Academic and Geographic Employment Outcomes for Graduating Residents in Radiation Oncology: 2015-2022.

PURPOSE: Little is known about how the academic and geographic employment outcomes of new radiation oncology (RO) graduates have changed over time. In this study, we sought to trace the evolution of these outcomes for all RO residents who graduated between 2015 and 2022. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using publicly available data sources, we identified the first permanent, clinical employment positions accepted by graduating members of the RO residency classes of 2015 to 2022. We additionally determined the medical school and residency program attended by each graduate. We then classified each clinical employment position by its rural-urban continuum code and core-based statistical area, and whether it was academic or nonacademic. RESULTS: Of 1478 RO graduates identified, 1396 first accepted clinical positions in the United States after residency. A majority accepted positions in the largest metropolitan areas (N = 878, 62.9%) and in nonacademic settings (N = 719, 51.5%). The proportion of graduates who accepted academic positions climbed steadily from 2015 to 2020 before dropping by 31% in 2021 and partially rebounding in 2022. Women and graduates of large-sized academic programs were more likely to have accepted academic positions. In contrast, graduates of small-sized residency programs were more likely than those of large-sized residency programs to have accepted positions in nonmetropolitan areas. At least 288 of the examined individuals (20.6%) had switched jobs at least once at the time of this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Most new RO graduates in this study accepted clinical positions in large metropolitan areas. A slight majority accepted nonacademic positions. While the RO job market was able to absorb the vast majority of these new graduates between 2015 and 2022, there is no guarantee that this equilibrium will hold in the future. Additional studies aiming to refine projections of future RO demand are needed.

The potential role of precision medicine to alleviate racial disparities in prostate, bladder and renal urological cancer care.

Background: Racial disparities in oncological outcomes resulting from differences in social determinants of health (SDOH) and tumour biology are well described in prostate cancer (PCa) but similar inequities exist in bladder (BCa) and renal cancers (RCCs). Precision medicine (PM) aims to provide personalized treatment based on individual patient characteristics and has the potential to reduce these inequities in GU cancers. Objective: This article aims to review the current evidence outlining racial disparities in GU cancers and explore studies demonstrating improved oncological outcomes when PM is applied to racially diverse patient populations. Evidence acquisition: Evidence was obtained from Pubmed and Web of Science using keywords prostate, bladder and renal cancer, racial disparity and precision medicine. Because limited studies were found, preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were not applied but rather related articles were studied to explore existing debates, identify the current status and speculate on future applications. Results: Evidence suggests addressing SDOH for PCa can reverse racial inequities in oncological outcomes but differences in incidence remain. Similar disparities in BCa and RCC are seen, and it would be reasonable to suggest achieving parity in SDOH for all races would do the same. Research applying a PM approach to different ethnicities is lacking although in African Americans (AAs) with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPCa) better outcomes have been shown with androgen receptor inhibitors, radium-223 and sipuleucel. Exploiting the abscopal effect with targeted radiation therapy (RT) and immunotherapy has promise but requires further study, as does defining actionable mutations in specific patient groups to tailor treatments as appropriate. Conclusion: For all GU cancers, the historical underrepresentation of ethnic minorities in clinical trials still exists and there is an urgent need for recruitment strategies to address this. PM is a promising development with the potential to reduce inequities in GU cancers, however, both improved understanding of race-specific tumour biology, and enhanced recruitment of minority populations into clinical trials are required. Without this, the benefits of PM will be limited.

Combining theranostic/particle therapy with immunotherapy for the treatment of GU malignancies.

Particle therapy and radiopharmaceuticals are emerging fields in the treatment of genitourinary cancers. With these novel techniques and the ever-growing immunotherapy options, the combinations of these therapies have the potential to improve current cancer cure rates. However, the most effective sequence and combination of these therapies is unknown and is a question that is actively being explored in multiple ongoing clinical trials. Here, we review the immunological effects of particle therapy and the available radiopharmaceuticals and discuss how best to combine these therapies.

The effects of radiation therapy on the heart: implications for management.

Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery constitute the three primary modalities employed in the treatment of patients with cancer. Radiotherapy, in particular, is a mainstay of treatment for patients with cancers of the breast, esophagus, lung, and lymph nodes. Prior studies have shown, however, that radiotherapy can impact the heart. Radiation exposure, in fact, can lead to pathophysiological changes that may result in short- and long-term radiation-induced cardiac toxicities. Such toxicities can cause substantial morbidity and may manifest clinically in the weeks to years after the completion of treatment. As a result, in both modern clinical practice and clinical trials, the heart has been recognized as an organ-at-risk, and radiotherapy treatment plans seek to minimize the dose that it receives. In this review, we focus on the impacts of radiotherapy on underlying cardiac risk factors, the pathophysiology of radiotherapy-induced cardiac changes, and the clinical impacts of radiotherapy on the heart. Due to the location of the heart, we focus primarily on patients who have received radiotherapy for cancers of the breast, esophagus, lung, and lymph nodes, and those who have received cardiac-directed therapy. We then elaborate on the ongoing attempts to further lower the doses delivered to the heart during therapeutic courses of radiation.

