Interview impressions

[eidolon]

UCSF: This was a program I was dying to fall in love with! But . . . I left feeling this program was still very much in transition. Dr. Roach, the interim chair, will likely become the new chair although this has not been made official at the time of my visit. UCSF boasts perennial high boards scores and it is easy to see why. The residents were some of the coolest and smartest I have ever met. The radiobio and radiophysics classes appeared to be well received as well. In the past, the department has had some criticisms regarding didactics and morning conferences. Morning conferences appeared to be improving and becoming more structured. However, faculty attendance at these conferences was still low, with only site-specific attending for the topic being discussed present. The residents appeared to do a lot of “self-teaching” and learning from each others so one probably has to be quite independent to thrive here. They also appeared to have a decent amount of free time to explore all that San Francisco and its surrounding locales have to offer. Clinics are divided between Mount Zion and the Parnassus campus. There is a shuttle that runs in between the two. Someone mentioned at the interview that Kaiser is starting its own radiation oncology program which could encroach on the patient base at UCSF. Not sure how exactly. UCSF has recently increased its protected research time from 6 to 10 months so it’s now on par with the other Bay Area program—Stanford. Many of the applicants I met during the interview have done an away rotation here (not sure what to make of this—just an observation). UCSF has incredible research opportunities. A quarter of the faculty within the rad onc department have significant protected research time which is impressive. However, no one in the program is currently pursuing the Holman Pathway or a serious commitment to bench research. Perhaps that will change with the new incoming class?

Stanford: Another very high quality program . . . the PD at Stanford, Dr. Donaldson, is rather experienced and very hands-on in terms of residents training. Some senior residents have remarked that the teaching has improved tremendously in recent years after the implementation of a set of conferences and core lecture topics. Residents don’t have to present cases at conferences here. They simply go and learn. Residents here cover all patients seen in the department and attend multidisciplinary tumor boards. Despite that, they appear happy and have adequate amount of free time outside work. Stanford’s strength complements that of UCSF in terms of disease sites. Stanford is a leader in lymphoma while UCSF is well-known in CNS and GI. What I believe that truly sets the program apart from many others is its strength in biological research. They have a world-class radiobiology department. Many members have R01’s. Hypoxia is an overriding theme here. The department seems to favor MD/PhD’s since the majority of the residents have dual degrees. Many are also older and have families. The department supports 10 months of protected research which can be conducted in any of the fine laboratories around campus, with PD approval. Even though Stanford supports the Holman Pathway, currently there is only 1 Holman resident. There is an alternative where the department will fund for an 1 year of protected research (on top of the 10 months) if one were willing extend his training (similar to the Wisconsin).

MSKCC: The faculty and residents here are extremely forthcoming. They made no secret in that the clinical responsibilities are heavy—“we learn by doing”—and that the department is unlikely to support the Holman pathway anytime soon. This is somewhat unfortunate since the track record of previous Holman residents from here have been overwhelmingly successful. Plus there is so much world-class opportunities around MSKCC with Cornell and Rockefeller nearby. The department is currently searching for a new chair. Perhaps with the new chair, the program may re-examine its position on resident research. Currently, residents are encouraged to conduct several clinical outcome projects throughout residency. They appear very happy overall, despite the heavy clinical load. I have no doubt one will receive excellent training here. MSKCC also offers heavily subsidized apartments (some with gorgeous views) in the heart of Manhattan. Faculty bios read like a “Who’s Who in Rad Onc.” Faculty presents frequently at ASTRO. Many of the applicants I met appeared to have done an away rotation here or otherwise have ties to New York somehow.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[stephew]

thanks for those impressions guys. keep 'em coming.

 

[G'ville Nole]

Wisconsin: Socially the theme revolved a lot around sports and beer.

I just had half of the residents reading this, and all were pumping their fists in the air and celebrating. Well, it's St Paddy's Day, what did you expect?

 

[stephew]

this belies the lovely nature of the UWisc folks. Honestly they are lovely intelligent people.

 

[radonc4evermore]

List of programs: i listed places i interviewed. i made noteworthy observations. for more info, call 800-87-AMCAS. yes, i did match at one of these. yes, i am fine with the outcome.

1. md anderson:
at the top of many rank lists. the chair is obviously an important figure in rad onc. great clinical attendings, great research opportunities. houston is very hot, can be quite ghetto (rampant drinking and driving, insane gun laws (allowed to carry firearms), fair amount of violent crime). dr. eifel, um, um. the chair seems to like the women. favor candidates who have rotated through department. best program in country?

2. msk:
top of many rank lists. favor candidates who have rotated through department. beautiful facility. many vip patients, like anderson. great attendings. fairly high demands on residents. zvi fuks indicted on insider trading charges @ imclone or something. do not bring this up at the interview--attendings will definitely be rankled by any suggestion msk is not the vatican city of rad onc. best program in country?

3. joint center:
fairly formal, attendings fairly arrogant, products of harvard system. when interviewing, treat the attendings like they are royalty--if you don't, they are not used to this, and will be very unhappy. remember, many rad oncs hail from the prehistoric era, when rad oncs were short, ugly, and socially awkward. remember this, and don't bring out these aspects of their personalities. remember, they are not geeky losers, they are all amazing scientists, clinicians, and people. oh, did i mention harvard is awesome and super and amazing and fu

4. michigan:
great program. very interested in md/phds, usually give one spot to a michigan candidate. have some ivy envy, so you harvard md/phds, listen up: you'll get in here. lawrence and ben-josef are really nice. brush up on your research. say you want to study mechanisms of activity of chemotherapuetic agents that are radiosensitizers. don't say you want to do clinical research--you'll be booted out on your ass. watch out for a couple of the attendings, one with an mph--he's a bit of a jerk.

