In-service 2014

[irrad8]

Is it true that Cetuximab was used in the RTOG-95-01 protocol?

If this is not true ( which is most likely the case) then the first question stem in the In-service 2014 was wrong and confusing which read " According to RTOG 95-01, the addition of cetuximab to radiation significantly increased a) acute but not late toxicity; b)local control, but not median survival; c) both local control and overall survival; or d) median survival, but not overall survival"

Now going by RTOG 95-01 (without considering cetuximab) the answer would most likely be "b".

However if one wants to go by cetuximab (ignoring the RTOG 95-01 part) then the answer would most likely be "c" (Bonner et al 2006, NEJM).

Please educate me.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[thesauce]

One of many bad questions. The answer wouldn't even be "b" if referring to 9501 since the update didn't show a LC benefit except in the unplanned subset analysis.

I assume it'll be thrown out.

 

[DukeNukem]

A resident initially had 2 brain cells and subsequently had 0 brain cells after the in-service exam. Has the resident become more brain damaged?

A. No.
B. Yes.
C. Insufficient information: need SD.
D. Insufficient information: need median.

 

[irrad8]

LOL like it.

 

[CyberKnife19]

Agreed. It will be interesting to see the explanations to the aforementioned questions when the exam comes out with the accompanying answers.

 

[Irradi8or]

YES! That was the absolute worst way to start this exam. No cetuximab used in 9501...

 

[ramsesthenice]

The in service exams remind me of The lecture the moderater gave Billy Maddison for his analysis of the puppy book. "at no point did you even come close to answering anything relevant...all of us are now dumber for hearing this. May god have mercy on your soul."