The American Board of Radiology B. Leonard Holman Research Pathway to Initial Certification: Opportunities Lost for Diagnostic Radiology.

OBJECTIVE: In 1998, the American Board of Radiology introduced the B. Leonard Holman Research Pathway (HRP) to initial certification for trainees in diagnostic radiology (DR) and radiation oncology (RO) motivated to pursue research-oriented careers in academic DR and RO. CONCLUSION: The HRP Committee anticipated that there would be a relatively even distribution between DR and RO participants, but with 18 years of experience that has not been the case. This article focuses on the HRP and DR.

ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for Communication: Radiation Oncology.

BACKGROUND: This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), and the American Radium Society (ARS). Timely, accurate, and effective communications are critical to quality and safety in contemporary medical practices. Radiation oncology incorporates the science and technology of complex, integrated treatment delivery and the art of providing care to individual patients. Through written physical and/or electronic reports and direct communication, radiation oncologists convey their knowledge and evaluation regarding patient care, clinical workup, and treatment provided to others in the management of the patient. Applicable practice parameters need to be revised periodically regarding medical record documentation for professional and technical components of services delivered. METHODS: This practice parameter was developed and revised according to the process described under the heading "The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards" on the ACR website ( https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards ) by the Committee on Practice Parameters-Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the ARS. Both societies have reviewed and approved the document. RESULTS: This practice parameter addresses radiation oncology communications in general, including (a) medical record, (b) electronic, and (c) doctor-patient communications, as well as specific documentation for radiation oncology reports such as (a) consultation, (b) clinical treatment management notes (including inpatient communication), (c) treatment (completion) summary, and (d) follow-up visits. CONCLUSIONS: The radiation oncologist's participation in the multidisciplinary management of patients is reflected in timely, medically appropriate, and informative communication with patients, caregivers, referring physician, and other members of the health care team. The ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for Communication: Radiation Oncology is an educational tool designed to assist practitioners in providing appropriate communication regarding radiation oncology care for patients.

ACR-ACNM-ARS-ASTRO-SNMMI Practice Parameter for the Performance of Therapy With Radiopharmaceuticals.

OBJECTIVES: This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the American College of Nuclear Medicine, the American Radium Society, the American Society for Radiation Oncology, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. The document is intended to serve as a resource for appropriately trained and licensed physicians who perform therapeutic procedures with unsealed sources, referred to in the document using the more inclusive terminology of radiopharmaceuticals, for which a written directive is required for authorized users under NRC 10 CFR 35.300. METHODS: This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website ( https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards ) by the Committee on Practice Parameters-Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the American Radium Society. RESULTS: This practice parameter addresses the overall role of the applicable physician-authorized user, Qualified Medical Physicist, and other specialized personnel involved in the delivery of radiopharmaceutical therapy. Therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals include those administered as elemental radioactive isotopes (radionuclides) or the radioactive element incorporated into a targeting molecule (ligand) by one or more chemical bonds. This document provides guidance regarding general principles of radionuclide therapies and indications of various alpha, beta, gamma, and mixed emission agents with references to several recent practice parameters on new and commonly performed radiopharmaceutical therapies. CONCLUSION: This document addresses clinical circumstances, elements of available agents, and the qualifications and responsibilities of various members of the radiation care team, specifications of consultation and other clinical documentation, post-therapy follow-up, radiation safety precautions, elements of quality control and improvement programs, infection control, and patient education to ensure optimal patient care and safety when utilizing radiopharmaceuticals.

The new golden era for radioimmunotherapy: not just for lymphomas anymore.

