Rad onc rankings

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I've been reading this thread for years and I think it is time to give my two cents. The Top 10 list has definitely needed some updating for a while.

First, it is important to know that the majority of programs in the country are very similar in quality and strength of training. With a few rare, highly malignant exceptions, you will get out of your residency what you put into it. If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation.

Second, the best cancer centers, hospitals, and medical school do NOT necessarily have the best radiation oncology residency training programs. It is important to know the history and perception of radiation oncology. Medical and surgical oncologists have long been less than enthusiastic about radiation oncology as a field. As a result, the best cancer centers or hospitals have sometimes been filled with famous medical oncologists and surgeons that have successfully created a system to hinder the development of radiation oncology at their respective institutions - sad but true. Medical and surgical oncologists are typically the directors of cancer centers. In some (not all) top notch cancer centers the radiation oncology departments there are highly subordinate and weak clinically.

Third, location does matter. Unless you are a solitary monk in the world of XRT, where you train and live makes a huge difference in your overall experience during residency. No one location fits all individuals best. However, being in a place that fits you as an individual matters tremendously.

Fourth, being miserable during residency is NOT acceptable. Residency is the time when you learn to be the kind of radiation oncologist that you aspire to be. If you feel abused, used, neglected, or scutted-out, it will impact your training and the behavior patterns that you develop with colleagues and PATIENTS. Also, there is much more to learn in radiation oncology than can be derived simply from seeing the highest volume of patients. For surgeons, volume is all that matters in education. For radiation oncologists, buckets of outside reading in evidence based rad onc, rad bio, and physics could easily take up half of your time. So you'd better have free time in your residency or something is wrong!

Fifth, and finally…it's OK to be honest (at least with yourself). If you tell anyone during the application process that you want to go into private practice you will be hurting your chances dramatically. However, you probably don't have any idea now what you will want five years from now. The majority of residents do NOT go into academics. I am in academics. I have been in academics for years. This life decision fits me well and I feel blessed to be in the position that I am today. There are many more factors that go into the decision to choose an academic position after residency other than the love for research and academic medicine. If a few uncontrollable factors had been different for me when choosing my first job, I would have easily gone into private practice and would have been very stimulated by caring for patients as a radiation oncologist.

With that said, it is import for you to find a program where the residents are happy and an educational infrastructure is in place to support your individual goals for becoming an outstanding radiation oncologist.

Top 10 best radiation oncology RESIDENCY PROGRAMS in the country (2007/2008):

  • #1 MD Anderson: Without question one of the best cancer centers in the world. Great atmosphere of clinical learning and research. Unlimited resources and tremendous institutional investment in radiation oncology. Happy residents. Only con is that 3 months of the year are 100+ degree weather that is not doable by everyone who applies.
  • #2 UCSF: Great Chair. Great faculty. Happy, stimulated, successful residents with access to world class research and clinical opportunities. One of the best locations in the world. Resident education is a priority with new Chair. Enough said!
  • #3 Harvard: Great faculty from top to bottom. Extraordinary culture of academics. Nice balance between clinical volume and research activities. Mild hint of Harvard politics and professional positioning does occasionally dominate, but much less than would be initially anticipated. Dr. D'Amico is great with the residents. Most people like Boston. Program is too big (2-3 per year is perfect for attention and development of residents, 8 per year is out of control).
  • #4 MSKCC: One of the best, if not the best, cancer centers in the world. The residents are a little more "busy" than anticipated, even though past and current MSKCC residents told them how "busy" they would be - "busy" passed the useful part of the learning curve. Historically a little weak with regard to educational infrastructure and didactics. NYC is not for everyone and expensive; but those who love it wouldn't live anywhere else.
  • #5 Stanford: Wonderful radiation oncology history at this institution. Great physics and basic science research. Sarah Donaldson is a feisty educator passionate about pediatrics and women's health issues. Weather is spectacular, less urban.
  • #6 Fox Chase: Alan Pollack is phenomenal and the former residency director at MD Anderson. Tremendous radiation oncology focus at this now expanding institution. Unparalleled resident education infrastructure with the least amount of scut work possible. Consistently some of the most productive and happiest residents I have interacted with at national and international meetings. They even have Noble Prize winners roaming the halls. The only con is outside the oncology community few have even heard of the Fox Chase Cancer Center.
  • #7 Wisconsin: Great, great, great program. Developed Tomotherapy. Wonderful faculty. Happy residents that learn a board based oncology view during their training. Harari and Mehta make translational oncology a reality. Madison is actually a hip and fun little city in the Midwest with pretty cool things to do for young residents – married or not. Now this is a true consideration…the cold. Temps of –15 are routine in the winter and the bugs in the summer time are crazy like caged beasts!
  • #8 Chicago: Strong history. Residents have voiced concerns in past about too low of an education to work ratio. Recent changes in faculty maybe positive. Nonetheless a very strong program. Research opportunities in cancer biology are definitely a draw to some applicants. Friendly Midwestern city that is large but feels small.
  • #9 Michigan: Ted Lawrence is a bigwig to say the least. Academics is the only supported career path at U Michigan. Big research focus, with mandatory year of research makes the other three already very "busy" clinical years almost a little painful. Nonetheless, great academic opportunities for residents.
  • #10 Wash U: Huge amount of research dollars within the dept – traditionally the most in the country. Historically one of the strongest academic programs in the country. There have been the occasional grumblings that the atmosphere for residents has been less than friendly, mostly due to aggressive teaching style during conferences.

Next tier of still truly amazing radiation oncology residency programs:
William Beaumont – Great brachytherapy exposure
U Florida – Some significant commuting required between centers, but strong program
UAB – Excellent Chair, often overlooked because of location
Vanderbilt – True MD/PhD program
Yale – Strong Rad Bio history

Next tier of programs with strong history or currently very solid programs:
Duke – Likely to no longer be a malignant program
Maryland – Aggressive teaching environment with successful residents
Mayo – Need to be married and enjoy the outdoors, but great exposure
Penn – Basic science focus, recently the most outdated tech wise, now proton heavy/only
Univ. of Washington – Only strong program in the Northwest, odd application process

If you are lucky enough to have all these options - wonderful! If not, there are many more programs that I don't have time to list that are also great programs. Pick a program that works best for you, and enjoy learning the art and science of the greatest field in medicine.

Cheers
Members don't see this ad.
 
Thanks for the insightful comments. I agree that the places with the biggest names aren't necessarily the best places for residents. However, the big names are an important factor for people who want to go into academics, especially given how small and tiny the field of academic radiation oncology is. In addition, I'd look at the big names of the future as important, rather than the big names of the past, especially for residents who will be looking for jobs in 5 years, rather than today.

Everyone is going to have their own criticisms and their own personal top ten lists, and in the end it all comes down to what is important to the individual. That said, there are tons of medical students who read these forums as if they're the gospel of who's top 10 and who isn't, so here are my criticisms for the record: Personally I'd push Michigan way up, and pull UCSF way down. Also, would put Penn further up. If UCSF were in Ann Arbor and Michigan in San Francisco, would there be any debate at all? I don't think so. I mean, UCSF as a better place to train than Harvard? What? UCSF better than MSKCC, Wisconsin, Penn, Yale, Wash U and Michigan? Are you kidding me? Also, Fox Chase #6? Stanford #5? I didn't know we had gone back in time and it was 1987, not 2007. Just my two cents.
 
OldCaliRad said:
I’ve been reading this thread for years and I think it is time to give my two cents. The Top 10 list has definitely needed some updating for a while.

First, it is important to know that the majority of programs in the country are very similar in quality and strength of training. With a few rare, highly malignant exceptions, you will get out of your residency what you put into it. If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation.

Second, the best cancer centers, hospitals, and medical school do NOT necessarily have the best radiation oncology residency training programs. It is important to know the history and perception of radiation oncology. Medical and surgical oncologists have long been less than enthusiastic about radiation oncology as a field. As a result, the best cancer centers or hospitals have sometimes been filled with famous medical oncologists and surgeons that have successfully created a system to hinder the development of radiation oncology at their respective institutions - sad but true. Medical and surgical oncologists are typically the directors of cancer centers. In some (not all) top notch cancer centers the radiation oncology departments there are highly subordinate and weak clinically.

Third, location does matter. Unless you are a solitary monk in the world of XRT, where you train and live makes a huge difference in your overall experience during residency. No one location fits all individuals best. However, being in a place that fits you as an individual matters tremendously.

Fourth, being miserable during residency is NOT acceptable. Residency is the time when you learn to be the kind of radiation oncologist that you aspire to be. If you feel abused, used, neglected, or scutted-out, it will impact your training and the behavior patterns that you develop with colleagues and PATIENTS. Also, there is much more to learn in radiation oncology than can be derived simply from seeing the highest volume of patients. For surgeons, volume is all that matters in education. For radiation oncologists, buckets of outside reading in evidence based rad onc, rad bio, and physics could easily take up half of your time. So you’d better have free time in your residency or something is wrong!

Fifth, and finally…it’s OK to be honest (at least with yourself). If you tell anyone during the application process that you want to go into private practice you will be hurting your chances dramatically. However, you probably don’t have any idea now what you will want five years from now. The majority of residents do NOT go into academics. I am in academics. I have been in academics for years. This life decision fits me well and I feel blessed to be in the position that I am today. There are many more factors that go into the decision to choose an academic position after residency other than the love for research and academic medicine. If a few uncontrollable factors had been different for me when choosing my first job, I would have easily gone into private practice and would have been very stimulated by caring for patients as a radiation oncologist.

With that said, it is import for you to find a program where the residents are happy and an educational infrastructure is in place to support your individual goals for becoming an outstanding radiation oncologist.