5. university of florida:
experienced at gator wrestling? good, because you may find this your only source of amusement besides the decidedly college-age crowds at the local eateries. watch waterboy before your interview. the mendenhalls are the high priests of this institution, and amdur's bowtie is the gateway to success here. great program, actually. proton center in jackonsville a plus if you don't mind living in jacksonville for 15% of your residency. watch out for the speedtrap from jacksonville to gainesville.

6. uwashington:
very strange place. you might think you'll be doing stuff at fred hutchison, but you really won't. the brachy experience with wallner is good, i guess. tell the pd you love peds onc, that's what he used to do. don't mind the grumpy girl attending--she thinks it's cool to act like a nihilist. wrong.

7. kaiser la:
oh geez. steer clear. well, no. it's a really really laid back program. the residents can get by doing next to nothing. there are like 20 or 40 attendings or something ridiculous, and they operate independently. god knows why kaiser has this residency program. love la? great--you'll get to enjoy it as a resident here. watch out for the chair and pd--they have some emotional problems, i'm guessing. if you're a good candidate, i guarantee they will be rude to you. all the other attendings are actually really nice. panel interview=tears.

8. uwisconsin:
uh, wait folks. how great can it be if it's in madison? well, if you're into fishing and hunting, cold, being 1.5 hours from chicago, this is the place for you. uwisc is a pretty great academic institution, and the attendings take the program very seriously. lots of cutting-edge technology

9. beaumont:
seen 8 mile? well, it's not quite like that in detroit, unless you're actually in detroit, in which case turn around and go the other way. martinez presides as a demigod over a fairly good attending staff. you may find heavy favoritism of folks who have spent years researching here.

10. uchicago:
hellman, weichselbaum, blah blah blah. what really matters? decide. if you want academics, go to an academic place. if you don't, then say you want to do academics, but rank non-academic programs highest. chicago is an academic place, full years of bench research required. good town, cold, good bang for your buck. work pretty hard.

11. ucsf:
at the top of many people's lists. if you are nice and sweet and goody-two-shoes, you have a good chance. or if you can fool them into thinking you are, you have a good chance. not much exciting stuff from this rad onc department considering how famous it is. volume has been falling in recent years. great attendings. sneed tough to read. that rhymes, slightly.

12. stanford:
top of many rank lists. best weather in america? maybe. be prepared for pd asking weird questions, making proclamations, perhaps being passive-aggressive. knowledgeable attendings who take work seriously, benefits from relationship with varian. residents seem not to like hoppe too much, and complain about some of the older attendings (report from unconfirmed sources).

13. upenn:
in my opinion, best fit for me. chair is really nice, pd tough to read but seems like a smart lady. not much excitement in physics here. glatstein is neo-luddite, but i agree--biology will make next big breakthroughs. tell them this, they will like it. building new center, getting protons. you may ask, who cares about protons? i don't know, i guess the people getting paid to build them and the folks who will be charging a ton of money to patients who get treated with them.

14. fox-chase:
claims to be best in philly area. rotate here if you want an interview. favor folks from new england. rad onc is pretty regional, so if you go to school in new england, you'll get most of your interviews here. south, interview in south. unless you get screwed. interview day not too bad as things go. attendings nice, i guess.

places favoring md/phds heavily:
penn, michigan, msk (tell them you want to do clinical research, for some weird reason they are anti basic-science research for residents because they claim you need years to complete a project), anderson, chicago

grand scheme of things/clinical pearls/take-home points, etc.:

0. please respond to this and say unconstructive things. this is obviously totally biased, but it is what it is.
1. didn't get over a 240? don't worry, med onc still pays really well, and medicine residency is pretty fun. no, but there are a lot of people who are not good test-takers who get in anyway. personality can trump performance, so be friendly!
2. a woman? awesome--we have a much better chance of matching than the guys. very few of us interviewing, lots of us matching. great field for women--we can work part-time, full-time three days a week, etc. conducive to having kids.
3. didn't go to top name school? apply everywhere. there are a lot of programs that are not top-tier with chips on their shoulders, and they think taking folks from the harvards and hopkins will make their program better, a fallacious assumption, i think.
4. make sure you rotate, at least two aways, to be safe.
5. just apply to all the schools, folks. you'll eventually make the money back, unless you do academics, in which case you'll be making $180K and having some problems buying real estate in boston, ny, and sf once you're an attending.
6. wherever you interview, invent an uncle that lives there. "oh yeah, i have an uncle in louisville, i see him every christmas." it's the small things that count?
7. think you have enough publications? think again. one phd=6 first author publications for non phd candidates. md folks: to outcompete a phd, 6 first author pubs. just a guideline.
8. really bad programs (from talking to residents, med students): 1. wayne state, 2. suny downstate, 3. suny upstate, 4. kaiser LA (lots of folks had horrible experiences interviewing here), 5. thomas jefferson (most malignant, from the sound of things)
9. beware programs: 1. kaiser la, 2. ohsu (new program), 3. all the great plains state and appalachia programs, 4. u chicago (department is imploding), 5. cleveland clinic (fairly malignant too)
10. ignore programs that claim they're increasing number of spots--everyone says this. unless they have increased the number, ignore them. also don't be fooled by a bad program that's going to be turned around. it takes years to turn around a program.
11. sycophant=successful
12. think you won't match? you may be right (67% are right). apply in something else.
13. if someone asks you what you'll do if you don't match, tell them you'll go to law school. it's important to be well-rounded, right?
14. get letters from well-known rad oncs. remember, just because neither you nor any of your attendings have ever heard of someone, doesn't mean that person's not a "famous" radiation oncologist. in subspecialty fields, the word "famous" is used very very loosely.
15. an overrepresented minority? you have your work cut out for you. better to be of european descent, at least for matching purposes.
16. hand write thank you letters to every single person. you don't want to be wondering if you should have when you end up not matching. don't be afraid to tell programs in different tiers that they are all your first choice. programs near each other or with some connection to each other talk. but ukentucky and msk are not going to be talking, for example. telling a program it is your first choice confers an advantage, so do it as many times as is safe.

