Applicant and Program Director Perceptions of Second Look Events During the 2023 Radiation Oncology Residency Match.

Purpose: Virtual radiation oncology (RO) residency interviews may impair applicant and program evaluation. Second look events (SLEs) exist; however, the frequency, nature, and implications are unknown. We surveyed applicants and program directors (PDs) to characterize the 2023 RO Match SLEs and assess perspectives. Method and Materials: An online, anonymous survey was distributed to 2023 RO Match applicants and American College of Graduate Medical Education-accredited RO PDs post-Match. Number and percentage are reported as response per question. Likert-type scores (1, strongly agree; 5, strongly disagree) are reported as median, IQR. Results: Responses were received from 51 of 246 applicants (21%) and 52 of 88 PDs (59%). Forty applicants (87%) were offered in-person and virtual SLEs; 20 (51%) and 17 (44%) applicants were invited to 1 to 3 and 4 to 6 events, respectively. Most invited applicants attended none (21, 54%). Applicants reported that all (21, 54%) or some (16, 41%) programs communicated intentions to finalize rank order lists (ROLs) before SLEs. Most applicants (29, 74%) agreed that SLEs were optional without ROL consequences (median, 2, IQR 1-3). Applicants declined in-person SLEs due to city/facility indifference (10, 43%), finances (10, 43%), and logistics (9, 39%). Most (12, 86%) in-person SLE attendees agreed that SLEs influenced their ROL (median, 2, IQR 1-2). Nineteen PDs (40%) reported offering SLEs, with 18 of 19 being in-person. PDs who did not offer SLEs cited ethical concerns (13, 45%) and institutional policies (11, 38%). All PDs reported that SLEs were optional, and 18 of 19 explained that the SLE would be without ROL consequences. SLEs mostly occurred in February before (11, 58%) and after (15, 79%) ROL submission. Conclusions: In-person SLEs occurred during Match 2023. All PDs considered SLEs optional which was trusted by most applicants. Attendance at in-person SLEs influenced applicants' ROLs; however, finances and logistics impaired applicant attendance. Further work is needed to appreciate SLE implications and ensure equitable residency recruitment.

Patient Interest in Exploring Nonsurgical Treatment Approaches for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: Advances in radiation therapy have enabled the ability to deliver ablative treatments, but there has been limited application of these treatments to early-stage breast cancers with a goal of omitting surgery. The purpose of this study was to explore patient interest in pursuing nonsurgical treatment approaches for their early-stage breast cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a qualitative study involving interviews with 21 patients with early-stage breast cancer who were eligible for participation in a phase 2 clinical trial offering omission of definitive surgery. Interviews were transcribed and an inductive, thematic analysis was performed by 3 independent reviewers to generate themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Data analysis revealed the following factors that affected patient willingness and desire to explore nonsurgical treatment options: (1) perceptions and feelings about their cancer; (2) current quality of life and the level of support available in their daily life; (3) external conversations focusing on family members' and friends' experiences with cancer and/or cancer treatments; (4) personal health care experiences, including their current breast cancer diagnosis; (5) perceptions and feelings about their physicians; (6) conversations with their physicians about their treatment options; and (7) self-identified desire to direct care decisions. Specifically, patients verbalized fearing surgery and surgical recovery; wanting to preserve their breast(s); the prior negative surgical experiences of friends, family, and themselves; a desire to receive treatment per the latest research; wanting to match the level of treatment with the severity of their cancer; and other comorbidities as reasons for wanting to explore omitting surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate an unmet need directed by patient interest to explore nonsurgical options for early-stage, biologically favorable breast cancer. These results may shape conversations around shared decision-making and clinical trial design, and result in more personalized treatment options for women with early-stage breast cancer.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Radiation Oncology Residency Applicant Away Rotations, Interviews, and Rank Lists: A Comparison Between the 2020 Match and 2021 Match.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic modified the Residency Match process for fourth-year medical students. In-person away rotations were discouraged, interviews were virtual, and traditional factors used to rank programs were absent. Here, we compare survey results administered to both the 2020 and 2021 Match applicants to assess the influence of the pandemic on the radiation oncology (RO) Match process. METHODS: An institutional review board-approved prospective cross-sectional study was conducted. The 2020 and 2021 RO Match applicants at a large RO program were invited to participate. Descriptive summary statistics were assessed. RESULTS: The 2020 and 2021 Matches each had 76 applicants complete the survey with response rates of 54% and 57%, respectively. The 2 groups were predominantly white, cisgender male, single, and without children. Whereas 11% of 2020 applicants did not complete away rotations, 45% of 2021 applicants did not. For 2021 Match applicants, 65% of away rotations were performed virtually, whereas 51% were not for medical school credit. Of the applicants, 84% were satisfied with virtual interviews and 72% felt cost savings were worth not having in-person interviews. Whereas 49% of Match 2020 applicants spent >$5000 in interview costs, 0% of the Match 2021 applicants did so, with 45% spending <$100. Postinterview communications from programs increased during the pandemic from 36% to 42% in 2020 Match and 2021 Match, respectively. Although program culture was the most common factor influencing 2021 Match applicants program rankings, half of applicants did not gain a sense of program culture during virtual interviews. CONCLUSIONS: We found 2021 Match applicants completed fewer away rotations, were satisfied with virtual interviews/reduced costs, and did not gain a sense of program culture through virtual rotations/interviews despite it being the most important ranking factor reported. This study supports further exploration of virtual away rotations and virtual interviews moving forward beyond the pandemic.