(P02) Representation of Radiation Oncology Research at an Interdisciplinary Oncology Conference

Abstract

The contemporary management of breast cancer involves complex care coordinated between many medical specialties. Medical and radiation oncologists as well as general and specialty surgical oncologists may render most treatment, but diagnostic radiologists, pathologists, primary care physicians, and supporting specialties play significant roles. Despite the importance of integrated care, significant disparities remain in the representation of federal funding and dissemination of research among different medical specialties. The objective of this analysis is to assess the representation of radiation oncology compared to other specialties in breast cancer research based on abstracts at an interdisciplinary oncology research conference. All electronically available abstracts in breast cancer categories (breast cancer local/regional/adjuvant, breast cancer metastatic, breast cancer HER2/ER, and breast cancer triple negative/cytotoxics/local therapy) at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) from 2015 to 2017 were reviewed. In these categories, only abstracts that were presented at the annual meeting via a poster or oral presentation were included. The medical discipline, gender, and country of institution were recorded for first and final authors. Country of institution was recorded based on abstract report affiliation. Gender and medical discipline was recorded based on information from academic and industry profiles available online. A total of 672 breast cancer posters (n = 610) and oral abstracts (n = 62) were presented at ASCO from 2015 to 2017. Distribution of abstracts were 33.2%, 35.0%, and 31.9% in 2015, 2016, and 2017 respectively. The first & final authorships in the 3 most common regions were North America (57.3% & 59.5%), Europe (31.5% & 30.4%) and Asia (7.0% & 6.7%). While, medical oncology represented the majority of first (58.5%) and final (61.8%) author disciplines, radiation oncology was underrepresented at 3.4% of first and 4.0% of final authors. Other disciplines of surgery (11.3% & 9.5%), OBGYN (6.0% & 5.2%), pathology (4.0%, 4.5%), and diagnostic radiology (0% & 0.4%) were poorly represented as first and final authors respectively. When separated by year, radiation oncology consistently showed poor representation in 2015 (3.6% & 3.6%), 2016 (3.4% & 5.5%), and 2017 (2.0% & 2.4%) for first and final authorships respectively. Despite the inherent interdisciplinary collaboration involved in contemporary management of breast cancer, there are disparities in the representation of medical specialties and their subsequent investigations at what is arguably the most prestigious cancer conference for this purpose. Researchers in the field of radiation oncology were less likely to present scholarly endeavors at ASCO. This was only surpassed by the poor representation of diagnostic radiology. The underlying process behind this finding is likely multi-factorial in nature and warrants further examination of barriers involved in the conduct and representation of radiotherapy breast cancer research.