about me:
step 1: >250
step 2: <220>
married
ivy league college + med school

 

[CNphair]

I have to be honest. I was having a bad day (start Surgical ICU tomorrow), and radonc4evermore's post brought a smile to my face. Honesty is such a rare thing.

Can't agree with it all, but most of the points are fair.

 

[deleted4401]

Outstanding! Gimme a few days, I'd like to do my own little version for the non Top 10 crowd ...

-S

 

[libaobao8]

Here is my two cents:

1) MD Anderson - lots of great things have been said about the program, the chair and the PD. The only thing i wanted to add is that this is the most applicant-friendly program I've visited. They put you up in a nice hotel and pay for 3 nights if you want to stay and explore the city. There is a gift bag waiting for you in the hotel when you check in. At the dinner, the chair, PD and other senior faculty members rotate around the table to make sure they talk to every applicant. To me this is reflection of their reputation as the most resident friendly program

2) Harvard - I have only the greatest things to say about my interview experience. I didn't encounter any so called "Harvard attitude". All the attendings referred to themselves by their first names. Most interviews were low-key (although 20 interviews in two days is a bit too much). The residents truly looked happy and they were all very nice. Even though 5/7 spots for 2007 were filled by the Harvard graduates, I was told during my interview that 2-3 spots were intended for the 10 Harvard applicants and the remaining 4-5 were for the 16 non-Harvard students. I believe they strive to bring the best applicants into their program, regardless of where they are from.

3) Wisconsin - a small but unbelievably strong program. Resident teaching is "Cleveland style". The research opportunities are excellent - in my opinion better than some of the big name programs. Dr Mehta is extremely supportive of resident/student research. They will have a female resident joining the program this year.

Have to go to ER to admit a pt......

 

[alphacentauri]

Thanks, radonc4evermore. I needed a laugh tonight.

And to second the sentiment about Kaiser LA - just one additional point - it's the only place I interviewed where the residents have no rotations. They just hop around to different attendings every half day, which means zero continuity with patients. It was the only program I didn't rank at all.

 

[Gfunk6]

radonc4evermore = teh truth!

especially agree with points #3 and #6.

 

[Impressions]

No truer words were ever spoken . Kudos to ur post, radonc4evermore!

Would specifically endorse impressions of schools #2, 11, 12 (albeit the PD appeared less popular than Dr. Hoppe).

In terms of programs favoring MD/PhD's, would add Joint Center to the list (matching 4 MD/PhD's this year!) and probably remove MSKCC.

Regarding "telling a program it is your first choice confers an advantage, so do it as many times as is safe," never figured out the knack for doing it. Probably
would have helped my cause somewhat. But unsure how I'd feel afterwards . . .

 

[Impressions]

8. really bad programs (from talking to residents, med students): 1. wayne state, 2. suny downstate, 3. suny upstate, 4. kaiser LA (lots of folks had horrible experiences interviewing here), 5. thomas jefferson (most malignant, from the sound of things)
9. beware programs: 1. kaiser la, 2. ohsu (new program), 3. all the great plains state and appalachia programs, 4. u chicago (department is imploding), 5. cleveland clinic (fairly malignant too)

With regards to bad programs, I had also heard that SUNY Downstate/Buffalo were subpar for residency training, but my impression was that Upstate and Wayne State were ok??

 

[UHS05]

Regarding "telling a program it is your first choice confers an advantage, so do it as many times as is safe," never figured out the knack for doing it. Probably
would have helped my cause somewhat. But unsure how I'd feel afterwards . . .

I told the ones that really were around the top of my list that they were in fact up there. I still feel a little uncomfortable because the PD of the program I ranked second or third ( a really nice person and a really nice program) called me to let me kow that I was candidate that they wanted (I know from other candidates that they weren't called) and I let him know that their program was at the top of my list (meaning my top 2-3)...may have been construed as meaning #1. I went on to match at my actual number 1 and haven't really had a chance to talk to the PD since...probably at ASTRO this year...

I guess what I'm saying is that with programs that have sincere, friendly and, above all, non-malignant people, it sometimes is hard to tell em all they're #1.

Other than that, I really do agree with radonc4evermore's list, esp #1 I'll have my own candid impressions of some of the programs here pretty soon...

 

[Gfunk6]

With regards to bad programs, I had also heard that SUNY Downstate/Buffalo were subpar for residency training, but my impression was that Upstate and Wayne State were ok??

