Rad Onc Twitter

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted1002574
  • Start date Start date
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I think checking in if I was unhappy was a nice (but, perhaps a tad condescending) touch.
Beautiful wife and kids, live in a wondrous part of the country, truly enjoying my dream job and excellent health.
I've got everything I need and nothing that I don't 🙂
Mike spends more per year in advertising than many rad oncs make per year. He played “Don’t Cry For Me Argen-tweeta” on his $250K home sound system last night... he is proud of it because that’s about what he makes per month.
 
Mike spends more per year in advertising than many rad oncs make per year. He played “Don’t Cry For Me Argen-tweeta” on his $250K home sound system last night... he is proud of it because that’s about what he makes per month.
Sounds about right.... Could be understating it considering he owns the whole center?



Screenshot_20210724-063139_Chrome.jpg
 
I think checking in if I was unhappy was a nice (but, perhaps a tad condescending) touch.
Beautiful wife and kids, live in a wondrous part of the country, truly enjoying my dream job and excellent health.
I've got everything I need and nothing that I don't 🙂
Bullies are everywhere and the ones who have a sense of entitlement and power when challenged, can become monsters. These guys live off their pride and egos and are miserable in their own lives because they are wrong in truly understanding what is valuable and meaningful in life. This is why they lash out.. It’s truly sad to see.
 
Sounds about right.... Could be understating it considering he owns the whole center?



View attachment 340946
Mike's in the top 20 highest paid rad oncs in the United States. He owns his own thing. This is what I wish we ALL could do.

I have had physicists do work in Mike's center. He is a good rad onc. You can find his books on Amazon.com.

He has the DART and is the **only** center in the world to have the DART.

Simul. I AM JEALOUS a little ok you made me admit it 😉 (No really. I am actually a little jealous of Mike.)
 
Some of you too young to know there was a mini-"arms race" of prostate cancer centers in the early 2000s (with the advent of IMRT!) that took place in the US. There was Urorads, Dattoli, and Frank Critz and the Prostrcision method (it's just beam and seeds... for everybody, no matter what). West Coast players were Seattle (seeds for 100% of low risk patients... they were doing like 5 or more seed implants a day at one point). There was a guy in Cali doing HDR on everyone (Jeff Demanes I think?).
 
Some of you too young to know there was a mini-"arms race" of prostate cancer centers in the early 2000s (with the advent of IMRT!) that took place in the US. There was Urorads, Dattoli, and Frank Critz and the Prostrcision method (it's just beam and seeds... for everybody, no matter what). West Coast players were Seattle (seeds for 100% of low risk patients... they were doing like 5 or more seed implants a day at one point). There was a guy in Cali doing HDR on everyone (Jeff Demanes I think?).
Soon after, the cyberknife wars started... At one point it seemed like FL had like 20+ of them...3 in Tampa alone. Used to see billboards in many major cities touting it etc
 
I think the rest of Drew Moghanaki's Twitter makes him look like a tool. He's either fellating someone, trying to ride other people's coattails, or doing stuff like this, dogging on other docs.

Why does anyone like Drew?

Ive been fortunate to never interact with him but by all accounts he is a tool with a well known hidden problem
 
Soon after, the cyberknife wars started... At one point it seemed like FL had like 20+ of them...3 in Tampa alone. Used to see billboards in many major cities touting it etc
Twenty plus years ago when you retired from rad onc you knew you were going out with $10 million in the bank. Jim was one who did. They (the CyberKnifers) were doing prostate SBRT when "everyone" said it was dumb or unsafe. Like they say...
 
Twenty plus years ago when you retired from rad onc you knew you were going out with $10 million in the bank. Jim was one who did. They (the CyberKnifers) were doing prostate SBRT when "everyone" said it was dumb or unsafe. Like they say...
Actually a lot of them were money losers... Prostate ck was considered experimental and often didn't get paid esp if you weren't a hospital...

It was basically like protons now though, a way to get patients in the door who would often end up getting photons/IMRT when they weren't good CK/proton candidates
 
Last edited:
Twenty plus years ago when you retired from rad onc you knew you were going out with $10 million in the bank. Jim was one who did. They (the CyberKnifers) were doing prostate SBRT when "everyone" said it was dumb or unsafe. Like they say...
Some of these guys are truly bad actors/ and consummate hucksters, but that only makes them indistinguishable from many of the larger/proton centers. At the end of day, probably safer to go with Jim’s cyber knife or datolis 10 gy/5 fractions to “prime” the cells followed by an implant for low/intermediate risk prostate than protons with space oar.
 
Last edited:
Some of these guys are truly bad actors/ and consummate hucksters, but that only makes them indistinguishable from many of the larger/proton centers. At the end of day, probably safer to go with Jim’s cyber knife or datolis 10 gy/5 fractions to “prime” the cells followed by an implant for low/intermediate risk prostate than protons with space oar.
That 10 Gy in 5 fx stuff was pretty uh ......
 
