Rosenstein BS, Held KD, Rockwell S, Williams JP, Zeman EMAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) survey of radiation biology educators in U.S. and Canadian radiation oncology residency programs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 75(3): 896-905

Department of Radiation Oncology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, One Gustave Levy Place, New York, NY 10029, USA.
International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics (Impact Factor: 4.26). 10/2009; 75(3):896-905. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.05.009
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To obtain, in a survey-based study, detailed information on the faculty currently responsible for teaching radiation biology courses to radiation oncology residents in the United States and Canada.
In March-December 2007 a survey questionnaire was sent to faculty having primary responsibility for teaching radiation biology to residents in 93 radiation oncology residency programs in the United States and Canada.
The responses to this survey document the aging of the faculty who have primary responsibility for teaching radiation biology to radiation oncology residents. The survey found a dramatic decline with time in the percentage of educators whose graduate training was in radiation biology. A significant number of the educators responsible for teaching radiation biology were not fully acquainted with the radiation sciences, either through training or practical application. In addition, many were unfamiliar with some of the organizations setting policies and requirements for resident education. Freely available tools, such as the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Radiation and Cancer Biology Practice Examination and Study Guides, were widely used by residents and educators. Consolidation of resident courses or use of a national radiation biology review course was viewed as unlikely by most programs.
A high priority should be given to the development of comprehensive teaching tools to assist those individuals who have responsibility for teaching radiation biology courses but who do not have an extensive background in critical areas of radiobiology related to radiation oncology. These findings also suggest a need for new graduate programs in radiobiology.

Download full-text


Available from: Jacqueline P Williams, Sep 28, 2015
1 Follower
55 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The sustainability of radiation biology (radiobiology) is under threat in South Africa because of underdevelopment in the discipline, despite the fact that South Africa has been a user of radiation since radioactivity and X-rays were discovered. The widespread use of radiation in medicine, nuclear reactors, particle accelerators and other sophisticated nuclear facilities in South Africa makes it imperative that the interaction of radiation with biological systems is understood. For example, radiobiology is critical in radiation oncology and cancer treatment. Radiobiology is a distinctly biological science and its uniqueness and value should be highlighted to provide insight for authorities and other relevant parties. Regrettably, radiobiology has been largely neglected despite the importance of maintaining expertise and competence in this discipline. Many radiation-associated disciplines require radiobiology for their training and practice yet few radiobiologists are available nationally. The scientific community needs to be informed of the predicament of radiobiology in South Africa so that the situation can be addressed. Radiobiology is a scarce skill that needs to be developed to support South Africa's mature radiation infrastructure. The country has too few radiobiologist training programmes and there is a lack of succession planning. Radiobiology is required for training and practice in a number of disciplines that use radiation, but, as a result of a shortage of qualified personnel, teaching of radiobiology has frequently been conducted by non-experts. To reinvigorate radiobiology in South Africa, a collective effort by government, academia, industry and allied professionals is required.
    South African Journal of Science 12/2011; 108(7-8):33-43. DOI:10.4102/sajs.v108i7/8.972 · 0.96 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The addition of chemotherapeutic agents to ionizing radiation has improved survival in many malignancies. Cure rates may be further improved by adding novel targeted agents to current radiotherapy or radiochemotherapy regimens. Despite promising laboratory data, progress in the clinical development of new drugs with radiation has been limited. To define and address the problems involved, a collaborative effort between individuals within the translational research program of the Radiation Oncology Therapy Group and the National Cancer Institute was established. We discerned challenges to drug development with radiation including: 1) the limited relevance of preclinical work, 2) the pharmaceutical industry's diminished interest, and 3) the important individual skills and institutional commitments required to ensure a successful program. The differences between early-phase trial designs with and without radiation are noted as substantial. The traditional endpoints for early-phase clinical trials-acute toxicity and maximum-tolerated dose-are of limited value when combining targeted agents with radiation. Furthermore, response rate is not a useful surrogate marker of activity in radiation combination trials.Consequently, a risk-stratified model for drug-dose escalation with radiation is proposed, based upon the known and estimated adverse effects. The guidelines discuss new clinical trial designs, such as the time-to-event continual reassessment method design for phase I trials, randomized phase II "screening" trials, and the use of surrogate endpoints, such as pathological response. It is hoped that by providing a clear pathway, this article will accelerate the rate of drug development with radiation.
    Journal of the National Cancer Institute 12/2012; 105(3). DOI:10.1093/jnci/djs472 · 12.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The detonation of a nuclear device in a US city would be catastrophic. Enormous loss of life and injuries would characterize an incident with profound human, political, social, and economic implications. Nevertheless, most responders have not received sufficient training about ionizing radiation, principles of radiation safety, or managing, diagnosing, and treating radiation-related injuries and illnesses. Members throughout the health care delivery system, including medical first responders, hospital first receivers, and health care institution support personnel such as janitors, hospital administrators, and security personnel, lack radiation-related training. This lack of knowledge can lead to failure of these groups to respond appropriately after a nuclear detonation or other major radiation incident and limit the effectiveness of the medical response and recovery effort. Efficacy of the response can be improved by getting each group the information it needs to do its job. This paper proposes a sustainable training strategy for spreading curricula throughout the necessary communities. It classifies the members of the health care delivery system into four tiers and identifies tasks for each tier and the radiation-relevant knowledge needed to perform these tasks. By providing education through additional modules to existing training structures, connecting radioactive contamination control to daily professional practices, and augmenting these systems with just-in-time training, the strategy creates a sustainable mechanism for giving members of the health care community improved ability to respond during a radiological or nuclear crisis, reducing fatalities, mitigating injuries, and improving the resiliency of the community.
    Prehospital and disaster medicine: the official journal of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the World Association for Emergency and Disaster Medicine in association with the Acute Care Foundation 02/2014; 29(1):80-6. DOI:10.1017/S1049023X1400003X
Show more