bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Lung cancer screening knowledge in four internal medicine university programs.
Authors: Urrutia Argueta Samuel , Basnet Nishraj , Brittan Mollie , Abdul-Kafi Owais , Hanna Nasser H. 
Published: May 2020

11027 Background: Low density CT (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer specific and all-cause mortality in high risk populations. However, it remains underutilized. Screening discussions often start in primary care clinics of which nearly 30% are occupied by residents. Recognizing gaps in knowledge in early medical training may translate into a higher utilization of LDCT screening. Methods: To evaluate knowledge about lung cancer screening in Internal Medicine (IM) residents at 4 academic programs we distributed a survey to assess population at risk, mortality benefits, comparison between LDCT, colonoscopy and mammogram, and a knowledge self assessment. Results: 166 out of 360 (46%) IM residents at the 4 institutions participated, including 42% PGY-1, 30% PGY-2, and 28% PGY-3. Residents attained an average of 2.9 correct responses out of 7 (43.1%), without any statistically significant difference among programs. PGY-1 residents performed better than PGY-2 and PGY-3 (p=0.022). 36% correctly identified the appropriate population for screening. 90% correctly indicated that LDCT screening results in a cancer specific mortality reduction. 59% correctly indicated that LDCT results in all-cause mortality reduction. 7.7% answered that women stand to benefit the most from screening. 66% correctly answered that LDCT underperforms colonoscopy regarding mortality reduction. 22% answered correctly that LDCT outperforms mammography in reducing mortality. 65% of residents perceived their knowledge to be average or lower. Conclusions: LDCT knowledge is deficient among the residents studied. PGY-1 residents performed significantly better than their upper level peers. There were no significant differences among institutions. [Table: see text]
Perceptions of research training in a hematology/oncology fellowship program.
Authors: Pritzl Stephanie L , Lang Laura M , Lang Joshua Michael , Lubner Sam Joseph , Parkes Amanda Marie 
Published: May 2020

11030 Background: Current research training in Hematology/Oncology (Heme/Onc) fellowship is typically limited to mentoring relationships, which are highly variable due to the absence of standardized training for mentors and different perceptions of successful mentor-mentee relationships. Formal research productivity assessment is challenging and lacking in our current educational framework. Methods: Electronic surveys were developed to assess research training during fellowship at the University of Wisconsin (UW). Surveys were sent to current Heme/Onc fellows (n = 9), members of fellowship leadership (n = 4), and core research faculty (n = 5) with prior successful mentorship to trainees. Results: Surveys were completed by 6 fellows, 3 fellowship leadership, and 5 core research faculty. Both faculty and trainees recognized the research mentor-mentee relationship to be critical, with 5/6 (83%) fellows and 3/5 (60%) core research faculty identifying research mentors as the most meaningful training source. However, despite 5/6 (83%) fellows having a research mentor identified, there were large variations in the perceived level of proficiency in core research topics. While 3 fellows felt only slightly prepared in basics of clinical trial design, 1 fellow felt very prepared and 2 felt somewhat prepared. Furthermore, 2 fellows each felt very prepared, somewhat prepared, or not at all prepared in assembling grant components. There was also variable confidence reported by core research faculty in the ability of trainees to obtain funding and conduct independent research after fellowship, with 1 extremely confident, 2 somewhat confident, and 2 only a little confident. All individuals surveyed recognized manuscript publication, abstract presentation, and grant acquisition as important measures of research productivity. Beyond that, however, only 1/5 (20%) core research faculty and 0/3 (0%) fellowship leadership noted using rubrics for critical review of trainee academic progress despite 3/6 (50%) fellows believing that such rubrics were being used for their evaluation. Conclusions: The divergent experiences identified among research mentors and mentees and the lack of clearly defined metrics of research productivity highlights the need for a more standardized educational framework and formative evaluation tools. These identified needs have led to a pilot program at UW that intends to create a professional learning community for research mentors, define competencies for research training, and design a research training portfolio and accompanying assessment rubric.
Assessing impact of inpatient rotations on resident interest in hematology-oncology.
Authors: Farooqi Bilal , Meyer Lynne , Close Julia Lee , Duff Jennifer Michelle 
Published: May 2020

