Explore the vast range of titles available.

Comprehensive patient education is necessary for shared decision-making. While patient–provider conversations primarily drive patient education, patients also use published materials to enhance their understanding. In this investigation, we evaluated the readability of 2585 patient education materials published in high-impact medical journals from 1998 to 2018 and compared our findings to readability recommendations from national groups. For all materials, mean readability grade levels ranged from 11.2 to 13.8 by various metrics. Fifty-four (2.1%) materials met the American Medical Association recommendation of sixth grade reading level, and 215 (8.2%) met the National Institutes of Health recommendation of eighth grade level. When stratified by journal and material type, general medical education materials from Annals of Internal Medicine were the most readable (P < .001), with 79.8% meeting the eighth grade level. Readability did not differ significantly over time. Efforts to standardize publication practice with the incorporation of readability evaluation during the review process may improve patients’ understanding of their disease processes and treatment options.

Purpose/objectives Three‐dimensional (3D) printing is recognized as an effective clinical and educational tool in procedurally intensive specialties. However, it has a nascent role in radiation oncology. The goal of this investigation is to clarify the extent to which 3D printing applications are currently being used in radiation oncology through a systematic review of the literature. Materials/methods A search protocol was defined according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included articles were evaluated using parameters of interest including: year and country of publication, experimental design, sample size for clinical studies, radiation oncology topic, reported outcomes, and implementation barriers or safety concerns. Results One hundred and three publications from 2012 to 2019 met inclusion criteria. The most commonly described 3D printing applications included quality assurance phantoms (26%), brachytherapy applicators (20%), bolus (17%), preclinical animal irradiation (10%), compensators (7%), and immobilization devices (5%). Most studies were preclinical feasibility studies (63%), with few clinical investigations such as case reports or series (13%) or cohort studies (11%). The most common applications evaluated within clinical settings included brachytherapy applicators (44%) and bolus (28%). Sample sizes for clinical investigations were small (median 10, range 1–42). A minority of articles described basic or translational research (11%) and workflow or cost evaluation studies (3%). The number of articles increased over time (P < 0.0001). While outcomes were heterogeneous, most studies reported successful implementation of accurate and cost‐effective 3D printing methods. Conclusions Three‐dimensional printing is rapidly growing in radiation oncology and has been implemented effectively in a diverse array of applications. Although the number of 3D printing publications has steadily risen, the majority of current reports are preclinical in nature and the few clinical studies that do exist report on small sample sizes. Further dissemination of ongoing investigations describing the clinical application of developed 3D printing technologies in larger cohorts is warranted.

Traditionally IFN/STAT1 signaling is connected with an anti-viral response and pro-apoptotic tumor-suppressor functions. Emerging functions of a constitutively activated IFN/STAT1 pathway suggest an association with an aggressive tumor phenotype. We hypothesized that tumor clones that constitutively overexpress this pathway are preferentially selected by the host microenvironment due to a resistance to STAT1-dependent cytotoxicity and demonstrate increased metastatic ability combined with increased resistance to genotoxic stress. Here we report that clones of B16F1 tumors grown in the lungs of syngeneic C57BL/6 mice demonstrate variable transcriptional levels of IFN/STAT1 pathway expression. Tumor cells that constitutively overexpress the IFN/STAT1 pathway (STAT1(H) genotype) are selected by the lung microenvironment. STAT1(H) tumor cells also demonstrate resistance to IFN-gamma (IFNgamma), ionizing radiation (IR), and doxorubicin relative to parental B16F1 and low expressors of the IFN/STAT1 pathway (STAT1(L) genotype). Stable knockdown of STAT1 reversed the aggressive phenotype and decreased both lung colonization and resistance to genotoxic stress. Our results identify a pathway activated by tumor-stromal interactions thereby selecting for pro-metastatic and therapy-resistant tumor clones. New therapies targeted against the IFN/STAT1 signaling pathway may provide an effective strategy to treat or sensitize aggressive tumor clones to conventional cancer therapies and potentially prevent distant organ colonization.

An siRNA screen targeting 89 IFN stimulated genes in 14 different cancer cell lines pointed to the RIG-I (retinoic acid inducible gene I)–like receptor Laboratory of Genetics and Physiology 2 (LGP2) as playing a key role in conferring tumor cell survival following cytotoxic stress induced by ionizing radiation (IR). Studies on the role of LGP2 revealed the following: (i) Depletion of LGP2 in three cancer cell lines resulted in a significant increase in cell death following IR, (ii) ectopic expression of LGP2 in cells increased resistance to IR, and (iii) IR enhanced LGP2 expression in three cell lines tested. Studies designed to define the mechanism by which LGP2 acts point to its role in regulation of IFNβ. Specifically (i) suppression of LGP2 leads to enhanced IFNβ, (ii) cytotoxic effects following IR correlated with expression of IFNβ inasmuch as inhibition of IFNβ by neutralizing antibody conferred resistance to cell death, and (iii) mouse embryonic fibroblasts from IFN receptor 1 knockout mice are radioresistant compared with wild-type mouse embryonic fibroblasts. The role of LGP2 in cancer may be inferred from cumulative data showing elevated levels of LGP2 in cancer cells are associated with more adverse clinical outcomes. Our results indicate that cytotoxic stress exemplified by IR induces IFNβ and enhances the expression of LGP2. Enhanced expression of LGP2 suppresses the IFN stimulated genes associated with cytotoxic stress by turning off the expression of IFNβ.

