Implementing a Military-Specific Hematology/Oncology Curriculum: A Multi-Institutional Assessment of Fellow-Reported Preparedness
Rebecca Wetzel, Paul Gonzales, Arjun Kalra, Tiffany Oommen, Sarah Darmon, Christin DeStefano
Researchers' Journal of Internal Medicine.
Background: More than 800 active-duty service members (ADSMs) are diagnosed with cancer annually, making cancer a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the force. Military Hematology/Oncology (Heme/Onc) physicians must therefore integrate subspecialty training with military-specific responsibilities that affect patient care, including duty limitations, retention standards, and operational readiness. These competencies are not captured within standard Heme/Onc fellowship training, creating a quality-relevant training gap. Methods: Two Defense Health Agency fellowship programs implemented a joint virtual military-unique curriculum delivered quarterly from July 2023 to December 2025. Fellows completed a 13-item pragmatic survey prior to each session assessing preparedness across leadership, operational readiness, and military-specific clinical domains. Preparedness scores were compared between early-year (PGY-4-5) and final-year (PGY-6) fellows using nonparametric tests. Results: Twenty-four fellows contributed 92 survey responses, and the survey completion rate was estimated at 48%. Final-year fellows reported unadjusted significantly higher preparedness in three domains: operational readiness for conflict (p=0.0326), indications for whole blood versus component therapy (p=0.0290), and adolescent and young adult survivorship (p=0.0010). No significant differences were observed in the remaining ten domains. Conclusions: A joint virtual curriculum is feasible and addresses a critical training gap in preparing Heme/Onc physicians to care for ADSMs. Final-year fellows reported higher preparedness in adolescent and young adult oncology, consistent with expected progression through fellowship training. Leadership and administrative competencies showed limited progression, suggesting the need for simulation, mentorship, and scenario-based training. Incorporating graduate feedback and mixed-methods evaluation may strengthen future iterations of our joint military unique curriculum.