Top 10 best radiation oncology RESIDENCY PROGRAMS in the country (2007/2008):

  • #1 MD Anderson: Without question one of the best cancer centers in the world. Great atmosphere of clinical learning and research. Unlimited resources and tremendous institutional investment in radiation oncology. Happy residents. Only con is that 3 months of the year are 100+ degree weather that is not doable by everyone who applies.
  • #2 UCSF: Great Chair. Great faculty. Happy, stimulated, successful residents with access to world class research and clinical opportunities. One of the best locations in the world. Resident education is a priority with new Chair. Enough said!
  • #3 Harvard: Great faculty from top to bottom. Extraordinary culture of academics. Nice balance between clinical volume and research activities. Mild hint of Harvard politics and professional positioning does occasionally dominate, but much less than would be initially anticipated. Dr. D’Amico is great with the residents. Most people like Boston. Program is too big (2-3 per year is perfect for attention and development of residents, 8 per year is out of control).
  • #4 MSKCC: One of the best, if not the best, cancer centers in the world. The residents are a little more “busy” than anticipated, even though past and current MSKCC residents told them how “busy” they would be - “busy” passed the useful part of the learning curve. Historically a little weak with regard to educational infrastructure and didactics. NYC is not for everyone and expensive; but those who love it wouldn’t live anywhere else.
  • #5 Stanford: Wonderful radiation oncology history at this institution. Great physics and basic science research. Sarah Donaldson is a feisty educator passionate about pediatrics and women’s health issues. Weather is spectacular, less urban.
  • #6 Fox Chase: Alan Pollack is phenomenal and the former residency director at MD Anderson. Tremendous radiation oncology focus at this now expanding institution. Unparalleled resident education infrastructure with the least amount of scut work possible. Consistently some of the most productive and happiest residents I have interacted with at national and international meetings. They even have Noble Prize winners roaming the halls. The only con is outside the oncology community few have even heard of the Fox Chase Cancer Center.
  • #7 Wisconsin: Great, great, great program. Developed Tomotherapy. Wonderful faculty. Happy residents that learn a board based oncology view during their training. Harari and Mehta make translational oncology a reality. Madison is actually a hip and fun little city in the Midwest with pretty cool things to do for young residents – married or not. Now this is a true consideration…the cold. Temps of –15 are routine in the winter and the bugs in the summer time are crazy like caged beasts!
  • #8 Chicago: Strong history. Residents have voiced concerns in past about too low of an education to work ratio. Recent changes in faculty maybe positive. Nonetheless a very strong program. Research opportunities in cancer biology are definitely a draw to some applicants. Friendly Midwestern city that is large but feels small.
  • #9 Michigan: Ted Lawrence is a bigwig to say the least. Academics is the only supported career path at U Michigan. Big research focus, with mandatory year of research makes the other three already very “busy” clinical years almost a little painful. Nonetheless, great academic opportunities for residents.
  • #10 Wash U: Huge amount of research dollars within the dept – traditionally the most in the country. Historically one of the strongest academic programs in the country. There have been the occasional grumblings that the atmosphere for residents has been less than friendly, mostly due to aggressive teaching style during conferences.
Next tier of still truly amazing radiation oncology residency programs:
William Beaumont – Great brachytherapy exposure
U Florida – Some significant commuting required between centers, but strong program
UAB – Excellent Chair, often overlooked because of location
Vanderbilt – True MD/PhD program
Yale – Strong Rad Bio history

Next tier of programs with strong history or currently very solid programs:
Duke – Likely to no longer be a malignant program
Maryland – Aggressive teaching environment with successful residents
Mayo – Need to be married and enjoy the outdoors, but great exposure
Penn – Basic science focus, recently the most outdated tech wise, now proton heavy/only
Univ. of Washington – Only strong program in the Northwest, odd application process

If you are lucky enough to have all these options - wonderful! If not, there are many more programs that I don't have time to list that are also great programs. Pick a program that works best for you, and enjoy learning the art and science of the greatest field in medicine.

Cheers
Click to expand...


Thank you! Great review. I was happy to see a current (as of 2007) top 10 list that accurately reflects the daily experiences that a resident will go through during their training.

How much a resident is supported versus abused during their years of training matters most with regard to how well-rounded a resident becomes and how strong a candidate they are for a position upon graduation.

 
Members don't see this ad :)
"If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation. "
couldn't agree more, thank you for pointing it out!

your thoughts and opinions are clear, concise and relevant. Thank you for sharing it on this forum.

-Irfan
 
very thoughtful insights, thank you.
from someone at the Harvard Bottom.

OldCaliRad said:
I’ve been reading this thread for years and I think it is time to give my two cents. The Top 10 list has definitely needed some updating for a while.

First, it is important to know that the majority of programs in the country are very similar in quality and strength of training. With a few rare, highly malignant exceptions, you will get out of your residency what you put into it. If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation.

Second, the best cancer centers, hospitals, and medical school do NOT necessarily have the best radiation oncology residency training programs. It is important to know the history and perception of radiation oncology. Medical and surgical oncologists have long been less than enthusiastic about radiation oncology as a field. As a result, the best cancer centers or hospitals have sometimes been filled with famous medical oncologists and surgeons that have successfully created a system to hinder the development of radiation oncology at their respective institutions - sad but true. Medical and surgical oncologists are typically the directors of cancer centers. In some (not all) top notch cancer centers the radiation oncology departments there are highly subordinate and weak clinically.

Third, location does matter. Unless you are a solitary monk in the world of XRT, where you train and live makes a huge difference in your overall experience during residency. No one location fits all individuals best. However, being in a place that fits you as an individual matters tremendously.

Fourth, being miserable during residency is NOT acceptable. Residency is the time when you learn to be the kind of radiation oncologist that you aspire to be. If you feel abused, used, neglected, or scutted-out, it will impact your training and the behavior patterns that you develop with colleagues and PATIENTS. Also, there is much more to learn in radiation oncology than can be derived simply from seeing the highest volume of patients. For surgeons, volume is all that matters in education. For radiation oncologists, buckets of outside reading in evidence based rad onc, rad bio, and physics could easily take up half of your time. So you’d better have free time in your residency or something is wrong!

Fifth, and finally…it’s OK to be honest (at least with yourself). If you tell anyone during the application process that you want to go into private practice you will be hurting your chances dramatically. However, you probably don’t have any idea now what you will want five years from now. The majority of residents do NOT go into academics. I am in academics. I have been in academics for years. This life decision fits me well and I feel blessed to be in the position that I am today. There are many more factors that go into the decision to choose an academic position after residency other than the love for research and academic medicine. If a few uncontrollable factors had been different for me when choosing my first job, I would have easily gone into private practice and would have been very stimulated by caring for patients as a radiation oncologist.

With that said, it is import for you to find a program where the residents are happy and an educational infrastructure is in place to support your individual goals for becoming an outstanding radiation oncologist.

Top 10 best radiation oncology RESIDENCY PROGRAMS in the country (2007/2008):

  • #1 MD Anderson: Without question one of the best cancer centers in the world. Great atmosphere of clinical learning and research. Unlimited resources and tremendous institutional investment in radiation oncology. Happy residents. Only con is that 3 months of the year are 100+ degree weather that is not doable by everyone who applies.
  • #2 UCSF: Great Chair. Great faculty. Happy, stimulated, successful residents with access to world class research and clinical opportunities. One of the best locations in the world. Resident education is a priority with new Chair. Enough said!
  • #3 Harvard: Great faculty from top to bottom. Extraordinary culture of academics. Nice balance between clinical volume and research activities. Mild hint of Harvard politics and professional positioning does occasionally dominate, but much less than would be initially anticipated. Dr. D’Amico is great with the residents. Most people like Boston. Program is too big (2-3 per year is perfect for attention and development of residents, 8 per year is out of control).
  • #4 MSKCC: One of the best, if not the best, cancer centers in the world. The residents are a little more “busy” than anticipated, even though past and current MSKCC residents told them how “busy” they would be - “busy” passed the useful part of the learning curve. Historically a little weak with regard to educational infrastructure and didactics. NYC is not for everyone and expensive; but those who love it wouldn’t live anywhere else.
  • #5 Stanford: Wonderful radiation oncology history at this institution. Great physics and basic science research. Sarah Donaldson is a feisty educator passionate about pediatrics and women’s health issues. Weather is spectacular, less urban.
  • #6 Fox Chase: Alan Pollack is phenomenal and the former residency director at MD Anderson. Tremendous radiation oncology focus at this now expanding institution. Unparalleled resident education infrastructure with the least amount of scut work possible. Consistently some of the most productive and happiest residents I have interacted with at national and international meetings. They even have Noble Prize winners roaming the halls. The only con is outside the oncology community few have even heard of the Fox Chase Cancer Center.
  • #7 Wisconsin: Great, great, great program. Developed Tomotherapy. Wonderful faculty. Happy residents that learn a board based oncology view during their training. Harari and Mehta make translational oncology a reality. Madison is actually a hip and fun little city in the Midwest with pretty cool things to do for young residents – married or not. Now this is a true consideration…the cold. Temps of –15 are routine in the winter and the bugs in the summer time are crazy like caged beasts!
  • #8 Chicago: Strong history. Residents have voiced concerns in past about too low of an education to work ratio. Recent changes in faculty maybe positive. Nonetheless a very strong program. Research opportunities in cancer biology are definitely a draw to some applicants. Friendly Midwestern city that is large but feels small.
  • #9 Michigan: Ted Lawrence is a bigwig to say the least. Academics is the only supported career path at U Michigan. Big research focus, with mandatory year of research makes the other three already very “busy” clinical years almost a little painful. Nonetheless, great academic opportunities for residents.
  • #10 Wash U: Huge amount of research dollars within the dept – traditionally the most in the country. Historically one of the strongest academic programs in the country. There have been the occasional grumblings that the atmosphere for residents has been less than friendly, mostly due to aggressive teaching style during conferences.

Next tier of still truly amazing radiation oncology residency programs:
William Beaumont – Great brachytherapy exposure
U Florida – Some significant commuting required between centers, but strong program
UAB – Excellent Chair, often overlooked because of location
Vanderbilt – True MD/PhD program
Yale – Strong Rad Bio history

Next tier of programs with strong history or currently very solid programs:
Duke – Likely to no longer be a malignant program
Maryland – Aggressive teaching environment with successful residents
Mayo – Need to be married and enjoy the outdoors, but great exposure
Penn – Basic science focus, recently the most outdated tech wise, now proton heavy/only
Univ. of Washington – Only strong program in the Northwest, odd application process

If you are lucky enough to have all these options - wonderful! If not, there are many more programs that I don't have time to list that are also great programs. Pick a program that works best for you, and enjoy learning the art and science of the greatest field in medicine.

Cheers
Click to expand...
 
youre point is well taken; a good doctor is a good doctor in large part because of their personal characteristings. however; training does matter; you said so yourself- the nature of the program will effect how you approach things; also some places will teach you better skills.
irfanmd1 said:
"If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation. "
couldn't agree more, thank you for pointing it out!

your thoughts and opinions are clear, concise and relevant. Thank you for sharing it on this forum.

-Irfan
Click to expand...
 
OldCaliRad said:
I’ve been reading this thread for years and I think it is time to give my two cents. The Top 10 list has definitely needed some updating for a while.

First, it is important to know that the majority of programs in the country are very similar in quality and strength of training. With a few rare, highly malignant exceptions, you will get out of your residency what you put into it. If you want to be a great radiation oncologist, you (and not your program) will play the largest deciding factor in that equation.

Second, the best cancer centers, hospitals, and medical school do NOT necessarily have the best radiation oncology residency training programs. It is important to know the history and perception of radiation oncology. Medical and surgical oncologists have long been less than enthusiastic about radiation oncology as a field. As a result, the best cancer centers or hospitals have sometimes been filled with famous medical oncologists and surgeons that have successfully created a system to hinder the development of radiation oncology at their respective institutions - sad but true. Medical and surgical oncologists are typically the directors of cancer centers. In some (not all) top notch cancer centers the radiation oncology departments there are highly subordinate and weak clinically.

Third, location does matter. Unless you are a solitary monk in the world of XRT, where you train and live makes a huge difference in your overall experience during residency. No one location fits all individuals best. However, being in a place that fits you as an individual matters tremendously.

Fourth, being miserable during residency is NOT acceptable. Residency is the time when you learn to be the kind of radiation oncologist that you aspire to be. If you feel abused, used, neglected, or scutted-out, it will impact your training and the behavior patterns that you develop with colleagues and PATIENTS. Also, there is much more to learn in radiation oncology than can be derived simply from seeing the highest volume of patients. For surgeons, volume is all that matters in education. For radiation oncologists, buckets of outside reading in evidence based rad onc, rad bio, and physics could easily take up half of your time. So you’d better have free time in your residency or something is wrong!

