Fellowship in surgical oncology: The results of an experience in Portuguese-speaking African countries.

Cancer incidence rates are increasing worldwide including in Portuguese speaking African countries. We present the results of the fellowship in surgical oncology promoted by the Portuguese Institute of Oncology in Porto (IPO), Fernando Pessoa University, Portugal, and the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, which involved the training of residents and surgeons from Portuguese-speaking African countries in Portugal. The program's structure and content was the same of UMES/ESSO. The hands-on activity took place at the IPO. After the fellowship, a theoretical and practical assessment was held, and all fellows scored above the threshold to pass. The surgical performance of the fellows was assessed in their workplaces in Africa. The impact of the training was evaluated by a questionnaire completed by all the fellows. It was reported an increase in knowledge, skills and organizational skills that fellows are committed to implement. As the fellowship is certified by a Portuguese University, it may be recognized by the Local Health and University Authorities, impacting on the professional progression of fellows.

Development of the Breast Surgical Oncology Fellowship in the United States.

The surgical treatment of breast cancer has rapidly evolved over the past 50 years, progressing from Halsted's radical mastectomy to a public campaign of surgical options, aesthetic reconstruction, and patient empowerment. Sparked by the research of Dr. Bernard Fisher and the first National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial in 1971, the field of breast surgery underwent significant growth over the next several decades, enabling general surgeons to limit their practices to the breast. High surgical volumes eventually led to the development of the first formal breast surgical oncology fellowship in a large community-based hospital at Baylor University Medical Center in 1982. The establishment of the American Society of Breast Surgeons, as well as several landmark clinical trials and public campaign efforts, further contributed to the advancement of breast surgery. In 2003, the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO), in partnership with the American Society of Breast Surgeons and the American Society of Breast Disease, approved its first fellowship training program in breast surgical oncology. Since that time, the number of American fellowship programs has increased to approximately 60 programs, focusing not only on training in breast surgery, but also in medical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, breast imaging, and plastic and reconstructive surgery. This article focuses on the happenings in the United States that led to the transition of breast surgery from a subset of general surgery to its own specialized field.

Impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on Breast Surgical Oncology fellow education.

INTRODUCTION: The early COVID-19 pandemic rapidly transformed healthcare and medical education. We sought to evaluate the professional and personal impact of the pandemic on 2019-2020 Breast Surgical Oncology (BSO) fellows in Society of Surgical Oncology approved programs to capture the experience and direct future changes. METHODS: From July 15, 2020 to August 4, 2020 a survey was administered to the American Society of Breast Surgeons' fellow members. The survey assessed the impact of the pandemic on clinical experience, education/research opportunities, personal health/well-being, and future career. Responses were collected and aggregated to quantify the collective experience of respondents. RESULTS: Twenty-eight of fifty-seven (54%) eligible fellows responded. Twenty-one (75%) indicated the clinical experience changed. Twenty-seven (96%) reported less time spent caring for ambulatory breast patients and sixteen (57%) reported the same/more time spent in the operating room. Fourteen (50%) stated their future job was impacted and eight (29%) delayed general surgery board examinations. Stress was increased in 26 (93%). Personal health was unaffected in 20 (71%), and 3 (10%) quarantined for COVID-19 exposure/infection. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic altered the clinical experience of BSO fellows; however, the operative experience was generally unaffected. The creation of frameworks and support mechanisms to mitigate potential challenges for fellows and fellowship programs in the ongoing pandemic and other times of national crisis should be considered.

A How-To Guide: Virtual Interviews in the Era of Social Distancing.