11031 Background: Working as a hematologist-oncologist is rewarding yet challenging. As cancer cases increase, there is a growing need to recruit more oncologists. It has been hypothesized that earlier exposure to oncology may improve resident interest in the field. This is often achieved by rotations on inpatient oncology wards, which represents only a small subset of the clinical work typical in hematology-oncology. We looked to assess whether early exposure to an inpatient oncology rotation impacts pursuit of this career path. Methods: Categorical interns in Internal Medicine at the University of Florida during year 2017-2018 were surveyed anonymously before and after their inpatient oncology rotation. Confidential identifiers were used to pair surveys. Similar surveys were used in the cardiology and gastroenterology rotations to allow for comparison. The survey included descriptor words to choose when describing the field. These words were categorized as either positive or negative. Results: Thirty-three interns were surveyed. Seventeen surveys were able to be paired (52% response rate) in oncology. Cardiology had 15 paired survey responses and gastroenterology had 13 paired responses. Using a 4-point Likert scale, interest in hematology-oncology decreased overall from 3.12 to 2.82 (p = 0.059) while interest in pursuing a fellowship remained the same. Stress levels were increased slightly from 2.30 to 2.05 (p = 0.564). Cardiology also saw a decrease in interest in the field from 3.53 to 2.93 (p = 0.007) but also an increase in pursuing fellowship from 2.20 to 2.60 (p = 0.014) and decreased stress from 3.13 to 2.67 (p = 0.020). Gastroenterology saw a decrease in interest in the field as well from 3.46 to 2.92 (p = 0.020). Interest in pursuing a fellowship and stress levels were not significantly different for gastroenterology. Field descriptors including “challenging,” “scared,” and “excited” decreased the most while “confident,” “inspired,” and “motivated” increased the most when describing hematology-oncology. Conclusions: While interest in this field was negatively impacted, stress levels associated with the field decreased. Furthermore, field descriptors were generally more positive and optimistic in the post-rotation setting. Though not statistically significant, these findings suggest that interns see oncology as less stressful and feel more capable after inpatient exposure during intern year. As much of hematology-oncology practice is outpatient, increasing intern exposure in this area may further improve perception and recruitment to the field.
Use of oncology electronic learning resources to learn about geriatric oncology.
Authors: Hsu Tina , LaDonna Kori , Touchie Claire 
Published: May 2020

11033 Background: Despite the aging population driving cancer growth, oncology trainees receive little training in geriatrics. While electronic resources, such as ASCO University, may help meet this gap, use of available geriatric oncology (GO) modules is low. We sought to understand why by exploring how oncology trainees currently learn about GO, their preferred methods for learning about GO, and their attitudes towards e-learning and geriatrics. Methods: Canadian medical oncology residents and recent graduates were electronically surveyed about the following domains: demographics, self-directed learning practices, use of electronic resources, perceived facilitators and barriers to e-learning, and geriatric oncology teaching. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Results: Respondents (n = 47) were mostly aged < 35 (66%). Respondents felt that learning about older adults was important (mean 4.3±1.0 out of 5) and generally felt comfortable caring for them (mean 3.9±0.9 out of 5) despite minimal training in geriatrics.Almost half (48.9%) received 0-2 hours of teaching in GO during residency, with the majority (59.6%) receiving teaching in clinic, 36.2% through lectures and 21.3% via seminars. Respondents also learned about GO through reading journal articles (42.6%), modelling in clinic (36.2%), reading a textbook (19.2%) or attending a conference (19.2%). Respondents preferred to learn about GO through on-site lectures (46.8%), dinner meetings (42.6%), case discussion (42.6%) and attending conferences (38.3%). Although overall respondents highly valued electronic learning (mean 4.3±0.75 out of 5), only a minority (8.5%) had received GO teaching electronically using e-modules and only 23.4% respondents were aware of e-learning resources in GO. In contrast most respondents (83%) had used an e-learning resource to learn about oncology. The most common oncology e-resources used were ASCO University (61.7%), Oncology Education (61.7%), and ASCO meeting videos (44.7%). Conclusions: Although oncology trainees value and commonly use e-learning resources, e-learning is not a common or preferred way to learn about GO, potentially due to lack of awareness about these resources. Future research will explore whether the current methods of educating oncology learners about older adults are appropriate and sufficient, as well as how trainees value and prioritize learning about topics that are not included in the formal curricula.
Effect of live education targeted to genetic counselors on knowledge and competence.
Authors: Carranza Vanessa , Gitzinger Susan H. , Taylor Bryan Carson , Fowler Joan B. 
Published: May 2020