Obviously what one considers "bad" is highly subjective, but I was thoroughly impressed by Buffalo's program. I think they have really turned the department and residency program around recently (see my impression in this thread). Didn't go to WSU or Upstate so can't comment on those.

 

[stephew]

folks, pay heed to Gfunk; this is one users personal view and weighs no more or less than the dozens of others out there.

 

[Houston500]

11. sycophant=successful

Very enjoyable and refreshing post, but I can't help but feel a little concerned as I'm sure there will be some people who actually will apply your advices in verbatim. I've already seen an increasing trend of aspiring radoncs who are willing to dig their nose into anatomically-designed exit holes without any hesitation, but what I am quite surprised is number of those who proudly walk with their brown noses pointed high into the sky.

sycophant = successful (in getting into a rad onc residency, perhaps), but who here wants to have a sycophant as a co-resident or a colleague?

 

[stephew]

the problem is students dont see things from the other side. most of the attendings know a syncophant when they see it and don't like it. there is no system designed to give the good guys a guarenteed win and the bad guys the proper exposure. But residents are a little like teens in that while they're correct, mom and dad haven't been that age for a while and may be a bit creakier, we do have more life expereince and can remember being in your shoes more than you think we can. But then i imagine this issue will be like that of the interview one; no one believed me until they started seeing it from the other side.

as a tangent: there is no joint center any more nor has there been one for a few years now.

 

[plentystupid]

6. wherever you interview, invent an uncle that lives there. "oh yeah, i have an uncle in louisville, i see him every christmas." it's the small things that count?
11. sycophant=successful
15. an overrepresented minority? you have your work cut out for you. better to be of european descent, at least for matching purposes.
16. hand write thank you letters to every single person. you don't want to be wondering if you should have when you end up not matching. don't be afraid to tell programs in different tiers that they are all your first choice. programs near each other or with some connection to each other talk. but ukentucky and msk are not going to be talking, for example. telling a program it is your first choice confers an advantage, so do it as many times as is safe.

I realize that a couple of posters have commened radonc4evermore on her frankness and honesty...

I would strongly urge readers not to come close to lying to any program by telling more than one that they are your first choice. This can only hurt you and quite considerably so. I would go so far as to say that even a seemingly harmless lie, like your uncle lives in the city that you are applying in is wrong...

My recomendation is to be completely honest... That being said, feel free to keep your cards close to your chest... Just don't lie.

Other than that, I feel radonc4evermore's comments are a good contribution to the mix.

Congrats on mathcing radonc4evermore and good luck.

 

[deleted4401]

MCW - One of my favorite programs to visit, both times around. Lots of technology including tomotherapy, strong department within the university - almost all the students do a rotation!, beautiful facility that is on the third floor, and they are building a cancer center right next door. They have enough peds that they don't have to do away rotations. The faculty was so nice, lots of women, and the chairman is an institution in his own right. Good amount of clinical research going on, but no protected time. Hours seemed pretty good, even for rad-onc standards. Most take private jobs. Milwaukee is a liveable city, has a so-so rep, but I could have really been happy there. Plus, it's a 90 minute train ride to Chicago. Ranked it fourth, but first last year.

Minnesota - Very similar feel to MCW, but not as pretty of a department. Again, good amount of techology, super friendly faculty, and the residents seemed very happy to be there. They have a VA, which is important to me, and a fair amount of peds as well. Not research oriented at all, really, again some clinical research options but nothing protected. Schedule seemed pretty light, again, even for rad-onc standards. Similar again to MCW, most take private practice jobs, I'd say more so than most. Chairwoman is a nice person, PD is very interested in residents and learning. It's in Minneapolis, which except for the miserable winters, is a fabulous city, one of the best in the midwest. Ranked it first, probably because I love the city and it was "balmy" the day I interviewed (35F in January).

And ... sycophant-ism may not be the best way to describe it. Being self-serving and flattering to those that influence the decision making process is not only prevalent ... it's sort of the way you conduct yourself at an interview - if you're good, reveal it. If you think they're good, why not let them know? I think people act like this to present themselves the best they can at an interview, and also express interest in the place they are interviewing at.

Is it weird the program I matched at has made no contact with me?

Simul

 

[happyradonc]

aaa

 

[kp99]

I'd like to head back around the south east coast if at all possible when I'm applying 2 years down the med school road. Does anyone have any impressions of some of the other programs yet to be commented on in that area: Drexel/Hahnemann, Maryland, Georgetown, Eastern Virginia, Med.Coll. of VA, UVA, UNC, Wake, etc... Thanks!

 

[kp99]

I'd like to head back around the south east coast if at all possible when I'm applying 2 years down the med school road. Does anyone have any impressions of some of the other programs yet to be commented on in that area: Drexel/Hahnemann, Maryland, Georgetown, Eastern Virginia, Med.Coll. of VA, UVA, UNC, Wake, etc... Thanks!

How about if someone can just say if they really liked any of these places on the east coast or if any of them are "on the way up." I just figured this would be a good time to ask since everyone would still have their interview day impressions fresh in their heads.

 

[medgator]

Eastern VA is now defunct I believe. Can't say much about Drexel or Georgetown. The remaining programs are excellent and you would probably get great training at any of them. If you are looking for SE programs, you might want to add UAB, UF, and Emory to your list.

 

[napoleondynamite]

Hey Steph,

Can we re-sticky this thread? I think many of us have been searching for it for interview season & it would make it easier to find. ND

 

[stephew]

INTERVIEW IMPRESSIONS 2006

 

[alvin]

Too soon for impressions.....even good ones?

