Best residency program for onc?

[Sylar11]

Hi, I was wondering what the top few east coast programs would be for an academic fellowship in Onc?
E.g. is it better to go to Cornell over a "higher-ranked" program like Columbia, Penn etc. because of its affiliation with MSKCC? How would those stack up to MGH, BWH, BIDMC or other NYC programs?

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Nadir]

I am currently a third year resident at Cornell and matched in heme onc last year.

I think the connection with MSKCC helped a great deal. We rotate their for 6 weeks a year, and I was able to start doing research with a faculty member there as an intern (they really love having cornell residents for research projects, very easy to get mentors).

As a rule, I think almost everyone who wants to end up at MSKCC for fellowship, assuming they did well at Cornell, is able to go (there are exceptions, but not many). Most people got interviews everywhere they applied. We also match great outside new york (although I think you'll find most people want to stay in the city because of spouses etc).

I'm sure other New York programs match fine. I think coming from a place like Columbia, you're likely to great in the match...so I wouldn't rule a place like that out just because the cancer center is smaller. The one caveat is Boston. Going to a harvard program is almost a prerequisite if you want to go to Dana Farber (I heard 13/14 of their spots went to people from Harvard programs). None of the other top programs are that inbred, so you'll have a decent shot coming from anywhere good.

For what its worth, last year, we had 7 people apply in heme onc.

1 is staying at Cornell
1 is going to Columbia
1 is going to MD Anderson
and 4 are staying at MSKCC

I think thats pretty representative of the match annually. Hope that helps.

 

[bandw14]

You pretty well nailed it about Boston and the Harvard programs.

Brigham - 12 heme onc

6 DFCI
2 MSKCC
2 UCSF
1 UPenn
1 UWash

I assume MGH is about the same - most stay at Dana Farber.

 

[tallash]

You pretty well nailed it about Boston and the Harvard programs.

Brigham - 12 heme onc

6 DFCI
2 MSKCC
2 UCSF
1 UPenn
1 UWash

I assume MGH is about the same - most stay at Dana Farber.

Any one have a similar break down for DF specifically? The HMS academic incest is well documented, but I'm curious just how closed the door is to people outside of the Boston metro area.

 

[gutonc]

Any one have a similar break down for DF specifically? The HMS academic incest is well documented, but I'm curious just how closed the door is to people outside of the Boston metro area.

I don't have actual data (and DFCI does a really nice job of hiding it on their public website) but I know a few current/former DFCI fellows and they are roughly 50/50 HMS/outside residents. I don't think DFCI has a "pro-HMS" bias so much as they see so many of the HMS program residents (and that's ~120 residents between the 3 programs) and it's just a lot easier to rank a candidate that you know (and that knows you) than somebody you don't know outside of their numbers/letters/interview. There's no other program that has so much easy access to good local talent. They don't have to take people from outside, so they don't bother. That is, quite honestly, to the detriment of the program, and none of the people I know who have trained there there have wanted to stay there.

 

[gutonc]

Hi, I was wondering what the top few east coast programs would be for an academic fellowship in Onc?
E.g. is it better to go to Cornell over a "higher-ranked" program like Columbia, Penn etc. because of its affiliation with MSKCC? How would those stack up to MGH, BWH, BIDMC or other NYC programs?

Thanks!

All of those places will be fine. If you have a massive stiffy for MSKCC or DFCI and will kill yourself if you don't get into one of those programs for fellowship, then go to the most closely associated residency. If you want good training and research opportunities that will give you lots of opportunities for fellowship placement, go to the program you feel most comfortable in.

 

[tallash]

I don't have actual data (and DFCI does a really nice job of hiding it on their public website) but I know a few current/former DFCI fellows and they are roughly 50/50 HMS/outside residents. I don't think DFCI has a "pro-HMS" bias so much as they see so many of the HMS program residents (and that's ~120 residents between the 3 programs) and it's just a lot easier to rank a candidate that you know (and that knows you) than somebody you don't know outside of their numbers/letters/interview. There's no other program that has so much easy access to good local talent. They don't have to take people from outside, so they don't bother. That is, quite honestly, to the detriment of the program, and none of the people I know who have trained there there have wanted to stay there.