BACKGROUND: Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) has been approved for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas in the United States for more than a decade. However, the history of the development of RIT agents for advanced-stage solid malignancies dates back much further, and recent advances have renewed interest in this approach for solid tumors. METHODS: This paper reviews available evidence for the preclinical and clinical development of RIT agents for solid tumors. RESULTS: Several RIT agents have been studied for the treatment of a variety of solid malignancies, particularly colorectal, breast, prostate, ovarian, pancreatic, hepatocellular, and primary brain tumors. Multiple novel RIT agents are in active clinical investigation, either as single agents or combined with radiosensitizing chemotherapy or with external beam radiotherapy. Improvements in antibody (and antibody fragment) design and the availability of novel radionuclides have improved the therapeutic window for these agents. CONCLUSIONS: RIT for solid malignancies shows promise, typically with fewer adverse events than traditional cytotoxic systemic therapy. The greatest efficacy will likely be in the adjuvant setting of minimal residual disease. Newer radionuclides, particularly alpha-emitters, offer increased antitumor potency with less toxicity. Physicians and patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials of these promising agents.

The ABR 2021 Radiation Oncology Remote Examinations: Development, Administration, and Implications for the Future.

With the onset of the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in early 2020, it became apparent that routine administration of the ABR Qualifying and Certifying Exams would be disrupted. Initial intent for postponement was later altered to a recognition that replacement of the existing delivery methodologies was essential. Herein, the authors describe the conceptualization, development, administration, and future implications of the new remote examination delivery platforms.

The Declining Residency Applicant Pool: A Multi-Institutional Medical Student Survey to Identify Precipitating Factors.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to better understand and identify concerns that may be responsible for the declining radiation oncology (RO) residency applicant pool. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All RO residency programs affiliated with a US medical school were asked to participate in the study survey. An optional and anonymous survey consisting of 12 questions was emailed to all graduating medical students in 2020 at the 12 allopathic medical schools that agreed to survey administration. Survey responses were collected from March to May 2020. RESULTS: The study consisted of 265 survey responses out of 1766 distributed to eligible medical students, resulting in a response rate of 15.0%. The majority of students reported no exposure to RO (60.8%) and never considered it as a career option (63.8%). Neutral perceptions of the field were more common (54.3%) than positive (39.6%) and negative (6.0%). The top factors attracting medical students to RO were perceptions of high salary, favorable lifestyle and workload, and technological focus. The top negative factors were the field's interplay with physics, competitive United States Medical Licensing Examination board scores for matched applicants, and the focus placed on research during medical school. In the subgroup of students who were interested in RO but ultimately applied to another specialty, the job market was the most salient concern. CONCLUSIONS: Finding a place for RO in medical school curricula remains a challenge, with most surveyed students reporting no exposure during their education. Concern over the job market was the primary deterrent for medical students interested in pursuing RO. For disinterested students who had not considered RO as a career option, the required physics knowledge was the main deterrent.

Potential Significant Changes in Nuclear Regulatory Commission Policies Regarding Training and Experience Requirements for the Use of Radiopharmaceuticals.

The Code of Federal Regulations is a single-source repository of all rules and regulations promulgated by federal departments and agencies. In Title 10, Chapter 1, Part 35, Subpart D, §§35.100 to 35.290 detail regulations for the use of unsealed by product material not requiring a written directive (ie, diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals), and in Subpart E, §§35.300 to 35.396 detail regulations for the use of unsealed by product material requiring a written directive (ie, therapeutic radionuclides). Currently proposed changes for both Subparts D and E could have profound effects on patient care, public safety, and the practice of nuclear medicine, diagnostic radiology, and radiation oncology. This article details those proposed changes and actions under way to prevent promulgation of proposals that could negatively affect patient care and public safety.

Addressing overutilization in medical imaging.

The growth in medical imaging over the past 2 decades has yielded unarguable benefits to patients in terms of longer lives of higher quality. This growth reflects new technologies and applications, including high-tech services such as multisection computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and positron emission tomography (PET). Some part of the growth, however, can be attributed to the overutilization of imaging services. This report examines the causes of the overutilization of imaging and identifies ways of addressing the causes so that overutilization can be reduced. In August 2009, the American Board of Radiology Foundation hosted a 2-day summit to discuss the causes and effects of the overutilization of imaging. More than 60 organizations were represented at the meeting, including health care accreditation and certification entities, foundations, government agencies, hospital and health systems, insurers, medical societies, health care quality consortia, and standards and regulatory agencies. Key forces influencing overutilization were identified. These include the payment mechanisms and financial incentives in the U.S. health care system; the practice behavior of referring physicians; self-referral, including referral for additional radiologic examinations; defensive medicine; missed educational opportunities when inappropriate procedures are requested; patient expectations; and duplicate imaging studies. Summit participants suggested several areas for improvement to reduce overutilization, including a national collaborative effort to develop evidence-based appropriateness criteria for imaging; greater use of practice guidelines in requesting and conducting imaging studies; decision support at point of care; education of referring physicians, patients, and the public; accreditation of imaging facilities; management of self-referral and defensive medicine; and payment reform.