 

[nod]

Last year, I believe the applicants preferred to wait until after the match lists were final to post their impressions. Maybe we all need a little time and distance before committing thoughts to words.

 

[Adawaal]

Last year, I believe the applicants preferred to wait until after the match lists were final to post their impressions. Maybe we all need a little time and distance before committing thoughts to words.

WIMPS!!! j/k

 

[napoleondynamite]

Now that ROL's are certified, I thought I'd resurrect this thread and start posting my own interview impressions. Hopefully, for the benefit of next year's applicants, others will also post their impressions.

I'll start with UTMB Galveston, for no particular reason.

I didn't know anything about this program prior to visiting. I was quite impressed during my interview day. The biggest strength in my mind was that the residents seem to get plenty of research time and are cranking out plenty of publications...all on the clock seemingly. From what I was told, residents really only work 3-3.5 days per week with clinical duties, then normally have 1-2 days during the week "off" b/c their attending has research time or other duties. This frees the residents up to catch up with dictations or other fun stuff. But most also have plenty of time to do research, without having to do much on their "own time." The program has awesome incentives to publish b/c they will pay your way to unlimited conferences for presentations, posters, etc. This does not count as your vacation time as it does at some other places I visited. One resident told me that he'd been to Amsterdam and Maui in the same year..all while building the CV and getting paid to do it..pretty sweet setup if you ask me.

The biggest weakness to the program in my opinion is that you have to travel to Houston for about 3 months of the year (about an hour away one-way) to their satellite clinic. They have an apt for you to live in if you do not want to commute, but it sounds like you may have to share those quarters with an attending on the weekends. They also were talking about possibly forming a relationship with Austin, so residents may also have to travel to Austin for part of the year. I'm sure the program would pony up for travel expenses and an apt, but still not ideal in my opinion. Also, as is common in many other programs, residents go to St. Judes for peds experience. I see that as a positive, but others may not.

The location is great. I loved Galveston and I think it would be a fun place to live. Housing is CHEAP. You can buy a PIMP house for like 200K, so that's a big plus.

Another big plus of the program is that it seems to be a very "hands-on" program for the residents. A large portion of their pts come from the prison as well as the indigent populations and immigrant workers in the area, so you see a different dynamic than other places. The residents happily touted their autonomy and good working relationships with the faculty.

All in all, I think this is an awesome program and was really impressed.

 

[cgk]

I'd like to head back around the south east coast if at all possible when I'm applying 2 years down the med school road. Does anyone have any impressions of some of the other programs yet to be commented on in that area: Drexel/Hahnemann, Maryland, Georgetown, Eastern Virginia, Med.Coll. of VA, UVA, UNC, Wake, etc... Thanks!

Does anyone know anything specifically about Medical College of VA's program?

 

[phil the thrill]

Does anyone know anything specifically about Medical College of VA's program?

They are a good program. New chair from Duke. Excellent in breast and actively involved in the NSABP partial breast irradiation trial. A pioneer of the mammosite. The PD is a very nice guy. This program has good research opportunities and is well represented at ASTRO. A negative about this program is that a couple of the residents are vocally not very happy there, although the other residents seem to like the program. It has a history of being a malignant program for whatever that is worth. Probably not as much now as it was in the past.

I believe that one would get great training there with the opportunity for bench research if that is what you desire. The facilites are very nice and up to date. Richmond may not be for everyone but it has a low cost of living and friendly people.

 

[ideas]

Now that ROL's are certified, I thought I'd resurrect this thread and start posting my own interview impressions. Hopefully, for the benefit of next year's applicants, others will also post their impressions.

I'll start with UTMB Galveston, for no particular reason.

I didn't know anything about this program prior to visiting. I was quite impressed during my interview day. The biggest strength in my mind was that the residents seem to get plenty of research time and are cranking out plenty of publications...all on the clock seemingly. From what I was told, residents really only work 3-3.5 days per week with clinical duties, then normally have 1-2 days during the week "off" b/c their attending has research time or other duties. This frees the residents up to catch up with dictations or other fun stuff. But most also have plenty of time to do research, without having to do much on their "own time." The program has awesome incentives to publish b/c they will pay your way to unlimited conferences for presentations, posters, etc. This does not count as your vacation time as it does at some other places I visited. One resident told me that he'd been to Amsterdam and Maui in the same year..all while building the CV and getting paid to do it..pretty sweet setup if you ask me.

The biggest weakness to the program in my opinion is that you have to travel to Houston for about 3 months of the year (about an hour away one-way) to their satellite clinic. They have an apt for you to live in if you do not want to commute, but it sounds like you may have to share those quarters with an attending on the weekends. They also were talking about possibly forming a relationship with Austin, so residents may also have to travel to Austin for part of the year. I'm sure the program would pony up for travel expenses and an apt, but still not ideal in my opinion. Also, as is common in many other programs, residents go to St. Judes for peds experience. I see that as a positive, but others may not.

The location is great. I loved Galveston and I think it would be a fun place to live. Housing is CHEAP. You can buy a PIMP house for like 200K, so that's a big plus.

Another big plus of the program is that it seems to be a very "hands-on" program for the residents. A large portion of their pts come from the prison as well as the indigent populations and immigrant workers in the area, so you see a different dynamic than other places. The residents happily touted their autonomy and good working relationships with the faculty.

