OLD LYME, CT — MARCH 15, 2016 — That is the question posed by the board of the World Conference on Interventional Oncology (WCIO) and together in partnership with The France Foundation set out to create a solution for this need. Interventional oncology (IO) represents one of the more exciting and evolving fields in medicine and has been growing rapidly as more minimally invasive approaches emerge in cancer treatment.1-4 Clinicians working in IO must be able to understand and undertake IO approaches in the context of, and sometimes in combination with, standard cancer treatments. A recent study of chemoembolization practices primarily within the United States showed a lack of consensus on treatment endpoints and embolization technique.5-6 Why? Such comprehensive education and training has not existed in current Interventional Radiology training programs. Until now. We have set out to make a change and deliver a centralized, comprehensive, expert-informed certified educational resource to guide practitioners.
Michael Soulen, MD, Professor of Radiology and Director of Interventional Oncology at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania, emphasizes that this education is even more relevant in light of the upcoming dual certificate IR/diagnostic radiology (DR) residency programs. The American Board of Medical Specialties approved the American Board of Radiology’s request for a new Dual Primary Certificate in Interventional and Diagnostic Radiology in September 2014.7
In 2015, the first phase of the IO curriculum launched. The multi-modal, multi-year educational initiative has been designed to arm clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of the fundamentals of oncology as it applies to IO and enable clinicians to incorporate IO into existing treatment offerings and modalities within various oncology settings including academic institutions and community clinical settings.
The curriculum aims to cover everything from the basics of medical and surgical oncology to cancer specific models that include describing technical options now available including chemoembolization and radioembolization; percutaneous ablative therapies such as radiofrequency, cryoablation, and microwave ablation; and palliative procedures. The IO Curriculum is a highly valuable, scientific, evidence-based, and practical educational initiative that will help to improve the care being provided to patients with cancer. To learn more about these ground-breaking certified educational offerings, visit today at www.io-central.org.
1. Millennium Research Group. Advantages over traditional therapies will drive strong expansion in the U.S. interventional oncology device market. September 10, 2014. http://www.interventionaloncology360.com/content/advantages-over-traditional-therapies-will-drive-strong-expansion-us-interventional-oncology Accessed October 9, 2015.
2. Solomon SB, Silverman SG. Imaging in interventional oncology. Radiol. 2010;257:624-640.
3. Kwan SW, Kerlan RK Jr, Sunshine JH. Utilization of interventional oncology treatments in the United States. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21:1054-1060.
4. Angle JF. The Society of Interventional Radiology meeting for interventional oncology clinicians: an interview with John Fritz Angle, MD. http://www.interventionaloncology360.com/content/society-interventional-radiology-meeting-interventional-oncology-clinicians-interview-john. Accessed October 9, 2015.
5. Gaba RC. Chemoembolization practice patterns and technical methods among interventional radiologists: results of an online survey. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:692-699.
6. Stang A, Oldhafer KJ, Weilert H, Keles H, Donati M. Selection criteria for radiofrequency ablation for colorectal liver metastases in the era of effective systemic therapy: a clinical score based proposal. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:500.
7. Medical University of South Caroline. Dual certificate in interventional radiology and diagnostic radiology. http://academicdepartments.musc.edu/radiology/residency/clinical-rotations.html