11035 Background: Rapid advancements in genomics and sequencing technologies have presented a growing need for experts in the field of genetics to translate results and optimize patient care. As knowledge regarding DNA mutations and the technology to properly detect them continuously advances, it will be vital that genetic counselors play a larger role in the oncology healthcare team. Methods: These activities were designed to target genetic counselors involved in the diagnosis, management and genetic counseling of patients who have or are at risk for DDR-mutated cancers, attending live symposia at the 2018 & 2019 American College of Medical Genetics & Genomics Annual Meeting. Learning and knowledge was objectively assessed by analyzing pre- and post-test results before and after the educational activities. To determine retention of knowledge over time, follow-up assessments were sent to participants after each live activity. Assessment questions in the form of case studies were utilized to gauge whether participants translated knowledge into practice at follow-up. Statistical testing between pre- and post-tests and from pre-test to follow-up were conducted via chi square analysis with a priori significance set at 0.05. Results: Evaluations were collected from N = 275 (onsite) participants. Improved learners, as determined by significant ( P < 0.05) increases in correct responses, were observed in several specific topic areas: When to consider germline testing (2018 participants: 53.33% pre-test vs. 87.5% post-test; 2019 participants: 42.55% pre-test vs. 84.72% post-test). Patients most likely to benefit from a PARP inhibitor based on genetic testing results (2018 participants: 50% pre-test vs. 93.75% post-test; 2019 participants: 75.49% pre-test vs. 94.37% post-test). However not all improvement was sustained at follow-up: When it is appropriate to consider germline testing (2018 participants: 64.44% at follow-up – not significant ( P= 0.138); 2019 participants: 85% at follow-up ( P< 0.001). Patients most likely to benefit from a PARP inhibitor based on genetic testing results (2018 participants: 68.89% at follow-up – not significant ( P= 0.140); 2019 participants: 65% at follow-up – not significant ( P= 0.329). Conclusions: This analysis shows that live accredited education can significantly improve the knowledge and competence of genetic counselors in multiple areas surrounding the use of germline testing to guide treatment recommendations. Results also suggest that ongoing education in clinically appropriate scenarios is warranted.
Customized social media-based oncology education.
Authors: Punukollu Udaykumar , Jonnadula Jyothi , Rasheed Abdul , Parikh Purvish Mahendra , Srilanari Numburu , Chanakya Ajay , Thomas Joseph , Patlolla Rajkumar , Gundeti Sadashivudu , Bala Stalin J. , Chennamaneni Rachana , Konatam Meher Lakshmi , P Venkateswar Rao , Shrivastva Sarita ,   Team Abhaya
Published: May 2020

11038 Background: Social media has profoundly impacted our professional lives. Quick access to reliable sources of information and engaging with like-minded experts certainly aids in professional development. The purpose of this study is to assess the perception of oncology experts towards social media based education and to develop a platform based on their feedbacks for constructive engagement of the professionals and to improve educational outcomes. Methods: Based on Kirkpatrick 4 level model, 15 questions were designed for oncology experts. We collected responses through online surveys and by distributing the questionnaires at oncology events. Based on the results obtained, we developed a customised social media application for oncologists in android version. User experience design was done in InVision Studio and Model View Presenter (MVP) design pattern was used in software development. Beta testing of the application was done with 50 experts and questionnaire was given to them at the end of beta testing period to compare the technical advantages of our mobile application with their currently preferred social media platform for oncology based education. Results: Among 311 responders, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgical oncologists, hemato oncologists and oncopathologists constituted 45%, 29%, 16%, 7% and 3% respectively. Only 14% clearly denied that social media has improved educational outcomes. Eighty seven percent felt that they lack adequate knowledge in other areas of expertise and 67% of the oncologists were not well informed about the latest oncology updates. Only 60% could actively engage in interdiscliplinary collaboration due to reasons unspecified. When asked about the best way to learn a topic of interest, majority opined it through peer discussion with experts pertaining to that topic of interest. The two major problems faced by experts while seeking social media based education is academic discussions being unorganised and non-academic discussions unwelcomed. After considering these feedbacks, a mobile application in android version was developed. At the end of beta testing, 96% reported a technical advantage of our customised application over their preferred social media based oncology education. Conclusions: A minimum viable product has been developed after considering the feedbacks received from oncologists of various sub-specialities. Such a customised social media application is more appealing when easily applicable across low and middle income countries and in a manner that allows addition of local language options without changing the application software.
Comparison of two chemotherapy regimens in Ewing sarcoma (ES): Overall and subgroup results of the Euro Ewing 2012 randomized trial (EE2012).
Authors: Brennan Bernadette , Kirton Laura , Marec-Berard Perrine , Martin -Broto Javier , Gelderblom Hans , Gaspar Nathalie , Strauss Sandra J , Sastre Urgelles Ana , Anderton Jennifer , Laurence Valerie , Whelan Jeremy , Wheatley Keith 
Published: May 2020

