How hard is it to get into a Heme Onc fellowship for a DO?

[LuluLovesMe]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I am currently applying to both MD and DO schools now and would like the perspective of people who are in or have completed IM residency. I know that shooting for heme onc specifically before I have even started med school seems naïve, but being able to work with cancer patients is the whole reason I want to go into medicine.

Does having a DO make it harder? Or does it all depend on your residency program, scores and evaluations?

 

[gutonc]

I am currently applying to both MD and DO schools now and would like the perspective of people who are in or have completed IM residency. I know that shooting for heme onc specifically before I have even started med school seems naïve, but being able to work with cancer patients is the whole reason I want to go into medicine.

Does having a DO make it harder? Or does it all depend on your residency program, scores and evaluations?

Yes.

 

[tryptophan321]

Avoid DO if you can. It will be a big handicap.

 

[LuluLovesMe]

Avoid DO if you can. It will be a big handicap.

How big of a disadvantage? Like as hard as DO getting into derm residency?

 

[asahi88]

It's not impossible. I know a guy, a DO, with lots of research credentials and other stuff (he's a bit older), but he got into heme/onc fellowship at Duke this year, coming from an average state residency program.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

Looking at the data from the last match, you can see that only 56% of the positions were filled by USMDs. 150 (30%) of the total positions were filled by FMGs. I'm welling to bet that a good number of these 155 spots could have easily been filled by DOs. Perhaps it is competitive to match specific programs, but overall, seeing that nearly half of the positions being filled by non USMDs compels me to believe that obtaining a spot as a DO is very attainable.

http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Results-and-Data-SMS-2015.pdf

 

[rokshana]

Looking at the data from the last match, you can see that only 56% of the positions were filled by USMDs. 150 (30%) of the total positions were filled by FMGs. I'm welling to bet that a good number of these 155 spots could have easily been filled by DOs. Perhaps it is competitive to match specific programs, but overall, seeing that nearly half of the positions being filled by non USMDs compels me to believe that obtaining a spot as a DO is very attainable.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...-into-a-heme-onc-fellowship-for-a-do.1164702/

this is not necessarily true...there are going to be specialties and programs that prefer FMGs over DOs (and vice versa), but don't assume that a DO is = to MD in everyone's eyes...as the above posters (including those who are actually in the specialty) have stated that DO is a disadvantage...to the OP if the ultimate goal is to go into hem/onc, then try to get into an MD program, even if it means waiting a year or 2 to improve your application.

 

[235009]

Looking at the data from the last match, you can see that only 56% of the positions were filled by USMDs. 150 (30%) of the total positions were filled by FMGs. I'm welling to bet that a good number of these 155 spots could have easily been filled by DOs. Perhaps it is competitive to match specific programs, but overall, seeing that nearly half of the positions being filled by non USMDs compels me to believe that obtaining a spot as a DO is very attainable.

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...-into-a-heme-onc-fellowship-for-a-do.1164702/

This is far from the truth, especially in a specialty like heme/onc that really values research experience. You'll see that the FMGs that did and did not match had way more abstracts/publications that the DOs. Even the FMGs who didn't match had on average 3 times as many as the DOs that matched. I would suspect that many of them also have additional advanced degrees. Don't be so quick to jump to the conclusion that programs would be willing to replace academically successful FMGs with DOs who have zero research experiences (80% of those who applied) and way fewer publications.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

Neither did I imply that DOs are equal to MDs and nor did I say that DOs > FMGs. All I implied was that since a significant portion of the fellowship spots get filled by FMGs/IMGs, it's reasonable to us to assume that heme-onc isn't as competitive as people are claiming. Yes, there are FMGs that have much more impressive applications than most DOs, especially those who attended Euopean med schools (Oxford). However, we all know that they are the minority.

In regards to research, I know many DOs who get several publications in residency.

With that said, I echo the advise you are giving. If the OP has the option, he/she should go to an MD school.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

This is far from the truth, especially in a specialty like heme/onc that really values research experience. You'll see that the FMGs that did and did not match had way more abstracts/publications that the DOs. Even the FMGs who didn't match had on average 3 times as many as the DOs that matched. I would suspect that many of them also have additional advanced degrees. Don't be so quick to jump to the conclusion that programs would be willing to replace academically successful FMGs with DOs who have zero research experiences (80% of those who applied) and way fewer publications.

Could you provide me with a link backing up this claim?

 

[rokshana]

Could you provide me with a link backing up this claim?

http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/chartingoutcomessms2011.pdf

look starting p65 and particularly pg 77.. DOs are not that well represented in ACGME hem/onc programs...its one thing if you are already in a DO program, but if you still have a choice...its a no brainer.

 

[rokshana]

Neither did I imply that DOs are equal to MDs and nor did I say that DOs > FMGs. All I implied was that since a significant portion of the fellowship spots get filled by FMGs/IMGs, it's reasonable to us to assume that heme-onc isn't as competitive as people are claiming. Yes, there are FMGs that have much more impressive applications than most DOs, especially those who attended Euopean med schools (Oxford). However, we all know that they are the minority.

In regards to research, I know many DOs who get several publications in residency.

With that said, I echo the advise you are giving. If the OP has the option, he/she should go to an MD school.

actually you did...your premise is that if there are a lot of FMGs then the specialty cannot be that competitive...and that if an FMG can get the spot, its not a problem for a DO.therefore you are looking at DO to be >FMG...in some fields, that is just simply not the way it is...maybe its because you are still in med school or have not applied for fellowship, but hem/onc is quite competitive and they are very research heavy...FMGs that have strong, proven research backgrounds are going to be considered over a freshly minted DO (or at times a USMD) with no research behind them.

