Abstract book - ESTRO meets Asia

S44 ESTRO meets Asia 2018

Purpose or Objective Cloud based planning systems have given radiation therapy education providers the opportunity to explore the option of blended learning for the delivery of several key learning outcomes in teaching and learning in radiation therapy planning by making planning available anywhere at anytime. At its simplest blended learning is a mix of face to face learning with online learning but there is wide variation in the interpretation, delivery and integration of these practices. This presentation is a narrative case study of our institutions experience in the implementation of cloud based planning and blended learning. Material and Methods Cloud based planning and blended learning was explored in 2016 by the planning teaching staff in the undergraduate programme. This included an exploration of the literature and the utilisation of distance learning specialists who provided a specific workshop to help craft the proposed programme. The programme was then implemented in 2017 for year two and year three cohorts of undergraduate students during their academic semester and has continued in 2018. Results The implementation was successful with staff and students reporting positive experiences in both learning, teaching and assessment in a blended learning setting and is now embedded with the programme. Conclusion Blended learning can be implemented in an undergraduate setting for the teaching of radiation therapy planning and offers opportunities for innovation to cater for diverse cohorts of students, learning styles and physical locations. OC-115 An update from the 1st ESTRO-CARO-RANZCR course on Foundations of Leadership in Radiation Oncology. T. Basu 1 1 HCG Apex Cancer Centre, Radiation Oncology, Mumbai, India Purpose or Objective The 1 st ESTRO-CARO-RANZCR course on “Foundations of Leadership in Radiation Oncology (FLRO)” was introduced to bring about the leadership qualities among the young oncologist specifically dealing with radiotherapy. The report gives an overview from one of the participants highlighting the need, benefit and future directions. Material and Methods The FLRO course started with advertisement in ESTRO website and a motivation letter, short resume and competitive application were required. The course as planned had online presence through interactive webinars and on-site training and interaction at ESTRO-37 held at Barcelona between 20 th -22nd april, 2018. The last part of webinar is scheduled in mid-June 2018. Before the beginning of the course the reading materials were uploaded in ESTRO website through a separate application only to the selected applicants. The onsite 3 days course started with full day session on day 1 and two lunch symposiums on consecutive days afterwards. The onsite sessions had didactic lectures, interactive sessions among participants, short task sessions, designing a project with fellow participants and also engaging games bringing out real world problems related to young leadership issues. Results The course started with webinar and questionnaires through survey monkey analysing each participant’s personality. The onsite training at Barcelona within the framework of ESTRO annual congress remained quiet engaging. The 1 st day morning session started with six participants in each table and each introduced the person next to them and that really broke the ice. Afterwards the personality trait analysis with red, blue, green and yellow color coding and highlighting the strength and weakness of

each persona from your opposite trait followed by circle forming between introvert and extrovert was extremely engaging. Personality analysis through the PMH module really brought about the real character. The second day lunch symposium had different set of people to interact and each had to present their pre-assigned short project to two other fellow colleagues for constructive inputs. The third and last day lunch symposium with another set of people were asked to design a short project on improving radiotherapy care and present in front of audience in disguise as fellow radiation oncologist, stakeholders, policy makers and general public. The highly interactive format was the biggest strength of the course with participation across globe. There was another survey after the onsite course and participation certificate was sent via email. Conclusion Participants across the globe face the similar challenge of introducing novelty among stakeholders. The inherent nature of each personality with their strength and weaknesses also plays a vital role. Future longer duration course with some educational grant support aiming at real world projects and probably on-site project will bring about real world young leaders in radiation oncology. OC-116 Evidence of Stage Migration to Higher Risk Prostate Cancer in a Community Practice J. Haas 1 , C. Mendez 1 , A. Sanchez 1 , A. Mirza 1 , J. Morgenstern 1 , T. Carpenter 1 , M. Witten 1 , G. Demircioglu 1 , A. Katz 2 , J. Fain 1 , S. Blacksburg 1 1 NYU Winthrop Hospital, Radiation Oncology, Mineola, USA 2 NYU Winthrop Hospital, Urology, Mineola, USA Purpose or Objective The association between the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations limiting PSA screening in 2012 and the subsequent increased detection of higher risk prostate cancer has been characterized in cancer registries. We investigated whether this phenomenon could be measured within a busy hospital practice and whether the aforementioned stage migration would prove reproducible for this population. Material and Methods We analyzed an IRB-approved database of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer treated at our institution from 2006-2017. Patients were stratified according to NCCN Risk groups (Low, Intermediate, and High), as well as by the modified Zumsteg/Zelefsky classification including Favorable and Unfavorable Intermediate risk disease. The frequency of risk group change across time was investigated. Differences in proportions were tested using the Pearson chi-square test. Results Between 2006 and 2017, 2910 consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were treated in our practice. The overall risk distribution of treated patients was 31.0% Low risk, 51.0% Intermediate risk, and 18.0% High risk by NCCN grouping. Further characterization of the Intermediate grouping involved 25.2% for Favorable Intermediate risk and 25.8% for Unfavorable Intermediate risk by Zumsteg/Zelefsky criteria. The distribution of Low risk patients treated decreased from 47.9% to 25.7% in years 2006-2011 compared with 2011-2017; there was a corresponding increase in distribution of the High-risk cohort from 14.5% to 19.1% (p<.0001). Further stratification demonstrated a decrease in patients treated with Low or Favorable Intermediate risk disease (67.2% vs. 52.8%) in years 2006-2011 compared with 2011-2017 with a significant increase in those treated with Unfavorable Proffered papers: CL4: Prostate