy for Abdominal and Thoracic Malignancies.

Magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy (MRgRT) offers advantages for image guidance for radiotherapy treatments as compared to conventional computed tomography (CT)-based modalities. The superior soft tissue contrast of magnetic resonance (MR) enables an improved visualization of the gross tumor and adjacent normal tissues in the treatment of abdominal and thoracic malignancies. Online adaptive capabilities, coupled with advanced motion management of real-time tracking of the tumor, directly allow for high-precision inter-/intrafraction localization. The primary aim of this case series is to describe MR-based interventions for localizing targets not well-visualized with conventional image-guided technologies. The abdominal and thoracic sites of the lung, kidney, liver, and gastric targets are described to illustrate the technological advancement of MR-guidance in radiotherapy.

The role of radiation therapy in the treatment of Stage II endometrial cancer: A large database study.

PURPOSE: The optimum adjuvant treatment for Stage II endometrial cancer patients is unknown. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is often considered the standard of care; however, retrospective series suggest that brachytherapy (BT) alone may be sufficient for selected patients. As randomized data are lacking, we used a large database to explore this question. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients with pathologic International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Stage II disease. Demographic, clinic-pathologic, and treatment details were compared between patients. Multivariable analysis was used to determine factors associated with receiving radiation therapy (RT). To account for imbalances between groups, a matched-pair analysis was completed. RESULTS: Eight thousand one hundred forty patients were included. RT was associated with overall survival (OS), with EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64), BT (HR 0.47), and combination (HR 0.54) showing increased OS on univariate analysis. Facility, urban location, diagnosis year, hysterectomy type, and chemotherapy did not reach significance. On multivariate analysis, RT was associated with OS, with EBRT (HR 0.69), BT (HR 0.60), and combination (HR 0.54) showing benefit. Using propensity-score matching, RT continued to show improved OS regardless of type: BT (82% vs. 73% 5-year OS) and EBRT (77% vs. 71%). BT as compared to EBRT had equivalent survival (81% vs. 79%, not statistically significant). CONCLUSION: This study of over 8,000 patients demonstrates that adjuvant RT confers a survival benefit in Stage II endometrial cancer and supports the continued use of RT in these patients. BT alone may be reasonable in carefully selected patients.

Radiation oncology residency selection: A postgraduate evaluation of factor importance and survey of variables associated with job securement.

BACKGROUND: Medical students often choose to pursue a career in radiation oncology with limited meaningful exposure to the field. We previously identified factors that were most influential to an applicant's rank list order. Here, we sought to assess if residency graduates had differing views regarding those factors. We also polled recent graduates' attitudes of the current job market. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An anonymous, internet-based survey was developed and distributed to graduates of radiation oncology residencies from 2003 through 2006 and 2012 through 2015 to assess the importance of factors with regard to residency selection, training, and job securement and attitudes toward the job market within the United States. RESULTS: Responses were received from 198 of 848 (23%) of those invited to participate. The respondents were divided into 2 cohorts for analysis, an "early" cohort (2001-2009) and a "contemporary" cohort (2010-2016). Respondents recalled "quality of clinical training," "perceived happiness of residents," and "sense of community among faculty and residents" as the 3 most important factors influencing the rank list. Postresidency, the most valued factors of the residency experience were "quality of clinical training," "geographic location," and "faculty mentorship." Factors that were assigned the greatest differential value in hindsight to influence the rank list included "faculty mentorship," "willingness of faculty to call employer," and "quality of alumni base." Sixty-four percent of respondents reported the job market to be difficult or very difficult. This perception was more common among contemporary graduates (P < .05). Sixty percent of respondents reported "far too many" or "somewhat too many" residency positions for the actual job needs in the United States. CONCLUSION: After training, residency graduates place higher value on factors in residency that can directly improve job procurement. This finding is more common among more recent graduates, potentially a result of the perception of a tightening job market with too many radiation oncologists in training.

Small cell carcinoma of the head and neck: An analysis of the National Cancer Database.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate treatment trends and overall survival of patients with small cell carcinoma of the head and neck region. MATERIALS/METHODS: Patients from 2004 to 2012 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Patient demographics and overall survival were analyzed. Multivariable analysis was used to identify predictors of survival. RESULTS: Among 347,252 head and neck patients a total of 1042 (0.3%) patients with small cell carcinoma were identified. 17% of patients were diagnosed as stage I/II, 61% as stage III/IVA/IVB and 22% as stage IVC disease. The distribution by anatomic site was 9% oral cavity, 12% oropharynx, 35% larynx, 4% hypopharynx, 10% nasopharynx and 30% nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. The median overall survival by anatomical site was 20.8months for oral cavity, 23.7months for oropharynx, 17.9months for larynx/hypopharynx, 15.1months for nasopharynx and 36.4months for nasal cavity primary tumors. On multivariable analysis across stage, patients with nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses tumors had the best survival and patients with nasopharynx primaries had the worst survival. In stage I/II patients, type of treatment delivered resulted in no overall survival difference (p=0.78). In patients with locally advanced disease, there was no difference in survival between those treated with combined surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy compared to those treated only with radiotherapy and chemotherapy (p=0.46). The addition of radiotherapy to chemotherapy in the metastatic setting did not result in improved survival (p=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Small cell carcinoma of the head and neck is a rare malignancy with a poor prognosis. The addition of surgery to radiotherapy and chemotherapy did not improve survival in patients with locally advanced disease.

Multi-institutional Randomized Trial Testing the Utility of an Interactive Three-dimensional Contouring Atlas Among Radiation Oncology Residents.

PURPOSE: The delivery of safe and effective radiation therapy relies on accurate target delineation, particularly in the era of highly conformal treatment techniques. Current contouring resources are fragmented and can be cumbersome to use. The present study reports on the efficacy and usability of a web-based contouring atlas compared with those of existing contouring resources in a randomized trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We enrolled radiation oncology residents into a 2-phase contouring study. All residents contoured a T1N1 nasopharyngeal cancer case using the currently available resources. The participants were then randomized to recontour the case with access to existing resources or an interactive web-based contouring atlas (eContour.org). Contour analysis was performed using conformation number and simultaneous truth and performance level estimation. At completion of the second contouring session, the residents completed a multiple choice question knowledge test and a 10-item System Usability Scale. RESULTS: Twenty-four residents from 5 institutions completed the study. Compared with the residents using currently available resources, the residents using eContour had improved contour agreement with both the consensus (0.63 vs 0.52; P=.02) and the expert (0.58 vs 0.50; P=.01) contours for the high-risk clinical target volume and greater agreement with the expert contour for the contralateral parotid gland (0.44 ± 0.12 vs 0.56 ± 0.08; P=.003). The residents using eContour demonstrated greater knowledge of contour delineation and radiographic anatomy on a multiple-choice knowledge-based test (89% vs 77%; P=.03). Usability (89 vs 66; P<.0001) and satisfaction (4.1 vs 3.0; P=.002) were greater for eContour than for the existing resources. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the capacity of an interactive 3-dimensional contouring atlas to improve quality of resident target delineation in radiation oncology. Further research is needed to define the utility of easily accessible interactive educational reference tool to improve adherence to contouring-based guidelines and quality of care in routine clinical practice.