Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIFs) are an under-appreciated late toxicity of radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies. Through a systematic literature review we further define incidence, risk factors, and management practices of PIFs. With an improved understanding of PIFs, additional studies can be developed to identify optimal prevention and treatment strategies.
To generate an understanding of the primary concerns facing medical physicists regarding integration of a demanding technical career with their personal lives. Methods and Materials: In 2019, we recruited 32 medical physics residents, faculty, and staff via emails to US medical physics residency program directors to participate in a 1-hour, semistructured interview that elicited their thoughts on several topics, including work−life integration. Standard techniques of qualitative thematic analysis were used to generate the research findings. Results: Of the participants, 50% were women and 69% were non-Hispanic White individuals, with a mean (SD) age of 37.5 (7.4) years. They were evenly split between residents and faculty or staff. Participant responses centered around 5 primary themes: the gendered distribution of household responsibilities, the effect of career or work on home and family life, the effect of family on career or work, support and strategies for reconciling work−life conflicts, and the role of professional societies in addressing work−life integration. Participants expressed concern about the effect of heavy workloads on home life, with female respondents more likely to report carrying the majority of the household burden. Conclusions: Medical physicists experience challenges in managing work−life conflict amid a diverse array of personal and professional responsibilities. Further investigations are needed to quantitatively assess the division of work and household labor by gender in medical physics, particularly after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, but this study's qualitative findings suggest that the profession should consider ways to address root causes of work−life conflict to promote the future success and well-being of all medical physicists, and perhaps women in particular.
Purpose
Medical physics residents (MPRs) will define and shape the future of physics in medicine. We sought to better understand the residency experience, as related to resilience and well‐being, through the lens of current MPRs and medical physicists (MPs) working with residents.
Methods and materials
From February–May 2019, we conducted 32, 1‐h, confidential, semi‐structured interviews with MPs either currently enrolled in an accredited residency (n = 16) or currently employed by a department with an accredited residency (n = 16). Interviews centered on the topics of mentorship, work/life integration, and discrimination. Qualitative analysis methods were used to derive key themes from the interview transcripts.
Results
With regard to the medical physics residency experience, four key themes emerged during qualitative analysis: the demanding nature of medical physics residencies, the negative impacts of residency on MPRs during training and beyond, strategies MPRs use to cope with residency stress, and the role of professional societies in addressing residency‐related change.
Conclusions
Residency training is a stress‐inducing time in the path to becoming a board‐certified MP. By uncovering several sources of this stress, we have identified opportunities to support the resiliency and well‐being of MPs in training through recommendations by professional societies, programmatic changes, and interventions at the department and residency program director level for residency programs, as well as strategies that MPRs themselves can use to support well‐being on their career journey.
Background
There is no consensus on the treatment of central nervous system (CNS) lymphoma refractory to first-line methotrexate-based chemotherapy. Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) is sometimes used but may result in unacceptable neurocognitive dysfunction. We examined the efficacy and toxicities of WBRT with or without concurrent temozolomide in CNS lymphoma treatment.
Methods
This single-institution IRB-approved retrospective study included adults with CNS lymphoma who received WBRT, either consolidative low-dose WBRT alone or low-dose WBRT with a focal boost to residual disease and were previously treated with high-dose methotrexate. The relationships between the WBRT regimen, concurrent temozolomide, and clinical outcomes and toxicities were assessed using proportional hazards and logistic regression models.
Results
A total of 45 patients with a median age of 64 years (range 24–74) treated from 2004 to 2019 were included. In total, 20 patients received concurrent temozolomide. In the WBRT + Boost cohort (n = 32), concurrent temozolomide resulted in better 2-year overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) (73% OS and 66% PFS) compared to patients treated without concurrent temozolomide (44% OS and 24% PFS). On multivariate analysis, concurrent temozolomide was associated with significantly better PFS (HR 0.28, P = .02). There were no significant differences between the two radiation groups or between those treated with or without concurrent temozolomide, with respect to significant acute hematologic, non-hematologic, and long-term neurocognitive toxicities (P > .05).
Conclusions
In this study, concurrent temozolomide with radiotherapy in CNS lymphoma was associated with better PFS and was well tolerated. Low-dose WBRT with a boost is a safe and reasonable treatment approach for focal refractory disease. Prospective research that includes rigorous neurocognitive assessments is now warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.