 

[235009]

Could you provide me with a link backing up this claim?

The fact you didn't automatically assume I got that from charting outcomes and were that suspicious is concerning and demonstrates that this discussion is over your head.

Also @gutonc why hasn't this thread been moved to the premed forum yet?

 

[ArkansasMed]

Neither did I imply that DOs are equal to MDs and nor did I say that DOs > FMGs. All I implied was that since a significant portion of the fellowship spots get filled by FMGs/IMGs, it's reasonable to us to assume that heme-onc isn't as competitive as people are claiming. Yes, there are FMGs that have much more impressive applications than most DOs, especially those who attended Euopean med schools (Oxford). However, we all know that they are the minority.

In regards to research, I know many DOs who get several publications in residency.

With that said, I echo the advise you are giving. If the OP has the option, he/she should go to an MD school.

DOs probably are not as represented since their whole training is more hands on. Onc is hot on personalized chemotherapy and basic science research. A lot of researchers go into it and a fair share of US MD kids don't match every year because it's fairly competitive (competition unfortunately correlates with end salary/hours worked for fellowship). Hence why GI cards and allergy are the hardest to get into while geriatrics never fills.

There are also probably DO only fellowships in Onc. Id look into this.

 

[235009]

There are also probably DO only fellowships in Onc. Id look into this.

Sounds like OP is a premed so with the ACGME takeover looming I doubt that will be an option by the time OP is applying for fellowship.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/chartingoutcomessms2011.pdf

look starting p65 and particularly pg 77.. DOs are not that well represented in ACGME hem/onc programs...its one thing if you are already in a DO program, but if you still have a choice...its a no brainer.

Thank you for the link.

You can't infer that DOs are at disadvantage compared to FMGs. Looking at the numbers, we see that 63% of DOs who applied to Heme/Onc matched. On the other hand, 49% of FMGs matched, and only 42% of IMG's matched. USMDs are doing much better than other applicants (83% matched), and I don't deny that. However, I still think that DOs, at least, have the same shot at matching Heme/Onc as their FMGs counterpart.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

The fact you didn't automatically assume I got that from charting outcomes and were that suspicious is concerning and demonstrates that this discussion is over your head.

Also @gutonc why hasn't this thread been moved to the premed forum yet?

No reason to get so defensive. I simply asked for a source of your claim so we can all have a beneficial discussion here.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

This is far from the truth, especially in a specialty like heme/onc that really values research experience. You'll see that the FMGs that did and did not match had way more abstracts/publications that the DOs. Even the FMGs who didn't match had on average 3 times as many as the DOs that matched. I would suspect that many of them also have additional advanced degrees. Don't be so quick to jump to the conclusion that programs would be willing to replace academically successful FMGs with DOs who have zero research experiences (80% of those who applied) and way fewer publications.

You are right, FMGs have a lot more publications than DOs. That also holds true when comparing them to USMDs (matched FMGs have 8 publications while matched USMDs have 2 publications). However, we all know, and data support it, that USMDs have a much better chance at matching fellowships.

 

[rokshana]

Thank you for the link.

You can't infer that DOs are at disadvantage compared to FMGs. Looking at the numbers, we see that 63% of DOs who applied to Heme/Onc matched. On the other hand, 49% of FMGs matched, and only 42% of IMG's matched. USMDs are doing much better than other applicants (83% matched), and I don't deny that. However, I still think that DOs, at least, have the same shot at matching Heme/Onc as their FMGs counterpart.

and that's your right to have that (idealistic) opinion, but since an ACTUAL hem/onc attending has said in the post after the initial OP that yes it is harder, i would have to give his opinion more weight...

 

[dozitgetchahi]

I think it's overplayed.

My home program's heme/onc department has multiple DO fellows.

The difference is that there aren't many DOs to be found in ACGME IM programs to begin with.

 

[gutonc]

and that's your right to have that (idealistic) opinion, but since an ACTUAL hem/onc attending has said in the post after the initial OP that yes it is harder, i would have to give his opinion more weight...

I assume that you're talking about me here. I'm not talking DO vs IMG, I was speaking about DO vs AMG. In that case, the AMG wins almost every time.

But the OP asked several questions, hence my blanket "yes" answer. AMGs will have an easier time matching virtually every specialty/sub-specialty than a DO w/ similar stats. But you can definitely make your fellowship options better as a DO (or IMG) be getting into the best IM program possible and crushing it. It won't completely level the playing field, but it makes a world of difference.

 

[meliora27]

N =1, but I had a DO Heme/Onc attending who did his fellowship at MD Anderson, I don't know much about the heme/onc world but I think that's a good program?? (sarcasm)

 

[Dr.Tao]

N =1, but I had a DO Heme/Onc attending who did his fellowship at MD Anderson, I don't know much about the heme/onc world but I think that's a good program?? (sarcasm)

Don't be so sure.

I did research there and while there were obvious superstars present, most days the "research" was no different that what goes on in Pharma (where I've also worked).

 

[hallowmann]

Obviously if there's a choice, and you are interested in subspecialties, then go MD. That said, if you're talking about if its possible as a non US-MD, then yes, and being a DO would offer the next best chances.

gutonc's most recent reply is sufficient to answer the OP's question.