Agreed re: hiding the info on the public website. Essentially in line with their residency programs, maybe barring BID, so not entirely surprising. Good to know, regardless, especially the last bit about not wanting to stay.

 

[gutonc]

Agreed re: hiding the info on the public website. Essentially in line with their residency programs, maybe barring BID, so not entirely surprising. Good to know, regardless, especially the last bit about not wanting to stay.

I'm not going to pretend that DFCI (and the associated HMS-related residency and fellowship programs) aren't great training locations, they are, and it's insane to pretend otherwise.

But I've heard time and again from residents, fellows and (former) attendings there that the attitude from the administration is "you're at Harvard/Farber/MGH/etc...you should be thankful you don't have to pay us to work here."

 

[tallash]

I'm not going to pretend that DFCI (and the associated HMS-related residency and fellowship programs) aren't great training locations, they are, and it's insane to pretend otherwise.

But I've heard time and again from residents, fellows and (former) attendings there that the attitude from the administration is "you're at Harvard/Farber/MGH/etc...you should be thankful you don't have to pay us to work here."

Oh yeah, believe me - I follow you. Have heard the same thing from others, including people close to me who were recruited to stay on for some programs outside of Hem/Onc and were frankly offended at the packages they were offered. It's good to know it happens across the board.

 

[bencejones]

**

 

[threecoins]

You mentioned one resident from your batch stayed at Cornell. How is their program?. I have heard good things about it but I am not sure how it measures up compared to the giant across the street or to MDACC or DFCI. How many opportunities exist Cornell fellows to collaborate with faculty from MSKCC?

 

[Nadir]

The Cornell Heme Onc program is sort of of a different beast than MSKCC. They do have a research requirement and consider themselves an academic program, but there is a lot more "service" involved. I.E. rough weekend calls and scut for attendings. There's people who chose to stay because they feel the clinical training is better/more hands on.

Cornell's leukemia program is arguably better than the one across the street. They also have some strength in lymphoma/myeloma. My sense is that the solid tumor stuff is decent, but not quite as strong.

Overall, good program.. but a bunch of the work you do is because there is nobody else to do it rather than because its good for your education.

I understand that its actually pretty easy to collaborate with people at both MSKCC and Rockefeller University.

 

[KeepOnTruckin31]

Have been on the interview trail and was hoping for some input. Some programs like Penn and Hopkins seem to match a lot of their own residents to fellowship at Penn or Hopkins. Is this because they want to stay? I also know they are very cards/GI heavy, does the lower amount of people going into hem/onc have an effect on where people match, i.e. home institution rather than the MSKCC, DFCI and MDAndersons?

 

[threecoins]

The Cornell Heme Onc program is sort of of a different beast than MSKCC. They do have a research requirement and consider themselves an academic program, but there is a lot more "service" involved. I.E. rough weekend calls and scut for attendings. There's people who chose to stay because they feel the clinical training is better/more hands on.

Cornell's leukemia program is arguably better than the one across the street. They also have some strength in lymphoma/myeloma. My sense is that the solid tumor stuff is decent, but not quite as strong.

Overall, good program.. but a bunch of the work you do is because there is nobody else to do it rather than because its good for your education.

I understand that its actually pretty easy to collaborate with people at both MSKCC and Rockefeller University.

Thanks for the input. I heard their second year is devoted fully to research and they insist on Lab research which sounds pretty hardcore even for bigger name programs. How is their reputation compared to MSKCC, DFCI , Hopkins?

 

[gutonc]

Thanks for the input. I heard their second year is devoted fully to research and they insist on Lab research which sounds pretty hardcore even for bigger name programs. How is their reputation compared to MSKCC, DFCI , Hopkins?

The Cornell program is good. It's not stellar and it's not on the level of MSK, DFCI and Hopkins (or MDACC or ....). But it's still pretty good. You won't do yourself any damage coming out of that program, especially if you're interested in heme malignancies. The only reason Cornell doesn't stand out more is because of it's neighbor to the West.