Fifth, and finally…it’s OK to be honest (at least with yourself). If you tell anyone during the application process that you want to go into private practice you will be hurting your chances dramatically. However, you probably don’t have any idea now what you will want five years from now. The majority of residents do NOT go into academics. I am in academics. I have been in academics for years. This life decision fits me well and I feel blessed to be in the position that I am today. There are many more factors that go into the decision to choose an academic position after residency other than the love for research and academic medicine. If a few uncontrollable factors had been different for me when choosing my first job, I would have easily gone into private practice and would have been very stimulated by caring for patients as a radiation oncologist.

With that said, it is import for you to find a program where the residents are happy and an educational infrastructure is in place to support your individual goals for becoming an outstanding radiation oncologist.

Top 10 best radiation oncology RESIDENCY PROGRAMS in the country (2007/2008):

  • #1 MD Anderson: Without question one of the best cancer centers in the world. Great atmosphere of clinical learning and research. Unlimited resources and tremendous institutional investment in radiation oncology. Happy residents. Only con is that 3 months of the year are 100+ degree weather that is not doable by everyone who applies.
  • #2 UCSF: Great Chair. Great faculty. Happy, stimulated, successful residents with access to world class research and clinical opportunities. One of the best locations in the world. Resident education is a priority with new Chair. Enough said!
  • #3 Harvard: Great faculty from top to bottom. Extraordinary culture of academics. Nice balance between clinical volume and research activities. Mild hint of Harvard politics and professional positioning does occasionally dominate, but much less than would be initially anticipated. Dr. D’Amico is great with the residents. Most people like Boston. Program is too big (2-3 per year is perfect for attention and development of residents, 8 per year is out of control).
  • #4 MSKCC: One of the best, if not the best, cancer centers in the world. The residents are a little more “busy” than anticipated, even though past and current MSKCC residents told them how “busy” they would be - “busy” passed the useful part of the learning curve. Historically a little weak with regard to educational infrastructure and didactics. NYC is not for everyone and expensive; but those who love it wouldn’t live anywhere else.
  • #5 Stanford: Wonderful radiation oncology history at this institution. Great physics and basic science research. Sarah Donaldson is a feisty educator passionate about pediatrics and women’s health issues. Weather is spectacular, less urban.
  • #6 Fox Chase: Alan Pollack is phenomenal and the former residency director at MD Anderson. Tremendous radiation oncology focus at this now expanding institution. Unparalleled resident education infrastructure with the least amount of scut work possible. Consistently some of the most productive and happiest residents I have interacted with at national and international meetings. They even have Noble Prize winners roaming the halls. The only con is outside the oncology community few have even heard of the Fox Chase Cancer Center.
  • #7 Wisconsin: Great, great, great program. Developed Tomotherapy. Wonderful faculty. Happy residents that learn a board based oncology view during their training. Harari and Mehta make translational oncology a reality. Madison is actually a hip and fun little city in the Midwest with pretty cool things to do for young residents – married or not. Now this is a true consideration…the cold. Temps of –15 are routine in the winter and the bugs in the summer time are crazy like caged beasts!
  • #8 Chicago: Strong history. Residents have voiced concerns in past about too low of an education to work ratio. Recent changes in faculty maybe positive. Nonetheless a very strong program. Research opportunities in cancer biology are definitely a draw to some applicants. Friendly Midwestern city that is large but feels small.
  • #9 Michigan: Ted Lawrence is a bigwig to say the least. Academics is the only supported career path at U Michigan. Big research focus, with mandatory year of research makes the other three already very “busy” clinical years almost a little painful. Nonetheless, great academic opportunities for residents.
  • #10 Wash U: Huge amount of research dollars within the dept – traditionally the most in the country. Historically one of the strongest academic programs in the country. There have been the occasional grumblings that the atmosphere for residents has been less than friendly, mostly due to aggressive teaching style during conferences.
Next tier of still truly amazing radiation oncology residency programs:
William Beaumont – Great brachytherapy exposure
U Florida – Some significant commuting required between centers, but strong program
UAB – Excellent Chair, often overlooked because of location
Vanderbilt – True MD/PhD program
Yale – Strong Rad Bio history

Next tier of programs with strong history or currently very solid programs:
Duke – Likely to no longer be a malignant program
Maryland – Aggressive teaching environment with successful residents
Mayo – Need to be married and enjoy the outdoors, but great exposure
Penn – Basic science focus, recently the most outdated tech wise, now proton heavy/only
Univ. of Washington – Only strong program in the Northwest, odd application process

If you are lucky enough to have all these options - wonderful! If not, there are many more programs that I don't have time to list that are also great programs. Pick a program that works best for you, and enjoy learning the art and science of the greatest field in medicine.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Finally, an evaluation of the top residency programs as they currently stand in 2007! I also appreciate that it has a forward vision, and is placing programs that are going to be even stronger 5 years from now in the top 10. It hurts me to see MSKCC under Harvard, but that is just a personal bias. All and all, your comments about the current top residency programs, and life of their residents, are spot on.

Thanks for posting!
 
remember folks, these things are loose assessments; there are strengths and weaknesses in all program. quality, prestigue, opportunity (and others) are all variable. A program can have any combination of these features and so its difficult to quantify.

as you read these assessments, keep these thoughts in the back of your mind.
-harvard Bottom.
 
Duke – Likely to no longer be a malignant program
Click to expand...
Good news...Duke is no longer a malignant program. Vast majority of residents are VERY happy (can't please everyone right). It is a VERY demanding program, but the residents get plenty of support and the education quality is top-notch.

I'm not a resident there, but someone I'm very close to is (wink, wink).
 
I am updating my previous rankings, factoring location into the mix
(per request)

1) MSKCC: Fantastic program, amazing mentors, academic leaders, strong clinical training, nice residents, perhaps the best cancer center in the country. And then location: NYC!!! With highly subsidized housing that comes out of your salary, pre-tax. Busy clinical practice, but lets face it: residency is for clinical training. Despite busy, residents seem to have time for research and fun. Chair search still in the works. Will be interesting to see where this goes.

2) Harvard: Strong academic program, filled to the brim with leaders in the field, Boston is a GREAT city to live in. The program tends to be hierarchical and having completely separate hospitals makes for more bureaucracy than other programs. Very large program.

3) MDACC: Perhaps one of the strongest programs in the country, but location is a bit of a downside. Location out of the picture, perhaps the best program. New clinical chair is Tom Buchholz and Chris Crane is the new program director. Strong place on all clinical fronts with tons of clinical research opportunity and education. Very well represented at national meetings given size and quality of productivity.

4) Michigan: AMAZING department!!! Location can be a good thing or a bad thing… Very clinically busy in order to give their residents the extra year of protected research time. Strong scientific program and well funded department. Strong leadership.

(5-6) as a group

Penn: Great location, great history, great attendings, and Steve Hahn. This is a great program that will ONLY get better in the future. Anyone who ranks another philly program over Penn has a serious bias. Solid attending staff and strong science; extremely well funded basic research program. Penn has great senior, mid range, and junior mentors for residents. New cancer center will be an impressive environment to train. Combined internship of a solid year of old school medicine. Combined internship is similar to Michigan.

UCSF: If you want to be in Cali, this is probably the best program there. That being said, it is still resting on its past reputation. Honestly, if taking location out of the picture, this probably would not be a top ten program. I am glad that Dr. Roach was finally chosen to lead this department. However this is a state institution which is arguably susceptible to more bureaucracy than private institutions. As an applicant, the residents told me that “this program is not all that.” They said that “unless you want to live in SF, there really isn’t a good reason to train there.”

(7-9) as a group

Yale: Although Yale has bounced around the rankings over the last couple of years, they have a emerged with a serious commitment to resident training. Driving this change seems to be recently appointed Vice Chair, Lynn Wilson. Great clinical teaching program with huge support for clinical, basic, or translational researcher’s agenda. Nationally recognized leadership via astro, red journal, and clinically. They just received a huge 10M program project grant, making this program perhaps the top funded radiobiology program in US. Environment is extremely supportive for residents. Many consider them the “happiest residents in the country.” This program has changed significantly over the last couple of years. Most would agree that New Haven is a serious neg, but it is close to nyc and boston.

Stanford: Historically strong and several big names. Residents and junior faculty may not have the support of some of the other programs though in terms of direction and mentorship. Radiobiology program is impressive and very well funded. Excellent research both in basic and clinical. Excellent facilities. Again, historical reputation and bay area keep this program in top 10, but removing geography, not sure it can stay
there.

Chicago: AJ Mundt departed last year and he was a major piece of the training picture as the program director. Huge loss. Seems that legend Sam Hellman appears to be playing less of a roll in the department and may retire in the next couple of years. Program with range of attendings, good science with historically famous chair. Fallen off the national radar but still solid. (perhaps not in the top 10 for much longer. Especially with Duke in the wings)


(10-12) as a group

Wisconsin: location is an issue. Beyond that, Harari is a great leader and translational investigator. Other faculty strong, and productive. Resident friendly and happy. Strong physics of course. Wisc always on the national-astro scene and there is a lot of positive energy. (Deserves to be in top 10)

Duke: very strong in technology, wide range of faculty. Intense but excellent environment. Strong clinical research agenda and terrific program director. Malignant rep over. Great chair with vision and drive. Perhaps a bit harvard wanna be or baby Harvard as many of their attendings came from Harvard or were trained there, That being said, Harvard is not such a bad thing to shoot for.

Wash U: strong science and science chair. Techno strong and excellent teaching. Clinical research always was and still is strong. Location is a factor for most.
 
plentystupid said:
I am updating my previous rankings, factoring location into the mix
(per request)

1) MSKCC: Fantastic program, amazing mentors, academic leaders, strong clinical training, nice residents, perhaps the best cancer center in the country. And then location: NYC!!! With highly subsidized housing that comes out of your salary, pre-tax. Busy clinical practice, but lets face it: residency is for clinical training. Despite busy, residents seem to have time for research and fun. Chair search still in the works. Will be interesting to see where this goes.


Thanks for the comments - always interesting! I love to see MSKCC at the top of the list!!!!

Honestly, I don't think "plentystupid's" list takes into account the experiences that residents have had at each of these programs. It also completely reverses the order and almost excludes some of the strongest programs.

But love to see MSKCC above Harvard!!
Click to expand...
 
Rather than lump all programs into one all-inclusive list, I thought I would break up the rankings into a couple of lists to better deliniate program objectives.

List A - ACADEMICS
This is for people who want to do Academic RadOnc and run a lab. If you are more interested in the clinical, administrative, or teaching side of things I believe the number of strong programs available to you is far broader than the following list.

#1 Michigan
Let's be honest. If you someday aspire to be the chair of a Radiation Oncology department you will likely give yourself the best shot at this place. Ted Lawrence (a very strong presence in the field in his own right) has crafted Michigan into the mecca of academics. Applicants who have been incessantly grilled about their research can attest to this program's intensity. However, this comes with a price. A PGY-1 year @ Michigans IM program is no walk in the park and the expanded dedicated research time means you will have a heavy clinic workload (by RadOnc standards anyway).

