No abstract

Aim:To evaluate the use of chemotherapy and radiation, and their outcomes for patients with astroblastoma.Patients & methods:This is a retrospective review of patients extracted from the National Cancer Database. We investigated overall survival (OS) using Kaplan–Meier curves. Cox proportional hazards models were used to correlate OS with risk variables and treatments.Results:OS at 5 years was 79.5%. Patients with high-grade tumors were more likely to receive chemotherapy and radiation. Patients with high-grade astroblastoma who did not receive adjuvant radiation had poor survival.Conclusion:Patients with astroblastoma should be treated with curative intent. Radiation is likely beneficial in high-grade astroblastoma. The exact role of radiation and chemotherapy following surgical resection warrant further investigation.

Highlights Cutaneous angiosarcoma has poor outcomes with no standardized treatment regimen. Paclitaxel-based chemoRT (CRT) was compared to other therapies at two US institutions. Similar oncologic outcomes and improved survival with paclitaxel CRT. Paclitaxel CRT + surgery provided best oncologic outcomes and survival. Paclitaxel CRT + surgery regimen now being studied in a prospective phase II trial.

IMPORTANCEWomen outnumber men in US medical school enrollment, but they represent less than 40% of academic oncology faculty. OBJECTIVE To identify the key factors associated with female oncologists' decision to pursue academic or nonacademic oncology practice and to characterize their perceptions about their current career. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional survey study was distributed through email and social media to female physicians in academic and nonacademic oncology practice in the United States. The survey was open for 3 months, from August 1 to October 31, 2020. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES No single primary study outcome was established because of the cross-sectional nature of the survey. Data were collected anonymously and analyzed using t tests for continuous variables and χ 2 tests for categorical variables. RESULTS Among the 667 female respondents, 422 (63.2%) identified as academic oncologists and 245 (36.8%) identified as nonacademic oncologists. Approximately 25% of respondents reported that their spouse or partner (156 [23.5%]) and/or family (176 [26.4%]) extremely or moderately affected their decision to pursue academic practice. Academic oncologists perceived the biggest sacrifice of pursuing academics to be time with loved ones (181 [42.9%]). Nonacademic oncologists perceived the biggest sacrifice of pursuing academics to be pressure for academic promotion ( 102[41.6%]). Respondents had different perceptions of how their gender affected their ability to obtain a chosen job, with 116 academic oncologists (27.6%) and 101 nonacademic oncologists (41.2%) reporting a positive or somewhat positive impact (P = .001). More than half of the women surveyed (54.6% academic oncologists [230]; 50.6% nonacademic oncologists [123]; P = .61) believed they were less likely to be promoted compared with male colleagues. Academic and nonacademic oncologists reported rarely or never having a sense of belonging in their work environment (33 [7.9%] and 5 [2.0%]; P < .001). Most respondents reported that they would choose the same career path again (301 academic oncologists [71.3%]; 168 nonacademic oncologists [68.6%]); however, 92 academic oncologists (21.9%) reported they were likely to pursue a career outside of academic oncology in the next 5 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThis survey study found that a spouse or partner and/or family were factors in the career choice of both academic and nonacademic oncologists and that female gender was largely perceived to adversely affect job promotion. Given that more than 20% of female academic oncologists were considering leaving academia, gender inequality is at high risk of continuing if the culture is not addressed.