An informal needs assessment and lack of a national standardized curriculum suggest that there is tremendous variability in the formal teaching of radiation oncology resident throughout the USA. The goal of this study was to characterize formal radiation oncology resident education, in order to identify knowledge gaps and areas for improvement. We developed a 14-item survey consisting of the following domains: program characteristics, teaching faculty, formal teaching time, instructional approaches for formal teaching, curricular topics, and satisfaction with didactics. All 91 accredited US-based radiation oncology program directors received an invitation to complete the survey anonymously by email. Twenty-four (26% response rate) program directors responded. Programs used a variety of instructional methods; all programs reported using lecture-based teaching and only a minority using simulation (38%) or flipped classroom techniques (17%). Other than PowerPoint, the most common electronic resource utilized was quizzing/polling (67%), webinar (33%), and econtour.org (13%). The lack of a national, standardized, radiation oncology residency didactic curriculum promotes variability and insufficiency in resident training. Themes for improvement were diversity in didactic topics, incorporation of evidence-based teaching practices, increased faculty involvement, and sharing of resources across programs. Development of a national curriculum and increased electronic resource sharing may help address some of these areas of improvement.

With cancer incidence increasing worldwide, physicians with cancer research training are needed. The Scholars in Oncology-Associated Research (SOAR) cancer research education program was developed to train medical students in cancer research while exposing them to the breadth of clinical oncology. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, SOAR transitioned from in-person in 2019 to virtual in 2020 and hybrid in 2021. This study investigates positive and negative aspects of the varying educational formats. A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the educational formats. Pre- and post-surveys were collected from participants to assess their understanding of cancer as a clinical and research discipline. Structured interviews were conducted across all three cohorts, and thematic analysis was used to generate themes. A total of 37 students participated in SOAR and completed surveys (2019 n = 11, 2020 n = 14, and 2021 n = 12), and 18 interviews were conducted. Understanding of oncology as a clinical (p < 0.01 for all) and research discipline (p < 0.01 for all) improved within all three cohorts. There was no difference between each cohort’s improvement in research understanding (p = 0.6). There was no difference between each cohort’s understanding of oncology-related disciplines as both clinical and research disciplines (p > 0.1 for all). Thematic analysis demonstrated that hybrid and in-person formats were favored over a completely virtual one. Our findings demonstrate that a medical student cancer research education program is effective using in-person or hybrid formats for research education, although virtual experiences may be suboptimal to learning about clinical oncology.

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.

BackgroundGoals of care discussions (GOCD) are essential when counseling patients with cancer. Respective roles of radiation oncologists (RO) and medical oncologists (MO) in GOCD can be unclear. This study aims to clarify the dynamics and barriers to GOCD.MethodsFive hundred and fifty-four ROs and 1604 MOs at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers were sent an anonymous electronic survey regarding demographics, opinions, training in GOCD, GOCD frequency, and three vignettes. Response formats were Yes/No, Likert-type, and free response. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed. Likert-type scores were reported as median [interquartile range].ResultsThere were 76 (13.7%) RO and 153 (9.5%) MO who completed surveys. Sixty-three percent of RO and 66% of MO reported GOCD with > 50% of patients (p = 0.90). GOCD were initiated for declining performance status (74%) and poor life expectancy (69%). More MO (42%) received formal GOCD training compared to RO (18%) (p < 0.01). MO were more comfortable conducting GOCD than RO (p < 0.01). RO-conducted GOCD were rated to be less important by MO compared to RO (p < 0.05). Thirty-six percent of MO reported being “not at all” or “somewhat” comfortable with RO-conducted GOCD. RO-initiated GOCD with new patients were rated less appropriate by RO compared to MO perceptions of RO-initiated GOCD (p < 0.01).ConclusionsWhile MO and RO conduct GOCD with similar frequency, MO are more comfortable conducting GOCD and are more likely to have formal training. MO rate importance of RO involvement lower than RO. Further research is needed to understand interdisciplinary dynamics that may impact GOCD and subsequent patient care outcomes.

Hyalinizing clear cell carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare malignancy of the minor salivary glands, most often managed by surgical resection. We report a case of a 63‐year‐old woman with an unresectable base‐of‐tongue tumor initially presumed to be squamous cell carcinoma. Histopathologic evaluation and molecular testing ultimately confirmed HCCC with an EWSR1‐ATF1 fusion. Given the tumor’s extent, she was treated with definitive chemoradiation using weekly cisplatin and 70 Gy in 35 fractions. Her course was complicated by pulmonary embolism, neutropenia, and severe mucositis requiring percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube placement. Post‐treatment imaging showed decreased FDG avidity, and circulating tumor DNA remained negative for minimal residual disease. This case highlights the importance of molecular diagnostics in distinguishing HCCC from other clear cell neoplasms and suggests a potential role for chemoradiation in unresectable cases, though treatment‐related toxicity remains a significant concern. Further investigation into systemic and targeted therapies for HCCC is warranted.