#2 Penn
Penn has undergone a rather startling transition over the past few years from a technological dinosaur to embracing protons and poneying up the dough to build a new facility. Very strong RadBio program with over a dozen well-funded investigators. Strong history of contribution to literature coupled with a preference for applicants with a research bent.

#3 Chicago
If you've been following this ratings thread, you will see that opinions on this program seem to have shifted. While it was once considered a strong, stable pillar of academic RadOnc, this has been peppered by innunendo and rumors of program instability. I know nothing of this but I do know that Chicago continues to attract some of the brightest academic applicants each year. And with Weischelbaum/Hellmann at the helm, I feel that this program remains in good hands.

#4 Vandebilt
Possibly the most Holman-pathway friendly program . . . ever. Dennis Hallahan has taken this relatively obscure program in the SE to new academic heights with an intense radbio focus. Don't have a PhD or don't have extensive research experience (e.g. basic science pubs)? Then don't bother applying here. This program's newly found focus is a fairly recent change but I think it is on the right track to academic supremacy.

#5 Yale
Similar to Chicago, but in the opposite direction. I don't think people had many positive things to say about this program 4-5 years ago, but my how things have changed. Very strong didactics, a new highly-funded radbio program and a unique Clinical Investigator Track = an increasingly strong place for academics.

List B - GENERAL
Okay, most of us have > $100,000 of debt and are not exactly paying off our loans with our meager resident "stipend." Nevertheless we "lie" about going into academics because it is a death sentence for your application otherwise. Most of us will go into private practice, but we would like the option of potentially going into academics if that's what we want five years from now. Also, we would like a good location to spend the ample free time a RadOnc residency affords and we would like a good mix of strong faculty, solid didactics, and far-seeing leadership.

#1 MDACC
Okay, I know that Houston kind of sucks even for a southern city. It's unbearably hot and the hurricanes and flooding seasons are not a picnic either. However if you've ever set foot into this place you will know you are in a different world. The opportunities for resident growth are nearly limitless, you can do anything you want after you are done. The faculty though large in number are a close-knit group and strongly support their housestaff with strong conferences/didactics. The MDACC name is gold.

#2 Harvard
The fusion of MGH w/ BWH was a good move. Now the entire resources of this institution are available to the housestaff. Just as with MDACC (though perhaps a hair less) the sky is the limit here. You can do whatever you want b/c Harvard has the resources to suppor it. I agree that the # of residents seems excessive but having not rotated through this dept it is diffucult for me to personally guage.

#3 UCSF
New chair + new program director + new vision + best location in the US = great place to train. The UCSF we have been reading about from 4 years ago no longer exists. Didactics are strong now, resident training is emphasized, some of the nicest/smartest residents. If private practice is your thing, these folks get the best available jobs on the West coast. Improving research focus (though still not in line with List A).

#4 MSKCC
This is the mecca of Oncology in arguably the most culturally-rich city in the world. Super location + great housing for residents + extensive network of affiliate hospitals in the NE = sky is the limit for jobs upon graduation. The workload is higher than normal (but we are still talking about RadOnc for crying out loud!). However the chair situation is somewhat concerning, Fuks didn't exactly "retire" and his actions have put a small taint on this otherwise imeccable institution.

#5 Stanford
Palo Alto boasts even better weather than SF though the cost of living is similarly steep. Superior program director + fairly new cancer center + friendly, intelligent residents. Research opportunities are present but not too many residents take them. Program is somewhat inbred, but this is not uncommon at elite institutions.

List C - "HIDDEN" GEMS
I've read some applicants are disgruntled b/c we only review the top programs. The majority of applicants will not go to the above 10 programs nor may they be granted an interview. As others have stated however, there is a wide swath of quality programs and the next few are a notch above the rest IMO.

#1 Beaumont
This program rules the hospital. RadOnc along w/ Cards are among the strongest departments in this private hospital and it shows in the political power wielded by the Chair. The required transitional year is very cush, rivaling the most competive ones in the country. The mandatory research year is a nice touch but means that the program will screen applicants for capacity to be productive in this arena. Top notch facilities and a gorgeous hospital. Detroit is not the best place to live unfortunately.

#2 Wisconsin
Vies for title of "residents I would most like to hang out with." Very strong in all aspects of RadOnc: clinical, radbio, physics. Good, stable program leadership. Location is an issue for single applicants but those with a family will be surprised to what Madison has to offer.

#3 Florida
Historically a strong program and is getting stronger with a proton facility in Jax -- an interesting relationship with Mayo Jax. Gainesville is kind of hit or miss but more fun parts of the state are not very far away.

#4 UAB
Revamped over the last several years under Jim Bonner. New RadOnc department currently under construction. Very friendly resident group but not very diverse. Birmingham is a livable southern city and if private practice is your thing you will be able to obtain a highly lucrative position upon graduation. Research opportunities are there but not generally taken advantage of by residents.

#5 Fox Chase
Very well known in the Oncology community. Highly well-organized residency program with very good housestaff. Location in Philly is a plus.
 
There have been a number of posts on this website about different rankings of radiation oncology residency programs. Some of the posts have been good. However, as a few have mentioned before many of the posts recycle the same list of programs with a huge academic bias. That trend is very misleading because the majority of graduates from radiation oncology programs are not looking for academic jobs. Most graduates actively seek the best private practice jobs, and academic positions are less sought-after by recent graduates. Did I just hear thunderclaps?? However, this website is run, monitored, mentored, filled, responded to, and geared for those of us in academics. And yes…since I’m actually on this website, yes I too am in academics. So regardless of what your MD/PhD advisor tells you or what you say to the program director on interview day, the lion’s share of you budding radiation oncologists will be hunting for the choice private practice jobs when graduation nears - not academic jobs.

We need good people in academics and in many different avenues of academics. But never lose sight of one of the facts that has made radiation oncology great in the last few decades…many of the clinical advances in radiation oncology have come from private practices and clinics.

So what I’ve done here is break down the rank list into meaningful categories based on the specific strengths of the programs as they would relate to a candidate with specific interests and personality types.

Dedicated Cancer Institutions (the people who have seen it all and done it all a bunch of times):
Radiation oncology lays claim to the only true oncology residency program. Medical oncologists have to do a combined Heme/Onc fellowship full of thalassemias and sickle cell disease. Surgical oncologists did a Gen Surg residency and then did a fellowship in Surg Onc (but many of these surgeons do a fair amount of general surgery for their practice). Dedicated cancer institutions are just plain different than anything on the planet. You can learn more about radiation oncology from a seasoned ICU nurse at a dedicated cancer institution then most attendings anywhere else in the country.
  • MD Anderson – the onc machine; Houston is hot and hotter
  • MSKCC – NYC: and busy, busy, busy residents (sink or swim)
  • Fox Chase – Soft $ for Noble Prize winners hidden in the woods of Philly
Basic Science Programs (the people who think of proteins and binding sites when you say the word “promiscuous”):
I once had a PI in a lab that I rotated through tell me that everyone thinks science is fun until you actually have to deliver reproducible and meaningful results that consistently allow you to get funding and keep your job.
  • Vanderbilt – MuD PhuD heaven
  • Michigan – If you go here you will go into academics if you like it OR NOT
  • Stanford – Best basic science outside the Department
  • Yale – Radiobiology actually happens here
Clinical Training Programs (private practice superstars):
These guys and gals get great clinical exposure that is cutting edge and useful to the top-notch private practices. Not many private practices are going to want their own proton facility, but they all want graduates who have done countless of the sexy techniques for prostate, breast, and the other bread and butter disease sites.
  • MSKCC – “I’ve done that 483 times without much supervision”
  • Fox Chase – Best bang for your buck, efficient high volume with low scut
  • William Beaumont – Can you say “brachy, brachy, brachy,…”
  • UCSF – Gets first choice of No. Cal. private practice jobs
Academic Programs (the guess what I’m thinking types and others that frequently say “That will be a nice quick little paper”):
If you want to spend the next twenty-five years after your MD/PhD program climbing your way up the academic ranks into a Chair position at a top Department here’s your chance.
  • MD Anderson – Great connections in academics that want to help you
  • Harvard – Great connections in academics
  • Michigan – Academics; you get both pain and gain (at least you get it)

So there they are. The always incomplete list of programs to serve as food for thought. These are thoughts and guidelines at best. Don’t let anyone’s opinion supersede your own thoughts and judgment about which program will work best for you.

Good luck




 
Members don't see this ad :)
OldCaliRad said:
#1 MD Anderson: Without question one of the best cancer centers in the world. Great atmosphere of clinical learning and research. Unlimited resources and tremendous institutional investment in radiation oncology. Happy residents. Only con is that 3 months of the year are 100+ degree weather that is not doable by everyone who applies.
Click to expand...

True, the summer in Houston is killer, but the temperature is usually only in the 90s and only rarely climbs over the century mark. It's the humidity that's so bad, with many days of 100+ humidity (and I do mean that PLUS).
 
BigAppleOnc said:
There have been a number of posts on this website about different rankings of radiation oncology residency programs. Some of the posts have been good. However, as a few have mentioned before many of the posts recycle the same list of programs with a huge academic bias. That trend is very misleading because the majority of graduates from radiation oncology programs are not looking for academic jobs. Most graduates actively seek the best private practice jobs, and academic positions are less sought-after by recent graduates. Did I just hear thunderclaps?? However, this website is run, monitored, mentored, filled, responded to, and geared for those of us in academics. And yes…since I’m actually on this website, yes I too am in academics. So regardless of what your MD/PhD advisor tells you or what you say to the program director on interview day, the lion’s share of you budding radiation oncologists will be hunting for the choice private practice jobs when graduation nears - not academic jobs.

We need good people in academics and in many different avenues of academics. But never lose sight of one of the facts that has made radiation oncology great in the last few decades…many of the clinical advances in radiation oncology have come from private practices and clinics.

So what I’ve done here is break down the rank list into meaningful categories based on the specific strengths of the programs as they would relate to a candidate with specific interests and personality types.