11500 Background: In 2010, different chemotherapy regimens were standard in Europe and the USA for newly diagnosed ES. In the absence of novel agents to investigate, comparison of these two strategies was considered worthwhile. Methods: Newly diagnosed localised or metastatic ES patients aged 5-50 were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either the European regimen (Arm A) of VIDE (vincristine [V], ifosfamide [I], doxorubicin [D] and etoposide [E]) induction and VAI or VAC (V, actinomycin D and I or cyclophosphamide [C]) consolidation or the USA regimen (Arm B) of compressed VDC/IE induction and IE/VC consolidation. The primary outcome measure was event-free survival (EFS); secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The design was Bayesian with interpretation based on posterior probabilities (with non-informative priors) – i.e. probability that true hazard ratio (HR) < 1.0 given the data [Pr(HR<1.0|data)], with 95% credible intervals (CrI) reported. HRs were obtained from Cox models adjusted for baseline stratification parameters. Heterogeneity tests (HT) were used to investigate whether the treatment effect differed according to baseline parameters. Analysis was intention-to-treat. Results: Between December 2013 and May 2019, 640 patients were randomised (320 to each arm) from 10 European countries. Baseline stratification factors were: sex (58% male; 42% female); age (41% <14 years; 59% 14+ years); disease type (74% localised, 17% lung/pleural metastasis, 9% other metastasis); tumour volume (56% <200 ml, 44% >200 ml); country (37% UK, 31% France, 32% other). Median follow-up was 1.7 years. The HRs (95% CrI) were 0.70 (0.51, 0.95) for EFS and 0.64 (0.42, 0.96) for OS in favour of Arm B, with posterior probabilities of 98% for both that Arm B was better. Subgroup analyses showed no evidence that this benefit differed depending the baseline features, with no HT being close to significance (table). There were no major differences in acute toxicity: 68% of patients in Arm A experienced serious adverse events and 67% in Arm B. Conclusions: VDC/IE chemotherapy is superior to VIDE for both EFS and OS, with no excess toxicity. This benefit is consistent across all baseline stratification parameters. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN92192408 . [Table: see text]
Efficacy of add-on treosulfan and melphalan high-dose therapy in patients with high-risk metastatic Ewing sarcoma: Report from the International Ewing 2008R3 trial.
Authors: Dirksen Uta , Bhadri Vivek , Brichard Bénédicte , Butterfass-Bahloul Trude , Cyprova Sona , Faldum Andreas , Gelderblom Hans , Hardes Jendrik , Hauser Peter , Havemann Lianne , Hjorth Lars , Juergens Heribert , Kanerva Jukka , Kuehne Thomas , Ladenstein Ruth Lydia , Raciborska Anna , Rascon Jelena , Timmermann Beate , Ranft Andreas , Koch Raphael ,   on behalf of the Cooperative Ewing Sarcoma Study Group Ewing 2008, Sponsor UKM
Published: May 2020

11501 Background: Ewing 2008R3 (EudraCT2008-003658-13) was conducted in 12 countries. It evaluated the effect of treosulfan and melphalan high dose chemotherapy followed by re-infusion of autologous hematopoietic stem cells (HDTreoMel) on event-free (EFS, primary endpoint) and overall survival (OS) in high-risk Ewing Sarcoma (EwS). Methods: Phase III, open label, prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial. Eligible patients (pts) had disseminated EwS with metastases to bone and/or other sites, excluding pts with only pleuropulmonary metastases. Pts received 6 cycles of VIDE induction and 8 cycles of VAC consolidation therapy. Patients were randomized to receive additional HDTreoMel chemotherapy or no further treatment (control), They were further stratified by number of bone metastases (1, 2-5, > 5). One-sided adaptive inverse-normal 4-stage design, changed after the 1st interim analysis via Müller-Schäfer method. Initial sample size 185 pts, type I error rate 2.5%, power 80%. Results: 109 pts were randomized between 2009 and 2018: 55 were randomized to HDTreoMel. With a median follow-up of 3.3 years, the primary endpoint EFS was not significantly different between HDTreoMel and control in the adaptive design (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55-1.32, intention-to-treat). 3-year (3y) EFS was 20.9 % (95% CI 11.5-37.9%) in HDTreoMel and 19.2 % (95% CI 10.8-34.4%) in control pts. Results were similar in the per protocol collective. Subgroup analyses showed that independent of treatment, male patients had a worse outcome than female patients: 3y EFS 13.3% (95% CI 5.7-31.1%) vs 25.2% (95% CI 15.5-40.8%); p = 0.07. Patients aged < 14 had a better outcome when treated in the HDTreoMel group: 3y EFS 39.3% (95% CI 20.4-75.8%) vs 9% (95% CI 2.4-34%); p = 0.016; HR 0.40 (0.19-0.87). These effects were similar in the per protocol collective. Severe toxicities of hematology, gut, general condition and infection were more pronounced in the HDTreoMel group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: In patients with very high risk EwS, additional HDTreoMel was of no benefit for the entire cohort of patients. HDTreoMel may be of benefit for children age < 14. This observation is supported by comparable results from a non-randomized trial EE99 R3 (Ladenstein et al. JCO, 2010). Clinical trial information: NCT00987636 .