All in all, I think this is an awesome program and was really impressed.

Thanks for the info! Anymore thoughts on any of the other programs that you visited?

 

[Wakemonkey]

I agree with Phil The Thrill, the PD at MCV is a really cool guy, the chairman brings unparalleled clinical expertise to the department and the residents at MCV were all very excited about the new education program in place, and are generally a happy fun group. I only interviewed at 12 programs, but for what it is worth I ranked MCV number one. It's an already good program and I think the new PD is going to make all the difference.

 

[stephew]

unparalleled clinical expertise? that's quite the statement.

 

[stephew]

folks please; rememebr how much you wanted this information? the match list is in. please put your impressions down for future gens. thank you.

 

[Turtle2]

I have to disagree with Wakemonkey. I interviewed at VCU and got a different impression. I know it won't make much difference for this match but for future reference. When I spoke to the resident's, the majority of them were pretty unhappy with where the department is and is going. All n all, it's a malignant program. The resident's deal with a lot of scut and get treated pretty poorly. I think from what I hear that their educational experience is pretty poor as well. I do agree that their technology is great and numbers for clinical experience won't be an issue. I do hear some of the attendings are really malignant. Also, one resident told me that their ASTRO budget is being cut and they are only allowed to go in their fourth year. Still a good program but I'd be careful saying it's that great of a program when the education and residents are not a priority.
On another note, other interviews I thought went well and really enjoyed the department were: Stanford, Wake Forest, and UAB. I think if your looking for a East coast program, UAB is the place to be.

 

[XRTmonster]

Didn't interview at VCU but word spread like wildfire about them on the interview trail. Multiple people who interviewed there mentioned malignancy issues. Apparently most residents there were miserable and pretty much told them not to rank their program very high.

I'll share my thoughts on the programs I visited in a few days. I'm finishing up my medicine sub-I right now.

 

[Wakemonkey]

But I'm talking about the big picture at MCV, sure, I heard about a few small issues when I was there, but I was also told that the new PD had a plan to correct the issues and that by the time I arrived it would be an even better place to train. I was very impressed by the knowledge base of the residents, they really seemed to know there stuff, its hard to argue with that? The proof is in the pudding as they say.

 

[phil the thrill]

I agree with MCV being a good place to train.

People have to take into account what malignant means. Its all relative. The most benign surgery program is more malignant than the most malignant rad onc program. Rad onc has a different philosophy than other fields. That's why it attracts a lot of people including myself. So you get pimped now and then, big deal. Programs change quickly. MCV has a new chair and PD. Most of the residents you meet will not be there when you are.

Wash U and Duke have been called malignant on this board before. I visited these programs and saw nothing even close to that and I do not think anyone would call either of these malignant now. But look back three years and everyone was saying it.

 

[CNphair]

sure, I heard about a few small issues when I was there, but I was also told that the new PD had a plan to correct the issues and that by the time I arrived it would be an even better place to train.

Hmmm...would not put a lot of stock in statements like this. It ranks up there with the "Oh, we are breaking ground on our new cancer center anyday now" assertion. It gets said by every program trying to compensate for a bad rep...I am sure sometimes it is even true.

As for "malignant" reputations...sure a malignant rad onc department at Duke was probably never as bad as the surgery department at Duke. But the reputation spread for a reason. Remember, anyone can play nice for a day.

 

[deleted4401]

I agree - it's important to keep in mind the relative nature of this. Most all rad-onc programs will be pretty comfortable and the people in the business, though sometimes strange, are pretty nice. What makes it a little different than, for example, medicine, is that the training is an apprenticeship - you spend entire days with attendings for 3 month blocks. You may repeat rotations with these attendings, especially at smaller programs. If there is a personality conflict or a hint of 'malignancy' it makes that 3 months (or total of 6 months) pretty tough. In medicine, if you have an attending you dislike for 1 month, you will probably never again rotate with them, and even still - during the day you may only have to work with them for 2 - 3 hours.

I agree that these reputations stick around longer than the actual behavior does, but there is a reason for reputations. It usually means that at least one resident had at least one major issue with one attending. You'll find that some programs will consistently be mentioned and other programs are never mentioned, and that should at least be something to think about.

-S

 

[stephew]

Hmmm...would not put a lot of stock in statements like this. It ranks up there with the "Oh, we are breaking ground on our new cancer center anyday now" assertion. It gets said by every program trying to compensate for a bad rep...I am sure sometimes it is even true.

As for "malignant" reputations...sure a malignant rad onc department at Duke was probably never as bad as the surgery department at Duke. But the reputation spread for a reason. Remember, anyone can play nice for a day.

without making comment on MCV (I really dont know them) i have to agree with this overall sentiment, along with the "malignant is all relative". if you hear that, red flags should go up. it may not be a hornets nest but that prelude tends to mean there are serious qualifications. of course someone's opinon might be an outlier. that is, the consensus is a place is great but one person for whatever reason sees it differently. hence a forum like this where everyone can post anonymously. I will tell you very frankly my first year at hopkins, it was malignant. it got better over time but bottom line, people we're happy. malignant isn't long hours etc. its atmosphere. so yes, radonc can be more malignant that surgery which is overall always harder in terms of hours and labor.

 

[stephew]

so no more input? Im disappointed that those who relied so heavily on this site aren't contributing back. Is there a reason for the reluctance that Im not appreciating or shall I just unsticky this thread?