Risk-Tailoring Radiotherapy for Endometrial Cancer: A Narrative Review.

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic cancer in the United States and it contributes to the second most gynecologic cancer-related deaths. With upfront surgery, the specific characteristics of both the patient and tumor allow for risk-tailored treatment algorithms including adjuvant radiotherapy and systemic therapy. In this narrative review, we discuss the current radiation treatment paradigm for endometrial cancer with an emphasis on various radiotherapy modalities, techniques, and dosing regimens. We then elaborate on how to tailor radiotherapy treatment courses in combination with other cancer-directed treatments, including chemotherapy and immunotherapy. In conclusion, this review summarizes ongoing research that aims to further individualize radiotherapy regimens for individuals in an attempt to improve patient outcomes.

Gender Representation Among Academic US Radiation Oncology Department Chairs: Who are They?

Purpose: Women are underrepresented in academic radiation oncology (RO), particularly in leadership positions. In this study, we sought to better understand the characteristics of individuals who currently serve as academic RO chairpersons at institutions with an associated Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited RO residency training program. Methods and Materials: We created a database of academic RO chairpersons in the United States by using publicly available sources, including residency training program websites, hospital/institutional websites, Doximity, LinkedIn, the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) website, the American College of Radiation Oncology website, and the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System National Provider Identifier Registry. We used the χ2 Goodness of Fit test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher exact test via R version 4.1.1 to evaluate for statistical significance among categorical variables, medians, and proportions, respectively. Results: We identified 85 of the 90 chairpersons (94.4%) currently serving at institutions with an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited RO residency training program, 5 of whom hold interim positions and were thus excluded from further analyses. Of the remaining 80 chairpersons, 9 (11.3%) are women, and 71 (88.8%) are men (P < .01). Seventy-six chairpersons (95.0%) are full professors, and 19 (23.8%) hold dual MD PhD degrees. Thirty-two chairpersons (40.0%) hold an official leadership role in a cancer center affiliated with their current institution (43.7% of men vs 11.1% of women; P = .08). Seventy-three chairpersons (91.3%) secured their current positions a median of 16 years (range, 6-33 years) after completing RO residency. Thirty-five chairpersons (43.8%) were promoted to chair from positions within their current institutions (40.8% of men vs 66.7% of women; P = .17). The majority of chairpersons are ASTRO Fellows (62.5%); notably fewer are ASTRO (5.0%) or American College of Radiation Oncology (2.5%) Gold Medalists. Eight RO residency programs trained more than half of current chairpersons. Conclusion: Significantly more men than women currently serve as RO chairpersons. Future interventions that promote the recruitment, retention, and promotion of talented women in academic RO should be considered.

Head and Neck Cancer Patient Population, Management, and Oncologic Outcomes from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic precipitated drastic changes in cancer care. Its impact on the U.S. head and neck cancer population has yet to be fully understood. This study aims to understand the impact of pandemic-related changes on the head and neck cancer population. An observational study of head and neck cancer patients at a single institution during the spring of 2020 and 2019 was performed. Clinical characteristics and survival outcomes were analyzed. In 2020, 54 head and neck cancer patients were evaluated in the department of radiation oncology vs. 74 patients seen in 2019; 42% of the patients were female in 2019 versus 24% in 2020 (p = 0.036). The median follow-up time was 19.4 and 31 months for 2020 and 2019, respectively. After adjusting for stage, the relapse-free survival probability at 6 and 12 months was 79% and 69% in 2020 vs. 96% and 89% in 2019, respectively (p = 0.036). There was no significant difference in the overall survival, with 94% and 89% in 2020 and 2019, respectively (p = 0.61). Twenty-one percent of patients received induction chemotherapy in 2020 versus 5% in 2019 (p = 0.011); significantly more treatment incompletions occurred in 2020, 9% vs. 0% in 2019 (p = 0.012). Moreover, the stage-adjusted RFS differed between cohorts, suggesting head and neck cancer patients seen during the initial wave of COVID-19 may experience worse oncologic outcomes.

Reirradiation With Proton Therapy for Recurrent Malignancies of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction: Results of the Proton Collaborative Group Multi-Institutional Prospective Registry Trial.