Dedicated Cancer Institutions (the people who have seen it all and done it all a bunch of times):
Radiation oncology lays claim to the only true oncology residency program. Medical oncologists have to do a combined Heme/Onc fellowship full of thalassemias and sickle cell disease. Surgical oncologists did a Gen Surg residency and then did a fellowship in Surg Onc (but many of these surgeons do a fair amount of general surgery for their practice). Dedicated cancer institutions are just plain different than anything on the planet. You can learn more about radiation oncology from a seasoned ICU nurse at a dedicated cancer institution then most attendings anywhere else in the country.
  • MD Anderson – the onc machine; Houston is hot and hotter
  • MSKCC – NYC: and busy, busy, busy residents (sink or swim)
  • Fox Chase – Soft $ for Noble Prize winners hidden in the woods of Philly
Basic Science Programs (the people who think of proteins and binding sites when you say the word “promiscuous”):
I once had a PI in a lab that I rotated through tell me that everyone thinks science is fun until you actually have to deliver reproducible and meaningful results that consistently allow you to get funding and keep your job.
  • Vanderbilt – MuD PhuD heaven
  • Michigan – If you go here you will go into academics if you like it OR NOT
  • Stanford – Best basic science outside the Department
  • Yale – Radiobiology actually happens here
Clinical Training Programs (private practice superstars):
These guys and gals get great clinical exposure that is cutting edge and useful to the top-notch private practices. Not many private practices are going to want their own proton facility, but they all want graduates who have done countless of the sexy techniques for prostate, breast, and the other bread and butter disease sites.
  • MSKCC – “I’ve done that 483 times without much supervision”
  • Fox Chase – Best bang for your buck, efficient high volume with low scut
  • William Beaumont – Can you say “brachy, brachy, brachy,…”
  • UCSF – Gets first choice of No. Cal. private practice jobs
Academic Programs (the guess what I’m thinking types and others that frequently say “That will be a nice quick little paper”):
If you want to spend the next twenty-five years after your MD/PhD program climbing your way up the academic ranks into a Chair position at a top Department here’s your chance.
  • MD Anderson – Great connections in academics that want to help you
  • Harvard – Great connections in academics
  • Michigan – Academics; you get both pain and gain (at least you get it)
So there they are. The always incomplete list of programs to serve as food for thought. These are thoughts and guidelines at best. Don’t let anyone’s opinion supersede your own thoughts and judgment about which program will work best for you.

Good luck
Click to expand...


Great to the point post and well organized!

"That will be a nice quick little paper." Too funny...

Thank you
 
OldCaliRad said:
... the best cancer centers, hospitals, and medical school do NOT necessarily have the best radiation oncology residency training programs. It is important to know the history and perception of radiation oncology. Medical and surgical oncologists have long been less than enthusiastic about radiation oncology as a field. As a result, the best cancer centers or hospitals have sometimes been filled with famous medical oncologists and surgeons that have successfully created a system to hinder the development of radiation oncology at their respective institutions - sad but true. Medical and surgical oncologists are typically the directors of cancer centers. In some (not all) top notch cancer centers the radiation oncology departments there are highly subordinate and weak clinically.
Click to expand...

That is always the hard thing for an applicant to get their hands around. Great hospitals, with striking frequency, have awful radiation oncology Depts because medical and surgical oncologists usually hate radiation and have for decades lived with the dream of wiping radiation oncology off of the face of the earth. Some "Top" cancer centers will actually intentionally change referral patterns and dept practices so that the radiation oncologists have as little power as possible. However, this tends NOT to be the trend at dedicated cancer INSTITUTIONS (MDACC, MSKCC, FCCC) - versus hospitals with an oncology center, orthopedics center, and cardiology center, etc). At hospitals that have a cancer center, and orthopedics center, and cardiology center, and rehab center, etc (and are NOT dedicated cancer institutions), the cancer center has a director (usually a medical oncologists who hates radiation) that has to fight at the hospital board meeting for dollars against the cardiology center, orthopedic center, etc. As a result, what little dollars the cancer center gets their hands on (even if most of the dollars are coming from the rad onc department) goes to medical oncology and surgical oncology.
 
Certainly the environment at MGH and MDACC is academic, and the senior faculty are well known in the field. That being said, most residents from the MDACC and Harvard programs go into private practice. Though I do not have the numbers, it would not surprise me if the percentage of residents going into private practice was no different than in other programs. UM also has a fair share of residents going into private practice, though I think the percentage is less than most other programs.


BigAppleOnc said:
Academic Programs (the guess what I’m thinking types and others that frequently say “That will be a nice quick little paper”):
If you want to spend the next twenty-five years after your MD/PhD program climbing your way up the academic ranks into a Chair position at a top Department here’s your chance.
  • MD Anderson – Great connections in academics that want to help you
  • Harvard – Great connections in academics
  • Michigan – Academics; you get both pain and gain (at least you get it)

So there they are. The always incomplete list of programs to serve as food for thought. These are thoughts and guidelines at best. Don’t let anyone’s opinion supersede your own thoughts and judgment about which program will work best for you.

Good luck
Click to expand...
 
"Academic career selection and retention in radiation oncology: the Joint Center for Radiation Therapy experience"
Balboni TA, et al., IJROBP, 2007
According to the paper, 65% went into academics from training but only 44% remain at last follow up. It appears that in the more recent portion of the study, the trend was more toward private practice vs. academics. (2 for private practice vs. 1 for academics over each of the last several years of the study).
 
BigAppleOnc said:
There have been a number of posts on this website about different rankings of radiation oncology residency programs. Some of the posts have been good. However, as a few have mentioned before many of the posts recycle the same list of programs with a huge academic bias. That trend is very misleading because the majority of graduates from radiation oncology programs are not looking for academic jobs. Most graduates actively seek the best private practice jobs, and academic positions are less sought-after by recent graduates. Did I just hear thunderclaps?? However, this website is run, monitored, mentored, filled, responded to, and geared for those of us in academics. And yes…since I’m actually on this website, yes I too am in academics. So regardless of what your MD/PhD advisor tells you or what you say to the program director on interview day, the lion’s share of you budding radiation oncologists will be hunting for the choice private practice jobs when graduation nears - not academic jobs.

We need good people in academics and in many different avenues of academics. But never lose sight of one of the facts that has made radiation oncology great in the last few decades…many of the clinical advances in radiation oncology have come from private practices and clinics.

So what I’ve done here is break down the rank list into meaningful categories based on the specific strengths of the programs as they would relate to a candidate with specific interests and personality types.

Dedicated Cancer Institutions (the people who have seen it all and done it all a bunch of times):
Radiation oncology lays claim to the only true oncology residency program. Medical oncologists have to do a combined Heme/Onc fellowship full of thalassemias and sickle cell disease. Surgical oncologists did a Gen Surg residency and then did a fellowship in Surg Onc (but many of these surgeons do a fair amount of general surgery for their practice). Dedicated cancer institutions are just plain different than anything on the planet. You can learn more about radiation oncology from a seasoned ICU nurse at a dedicated cancer institution then most attendings anywhere else in the country.
  • MD Anderson – the onc machine; Houston is hot and hotter
  • MSKCC – NYC: and busy, busy, busy residents (sink or swim)
  • Fox Chase – Soft $ for Noble Prize winners hidden in the woods of Philly
Basic Science Programs (the people who think of proteins and binding sites when you say the word “promiscuous”):
I once had a PI in a lab that I rotated through tell me that everyone thinks science is fun until you actually have to deliver reproducible and meaningful results that consistently allow you to get funding and keep your job.
  • Vanderbilt – MuD PhuD heaven
  • Michigan – If you go here you will go into academics if you like it OR NOT
  • Stanford – Best basic science outside the Department
  • Yale – Radiobiology actually happens here
Clinical Training Programs (private practice superstars):
These guys and gals get great clinical exposure that is cutting edge and useful to the top-notch private practices. Not many private practices are going to want their own proton facility, but they all want graduates who have done countless of the sexy techniques for prostate, breast, and the other bread and butter disease sites.
  • MSKCC – “I’ve done that 483 times without much supervision”
  • Fox Chase – Best bang for your buck, efficient high volume with low scut
  • William Beaumont – Can you say “brachy, brachy, brachy,…”
  • UCSF – Gets first choice of No. Cal. private practice jobs
Academic Programs (the guess what I’m thinking types and others that frequently say “That will be a nice quick little paper”):
If you want to spend the next twenty-five years after your MD/PhD program climbing your way up the academic ranks into a Chair position at a top Department here’s your chance.
  • MD Anderson – Great connections in academics that want to help you
  • Harvard – Great connections in academics
  • Michigan – Academics; you get both pain and gain (at least you get it)
So there they are. The always incomplete list of programs to serve as food for thought. These are thoughts and guidelines at best. Don’t let anyone’s opinion supersede your own thoughts and judgment about which program will work best for you.

Good luck
Click to expand...


By the way, the quote about "Basic Science Programs: the people who think of proteins and binding sites when you say the word “promiscuous”" hurts. It may be true, but it hurts.

Great post and great useful breakdown of the program categories.
 
A long while back someone asked about the Utah program. Admittedly, I am quite biased, since I ranked it #1, was lucky enough to match it, and have had an outstanding residency experience here. Here are some quick impressions:

Utah has a remarkable facility built above ground in a dedicated 50 cancer bed NCI designated cancer center. Utah Rad Onc's include some current thought leaders who sit on NCCN panels for various body sites.

Geography:-- I average ~30-40 days of skiing per year in world class resorts during the winter. We get "college season pass" rates. In the winter I hike, camp, fish mountain bike. All within 15 minutes of home and the hospital. Quality of life is exceptional.

Technology: Exceptional. We have 1 Novalis instrument for Steretactic, IGRT, SBRT etc. 3 other linacs (MLC's, portal vision, full IMRT etc.) We have localization with exac-trac, BAT system and calypso. We have full-capability 4D CT simulation and bodyfix systems. Lots of Brachy and HDR cases. We are purchasing a new top-of-the line linac which will have some bells and whistles that no one else has yet (but unfortunately I can't share what those are..) Entire department and hospital is fully computerized with remote capability. When I take call, I review the PACS at home...

Faculty: Exceptional. All treat residents well and with respect. Casual atmosphere.

Workload. Reasonable. Typical workday is 7:30 am to 5:30pm M-F. All lectures, didactics, tumor boards (daily) are PROTECTED TIME that override clinic. residents are assigned to attendings in 3 month apprenticeship blocks. Attendings will see patients solo as needed during protected time. Most attendings have 1-2 research days per week, therefore, resident on that service can be very productive with ancillary research projects during that time.

Research: In the last few years most residents have published between 5-15 papers by graduation. Very active research support in the department with 6 months dedicated with no clinical responsibilites, and more if needed. Outstanding meeting travel support annually, with no hemming and hawing over clinical coverage.

Honestly, the big focus of Utah's residency program is Resident Education. This is the training philosophy and this trumps clinic coverage.

Objective proof: It is my understanding (although I am not privy to this info) that recent Utah residents typically score in the top quartile on in-services, boards, and orals. The last few years graduating seniors had their choice of both private and academic job offers. Last years grad just started at Mayo.

-I love it here.

-Hope that helps a little.
 
Wow, that sounds wonderful. I wonder if the folks at MSKCC or UMich can say the same. Would be good to here what folks in the "top ten" programs have to say by comparison. I sometimes wonder if the places with the "better reputations" feel entitled to put their residents through a tougher experience.

ALso, at Utah, if there is a prostate implant or T&O that conflicts with lecture, does a resident go to lecture or do the implant?
 
Thanks, JTradonc, your review was very enlightening. Sounds like an ideal program.
Would anyone have similar comments on the Harvard program? Namely, the experience with faculty, happiness of residents, and workload; I read some older posts regarding HROP but am hoping someone out there who is a resident or rotated there would have newer thoughts. It seems MSKCC residents work long hours but are quite happy; is Harvard the same?
 
Can anyone provide insight about the Louisville and U Kentucky programs? There's a post a couple years back about the residents being unhappy and overworked in Louisville; any changes? A weird part of my subconscious has always wanted to move to Kentucky.
 