The coronavirus crisis hit at the beginning of the Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship (CGSO) and Breast Oncology Fellowship interview cycles. Within 2 weeks, nearly all programs, including ours, switched to a virtual platform for the remainder of the season. Given that social distancing will remain in place for the foreseeable future, it is possible that all residency and fellowship interviews will need to be conducted virtually. Our methods and shared experience can assist other programs faced with this task for their upcoming interview cycle. We recommend using a virtual meeting platform in which staff have the most comfort; we chose Zoom as our platform. Information on the program traditionally included in the welcome packet, research opportunities, details on the institution, hospital and staff, and detailed interview instructions were distributed prior to the interview day. A virtual "happy hour" was conducted to provide an opportunity for candidates and current trainees to interact. Our virtual interview day schedule mimicked our traditional in person interview day, and we always had a back-up plan for completing the interview if the virtual platform became unstable. While many programs would not choose to perform virtual interviews, we felt that by conducting them in the methods we describe, we were able to closely replicate our traditional interview day and appreciate the candidacy of the applicants.

Direct Comparison of In-Person Versus Virtual Interviews for Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship in the COVID-19 Era.

BACKGROUND: In the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship programs implemented virtual interviews (VI) during the 2020 interview season. At our institution, we had the unique opportunity to conduct an in-person interview (IPI) prior to the pandemic-related travel restrictions, and a VI after the restrictions were in place. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to understand how the VI model compares with the traditional IPI approach. METHODS: Online surveys were distributed to both groups, collecting feedback on their interview experience. Responses were evaluated using a two-sample t test assuming equal variances. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 26 (88%) applicants completed the survey. Most applicants reported that the interview gave them a satisfactory understanding of the CGSO fellowship (100% IPI, 92% VI) and the majority in both groups felt that the interview experience allowed them to accurately represent themselves (92% and 82%, respectively). All participants in the IPI group felt they were able to get an adequate understanding of the culture of the program, while only 64% in the VI group agreed with that statement (p = 0.02). IPI applicants were more likely to agree that the interview experience was sufficient to allow them to make a ranking decision (92% vs. 54%; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: While the VI modality offers several advantages over the IPI, it still falls short in conveying some of the more subjective aspects of the programs, including program culture. Strategies to provide applicants with better insight into these areas during the VI will be important moving forward.

Virtual Surgical Fellowship Recruitment During COVID-19 and Its Implications for Resident/Fellow Recruitment in the Future.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has overlapped with the scheduled interview periods of over 20 surgical subspecialty fellowships, including the Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowships in the National Resident Matching Program and the Society of Surgical Oncology's Breast Surgical Oncology fellowships. We outline the successful implementation of and processes behind a virtual interview day for CGSO fellowship recruitment after the start of the pandemic. METHODS: The virtual CGSO fellowship interview process at the University of Chicago Medicine and NorthShore University Health System was outlined and implemented. Separate voluntary, anonymous online secure feedback surveys were email distributed to interview applicants and faculty interviewers after the interview day concluded. RESULTS: Sixteen of 20 interview applicants (80.0%) and 12 of 13 faculty interviewers (92.3%) completed their respective feedback surveys. Seventy-five percent (12/16) of applicants and all faculty respondents (12/12) stated the interview process was 'very seamless' or 'seamless'. Applicants and faculty highlighted decreased cost, time savings, and increased efficiency as some of the benefits to virtual interviewing. CONCLUSIONS: Current circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic require fellowship programs to adapt and conduct virtual interviews. Our report describes the successful implementation of a virtual interview process. This report describes the technical steps and pitfalls of organizing such an interview and provides insights into the experience of the interviewer and interviewee.

Development of a surgical oncology training curriculum for accreditation.

In 2011, the American Board of Surgery announced a new specialty board certification for Complex General Surgical Oncology. The development of a 2-year fellowship training curriculum was based on the core values of multidisciplinary care, surgical management of oncologic disease, education in basic research and clinical trial design, community outreach, patient counseling, and leadership in oncology. This article highlights the elements necessary for developing a fellowship training program in the context of these core values.