Purpose: Treatment options for recurrent esophageal cancer (EC) previously treated with radiation therapy (RT) are limited. Reirradiation (reRT) with proton beam therapy (PBT) can offer lower toxicities by limiting doses to surrounding tissues. In this study, we present the first multi-institutional series reporting on toxicities and outcomes after reRT for locoregionally recurrent EC with PBT. Methods and Materials: Analysis of the prospective, multicenter, Proton Collaborative Group registry of patients with recurrent EC who had previously received photon-based RT and underwent PBT reRT was performed. Patient/tumor characteristics, treatment details, outcomes, and toxicities were collected. Local control (LC), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Event time was determined from reRT start. Results: Between 2012 and 2020, 31 patients received reRT via uniform scanning/passive scattering (61.3%) or pencil beam scanning (38.7%) PBT at 7 institutions. Median prior RT, PBT reRT, and cumulative doses were 50.4 Gy (range, 37.5-110.4), 48.6 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) (25.2-72.1), and 99.9 Gy (79.1-182.5), respectively. Of these patients, 12.9% had 2 prior RT courses, and 67.7% received PBT with concurrent chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 7.2 months (0.9-64.7). Post-PBT, there were 16.7% locoregional only, 11.1% distant only, and 16.7% locoregional and distant recurrences. Six-month LC, DMFS, and OS were 80.5%, 83.4%, and 69.1%, respectively. One-year LC, DMFS, and OS were 67.1%, 83.4%, and 27%, respectively. Acute grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 23% of patients, with 1 acute grade 5 toxicity secondary to esophageal hemorrhage, unclear if related to reRT or disease progression. No grade ≥3 late toxicities were reported. Conclusions: In the largest report to date of PBT for reRT in patients with recurrent EC, we observed acceptable acute toxicities and encouraging rates of disease control. However, these findings are limited by the poor prognoses of these patients, who are at high risk of mortality. Further research is needed to better assess the long-term benefits and toxicities of PBT in this specific patient population.

Adjuvant Reirradiation With Proton Therapy in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Purpose: For patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), locoregional failure and second primary tumors are common indications for adjuvant reirradiation (re-RT). Given an absence of clear consensus on the role of adjuvant re-RT, we sought to assess histopathologic risk factors of patients with HNSCC and their resulting outcomes after adjuvant re-RT with proton therapy. Methods and Materials: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with HNSCC who underwent salvage surgery at our institution followed by adjuvant re-RT with proton therapy over 1.5 years. All included patients received prior radiation therapy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate locoregional recurrence-free survival and overall survival. Results: The cohort included 22 patients, with disease subsites, including oropharynx, oral cavity, hypopharynx, larynx, and nasopharynx. Depending on adverse pathologic features, adjuvant re-RT to 66 Gy (32% of cohort) or 60 Gy (68%), with (59%) or without (41%) concurrent systemic therapy was administered. The majority (86%) completed re-RT with no reported treatment delay; 3 patients experienced grade ≥3 acute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events toxicity and no patient required enteral feeding tube placement during re-RT. Median follow-up was 21.0 months (IQR, 11.7-25.2 months). Five patients had biopsy-proven disease recurrences a median of 5.9 months (IQR, 3.8-9.7 months) after re-RT. Locoregional recurrence-free survival was 95.2%, 70.2%, 64.8% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. OS was 100%, 79.2%, and 79.2% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. Four patients had osteoradionecrosis on imaging a median of 13.2 months (IQR, 8.7-17.4 months) after re-RT, with 2 requiring surgical intervention. Conclusions: Adjuvant re-RT for patients with HNSCC was well-tolerated and offered reasonable local control in this high-risk cohort but appears to be associated with a risk of osteoradionecrosis. Additional study and longer follow-up could help define optimal patient management in this patient population.

Immune Escape in Glioblastoma: Mechanisms of Action and Implications for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and CAR T-Cell Therapy.

Glioblastoma, the most common primary brain cancer in adults, is characterized by a poor prognosis and resistance to standard treatments. The advent of immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of several cancers in recent years but has failed to demonstrate benefit in patients with glioblastoma. Understanding the mechanisms by which glioblastoma exerts tumor-mediated immune suppression in both the tumor microenvironment and the systemic immune landscape is a critical step towards developing effective immunotherapeutic strategies. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of immune escape mechanisms in glioblastoma that compromise the efficacy of immunotherapies, with an emphasis on immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. In parallel, we review data from preclinical studies that have identified additional therapeutic targets that may enhance overall treatment efficacy in glioblastoma when administered alongside existing immunotherapies.