If someone doesn't mind sharing, why is the Johns Hopkins program notably absent from these lists? I'm spending time in their clinic right now, and wondering why nobody has great things to say about it. Is it simply lack of exposure on the part of the individuals posting?

Thanks!
 
The JHH program simply wasn't up there. While the clinical training was supurb, it suffered from not being a chaired department with the autonomy to grow the way a radiation oncology program needs to grow. Specially, no major trials coming out the department there save for peds (Dr. Wharam a part of the consortium). It also suffered from a degree of malignancy that has since gone by the way side for the most part from what I am hearing.
Ted Deweese took over in 2003 I believe and has developed the physics and radiobio quite substanitally. There are protcols going on, new hires, etc etc. I highly doubt the clinic heavy emphasis on training has changed but i do see the residents are producing more academically than in the past.


---Esteemed Moderator.
 
achybrachy said:
Can anyone provide insight about the Louisville and U Kentucky programs? There's a post a couple years back about the residents being unhappy and overworked in Louisville; any changes? A weird part of my subconscious has always wanted to move to Kentucky.
Click to expand...

You won't feel the same way about Louisville after you take your oral boards.

There's a reason it's called KY.
 
unfortunately, it seems that Utah is not accepting applicants for this year....Unless we were misinformed?
 
stephew said:
The JHH program simply wasn't up there. While the clinical training was supurb, it suffered from not being a chaired department with the autonomy to grow the way a radiation oncology program needs to grow. Specially, no major trials coming out the department there save for peds (Dr. Wharam a part of the consortium). It also suffered from a degree of malignancy that has since gone by the way side for the most part from what I am hearing.
Ted Deweese took over in 2003 I believe and has developed the physics and radiobio quite substanitally. There are protcols going on, new hires, etc etc. I highly doubt the clinic heavy emphasis on training has changed but i do see the residents are producing more academically than in the past.


---Esteemed Moderator.
Click to expand...

That sheds some light on the situation for me. I only know the department in the context of what Dr. DeWeese has done / is doing with it. He is actually my preceptor for the "Introduction to Clinical Medicine" course.
 
Can anybody explain why the southern california programs are so poor? I am originally from the area and wouldn't mind matching there. How would people rank UCLA, USC, UCI, Loma Linda compared to other rad onc training programs across the country?
 
Apparently because they seem to lose a lot of faculty and graduates to lucrative private practice jobs in the area, thus it is difficult to build any kind of decent program infrastructure.
 
There must be some incredible candidates out there if you are deciding between MSK, Harvard, and unranked jHop! If you are in that position, I'm sure you're future in this field is secure...

BUT, for candidates like me who won't even venture to apply there :scared: and are just happy to get into any program - what programs do you recommend we avoid at all costs (if any)?

Plus, what are the "top" bottom tier schools for ppl who do not have a strong app?

PS I'm not being facetious - Honest! Just want to know where I'll eventually have to end up to do something I love - Thx in advance
 
Hi,

Just wondering if anyone has any comments/insights on the program at Rush in Chicago?

Thanks!
 
Where does the radiation oncology residency program at the NCI/NIH rank in this list?

Since the program does not participate in the nrmp match, I was just wondering what the general consensus on the type of training/reputation of program is?

Thanks!
 
epigenes said:
Where does the radiation oncology residency program at the NCI/NIH rank in this list?

Since the program does not participate in the nrmp match, I was just wondering what the general consensus on the type of training/reputation of program is?

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I think your question highlights the weakness (stupidity?) of rank lists in general. How you rank programs is heavily biased by your personal interests and goals. The NCI program is probably a great program for someone who wants to focus their career on research (I'd say easily top 10) and a horrible program for someone who wants to go into private practice (no where near top 10). I've asked around about it and generally the opinion seems to be that the patient volume is seriously lacking. I can't verify the truth in that with actaully case numbers and diversity. I'm sure you see some interesting zebras.

A big problem with NCI application is that you'll have to accept or decline them in January if they extend you an offer, and they have been known to apply pressure.
 
From what I've heard, the NCI is a great program is you are 110% committed to academics....they no longer have the patient volume to train anyone to be confidently competent in private practice. They do, however, have a good amount of pediatrics.

Ever since Norm Coleman stepped down as chair of the dept, it's not clear how bright/stable the future is for the NCI in the short-term.

strong points of NCI:

James Mitchell does the radiobiology program there. Also, they currently have David Gius (program director) who does some of the heavy-duty molecular biology research in the department. Rumor has it that he might leave the NCI soon? Not sure how strong basic science in the department will be if he leaves.

When I applied a couple years ago, I decided not to apply to the NCI program because it does not participate in the match...also, I love research and want to do academics, but it would be nice to train at a place with good clinical training. After all, isn't that the main point of residency for most of us??

*take what i say with a grain of salt as everythign I say is just word on the street! So check it out for yourself and see what you think.
 
curious ... what is 'not enough clinical volume'? i mean, don't you have to meet ACGME requirements. just can't believe a place couldn't meet those standards.
s
 
I think somebody asked this a while ago but there was never a reply...

Anyone have insight on the program at Kaiser in SoCal? Thanks.
 
....if I had interviewed at all these places (and assuming I was single, from Alaska, interested in location, and was 50/50 academic/private). Think this thread needs a bump.

1-5:
MDACC ("death star"; flat&humid&sprawling city),
MSKCC (volume&Manhattan if East Coastie),
UCSF (location&reputation if West Coastie),
Harvard(rep w/ cold, "death star" of NE w/ protons; Hellman style beat down)
Stanford(sunny&lab space; cyberknife like crazy; luv lymphoma),

6-10:
U Penn (soon to be "death star" with tough intern year),
U Chicago(windy city with Weichselbaum, the Hellman style beat down),
U Wisconsin (Madison&dept=fun; tomo like crazy),
Fox Chase (Pollack, golf course, & prostate like crazy)
U Washington(coffee w/ great residents; what about IGRT?),

11-15:
U Michigan(no brachy & tough intern year),
Wash U-St. Louis (no chair but no intern year),
JHop (Deweese but baltimore),
UFlorida(Gainesville neg, hint of dysfxn, historically stronger but...)
William Beaumont (where IGRT was born, soon to be proton center),

16-20:
Mayo Clinic (brrrrrrrr, what city?.....),
Yale(Manhattan too far)
Duke(Willett but Durham)
U Maryland(Regine but baltimore)
Colorado (good SBRT w/ great skiing),

21-25:
Vanderbilt(great for Holman, but Nashville),
NYU(Manhattan but reputation)
Cleveland Clinic (reputation but cleveland w/ the Hellman style beat down),
Southwestern (Hak Choy & Timmerman but not up there yet),
Jefferson (nice part of Philly),

26-30:
UNC(Teppler and Chapel Hill)
Mt. Sinai(Manhattan would be nice)
Mayo Jax(hmmm, 1 spot)
UAB (hmmm...Birmingham)
Case Western (hmmmm....Cleveland)

31-35:
Utah (great location for outdoors, better if LDS)
Loyola (Chicago is nice...)
Northwestern (Evanston is alright...)
Tufts (Boston is nice...)
UCLA (LA is nice but where did my faculty go...)

36-40:
U Miami (where/when's the expansion? let's find the beach...)
USC (LA is nice but this program is messy)
UCI (what happened? do you like driving?)
Oregon (Portland is a great city)
CPMC (because it's SF)

41-45:
Emory
Georgetown (luv the Cyberknife)
Columbia
UT Galveston
Henry Ford

Nobody on the interview trail "warned me" about programs to stay away. This list definitely would have been different if I were from the mid-west or New York or LA.
 
So I'll play your little ranking game. 3rd years--discount what I'm saying because it is entirely subjective.

1a) Harvard: The place is phenomenal. The faculty is friendly and a veritable Who's Who. The residents were the coolest on the trail. The 12 months of research/elective time offers the most flexibility of any program out there. With BWH/MGH/DFCI/Childrens/BIDMC/Boston Medical Center, it's like a giant oncological megalopolis. You've got your brachy, your peds, your protons. Boston is kick a$$. Yeah it gets a little cold, but who doesn't want the chestnuts-roasting type winters. Also--John Adams is from here and I'm loving his mini-series. 7-8 residents. HUGE POSITIVE. HUGE. You want to socialize with these guys. The more the merrier. And some of the whining about arrogance from past posters? Utterly untrue. You get your pick of any job at any location---private or academic. I was swooning. FYI- The PGY-5s coming on faculty are wonderful!

1b) MSKCC: An awesome cancer-hospital on the Upper East Side. This is a must-rank for all you Gossip Girl fans. Yeah the volume is high, but seriously, stop whining; it's RadOnc. Attendings I met were an amazing group. The residents were pretty cool (and objectively the hottest crew I encountered on the trail). I guess the assumption is that Powell is gonna beef up the research profile of the place. Good to hear, because the few months they offer are a bit anemic. But how to do that without expanding number of residents? Someone has to cover the 5.6 million patients that pass through here. NYC is (after Philly) the hippest city in the US. But there is nothing worse than the fetid NYC summers. Ugh. Trash factory. All your friends are probably here though, so you've got some distractions.

2) UCSF: Past Rad-Onc-Rankings haters aside, this was my first choice (didn't quite land it, but they're forgiven). The technology is uber-impressive; you're working hand-in-hand with the best Radiology dept in the country and everyone who's anyone knows that RadOnc is going molecular imaging crazy over the next decade. You've got incredible strengths in CNS and Prostate (fyi-loved the Roach fly-by at the dinner. I thought it was cute!). A dynamic cadre of young, enthusiastic attendings and a growing RadBio program. You've got your pick of priv/acad jobs.To address a lingering issue on these boards--LOCATION IS CRUCIAL. Location attracts top talent, end of story. San Francisco is as gorgeous as the Memorial residents. I visited late in the process and was blown away. First time out here.

3) Stanford: The weight of the quality of cancer bio/rad-bio research coming out of this place nearly broke both of my legs. I was swooning over the brand-new cancer center. Again--the young faculty are mightily impressive. Donaldson was a great saleswoman. She seems really involved in the program, concerned about resident life, and no doubt goes to bat for you come PGY-5 freak-out time. They love the cyber-knife and get a lot of the beta-versions of new technologies. I'd be surprised if, secretly, the didn't use the cyber-knife on things like URIs. 12-months of research is 2nd only to Harv in terms of flexibility. Palo-Alto is manicured. Stanford U is prettiest in the country.

4) Penn: I would marry Steve Hahn. In a heart-beat. And so would all of you. He was so thoroughly convincing, I almost cancelled the remainder of my interviews. Penn is throwing up what looks to be wonderful new RadOnc facilities with the much-talked-about, everyone-wants-to-impress-the applicants-by-mentioning-it proton facility. Again, cancer bio at Penn is awesome. Also, as someone interested in Peds, having CHOP here is a pretty important bonus. Research time here is not insignificant and they love da Holmans. Philly---move me here now. I'm from the MidWest, but had been a couple of times. I love the feel of the place. It's unpretentious, it's got the hip scenes, lot of young yuppies not doing medicine. Required intern year is a neg, but Philly's cool enough to off-set.