 

[nod]

just finished taking my step 2 ck and cs, need a little time to compose my thoughts, but mine at least are coming in the next few days...

 

[XRTmonster]

Honestly a lot of us are catching up on a little R&R after a grueling interview season not to mention the fact that many of us have had to deal with things like medicine or surgery sub-I's. A little patience may be in order...I'm just saying...the next cycle isn't even close to starting up. I'll post a couple for now.

 

[XRTmonster]

I liked G-funk's format so I'll use that...

University at Buffalo (Roswell Park)
Location: It's buffalo so if you don't like cold weather and snow forget about it. I'm from a cold weather climate so I didn't mind that so much as the city itself. Couldn't put my finger on it but I didn't get a very good feeling about Buffalo. As a disclaimer though I will say this was the tail end of 3 interviews in a row so I was definitely a bit tired. Cost of living is awesome. Housing costs are ridiculously low.

Faculty: Excellent. They were all very nice and did give me a ride back to the airport. Good peeps all around. The chair is definitely a business type and has the department and clinic running like a well-oiled machine. He's got an MBA in addition to an MD/PhD. The program director, Dr. Khan is awesome. He's a guy with a lot of energy and has some really cool nanoparticle stuff going on in his lab if you're interested in research. Energetic program directors are something all applicants should look for in a program. If they're kind of blah about things, that should be a red flag. Perhaps that's an obvious thing but just thought I'd mention it as its something I took note of during my interviews.

Residents: All seemed very happy on the day of the interview and were happy with both the clinic and research side of things. Absolutely NO SCUT whatsoever is definitely a perk they talked about a lot. They have a bunch of PAs that cover a lot of different things including inpatient consults and even follow ups so residents have the option of following whatver cases they are interested in. On the flip side though one could argue that follow-ups and on-treatment visits are an essential component of training however the residents seemed to indicate that they see more than enough to complete their training.

Department: Like I mentioned it runs like a well oiled machine. Research opportunities, especially in basic science abound. Although it is a bit of a newer program, Roswell Park is steeped in history as I believe it was one of the first cancer centers established in the US. By the way, Roswell Park is actually the name of the guy who founded the place back around the turn of the century and no, he wasn't Korean .

My Two Cents: A very solid program that I liked but would I have ranked higher if it was in another city. I got the impression that they might be pushing toward more MD/PhD types now although I wasn't one and most of the residents weren't either.

 

[XRTmonster]

Medical College of Wisconsin

Location: Milwaukee is not a bad city from my perspective. If you're one of these cultural snobby types (j/k) it may not be the place for you. I'm a beer and a ballgame type guy so there you go. In any case, Chicago is roughly and hour and a half away if you need the cultural fix on a weekend. Cpst of living is very reasonable.

Faculty: Ok, so some I liked and some I didn't. I like the Chair as he seemed a real down to earth guy however he's up there in terms of age and really don't know how much longer he'll be sticking around as chair. Pumps out a lot of clinical research. The program director is a bit of a control freak. She runs the interview process and the residency program. She personally went thru every application herself and selected the interviewees in addition to taking copious notes on each application much of which was repeated back to us during the interview with her. One of the odd things was she was the only faculty member that had read our application. The other faculty interviewers seemed to be more of a meet and greet thing; probably by design. It was the only interview I was on where we would take our 'folder' complete with LORs and ERAS app to each interviewer. As you could guess, many of us took the opportunity to 'glance' at our LORs.

Residents: Most seemed rather happy and didn't get any negative impressions from them. On the other hand, none of my interactions with them were particularly memorable. Not much scut from what I remember.

Department: The department is located on a very nice medical campus complete with a both an adult and children's hospital. I was very impressed in fact. They are also building a new cancer center and massive research building and it wasn't just lip service. They are actually going up as we speak. As others have said, be careful of lip service. If there's no concrete in the ground consider that whatever is being planned won't by there during your residency if ever. If it does come to fruition during your training, lucky you. In terms of equipent they pretty much have everything except protons. Tomo and a gamma knife too. If they have a weakness its research, especially the basic science side of things. There is limited time for research in the 4th year and there are probably other places that have a greater research focus.

My Two Cents: I think it would be a great place for clinical training but may not appeal as much to the research oriented folks. Nevertheless I'm sure one could go into academics if they wanted to. In fact, one thing I noted is that almost all programs regardless of reputation or training emphasis seem to pump out at least one person that goes into academics. I'll admit, I do have a research bias, especially on the translational side of things so I don't think it was a great fit for me. The program director weirded me out about things also although reportedly she's really nice on a day to day basis. In the end, they were on the lower half of my rank list. One word of note, they tend to be a program that likes to be contacted after the interview. In fact the secretary told us that we defintely needed to contact them after the interview. Supposedly they won't even rank you if you don't show interest afterwards. Send thank you notes - they seem to count at least for this program.

 

[stephew]

thanks xrtmonster. good luck on exams.

 

[blueMD]

.

 

[nod]

Disclaimer: these are the thoughts and opinions of just one person, from a day's interview experience. You are free to disagree, I am just adding my share to the rumor mill. I evaluated these programs based on the metrics that I am interested in, which may be very different from what you care about. Just to give you some clues as to my biases, I definitely prefer larger cities and the northeast, and I am just an MD (no PhD). Hopefully some will find this useful. These are in no particular order (that means this was not my rank list order). If you have any particular questions you can PM me.

