The American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) has announced its 2008 class of ASTRO Fellows. These 30 members will receive their awards at a special ceremony during the group's 50th annual meeting Sept. 21-25 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center in Boston.

"I am pleased to honor these individuals who have dedicated their careers to radiation oncology, ASTRO, and the men and women battling cancer that we serve every day," says Patricia Eifel, MD, FASTRO, ASTRO president and a professor of radiation oncology at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. "In its third year, this class of ASTRO fellows is an impressive group of some of the brightest in our field; it is a pleasure to recognize them for their outstanding achievements."

Members of ASTRO are eligible to become a fellow if they have been part of the Society for at least 20 years, served in a leadership role for the organization and have made a significant contribution to the field of radiation oncology. The primary pathways to becoming a fellow are excellence in research, patient care, education and leadership/service. The society values contributions to all four areas; however, each nominee needed to have an outstanding contribution to at least one of the pathways to be named a fellow.

The nominations were reviewed by a nine-member selection committee that made recommendations to the ASTRO Board of Directors to make the final decisions. Below is the list of the 2008 ASTRO fellows:

• John M. Bedwinek, MD, Missouri Cancer Care, Wentzville, Mo.
• Chu Huai Chang, MD, Tenafly, N.J.
• Donald S. Childs Jr., MD, Rochester, Minn.
• Florence H. C. Chu, MD, New York Hospital Cornell Medical Center, New York
• Joseph P. Concannon, MD, East Falmouth, Mass.
• Louis S. Constine, MD, University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.
• Laurie E. Gaspar, MD, MBA, University of Colorado Health Science Center, Aurora, Colo.
• Shankar P. Giri, MD, Michael DeBakey V.A. Medical Center, Houston
• Ruth J. Guttmann, MD, Southampton, N.Y.
• Bruce G. Haffty, MD, UMDNJ Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, N.J.
• Louis B. Harrison, MD, Beth Israel Medical Center, New York
• Joseph S. Kong, MD, Beaumont, Texas
• Mary K. Martel, PhD, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
• John L. Meyer, MD  St. Francis Memorial Hospital, San Francisco
• Lowell S. Miller, MD, Nada, Texas
• Donn G. Mosser, MD, Minneapolis
• Walter T. Murphy, MD, Lake Park, Fla.
• Dattatreyudu Nori, MD, New York Hospital Cornell Medical Center, New York
• James R. Oleson, MD, PhD, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C.
• Ajmel A. Puthawala, MD, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, Long Beach, Calif.
• Abram Recht, MD, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston
• Robert Robbins, MD, Redding, Calif.
• Robert H. Sagerman, MD, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Fayetteville, N.Y.
• Paul W. Scanlon, MD, Marco Island, Fla.
• Brenda Shank, MD, PhD, JC Robinson, M.D. Regional Cancer Center, San Pablo, Calif.
• Edward G. Shaw, MD, Wake Forest Univrsity, Winston-Salem, N.C.
• Lawrence J. Solin, MD, Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia
• Orliss Wildermuth, MD, Seattle
• Albert L. Wiley Jr., MD, PhD, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Salter Path, N.C.
• Steven R. Zeidner, MD, Toledo Radiation Oncology, Toledo, Ohio

Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center (Nashville, Tenn.) has received a $125,000 research grant to support clinical trials in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer research. The two-year grant from the Aptium Oncology GI Consortium (AGIC) will be used to expand and supplement ongoing clinical translational programs in GI cancer. Jordan Berlin, MD, associate professor of medicine, is the principal investigator for the grant.

"We are excited about this grant, as well as our membership in this new research consortium," Dr. Berlin says. "The purpose of this consortium is to speed up the process of bringing new products into translational research protocols for patients with GI cancer. We have already made important discoveries about the molecular biology of many GI cancers, but we need to find new drugs that take advantage of that knowledge."

The AGIC consortium is a select group of eight cancer centers chosen on the basis of their excellence and expertise in the translational aspects of GI cancers and their track records as clinical research investigators. The first treatment protocol will test the drug agent known as AstraZeneca PARP inhibitor, 2281 with irinotecan for stage IV colorectal patients whose cancer is resistant to the drug irinotecan.

Vanderbilt-Ingram recently joined with 21 of the world's leading centers in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, a non-profit alliance dedicated to improving cancer care for patients everywhere.

Americans are dissatisfied with the U.S. health care system and 82 percent think it should be fundamentally changed or completely rebuilt, according to a new survey released today by The Commonwealth Fund.