5) MDACC: I can hear the controversy surrounding this ranking. All the cries from people who say things like "best cancer center in the US, hands down" and "death star." Let me say all of the perfunctory positives: yes...amazing cancer center; yes, you're the only residents in the place and probably get your respect-on; yes, amazing rad-bio; yes, you can get all hot-and-bothered by protons. But HOUSTON is a sweltering conservative morass. It's sprawl, sprawl, and then more sprawl. I liked my interview. The faculty were a good bunch. But this single gal cannot spend 5 years here.

6) Michigan: Let me start out with a trifling, but not unimportant, observation--best run interview day of the season. They were on the ball. Loved the staff. Ted Lawrence gets silver-medal for chair I'd most like to marry. He was down to earth, interested in your application, and sold the program hard. The cancer research being done here is up there with Stanford and Yale; the physics research is unrivaled. The lab space is sprawling. The hospital is like a d*mn medical Pentagon-HUGE. Can you tell I'm obsessed with hospital aesthetics? Loved UM Hosp--a brutalist style. Lords over Ann Arbor. Again, a TON of research time. Ben-Josef was great. For me though, the required intern year was a bit of a downer. Ann Arbor is a great college town and all....but....

7) Yale[/B: So my only specific resident shout out. I believe his name was James Yu. Gave us the tour. HILARIOUS GUY. Set a real nice tone for the day. 2nd best run interview day of the season. Wilson is beyond on-the-ball, and tied for best salesman with Donaldson on the PD front. Glazer's research is mind-blowingly good. They just received some immense NIH grant. The research time (10-12 months) is another real winner, and the opportunity to do RWJ is incredibly appealing. My biggest a$$ positive for Yale, besides RadBio that rivals Stanford, is the new cancer center. Oh my lord. Gorgeous. Will be open by Fall of 2009. Going up now. Lets get serious. Having an appealing work area is top-notch important. This place will have the best facilities around. My two concerns were brachy time and New Haven. New Haven is +/- for me, but it is close to New York and Boston. Very manageable distances (my ex did med school here). Maybe New Haven is even a net positive--very cheap, good eats. Save the cash for romps in the city (NYC).

8) Johns Hopkins: So this might be my other controversial rank. Seems to get a bit of a bum rap here, but I. LOVED. THIS. PLACE. Maybe it's because I'm a Wire junkie, but let me start off by saying I kinda dig Baltimore. Sure you've got the grit, but Fells Point was hipster paradise. Your close to DC anyway, so don't freak out. Now--Hopkins itself--WOW. This place is the other oncological megalopolis. They're spending billions and billions on their facilities. The completed cancer center (relatively new) is a sight to behold. The RadOnc facilities were wonderful. I wanna see them flesh out the research opportunities a bit more. Ted DeWeese is my hero. Awesome temperament, great personality. He's really invested in radbio. They're gonna be up there in a short while. Physics is already tippy top. My prediction (near useless, I'll grant you): will rival Harvard and MSKCC in a decade. Very good return on your residency investment. Residents were a great bunch. Had us over for dinner. Loved em. PS- single hottest male resident. I'll keep the 3rd years guessing.

9) Univ of Chicago: So I dug the program. You've got some great young cancer bio faculty coming on-line here. The history is quite impressive, with all the oft mentioned names. The rumors of instability are a bit rampant on the trail, but I honestly don't care. This was up there on the old ROL. Chicago is the only Mid-Western city with a functioning downtown :)

10) Wash U : Awesome research, awesome facilities. The big-ole question is what happens now that Powell skipped down. Who knows? I'm not someone who places too much stock in chair-watching. This has historically been a top-notch place to train. Powell's departure ain't gonna change that, so don't hyperventilate on me. The downside for me was obviously St. Louis. The Central West End, near the hospital facilities, was quaint; i dug it. Overall though, St Louis ain't getting me all hot and bothered.

About me: midwestern, top 30 med school, a couple pubs, high 240s on Step 1, interviewed at about 20 places. Matched at my #2 choice (may or may not be on above list). Teasing you, aren't I?

Some pieces of advice: Amtrak blows (do not trust it), JetBlue/Virgin America are awesome. JetBlue has better TV though. A good two hours of VH1 classics on a red-eye will really perk you up for next day interviews. Appreciate and love Dunkin Donuts. Best wake-me-up coffee bar none. Base your residency decisions largely on proximity to Dunkin Ds (SF people, don't freak. Target carries the stuff). Don't worry about ball-busting interviewers (I'm looking at you NYU)--it's their fault, not yours. Also---rent cars and splurge on a GPS tracking system. Without it, I might have ended up in downtown Detroit.

Learn to love the match. It works out in the end. Your co-interviewers are your friends; well placed bitch sessions with them will keep you sane.:p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I agree with the last post about rankings. U Washington is wonderful for clinical training, research (really builiding that part of it up) and residents are happy. Yale is A+ for everything - brand new cancer center, all the new technology except for protons, amazing research, and A-1 mentorship from Wilson. The Wilson-Glazer combo is unbeatable basically anywhere, which is why their residents publish so much more than anyone in the 'death-star' programs. I think they recruited two high power MD-PhDs this year. Residents are ultra-happy and very productive. Major astro presence this year.
 
As someone who has actually lived in Texas for many years and specifically Houston for the past 2 years, I feel like I need to respond to the last posters comments about the city and how it single-handedly shoots MDACC below UCSF (for realz?!?) in her "rankings". As a disclaimer, I have also had the great fortune to live in DC, Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle. In any case, it always surprises me how quick *some* East and West Coasters are to judge a place without ever actually having lived there. We Texans don't go around saying things like "I could never live in Moscow" because we recognize how short-sighted a statement like that is.

Myth #1:
Houston is sprawling.
Yes, Houston is a big, big city but that is a matter of semantics: in Texas, we use the term "neighborhoods" instead of designating areas as towns. Thus, Houston captures an enormous number of neighborhoods that on the east or west coast would be considered separate cities. We don't do the whole Boston/Cambridge/Waltham/Framingham/Worcester thing (or for that matter the San Francisco/NorthBay/Peninsula/SouthBay/EastBay thing). We just call the whole thing Houston but it is otherwise similar in population, size, and sprawl to those other metropolises (metropoli?).

Myth #2:
Houston is conservative.
Texas has been a red state in the last election cycles mainly due to rural voters. Houston, Dallas, and Austin are all very purple. Houston itself has one the largest populations of gays, blacks, hispanics, and asian immigrants in the entire country (in fact, on rigorous sociological measures of ethnic diversity, Houston is *the most* diverse city -- more than New York or San Francisco; our Chinatown is actually the size of a town not four city blocks like, say, Boston). As you can imagine, the breadth of experience that the city offers lends itself to an open-mindedness among citizens. Moreover, it should be noted that Texas as a whole was a solidly Democratic state in the not-too-distant past, elected one of the first and most accomplished female governors (Ann Richards), and currently in national polling, Obama is about tied with McCain in a potential general election match-up (thus, Texas is more in play than, say, Pennsylvania -- also, speaking of PA, Philly is absolutely not the hippest city in America, that's crazy talk and I'm letting you know so you don't embarrass yourself in polite company :smuggrin:). And finally, one of the largest immigrant groups to Texas in the past five years has been displaced rust-belters from Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio who bring their own political bents to the melting pot.

Myth 3
Houston lacks a single scene.
This was just plain random. Houston is home to the biggest medical center in the world, the 2nd largest number of Fortune 500 headquarters in the states, and some of the most powerful international law firms in America (mostly because of the reflected glory of the energy industry). It also has a huge number of new economy industries (as a state, Texas is only behind California in number of technology jobs). On top of that is all the diversity previously mentioned, and a nice mix of party colleges and academic universities (~50 colleges and grad schools in Greater Houston alone). Thus, you will find people of all colors, incomes, and goals to date to your heart's content. And, probably the most important thing is that the bars and clubs are great but awesomely unpretentious. People also tend to be less guarded and less neurotic than their coastal counterparts. Austin, LA, Miami, and Vegas are perhaps a little more beautiful, but Houston is not far behind (I would put in on par with Nashville or Atlanta). Plus, with a lower cost of living, you have plenty to spend on your social life. Anyways, wherever you end up, find a case control in Houston and compare notes on the dating scene at the end of year 1 - you'll be surprised fo sho.

Myth #4
Houston is the boonies and is uncultured
Well, unlike San Francisco which has an isolated modern art museum (SF Moma), Houston has a museum district which includes multiple award winning collections (my personal favorite, the De Menil, has the best collection of surrealist art I've seen anywhere except maybe Paris). And you New Yorkers may not know this, but Houston is where a lot of artists come from -- you see, rich oil men were patrons of the arts during the heyday of American modernism. So while MOMA visitors revel at the broken obelisk in the lobby, keep in mind that the sister piece exists in Houston across from the Rothko Chapel above a reflecting pool outdoors, where it was meant to be). Okay, I can go on about the Houston symphony, ballet, theatre district, etc but seriously just google that sh** and read about them yourself.
Also, not only do we have all major and minor sports (except notably the NHL), all of our stadiums (Reliant - football, Toyota Center - Basketball, and Minute Maid Park - baseball) are brand-spanking new, which speaks to the general health of the civic economy. The history of Houston sports teams deserves its own post, but its worth mentioning the 22 game winning streak of the Rockets as the latest chapter.

Myth #5
Houston has crappy traffic.
Well, this one's true. But its worth mentioning that the city just passed an enormous extension of the light-rail system. Nonetheless, unless you live in New York, you have no right to complain about the traffic. Whether its the 101 in LA, the Massachusetts turn-pike in Boston, the Beltway in DC, or just about anywhere during rush hour on the Jersey Coast, Seattle, Portland, Atlanta, etc, etc then please. Houston's traffic sucks equally to anywhere else's.

Myth #6
Houston/Texas is irrelevant to national affairs.
A lot of my friends living in New York or San Francisco or LA seem to think that they are where the "action" is or where the history is made. But here's the thing, as far as historical significance, there are seven seats of power in the United States. (1) Banking - New York (2) Mass Media - New York (3) Entertainment - Los Angeles (4) Technology - Bay Area (5) Domestic Commodities/Trade - Chicago/NewYork (6) Government - DC

What is the 7th? Well, it's the ring that rules them all: Energy -- which is comfortably seated here. This is the reason we have had 3 presidents come from Texas in the last fifty years (admittedly, not great presidents <sigh>). It's also what fuels (pardon the pun) the infrastructure for the Texas Medical Center and MDACC.

And finally, speaking of history, let's not forget that Texan socialites brought down the iron curtain and won the cold war (see Charlie Wilson's War).

Myth #7
The weather is terrible.
The summers are actually brutally hot. Of course, I compare those summers to other places and then I don't feel so bad. For instance, the winters in New England were cold, dark, and characterized by one damn Nor'easter after another which made getting to the T a supreme headache. And don't even get me started on windshield ice. Even SF had cold, foggy, depressing summers. Seattle's drizzle 9 mths of the year was maddening. Unless you live in the Bay Area peninsula or Southern California, weather is going to be hard from time to time and so it comes down to personal preferences. But yeah, Houston summers are a beast (a trait they share with New Orleans and Miami, btw) -- but on the other hand, the rest of the year is mild and pleasant.