Some of you too young to know there was a mini-"arms race" of prostate cancer centers in the early 2000s (with the advent of IMRT!) that took place in the US. There was Urorads, Dattoli, and Frank Critz and the Prostrcision method (it's just beam and seeds... for everybody, no matter what). West Coast players were Seattle (seeds for 100% of low risk patients... they were doing like 5 or more seed implants a day at one point). There was a guy in Cali doing HDR on everyone (Jeff Demanes I think?).
Big prostate brachy practice in Chicago back in the day as well, used to offer a fellowship?
 
Some of you too young to know there was a mini-"arms race" of prostate cancer centers in the early 2000s (with the advent of IMRT!) that took place in the US. There was Urorads, Dattoli, and Frank Critz and the Prostrcision method (it's just beam and seeds... for everybody, no matter what). West Coast players were Seattle (seeds for 100% of low risk patients... they were doing like 5 or more seed implants a day at one point). There was a guy in Cali doing HDR on everyone (Jeff Demanes I think?).
 
True story, had this phobia for a portion of my younger life that I had a brain tumor and recall seeing Cyberknife and maybe even some Gamma Knife ads long before I knew what rad onc was. They both fueled my fears and simultaneously gave me solace knowing that the presumed tumor could be noninvasively burned out of my head when the time came.
 
True story, had this phobia for a portion of my younger life that I had a brain tumor and recall seeing Cyberknife and maybe even some Gamma Knife ads long before I knew what rad onc was. They both fueled my fears and simultaneously gave me solace knowing that the presumed tumor could be noninvasively burned out of my head when the time came.
"noninvasively burned out of my head." Lol. my new description of radiosurgery.
 
LOL does anyone believe a single thing coming from "The International Journal of Particle Therapy"

Their entire existence is dependent on showing protons are the best
Practice changing studies don't end up in the Red Urinal, that's for sure
 
Last edited:
Generally, protons are best used to minimize low/intermediate dose to parallel structures in circumstances where this can offer a clinically significant improvement in toxicity.
That is debateable. One can also say that they are best used to achieve very high doses in areas where photon plans can only deliver 10-15% lower dose without an excessive risk of toxicity in serial organs. I am thinking here about the classic indication for proton treatment in skull base tumors (chordomas and sarcomas), where you can give 70-74Gy with protons but cannot do the same with photons due to toxicity to serial organs like the brainstem and the optic pathway.
The benefits of protons when it comes to parallel organs are far more difficult to quantify. There is certainly less risk for pneumonitis for instance coming from the low dose bath of the lungs with IMRT, but even that will be difficult to show in a trial. Let alone the benefits of lower integral dose and secondary malignancies in kids.
 
That is debateable. One can also say that they are best used to achieve very high doses in areas where photon plans can only deliver 10-15% lower dose without an excessive risk of toxicity in serial organs. I am thinking here about the classic indication for proton treatment in skull base tumors (chordomas and sarcomas), where you can give 70-74Gy with protons but cannot do the same with photons due to toxicity to serial organs like the brainstem and the optic pathway.
The benefits of protons when it comes to parallel organs are far more difficult to quantify. There is certainly less risk for pneumonitis for instance coming from the low dose bath of the lungs with IMRT, but even that will be difficult to show in a trial. Let alone the benefits of lower integral dose and secondary malignancies in kids.
Agree there is benefit in sparing serial structures in situations like chordoma… but this is where failing to account for the range uncertainties and biology can be most dangerous. We see this with brainstem necrosis in ependymoma. Additionally, conformality is better with photons in a lot of cases , depending on spot size and the need for robust optimization. Hubris and weak physics support are most dangerous trying to get cute with high gradients with protons… and these indications tend to be very specific and rare diseases. The low/intermediate dose sparing matters the same times it matters with photons (v20, heart dose, brain dose with large meningioma, retroperitoneal sarcoma abdominal dose, liver dose with B8 HCC etc…). These applications are more generalizable. While there are certainly cases where they are helpful with high dose near a serial organ, I don’t think this will be the most common application of this technology
 
Agree there is benefit in sparing serial structures in situations like chordoma… but this is where failing to account for the range uncertainties and biology can be most dangerous. We see this with brainstem necrosis in ependymoma. Additionally, conformality is better with photons in a lot of cases , depending on spot size and the need for robust optimization. Hubris and weak physics support are most dangerous trying to get cute with high gradients with protons… and these indications tend to be very specific and rare diseases. The low/intermediate dose sparing matters the same times it matters with photons (v20, heart dose, brain dose with large meningioma, retroperitoneal sarcoma abdominal dose, liver dose with B8 HCC etc…). These applications are more generalizable. While there are certainly cases where they are helpful with high dose near a serial organ, I don’t think this will be the most common application of this technology
What makes the optimization “robust” in terms of biological parameters- tissue culture models?
 