The survey of more than 1,000 adults was conducted by Harris Interactive in May 2008. The vast majority of those surveyed--nine out of ten--felt it was important that the two leading presidential candidates propose reform plans that would improve health care quality, ensure that all Americans can afford health care and insurance, and decrease the number of uninsured. One in three adults reported that their doctors ordered a test that had already been done or recommended unnecessary treatment or care in the past two years. Adults across all income groups reported experiencing inefficient care, and eight in ten adults across income groups supported efforts to improve the health system's performance with respect to access, quality and cost.

"It is clear that our healthcare system isn't giving Americans the healthcare they need and deserve," said Commonwealth Fund President Karen Davis. "The disorganization and inefficiency are affecting Americans in their everyday lives, and it's obvious that people are looking for reform. With the upcoming election, there is great opportunity for our leaders to hear what the American people are saying they want from a health care system, and to respond with meaningful proposals."

The survey, Public Views on U.S. Health Care System Organization: A Call for New Directions, found that, in addition to respondents' overall dissatisfaction with the healthcare system, people are frustrated with the way they currently receive healthcare. Forty-seven percent of patients said they experienced poorly coordinated medical care in the past two years.

Respondents pointed out the need for a more cohesive care system. Nine of 10 surveyed believe that it is very important or important to have one place or doctor responsible for their primary care and for coordinating all of their care. Similarly, there was substantial public support for wider adoption of health information technology, like computerized medical records and sharing information electronically with other doctors as a means of improving patient care. Nine of 10 adults wanted easy access to their own medical records and thought it was important that their doctors have such access as well.

Those surveyed also reported problems with access to healthcare--nearly three out of four (73 percent) had a difficult time getting timely doctors' appointments, phone advice, or after-hours care without having to go to the emergency department. Although the uninsured were the most likely to report problems getting timely care without going to the ED, 26 percent of adults with health insurance also said it was difficult to get same- or next-day appointments when they were sick. And 39 percent of insured adults said it was hard to get through to their doctors on the phone when they needed them.

Women diagnosed with breast cancer shoulder the emotional burden of disclosing their diagnosis to loved ones, managing the feelings of others at precisely the time when they need support themselves, according to research to be presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association (ASA).

The research is the first study to comparatively and qualitatively examine how breast cancer survivors from different racial and ethnic backgrounds share the news of their illness with family, friends and acquaintances. The researchers interviewed 164 breast cancer survivors to examine the "emotion work" involved in disclosing a breast cancer diagnosis. These survivors included a mix of racially diverse women born in the United States and immigrants, and they were recruited throughout the San Francisco Bay area.

"Women diagnosed with breast cancer face an uphill emotional battle," said Grace J. Yoo, a sociologist at San Francisco State University and the study's primary investigator. "At a time when they are forced to deal with their own vulnerabilities, women with breast cancer must also navigate the vulnerabilities of loved ones as they react to the news."

For women--typically perceived as caregivers and expected to put the emotions of others above their own--a breast cancer diagnosis presents a paradox, according to Yoo. Women must face the challenge of determining how to ask for help from others when they are typically seen as the caregiver.

According to interviews with breast cancer survivors, different strategies were employed in conversations with close family members compared to those outside the family. Survivors viewed informing their family of the diagnosis as their most difficult task following a diagnosis. Most respondents felt the need to strategically manage the way family members were told in order to protect their loved ones and to provide comfort and reassurance.

Contrary to the approach they used with their families, women often related their diagnosis to peers spontaneously. Most respondents were surprised by the extent of the support they received as a result of these unplanned conversations and by the depth and breadth of their own social networks.

"Women who limit their emotions in discussing their breast cancer diagnosis often limit the possibilities for support they can receive," said Yoo. "Involving and including others in an illness increases intimacy among friends and family and opens the door to additional support."

Multidetector CT (MDCT) is just as accurate as MRI in assessing myocardial infarct size--an important predictor of clinical outcome--in an emergency setting according to a recent study conducted by researchers in collaboration between the VA Medical Center in San Francisco, CA and the University Claude Bernard in Lyon, France.

"The size of the infarct is one of the most important predictors of long-term left ventricular function in patients with an acute myocardial infarction," said Loic Boussel, MD, lead author of the study. "Imaging of myocardial infarct size is difficult in the emergency setting as the current 'gold standard' methods of delayed enhanced MRI and nuclear medicine techniques are difficult to perform in unstable patients. CT is very easy and quick to perform even at the acute phase so we wanted to find out if it can do the same job as MRI and potentially provide further information," he said.

The study included 19 patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent delayed enhanced MDCT immediately after coronary angioplasty and underwent delayed enhanced MRI within eight days of angioplasty. The study showed that there was agreement between MRI and MDCT. MDCT had a sensitivity and specificity of 87.6% and 97.7% for the classification of the volume of the myocardial infarct when compared to MRI.

Dr. Boussel noted that MDCT did not require an additional contrast injection and is very practical in an emergency setting.