IMHO, the biggest real flaw about Houston is that it is diffuse. Without a body of water directly crossing or abutting the city, there is not a defined center and this limits its aesthetic character. It becomes more like, say, Brooklyn: a big teaming mass of good stuff, but you better bring a guide. So if there was something I could change about the city, it would be to introduce stricter zoning laws and improve public transportation (which they are fortunately attempting to do).

But one common theme I've noticed is that people live in places like New York or Los Angeles for awhile but the romance tends to end. On the other hand, most of the people I've known who've moved to Houston, even if ostensibly for a temporary position, tend to stay. It grows on you I guess. It's Texas after all.
 
myth 1 plays into myth 2. In Houston, you can live in Sheila Jackson Lee's district or Tom Delay's old district.

That said, don't apologize for texas being conservative. Texas is going to be that way for a while, and 50% or so of the country thinks that is a good thing. btw, Ann Richards wasn't all that great. That's why George Bush (whatever you think of him) thumped her like a drum.

all in all, one of the most cogent defences of Houston I've seen in a while. I'm still not moving back there though.
 
Well some of you are using the impression account to good effect and an entertaining read. Thanks. But please lets not use it to try to give impressions about programs and not polemics about towns. Thanks again.
 
Rereading this I have to say, best assessment yet. Why? Aside from being massively entertaining, it jibes well with the places I know (including harvard insofar as anyone cares for my view on that). Also the bottom line advice (malignant interview? not your fault). nice post.

Impressions said:
So I'll play your little ranking game. 3rd years--discount what I'm saying because it is entirely subjective.

1a) Harvard: The place is phenomenal. The faculty is friendly and a veritable Who's Who. The residents were the coolest on the trail. The 12 months of research/elective time offers the most flexibility of any program out there. With BWH/MGH/DFCI/Childrens/BIDMC/Boston Medical Center, it's like a giant oncological megalopolis. You've got your brachy, your peds, your protons. Boston is kick a$$. Yeah it gets a little cold, but who doesn't want the chestnuts-roasting type winters. Also--John Adams is from here and I'm loving his mini-series. 7-8 residents. HUGE POSITIVE. HUGE. You want to socialize with these guys. The more the merrier. And some of the whining about arrogance from past posters? Utterly untrue. You get your pick of any job at any location---private or academic. I was swooning. FYI- The PGY-5s coming on faculty are wonderful!

1b) MSKCC: An awesome cancer-hospital on the Upper East Side. This is a must-rank for all you Gossip Girl fans. Yeah the volume is high, but seriously, stop whining; it's RadOnc. Attendings I met were an amazing group. The residents were pretty cool (and objectively the hottest crew I encountered on the trail). I guess the assumption is that Powell is gonna beef up the research profile of the place. Good to hear, because the few months they offer are a bit anemic. But how to do that without expanding number of residents? Someone has to cover the 5.6 million patients that pass through here. NYC is (after Philly) the hippest city in the US. But there is nothing worse than the fetid NYC summers. Ugh. Trash factory. All your friends are probably here though, so you've got some distractions.

2) UCSF: Past Rad-Onc-Rankings haters aside, this was my first choice (didn't quite land it, but they're forgiven). The technology is uber-impressive; you're working hand-in-hand with the best Radiology dept in the country and everyone who's anyone knows that RadOnc is going molecular imaging crazy over the next decade. You've got incredible strengths in CNS and Prostate (fyi-loved the Roach fly-by at the dinner. I thought it was cute!). A dynamic cadre of young, enthusiastic attendings and a growing RadBio program. You've got your pick of priv/acad jobs.To address a lingering issue on these boards--LOCATION IS CRUCIAL. Location attracts top talent, end of story. San Francisco is as gorgeous as the Memorial residents. I visited late in the process and was blown away. First time out here.

3) Stanford: The weight of the quality of cancer bio/rad-bio research coming out of this place nearly broke both of my legs. I was swooning over the brand-new cancer center. Again--the young faculty are mightily impressive. Donaldson was a great saleswoman. She seems really involved in the program, concerned about resident life, and no doubt goes to bat for you come PGY-5 freak-out time. They love the cyber-knife and get a lot of the beta-versions of new technologies. I'd be surprised if, secretly, the didn't use the cyber-knife on things like URIs. 12-months of research is 2nd only to Harv in terms of flexibility. Palo-Alto is manicured. Stanford U is prettiest in the country.

4) Penn: I would marry Steve Hahn. In a heart-beat. And so would all of you. He was so thoroughly convincing, I almost cancelled the remainder of my interviews. Penn is throwing up what looks to be wonderful new RadOnc facilities with the much-talked-about, everyone-wants-to-impress-the applicants-by-mentioning-it proton facility. Again, cancer bio at Penn is awesome. Also, as someone interested in Peds, having CHOP here is a pretty important bonus. Research time here is not insignificant and they love da Holmans. Philly---move me here now. I'm from the MidWest, but had been a couple of times. I love the feel of the place. It's unpretentious, it's got the hip scenes, lot of young yuppies not doing medicine. Required intern year is a neg, but Philly's cool enough to off-set.

5) MDACC: I can hear the controversy surrounding this ranking. All the cries from people who say things like "best cancer center in the US, hands down" and "death star." Let me say all of the perfunctory positives: yes...amazing cancer center; yes, you're the only residents in the place and probably get your respect-on; yes, amazing rad-bio; yes, you can get all hot-and-bothered by protons. But HOUSTON is a sweltering conservative morass. It's sprawl, sprawl, and then more sprawl. I liked my interview. The faculty were a good bunch. But this single gal cannot spend 5 years here.

6) Michigan: Let me start out with a trifling, but not unimportant, observation--best run interview day of the season. They were on the ball. Loved the staff. Ted Lawrence gets silver-medal for chair I'd most like to marry. He was down to earth, interested in your application, and sold the program hard. The cancer research being done here is up there with Stanford and Yale; the physics research is unrivaled. The lab space is sprawling. The hospital is like a d*mn medical Pentagon-HUGE. Can you tell I'm obsessed with hospital aesthetics? Loved UM Hosp--a brutalist style. Lords over Ann Arbor. Again, a TON of research time. Ben-Josef was great. For me though, the required intern year was a bit of a downer. Ann Arbor is a great college town and all....but....

7) Yale[/B: So my only specific resident shout out. I believe his name was James Yu. Gave us the tour. HILARIOUS GUY. Set a real nice tone for the day. 2nd best run interview day of the season. Wilson is beyond on-the-ball, and tied for best salesman with Donaldson on the PD front. Glazer's research is mind-blowingly good. They just received some immense NIH grant. The research time (10-12 months) is another real winner, and the opportunity to do RWJ is incredibly appealing. My biggest a$$ positive for Yale, besides RadBio that rivals Stanford, is the new cancer center. Oh my lord. Gorgeous. Will be open by Fall of 2009. Going up now. Lets get serious. Having an appealing work area is top-notch important. This place will have the best facilities around. My two concerns were brachy time and New Haven. New Haven is +/- for me, but it is close to New York and Boston. Very manageable distances (my ex did med school here). Maybe New Haven is even a net positive--very cheap, good eats. Save the cash for romps in the city (NYC).

8) Johns Hopkins: So this might be my other controversial rank. Seems to get a bit of a bum rap here, but I. LOVED. THIS. PLACE. Maybe it's because I'm a Wire junkie, but let me start off by saying I kinda dig Baltimore. Sure you've got the grit, but Fells Point was hipster paradise. Your close to DC anyway, so don't freak out. Now--Hopkins itself--WOW. This place is the other oncological megalopolis. They're spending billions and billions on their facilities. The completed cancer center (relatively new) is a sight to behold. The RadOnc facilities were wonderful. I wanna see them flesh out the research opportunities a bit more. Ted DeWeese is my hero. Awesome temperament, great personality. He's really invested in radbio. They're gonna be up there in a short while. Physics is already tippy top. My prediction (near useless, I'll grant you): will rival Harvard and MSKCC in a decade. Very good return on your residency investment. Residents were a great bunch. Had us over for dinner. Loved em. PS- single hottest male resident. I'll keep the 3rd years guessing.

9) Univ of Chicago: So I dug the program. You've got some great young cancer bio faculty coming on-line here. The history is quite impressive, with all the oft mentioned names. The rumors of instability are a bit rampant on the trail, but I honestly don't care. This was up there on the old ROL. Chicago is the only Mid-Western city with a functioning downtown :)

10) Wash U : Awesome research, awesome facilities. The big-ole question is what happens now that Powell skipped down. Who knows? I'm not someone who places too much stock in chair-watching. This has historically been a top-notch place to train. Powell's departure ain't gonna change that, so don't hyperventilate on me. The downside for me was obviously St. Louis. The Central West End, near the hospital facilities, was quaint; i dug it. Overall though, St Louis ain't getting me all hot and bothered.

About me: midwestern, top 30 med school, a couple pubs, high 240s on Step 1, interviewed at about 20 places. Matched at my #2 choice (may or may not be on above list). Teasing you, aren't I?

Some pieces of advice: Amtrak blows (do not trust it), JetBlue/Virgin America are awesome. JetBlue has better TV though. A good two hours of VH1 classics on a red-eye will really perk you up for next day interviews. Appreciate and love Dunkin Donuts. Best wake-me-up coffee bar none. Base your residency decisions largely on proximity to Dunkin Ds (SF people, don't freak. Target carries the stuff). Don't worry about ball-busting interviewers (I'm looking at you NYU)--it's their fault, not yours. Also---rent cars and splurge on a GPS tracking system. Without it, I might have ended up in downtown Detroit.

Learn to love the match. It works out in the end. Your co-interviewers are your friends; well placed bitch sessions with them will keep you sane.:p
Click to expand...
 
Please PM me. I think we need to have a few beers with like-minded folks at the next ASTRO. you are hilarious. :banana:
Also, I thoroughly enjoyed your reviews....

Impressions said:
So I'll play your little ranking game. 3rd years--discount what I'm saying because it is entirely subjective.

1b) MSKCC: An awesome cancer-hospital on the Upper East Side. This is a must-rank for all you Gossip Girl fans. Yeah the volume is high, but seriously, stop whining; it's RadOnc.....
Learn to love the match. It works out in the end. Your co-interviewers are your friends; well placed bitch sessions with them will keep you sane.:p
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

P
Rad Onc oral boards
Replies
10
Views
662
Barcelona PSG
B
Gfunk6
Rad Onc? Burnt Out?
Replies
36
Views
1K
thecarbonionangle
thecarbonionangle
TheWallnerus
Rad onc supervision, the epilogue
Replies
10
Views
1K
elementaryschooleconomics
elementaryschooleconomics
U
Why is rad onc not more competitive?
2 3 4 5
Replies
233
Views
9K
medgator
M
D
Rad onc as a second residency?
Replies
25
Views
2K
SneakyBooger
SneakyBooger
Top