TY - JOUR
T1 - International survey on training of dermatology residents in supportive oncodermatology
T2 - the RESCUE study
AU - Ortiz-Brugués, Ariadna
AU - Fattore, Davide
AU - Boileau, Marie
AU - Forsea, Ana Maria
AU - Apalla, Zoe
AU - Nikolaou, Vasiliki
AU - Radević, Tatjana
AU - Stojkovic-Filipovic, Jelena
AU - Freites-Martinez, Azael
AU - Kaminska-Winciorek, Grazyna
AU - Elshot, Yannick
AU - Baltas, Eszter
AU - Torre, Ana Clara
AU - Riganti, Julia
AU - Anadkat, Milan
AU - Bang, Alexander
AU - Fida, Monika
AU - Richert, Bertrand
AU - Kraehenbuehl, Lukas
AU - Avitan, Emily
AU - Preto-Gomes, Nuno Miguel
AU - Hassel, Jessica C.
AU - Doolan, Brent J.
AU - Kluger, Nicolas
AU - Pagès, Cécile
AU - Guillon, Benoit
AU - Lacroix, Noémie
AU - Lacouture, Mario
AU - Sibaud, Vincent
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2025.
PY - 2025/5
Y1 - 2025/5
N2 - Purpose: The dermatological management of cancer patients with cutaneous adverse events occurring during and after oncologic treatment is known as supportive oncodermatology. This includes prevention, early identification, and mitigation of dermatologic toxicities. The aim of the international RESCUE (Residents’ survey on training of dermatology residents in supportive oncodermatology) study was to ascertain the current level of expertise in supportive oncodermatology among dermatology residents. Methods: The European Task Force “Dermatology for cancer patients” and the US Oncodermatology Society developed an online questionnaire with 30 multiple-choice items. Responses were collected using qualitative ordinal data (yes/no, 1–5 ratings) and multiple-choice options. Ordinal range results were analyzed by aggregating responses 1 + 2 + 3 versus 4 + 5, with 5 representing the highest grade (“extremely confident” or “full training”). Results: A total of 442 dermatology residents from 20 countries replied. These participants reported receiving less comprehensive training in supportive oncodermatology (only 41% receiving complete training) compared to immunodermatology (75%), cutaneous oncology (75%), dermoscopy (64%), and dermatologic surgery (50%). Only 17% of the residents reported feeling confident in managing the dermatological toxicities associated with anticancer treatments. Residents also indicated receiving less education regarding toxicities related to endocrine therapies (28%). In particular, lower levels of competence were reported in managing nail, hair, and oral toxicities. A significant majority of residents (98%) deemed it essential to enhance training in dermatological toxicities associated with anticancer therapies during their oncology residency. Conclusion: The RESCUE study represents the first project assessing residents’ education in supportive oncodermatology. To enable future generations of dermatologists to provide enhanced care for cancer patients, supportive oncodermatology training should be integrated in residency programs worldwide, corresponding to training in other subspecialties. A more practical approach should also be incorporated, including extended training in hair, nail, and oral toxicities, enhancing the competencies of dermatology residents in all countries.
AB - Purpose: The dermatological management of cancer patients with cutaneous adverse events occurring during and after oncologic treatment is known as supportive oncodermatology. This includes prevention, early identification, and mitigation of dermatologic toxicities. The aim of the international RESCUE (Residents’ survey on training of dermatology residents in supportive oncodermatology) study was to ascertain the current level of expertise in supportive oncodermatology among dermatology residents. Methods: The European Task Force “Dermatology for cancer patients” and the US Oncodermatology Society developed an online questionnaire with 30 multiple-choice items. Responses were collected using qualitative ordinal data (yes/no, 1–5 ratings) and multiple-choice options. Ordinal range results were analyzed by aggregating responses 1 + 2 + 3 versus 4 + 5, with 5 representing the highest grade (“extremely confident” or “full training”). Results: A total of 442 dermatology residents from 20 countries replied. These participants reported receiving less comprehensive training in supportive oncodermatology (only 41% receiving complete training) compared to immunodermatology (75%), cutaneous oncology (75%), dermoscopy (64%), and dermatologic surgery (50%). Only 17% of the residents reported feeling confident in managing the dermatological toxicities associated with anticancer treatments. Residents also indicated receiving less education regarding toxicities related to endocrine therapies (28%). In particular, lower levels of competence were reported in managing nail, hair, and oral toxicities. A significant majority of residents (98%) deemed it essential to enhance training in dermatological toxicities associated with anticancer therapies during their oncology residency. Conclusion: The RESCUE study represents the first project assessing residents’ education in supportive oncodermatology. To enable future generations of dermatologists to provide enhanced care for cancer patients, supportive oncodermatology training should be integrated in residency programs worldwide, corresponding to training in other subspecialties. A more practical approach should also be incorporated, including extended training in hair, nail, and oral toxicities, enhancing the competencies of dermatology residents in all countries.
KW - Dermatologic toxicities
KW - Dermatology education
KW - Dermatology residents
KW - Education
KW - RESCUE
KW - Residency
KW - Residency education
KW - Supportive oncodermatology
KW - Training
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105003484796
U2 - 10.1007/s00520-025-09459-w
DO - 10.1007/s00520-025-09459-w
M3 - Article
C2 - 40272511
AN - SCOPUS:105003484796
SN - 0941-4355
VL - 33
JO - Supportive Care in Cancer
JF - Supportive Care in Cancer
IS - 5
M1 - 412
ER -