Shostrom, Valerie

BACKGROUND: Increased specialty competitiveness, alongside the inception of virtual interviews, has increased the number of applications submitted to the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) in anesthesiology. ERAS introduced signals to provide applicants with a means to demonstrate interest in a select group of residency programs. In the 2023 to 2024 application cycle, anesthesiology applicants had the opportunity to send 5 gold and 10 silver signals in a tiered system. METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional (exempt) research survey was created by members of the executive council of the Association of Anesthesiology Core Program Directors (AACPD) and housed and distributed through REDCap and the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Publicly available contact information of anesthesiology core program directors was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) website and membership roster of the AACPD. In total, 174 anesthesiology programs were identified. A survey invitation was distributed on March 12, 2024, to all programs via e-mail with reminders. The survey closed on April 30, 2024. Survey responses were collected anonymously, with instructions to provide 1 response per program. All statistical summaries and analyses were performed using SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute). RESULTS: The survey was sent to all 174 identified programs, with a response rate of 48.9%. Small programs were defined as having <44 residents, medium 44 to 62 residents, and large >62 residents. Small programs received significantly fewer applications (median 1255) than medium (1420) and large (1558) programs ( P = .0005). There was a statistically significant difference in the number of gold signals received based on program size, with large programs receiving significantly more than medium (169 vs 116, P = .0238) or small programs (168 vs 71, P < .0001). Applicants sending gold signals were more likely to receive an interview compared to those who sent silver signals (56.7% vs 31%, P ≤ .0001). Of the those interviewed, applicants who sent gold signals comprised 42% (28.7%–52.6%), whereas applicants who sent silver signals comprised 45.5% (33%–54.7%). Applicants who did not send a program signal but signaled geographically made up a smaller portion of the interview group at 3% (0%–15.4%). The percentage of matched residents sending gold signals made up 66.7% (47.1%–82.4%) of a program’s match list, whereas those sending silver signals were 25% (11.1%–33.3%) of the matched cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiology applicants who sent program signals were selected for a large majority of available interview positions, and interviewed applicants who submitted gold and silver signals comprised the vast majority of matched resident cohorts.

BACKGROUNDStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is the standard of care for patients with nonoperative, early‐stage non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) measuring < 5 cm, but its use among patients with tumors measuring ≥5 cm is considerably less defined, with the existing literature limited to small, single‐institution reports. The current multi‐institutional study reported outcomes evaluating the largest such population reported to date.METHODSClinical/treatment characteristics, outcomes, toxicities, and patterns of failure were assessed in patients with primary NSCLC measuring ≥5 cm without evidence of distant/lymph node metastasis who underwent SBRT using ≤5 fractions. Statistics included Kaplan‐Meier survival analyses and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.RESULTSA total of 92 patients treated from 2004 through 2016 were analyzed from 12 institutions. The median follow‐up was 12 months (15 months in survivors). The median age and tumor size among the patients were 73 years (range, 50‐95 years) and 5.4 cm (range, 5.0‐7.5 cm), respectively. The median dose/fractionation was 50 Gray/5 fractions. The actuarial local control rates at 1 year and 2 years were 95.7% and 73.2%, respectively. The disease‐free survival rate was 72.1% and 53.5%, respectively, at 1 year and 2 years. The 1‐year and 2‐year disease‐specific survival rates were 95.5% and 78.6%, respectively. The median, 1‐year, and 2‐year overall survival rates were 21.4 months, 76.2%, and 46.4%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, lung cancer history and pre‐SBRT positron emission tomography maximum standardized uptake value were found to be associated with overall survival. Posttreatment failures were most commonly distant (33% of all disease recurrences), followed by local (26%) and those occurring elsewhere in the lung (23%). Three patients had isolated local failures. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities included 1 case (1%) and 4 cases (4%) of grade 3 dermatitis and radiation pneumonitis, respectively (toxicities were graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). Grades 2 to 5 radiation pneumonitis occurred in 11% of patients. One patient with a tumor measuring 7.5 cm and a smoking history of 150 pack‐years died of radiation pneumonitis.CONCLUSIONSThe results of the current study, which is the largest study of patients with NSCLC measuring ≥5 cm reported to date, indicate that SBRT is a safe and efficacious option. Cancer 2017;123:688–696. © 2016 American Cancer Society.