Training and Education Requirements for Authorized Users of Therapeutic Radiopharmaceuticals: Changes Under Consideration for 10CFR35.390 and Their Potential Impact.

The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and 38 Agreement States have the regulatory authority to promulgate and enforce regulations related to the use of radioisotopes for medical purposes. Elements of these regulations include training and experience (T&E) requirements for individuals authorized to use the agents. These regulations are specified in 10CFR35.390. At this time, the NRC is considering significant revisions to the T&E requirements. This article describes current regulations and concerns related to the proposed changes and details the ACR organizational response.

Snapshot of a Specialty: Results of the ABR 2016 Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Analysis.

PURPOSE: Beginning in 2010, the ABR has administered triennial clinical practice analysis surveys to inform examination development volunteers and staff about the actual state of radiation oncology practice. METHODS AND MATERIALS: As reported here, the 2016 survey was designed to provide objective data regarding actual patient volumes of specific disease sites and subjective insight as to the importance and relevance of site-specific therapy to individual practices. RESULTS: The survey instrument was circulated to 4,075 radiation oncologists listed in the membership database of the American Society for Radiation Oncology, and responses were received from 690 (16.9%); a total of 287 (41.5%) self-identified as being in academic practice. Even in the academic setting, a majority (216 of 287, or 75.3%) indicated that they spend most of their time in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the survey are informative regarding changes in the practice of radiation oncology over the past 6 years.

ABR Subspecialty Certifications in Hospice and Palliative Medicine and Pain Medicine.

The ACGME currently approves fellowship training in 11 subspecialties of radiology, and the ABR currently offers six subspecialty certificates (vascular interventional radiology will be phased out in 2017) to its primary certificate holders. Four of the ABR-sponsored or co-sponsored subspecialties have been available to ABR diplomates for more than 18 years, but two-hospice and palliative medicine and pain medicine-are relatively new. The nature of specialty and subspecialty certificate development and details related to these two specific programs will be considered.

American College of Radiology-American Brachytherapy Society practice parameter for electronically generated low-energy radiation sources.

BACKGROUND: This collaborative practice parameter technical standard has been created between the American College of Radiology and American Brachytherapy Society to guide the usage of electronically generated low energy radiation sources (ELSs). It refers to the use of electronic X-ray sources with peak voltages up to 120 kVp to deliver therapeutic radiation therapy. MAIN FINDINGS: The parameter provides a guideline for utilizing ELS, including patient selection and consent, treatment planning, and delivery processes. The parameter reviews the published clinical data with regard to ELS results in skin, breast, and other cancers. CONCLUSIONS: This technical standard recommends appropriate qualifications of the involved personnel. The parameter reviews the technical issues relating to equipment specifications as well as patient and personnel safety. Regarding suggestions for educational programs with regard to this parameter,it is suggested that the training level for clinicians be equivalent to that for other radiation therapies. It also suggests that ELS must be done using the same standards of quality and safety as those in place for other forms of radiation therapy.

"Naked" radiopharmaceuticals.

The term "naked" radiopharmaceuticals, more appropriately, "unbound" radiopharmaceuticals, refers to any radioisotope used for clinical research or clinical purposes that is not attached to a chemical or biological carrier, and that localizes in various tissues because of a physiologic or chemical propensity/affinity, or secondary to focal anatomic placement. Although they remain useful in selected clinical circumstances, the available agents (except for Iodine-131) have been relegated to an unfortunate and somewhat secondary role. The agents remain useful and worthy of consideration for new clinical investigation and clinical use.