What makes the optimization “robust” in terms of biological parameters- tissue culture models?
I wouldn’t expect biological differences to have a profound affect on RBE with protons, because it never gets that high to begin with ~1.7 in the LOW dose fall off, maybe 1.4 in the distal SOBP (where dose still exists). This is more an issue with heavy ions, alpha particles, or neutrons. If you want to robustly optimize RBE for, you can probably do so by assuming a distribution of LETs which will more profoundly impact RBE than an tissue specific factors. I’d argue considering LET at all is probably the most important first step with regard to biology.
 
Agree there is benefit in sparing serial structures in situations like chordoma… but this is where failing to account for the range uncertainties and biology can be most dangerous. We see this with brainstem necrosis in ependymoma. Additionally, conformality is better with photons in a lot of cases , depending on spot size and the need for robust optimization. Hubris and weak physics support are most dangerous trying to get cute with high gradients with protons… and these indications tend to be very specific and rare diseases. The low/intermediate dose sparing matters the same times it matters with photons (v20, heart dose, brain dose with large meningioma, retroperitoneal sarcoma abdominal dose, liver dose with B8 HCC etc…). These applications are more generalizable. While there are certainly cases where they are helpful with high dose near a serial organ, I don’t think this will be the most common application of this technology
I have some proton experience myself and have seen these issues too around the Bragg peak (and immediately beyond it).
However, I still think the jury is out on what the clinical benefit for protons is when it comes to lowering the V20 for lungs or mean heart dose for instance.
Do we have good data pointing to better clinical endpoints when using protons for common indications were lung V20 and mean heart dose are an issue? I do not believe that a technique should be considered s.o.c. simply because the DVH looks better, you need clinical endpoints to be enhanced in order to make that claim. Even in mengioma or retroperitoneal sarcoma, I yet have to see data for better QoL, neurocognitive function, bowel issues with protons instead of photons. And B8 HCC is not quite a "generalizable" indication, not to mention that HCC is probably the most contested field when it comes to local therapies (RFA, MWA, TACE, IRE, SIRT ... and SBRT), what one does there is often not backed up by great evidence but rather who sits at the tumor board or refers the patient.
 
I wouldn’t expect biological differences to have a profound affect on RBE with protons, because it never gets that high to begin with ~1.7 in the LOW dose fall off, maybe 1.4 in the distal SOBP (where dose still exists). This is more an issue with heavy ions, alpha particles, or neutrons. If you want to robustly optimize RBE for, you can probably do so by assuming a distribution of LETs which will more profoundly impact RBE than an tissue specific factors. I’d argue considering LET at all is probably the most important first step with regard to biology.
Isn’t a 1.4 to 1.7 rbe same as 25 - 55 % hot spot?
 
we like to b*tch about prior authorization then you see this data and know (partially) why it exists.
Still not a peep from ASTRO about all of this while they were fraction shaming everyone else for years into "choosing wisely"
 
Gaslighting in full force over at RO Twitter again


I am glad there are people like lemmiwinks and MROGA fighting the good fight out there on Twitter. People needs to hear the truth, regardless if they agree with it or not. A meaningful job where one would be treated fairly is much more important than a 280-character pat on the back from the #radoncrocks crew. I hope these people will step up in 5 years when she is stuck in a dead end looking for a job, but I am not holding my breath.
 
I am glad there are people like lemmiwinks and MROGA fighting the good fight out there on Twitter. People needs to hear the truth, regardless if they agree with it or not. A meaningful job where one would be treated fairly is much more important than a 280-character pat on the back from the #radoncrocks crew. I hope these people will step up in 5 years when she is stuck in a dead end looking for a job, but I am not holding my breath.

they won’t help then

but it will allow for an epic takedown/humiliation of every radoncrocks that exists

Take names everybody
 
Isn’t a 1.4 to 1.7 rbe same as 25 - 55 % hot spot?
1.7 probably isn’t as clinically relevant… because it is in a region where does has already significantly died off. I don’t think 1.4 is as frequent with IMPT as opposed to passive scatter (no true SOBP with IMPR). Nonetheless, still the potential for very significant hot spot.
 
they won’t help then

but it will allow for an epic takedown/humiliation of every radoncrocks that exists

Take names everybody
I'll tell you, our group is not helping out. We have 20+ and have no intentions of hiring anyone over the next few years in absence of any catastrophic events (e.g. deaths or retirements). We have been asked to pick up more patients, instead of hiring new talent. This woman's, and everyone else's, outcomes will be on all of their heads.
 
Top