What does it take to get into Harvard, MSKCC, MDACC?

[ivybme]

I am an M1 in a Top-40 NIH funded school, but it is not a top school. I know a high step 1 score (250+), strong research (ASTRO abstracts and ideally a few publications), and good rec letters are necessary to match in rad onc. But what separates the top rad onc applicants (who have their choice of interviews) from other strong rad onc applicants? Is an away rotation that serves as an "audition" the difference?

As a full disclaimer, I would be totally happy to even match in rad onc at any program. I understand that even getting into rad onc by itself is hard enough, and maybe I shouldn't even think about these things early on. I just want to better understand exactly how competitive things are at the top of the top.

Just from a perusal of the Harvard rad onc program residents, it seems like nearly all the students are from Harvard, other top 10 schools, or is an MD/PhD student. Is it a huge uphill battle if I don't go to a top 10 medical school? Do I even have a chance at the "top tier" in rad onc, or am I pretty much out of luck?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nkmiami]

I really wouldnt fixate on those places-. When you look at most major developments/advances in radiation over the course of the past 40 years, guess where they did not come from- the places you just listed.
Moreover, if you think it will help you get a job in private practice over a program like Thomas Jefferson, Maryland, Florida, it really wont, and if you go for academic practice, it will depend on your research.
I can tell you what residents and faculty I have known at Harvard seem to have in common- they are extremely eloquent.


seed brachytherapy- denmark, seattle
brain stereo- linac/gamma knife- sweden and then Pitt in usa
SBRT- japan/europe/Indiana (MDACC chairman dismissed it)
CBCT- william beauomont
IMRT- MSKCC used garbage in house software when I was in NYC, treated prostate pts prone without image guidance well into 2000's when CBCT/fiducials were being used in most places; etc MGH did not use field within field for breast until after 2007 etc. Tomo/pinnacle wisconsin VMAT- maryland
hypofractrionation- rest of world.

immunotherapy/abscopal before radoncs knew what it was
(before immunotherapy was fda approved,): Fractionated but not single-dose radiotherapy induces an immune-mediated abscopal effect when combined with anti-CTLA-4 antibody. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[Haybrant]

I am an M1 in a Top-40 NIH funded school, but it is not a top school. I know a high step 1 score (250+), strong research (ASTRO abstracts and ideally a few publications), and good rec letters are necessary to match in rad onc. But what separates the top rad onc applicants (who have their choice of interviews) from other strong rad onc applicants? Is an away rotation that serves as an "audition" the difference?

As a full disclaimer, I would be totally happy to even match in rad onc at any program. I understand that even getting into rad onc by itself is hard enough, and maybe I shouldn't even think about these things early on. I just want to better understand exactly how competitive things are at the top of the top.

Just from a perusal of the Harvard rad onc program residents, it seems like nearly all the students are from Harvard, other top 10 schools, or is an MD/PhD student. Is it a huge uphill battle if I don't go to a top 10 medical school? Do I even have a chance at the "top tier" in rad onc, or am I pretty much out of luck?

I know its hard for you to see this from your vantage point, like really really hard, but don't even worry about stuff like this. Just go live your life, learn medicine, learn clinical medicine really well and see what happens. I believe those of us more senior around here would agree with this for the most part

 

[bluebubbles]

Anecdotally, I thought some of the top programs had residents with above-average looks. So, I recommend going to the gym, getting a personal stylist, revamping your wardrobe, etc.

 

[noobsauce]

To actually answer your question, you already know the answers it seems like. I would add that connections are KEY in this small field. Getting a letter who the program knows would be super important. Also, being an ethnic female will help

 

[StrongSide]

Who the hell uses the adjective “ethnic” in 2017?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[deleted18755]

Who the hell uses the adjective “ethnic” in 2017?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I still have plenty of honestly very nice patients who are 100% accepting of all people who refer to Asian people as "oriental" or just call any Asian person "Chinese"!

Back to the post though I assume being female helps as does being an URM (but definitely not Indian or Asian)

 

[medgator]

I still have plenty of honestly very nice patients who are 100% accepting of all people who refer to Asian people as "oriental" or just call any Asian person "Chinese"!

They probably call women sweetie and honey too lol, doesn't mean it's kosher in 2017

 

[deleted18755]

.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

IMRT- MSKCC used garbage in house software when I was in NYC, treated prostate pts prone without image guidance well into 2000's when CBCT/fiducials were being used in most places; etc MGH did not use field within field for breast until after 2007 etc. Tomo/pinnacle wisconsin VMAT- maryland

If anybody is curious and wants to read about the origins of IMRT. Komaki's IMRT book has a chapter by Michael Mills and Shiao Woo detailing the people/institutions involved, chapter 1 titled "History of IMRT".