Official 2012-2013 Heme/Onc fellowship application cycle

[threecoins]

http://www.ascopost.com/issues/nove...s-of-getting-into-an-oncology-fellowship.aspx


by the way, I agree that all of these program will prepare you for a successful academic hem/onc career, each has its own strong area(s) and there are rarely programs that are equally strong in all areas. I believe the "tiers" mentioned in the previous post are arbitrary.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[JohnnieBlue]

tier I: Dana Farber, MSKCC, MDACC.
tier 2: Fred Hutch, Hopkins, UCSF, Penn, Stanford
tier 3: Michigan, Mayo, Duke, Columbia, Chicago, OHSU
tier 4: Wash U, Northwestern, BID, Yale, Vanderbilt, UAB, UCLA, Hope, Cornell

I'm sure I'm forgetting some good ones.

Gotta love SDN. The only place where Hopkins can be considered "Tier 2" and Mayo "Tier 3."

 

[DrVanNostran]

http://www.ascopost.com/issues/nove...s-of-getting-into-an-oncology-fellowship.aspx


by the way, I agree that all of these program will prepare you for a successful academic hem/onc career, each has its own strong area(s) and there are rarely programs that are equally strong in all areas. I believe the "tiers" mentioned in the previous post are arbitrary.

Thanks for the article, it was an interesting read. I really want to build a solid application. I need to build some contacts. I'm wondering if I should pursue a research project with more than 1 mentor.

Tiering fellowships is impossible, so many differences. I just need to find a place Sold>Malignant>>>>>Benign

 

[Blackcomb]

After going through the process, I learned that its all a relative crapshoot. I applied from a top 75 university IM program, 250+ steps, chief resident, supposedly great letters, some lab research but overall weak research wise, no pubs. I got interviews at UC Davis, Yale, OHSU, Fox Chase, Jefferson, UMDNJ-RWJ and VCU. I absolutely thought I was going to land interviews from U of Maryland, UVA and Hershey but got no love despite my regional proximity. I was pleasantly surprised to get interviews from Yale and OHSU.

I didn't aim for the MSKCC/JHU/DFCI tier but I learned that the process is a relative crapshoot and that you can't take any rejections personally. Sometimes your application will jive with one program director and not with another and the reasons may be completely haphazard.

I also recommend to future applicants to not get swept up in the rat race of SDN. We would all love to put DFCI or JHU on our resume but those programs may not be the best fit for our individual situations. You have to really consider your career interests, geographic preferences and overall life goals. I felt the itch to rank the most academically prestigious program #1 even though they weren't a great fit for me. I probably wasn't a great fit for them either.

 

[stillpremed]

Congrats to all who matched! Can you post review of places for us applicants next year? Thanks!!

 

[eastlake]

question: have you contacted or been contacted by the program you matched to yet after 12/5?

 

[Blackcomb]

question: have you contacted or been contacted by the program you matched to yet after 12/5?

I received an email the day after. I think most programs would at least email?

 

[Happy Bird]

Well it seemed that the most important aspects of your application are: 1) research; 2) clear career goals; 3) name reputation of your residency program; 4) LORs from familiar faculty; 5) regional preference/having prior fellows from your residency program having matched there.

There are lot of very good fellowship programs out there, and unlike in residency, I don't think it is so clear cut which ones provide superior training/opportunities/which ones have a bigger reputation, etc. The top fellowships are designed at training people for academic onc, and as a result, each might be strong in a particular niche. My guess at the more competitive fellowships (most of these I did not interview at,so total guess), which is not necessarily to say the best fellowships, is as follows...

tier I: Dana Farber, MSKCC, MDACC.
tier 2: Fred Hutch, Hopkins, UCSF, Penn, Stanford
tier 3: Michigan, Mayo, Duke, Columbia, Chicago, OHSU
tier 4: Wash U, Northwestern, BID, Yale, Vanderbilt, UAB, UCLA, Hope, Cornell

I'm sure I'm forgetting some good ones.

Having interviewed at a lot of these places, I think this list is way off.

 

[Happy Bird]

Gotta love SDN. The only place where Hopkins can be considered "Tier 2" and Mayo "Tier 3."

And the only place where OHSU and U Chicago are considered a tier above programs like Wash U, Cornell and Vanderbilt. Seriously? Dont agree that UCLA and UAB belong on this list either, but that's just my opinion.

 

[HOIV]

Where would you rank UCLA and UAB?

 

[Happy Bird]

Where would you rank UCLA and UAB?

Truthfully, I think all those programs listed above are extremely strong, and creating "four" tiers to distinguish between them may be a bit too divisive. I would think that the list should look something like this:

tier Ia: Dana Farber, MSKCC, MDACC, NIH/NCI
tier 1b: Fred Hutch, Hopkins, UCSF, Penn, Stanford, Michigan, Mayo, Duke, Columbia, U Chicago, Wash U, Northwestern, Yale, Vanderbilt
tier 2: OHSU, UCLA, UAB

I will admit that my perspective is more east coast-centric. I did my graduate school, med school and residency all on the east coast. People in all of my programs still interviewed at midwestern, southern and west coast programs like Wash U, Vanderbilt, Michigan, Mayo, USCF, UW, etc... because these are still known as "top" programs" to many from the east. I think that UCLA and UAB are very well-regarded regionally and still very strong programs (both in terms of research and clinical volume), but they don't necessarily belong in the same category as some of those other programs above.

 

[Mo-Mo]

n