Implementation of a Surgical Oncology Disparities Curriculum for Preclinical Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Underinsured and uninsured surgical-oncology patients are at higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Curricular innovation is needed to train medical students to work with this vulnerable population. We describe the implementation of and early educational outcomes from a student-initiated pilot program aimed at improving medical student insight into health disparities in surgery. MATERIALS/METHODS: First-year medical students participated in a dual didactic and perioperative-liaison experience over a 10-month period. Didactic sessions included surgical-skills training and faculty-led lectures on financial toxicity and management of surgical-oncology patients. Students were partnered with uninsured and Medicaid patients receiving surgical-oncology care and worked with these patients by providing appointment reminders, clarifying perioperative instructions, and accompanying patients to surgery and clinic appointments. Students' interest in surgery and self-reported comfort in 15 Association of American Medical Colleges core competencies were assessed with preparticipation and postparticipation surveys using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Twenty-four first-year students were paired with 14 surgical-oncology patients during the 2017-2018 academic year. Sixteen students (66.7%) completed both preprogram and postprogram surveys. Five students (31.3%) became "More Interested" in surgery, whereas 11 (68.8%) reported "Similar Interest or No Change." Half of the students (n = 8) felt more prepared for their surgery clerkship after participating. Median self-reported comfort improved in 7/15 competencies including Oral Communication and Ethical Responsibility. All students reported being "Somewhat" or "Extremely Satisfied" with the program. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that an innovative program to expose preclinical medical students to challenges faced by financially and socially vulnerable surgical-oncology patients is feasible and may increase students' clinical preparedness and interest in surgery.

Theoretical and practical knowledge curriculum for European Breast Surgeons.

The Breast Surgery theoretical and practical knowledge curriculum comprehensively describes the knowledge and skills expected of a fully trained breast surgeon practicing in the European Union and European Economic Area (EEA). It forms part of a range of factors that contribute to the delivery of high quality cancer care. It has been developed by a panel of experts from across Europe and has been validated by professional breast surgery societies in Europe. The curriculum maps closely to the syllabus of the Union of European Medical Specialists (UEMS) Breast Surgery Exam, the UK FRCS (breast specialist interest) curriculum and other professional standards across Europe and globally (USA Society of Surgical Oncology, SSO). It is envisioned that this will serve as the basis for breast surgery training, examination and accreditation across Europe to harmonise and raise standards as breast surgery develops as a separate discipline from its parent specialties (general surgery, gynaecology, surgical oncology and plastic surgery). The curriculum is not static but will be revised and updated by the curriculum development group of the European Breast Surgical Oncology Certification group (BRESO) every 2 years.

Effect of Surgeon Factors on Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast-Conserving Therapy in Older Breast Cancer Survivors.

BACKGROUND: The effect of surgeon factors on patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is unknown and may help patients make informed care decisions. METHODS: We performed a survey study of women aged ≥ 67 years with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed in 2009 and treated with guideline-concordant BCT, to determine the association of surgeon factors with patient-reported outcomes. The treating surgeon was identified using Medicare claims, and surgeon factors were identified via the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. The primary outcome was patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction measured by the Cancer Surveillance and Outcomes Research Team (CanSORT) Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcome instrument, while secondary outcomes included BREAST-Q subdomains. All patient, treatment, and surgeon covariables were included in a saturated multivariable linear regression model with backward elimination applied until remaining variables were p < 0.1. RESULTS: Of 1650 women randomly selected to receive the questionnaire, 489 responded, of whom 289 underwent BCT. Median age at diagnosis was 72 years and the time from diagnosis to survey was 6 years. The mean adjusted CanSORT score was higher for patients treated by surgical oncologists than patients treated by non-surgical oncologists (4.01 [95% confidence interval [CI] 3.65-4.38] vs. 3.53 [95% CI 3.28-3.77], p = 0.006). Similarly, mean adjusted BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being (91.97 [95% CI 86.13-97.80] vs. 83.04 [95% CI 80.85-85.22], p = 0.006) and Adverse Radiation Effects (95.28 [95% CI 91.25-99.31] vs. 88.90 [95% CI 86.23-91.57], p = 0.004) scores were better among patients treated by surgical oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Specialized surgical oncology training is associated with improved long-term patient-reported outcomes. These findings underscore the value of specialized training and may be useful to patients choosing their care team.

