Stella K. Yoo

Does cancer literature reflect multidisciplinary practice? A systematic review of oncology studies in the medical literature over a 20-year period

PURPOSE Quality cancer care is best delivered through a multidisciplinary approach requiring awareness of current evidence for all oncologic specialties. The highest impact journals often disseminate such information, so the distribution and characteristics of oncology studies by primary intervention (local therapies, systemic therapies, and targeted agents) were evaluated in 10 high-impact journals over a 20-year period. METHODS AND MATERIALS Articles published in 1994, 2004, and 2014 in New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Annals of Oncology, Radiotherapy and Oncology, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, Annals of Surgical Oncology, and European Journal of Surgical Oncology were identified. Included studies were prospectively conducted and evaluated a therapeutic intervention. RESULTS A total of 960 studies were included: 240 (25%) investigated local therapies, 551 (57.4%) investigated systemic therapies, and 169 (17.6%) investigated targeted therapies. More local therapy trials (n=185 [77.1%]) evaluated definitive, primary treatment than systemic (n=178 [32.3%]) or targeted therapy trials (n=38 [22.5%]; P<.001). Local therapy trials (n=16 [6.7%]) also had significantly lower rates of industry funding than systemic (n=207 [37.6%]) and targeted therapy trials (n=129 [76.3%]; P<.001). Targeted therapy trials represented 5 (2%), 38 (10.2%), and 126 (38%) of those published in 1994, 2004, and 2014, respectively (P<.001), and industry-funded 48 (18.9%), 122 (32.6%), and 182 (54.8%) trials, respectively (P<.001). Compared to publication of systemic therapy trial articles, articles investigating local therapy (odds ratio: 0.025 [95% confidence interval: 0.012-0.048]; P<.001) were less likely to be found in high-impact general medical journals. CONCLUSIONS Fewer studies evaluating local therapies, such as surgery and radiation, are published in high-impact oncology and medicine literature. Further research and attention are necessary to guide efforts promoting appropriate representation of all oncology studies in high-impact, broad-readership journals.

Industry Funding Among Leadership in Medical Oncology and Radiation Oncology in 2015

PURPOSE To quantify and determine the relationship between oncology departmental/division heads and private industry vis-à-vis potential financial conflict of interests (FCOIs) as publicly reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database. METHODS AND MATERIALS We extracted the names of the chairs/chiefs in medical oncology (MO) and chairs of radiation oncology (RO) for 81 different institutions with both RO and MO training programs as reported by the Association of American Medical Colleges. For each leader, the amount of consulting fees and research payments received in 2015 was determined. Logistic modeling was used to assess associations between the 2 endpoints of receiving a consulting fee and receiving a research payment with various institution-specific and practitioner-specific variables included as covariates: specialty, sex, National Cancer Institute designation, PhD status, and geographic region. RESULTS The majority of leaders in MO were reported to have received consulting fees or research payments (69.5%) compared with a minority of RO chairs (27.2%). Among those receiving payments, the average (range) consulting fee was

Industry Funding Is Correlated With Publication Productivity of US Academic Radiation Oncologists

13,413 (

Meaningful and Accurate Disclosure of Conflict of Interest at the ASTRO National Meeting: A Need for Reassessment of Current Policies

200-

Who is Tweeting in Oncology? Social Media (SM) Activity among Academic Leadership in 2018

70,423) for MO leaders and

Safety-Net Versus Private Hospital Setting for Brain Metastasis Patients Treated With Radiosurgery Alone: Disparities in Follow-Up Care and Outcomes

6463 (

Resident satisfaction with radiation oncology training

837-

Development of a Radiation Oncology Resident Continuity Clinic to Improve Clinical Competency and Patient Compliance

16,205) for RO chairs; the average research payment for MO leaders receiving payments was

Close to Home: Employment Outcomes for Recent Radiation Oncology Graduates

240,446 (

Trends in Disclosures of Industry Sponsorship

156-