Harvard: so much has been said about this program that I really do not have much more to add. It is Harvard. It has many of the current leaders in rad onc on faculty. It has the resources for whatever research you want to do, be it basic science or clinical. It has the size for whatever rare diseases you could want to study. Because the program is combined between MGH, Dana Farber/Brigham, and Beth Israel, residents have to learn multiple systems and hospitals. This might add some annoyance, but then you do also get to learn different systems as opposed to just seeing one. As a non-Harvard trained person, I was a little surprised at the number of their residents that have gone to Harvard for undergrad, then Harvard med, and now Harvard residency. Many programs are inbred though, so I would not necessarily count that as a negative. People seemed happy enough and friendly enough. In terms of location, Boston has its good and bad, you just have to decide what best suits you. In conclusion, you cannot really go wrong by training at Harvard, can you?

MD Anderson: much has been said about this program as well. It is MD Anderson. It also has the famous people, the resources for whatever you are interested in, and the size. I do not think you can go wrong by training at this program either. If you are fortunate enough to be choosing between Harvard and MD Anderson, you can draw your own conclusions, but I thought there was greater diversity in terms of where the residents come from at MD Anderson. They also seemed happy and friendly enough. The general personality felt&#8230;different, and I am not saying either is better than the other. Houston exceeded my expectations as a city, but it is still in Texas (I guess that could be good or bad depending on your perspective). The entire day I spent there, everyone tried to convince me that Houston was a great place to live. I guess the program knows that they do not really need to sell MD Anderson, they just need to sell Houston. In the end, like I said before, you cannot go wrong by training at MD Anderson either, can you?

Stanford: compared with the two programs above, Stanford is clearly smaller. However, I think they still have all the biology, physics, and clinical research that you could want (or at least I could want). Biology seemed strong, physics has lots of toys and the radiology dept is also very strong and lots of collaborations seem possible, and there is plenty of clinical research as well. I definitely felt there was a strong female presence at the program with Dr. Donaldson. The only down side is that I think the program is very strong in lymphoma and peds with famous people in those fields, but not as many senior people in the other disease sites. However, I think that is a statement that can be made about most programs outside of the big three (MSK, MD Anderson, and Harvard). Many programs seem to have senior people in a couple of disease sites, and then a bunch of junior faculty in the other disease sites. For location, I think the San Francisco region is fabulous, but clearly not all would agree and some would complain about the cost of living. In the end, although not one of the "big three", it is up among the top and might be a better fit for you, depending on what you are looking for in a program.

Penn: I think their long awaited new cancer center is actually going to happen in the next couple of years, and the proton center should follow another couple of years after that. If you like penn, you can be very excited about all the changes taking place. The program is rapidly increasing the faculty count and they expect to double their patient population with their new facilities. They will also go from a history of technology challenged to all the newest toys. I agree that all the changes are very exciting and Penn will remain among the top programs in rad onc. Personally, I am a little wary of being a resident during a time of such change in the program. Change likely implies inefficiency and frustrations for the resident at the bottom of the food chain. Right now, the workload for the residents seems a bit on the lighter side, considering the size of the program and the number of patients, but when patients double, the program size will not. It might increase a bit, but not in proportion to the anticipated patient increase. I was also a bit disappointed to find that although the program supports the Holman Pathway, for its regular non-Holman residents, you only get six months of research, and that is actually split into two three-months blocks (you can negotiate to join those into one six month block). Many other "top" programs give you a year or at least 9 months, the ones that claim they want to produce academic clinicians anyway. Residents seemed happy, people were very friendly, I would say this is one of the friendlier programs, and that hopefully will not change as the program expands. You do have to do your internship year at Penn, so be ready for a rigorous year at a top academic institution. Philadelphia is a nice city as well. Overall: my impression is that the program would like to rival the big three within the next decade or so, and it might happen.

Hopkins: I think others on this forum have expressed that this is a program on the rise, and I would agree. They used to be a division of medical oncology (which sounds horrible) until about 4 years ago, and now they are their own department under leadership of Dr. DeWeese, who is possible the nicest, most approachable chair I have met (not that several of the others I met are not nice and approachable). For biology, you can probably draw on the resources of the whole Hopkins med. For physics, their head of physics is Dr. Wong, who apparently came from Beaumont and was one of the people who came up with the trilogy machine (I think every time a trilogy unit is purchased, he gets a tiny portion of the proceeds), and he is heading up some very interesting research in that division. Clinically, there are some nice junior faculty who seem interested in teaching. At the moment, they definitely need more senior people and still need to build a name for themselves, but I thin the future looks bright. I think this forum has already argued whether Baltimore is a nice place to live or not, so I will leave that to you to decide. Residents are very nice people and seem very friendly. Overall: a very good program now and hopefully will be even better in the future.


Duke: this seems to be one of the more controversial programs on this forum, but I really think the whole malignancy thing should be put to rest. This program has a more formal atmosphere than the programs that like to be on a "first name basis", but I do not think that equals malignancy. Duke has multiple senior faculty in multiple disease sites, something not many programs can boost. There is strong basic science, although the variety might not be as large as the bigger programs. Physics has come up by leaps and bounds since the new chair Dr. Willett took over 3 years ago, and I think they have the toys to do all the fancy new modalities except for protons. Residents are nice and come from a range of schools. Durham has great cost of living and is excellent for those with children or thinking of maybe children or just want more living space. Overall: great place to train, you have to decide whether Durham is right for you.