Residents entering Complex General Surgical Oncology fellowship lack confidence with pelvic MRI for rectal cancer: Results of a needs assessment survey.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for the multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer. However, baseline experience of surgical residents with MRI is unknown. Therefore, a needs assessment survey was conducted to examine confidence with pelvic MRI for residents entering Complex General Surgical Oncology (CSGO) fellowships. METHODS: A multi-institutional survey evaluated incoming CGSO fellows' experience with pelvic MRI for rectal cancer in residency. Additionally, confidence was assessed for essential components of pelvic MRI including T- and N-stage, circumferential resection margin (CRM), extramural venous invasion (EMVI), and pelvic anatomy. RESULTS: Of the twenty-four incoming fellows who completed the survey (response rate = 44%), 20 reported frequent use of pelvic MRI for rectal cancer in residency, but 16 reported rarely/never interpreting images themselves for staging or operative planning. Most respondents reported low confidence for T-stage, N-stage, CRM, EMVI, as well as pelvic anatomy, particularly for lateral and posterior pelvis. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a pelvic MRI curriculum for residents entering CGSO fellowships could enhance their clinical training in the multidisciplinary management of patients with rectal cancer.

Survey of Surgical Oncology Fellowship Graduates 2005-2016: Insight into Initial Practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite burgeoning interest in Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship training, little is reported about postgraduate employment. The goal of this study was to characterize CGSO graduates' first employment and to identify factors that influenced this decision. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Society of Surgical Oncology developed and distributed an electronic survey to CGSO fellows who graduated from 2005 to 2016. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 47% (237/509). Fifty-seven percent of respondents were first employed as faculty surgeons at a university-based/affiliated hospital, with 15% returning to their residency institution. The distribution of respondents' current employment across the United States mirrored the locations of their hometowns. Eighty-five percent of respondents care for patients across at least three disease types, most commonly hepatopancreatobiliary (81%), esophagus/gastric (75%), and sarcoma (74%). Twenty-seven percent of respondents spend the majority of their time in one area of surgical oncology; melanoma, breast, and head/neck were the most common. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) reported that they performed either clinical or basic science research as part of their current position. Multiple factors influenced the decision of first faculty position. CONCLUSIONS: Most CGSO graduates are employed at academic medical centers across the country in proximity to NCI-designated centers, treat a variety of disease types, and spend a percentage of their time dedicated to clinical research.

Variability in breast cancer surgery training across Europe: An ESSO-EUSOMA international survey.

BACKGROUND: At present there is a lack of standardization of training in breast cancer surgery across Europe. The aim of this survey was to assess current practice in Europe regarding training in breast cancer (BC) surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: General surgeons, surgical oncologists, gynecologist, and plastic surgeons in Europe were invited to participate in this bespoke survey including 19 questions. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 3.000 surgical oncologists across Europe. A total of 671 physicians (387 general surgeons, 152 gynecologists, 126 surgical oncologist, 31 plastic surgeons) answered the survey (23% response rate). Four hundred and sixty-eight physicians devoted between 50% -100% of their job to treating breast cancer. 45% worked in a community/University hospital within a dedicated Breast Unit. Specific additional breast surgery training was not universal: 20% had undertaken an accredited breast fellowship, 30% in a Breast Unit as a trainee, 21% had done additional courses, masters or diploma and 8% had not done any additional training. The majority (61%) of respondents worked in Units treating >150 BC cases per year, while 26% of the responders treat >120 new primary cases per year, and 23% less than 50 new cases a year. Multivariate analysis showed that breast surgeons working in a Breast Unit and treating more than 50 cases/year significantly performed oncoplastic procedures. CONCLUSION: There is a great variability in breast cancer surgery training in Europe. It is imperative to develop quality standards for breast cancer surgery training to ensure that patients get standardized and certified surgical management regardless of the country in which they are treated.