A Multicenter Feasibility Study of a Novel Curriculum for Oncology Trainees Regarding Medical Cannabis
Search for other papers by Rushad Patell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Poorva Bindal in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jason Freed in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Laura E. Dodge in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Gayathri Nagaraj in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ann S. LaCasce in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jacob Elkon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Anne Im in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sakiko Suzuki in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Nina Yedavalli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jerome D. Winegarden in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mary K. Buss in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mara A. Schonberg in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ilana M. Braun in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Deepa Rangachari in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: Oncology providers often lack the confidence to make clinical recommendations about medical cannabis (MC). This study aimed to develop and evaluate the feasibility of implementing an educational curriculum on the use of MC in patient care for oncology trainees. Methods: A multidisciplinary team designed an educational curriculum for MC use in oncology. The curriculum was piloted as a 1-hour interactive webinar across 8 United States–based hematology/oncology fellowship programs between 2022 and 2023. Incentivized surveys measuring feasibility outcomes, including cultural attitudes/norms, acceptability, compatibility, and self-efficacy (a composite index of self-confidence in discussing MC efficacy, risks, modes of use, and role in symptom management), were distributed before, immediately after, and 12 weeks post-webinar. Results: Of 103 trainees, 75 (72.8%) completed the pretraining survey and 66 (64.1%) completed the posttraining survey. Most respondents believed discussions about the role of MC in symptom management were valuable (n=56; 74.7%), though few (14.7%) believed trainees were expected to engage in such discussions. Most participants rated the curriculum as helpful (92.4%), beneficial for oncology trainees (84.8%), and likely to be recommended to colleagues (87.9%). Post-webinar, 78.8% of participants reported an increased likelihood of initiating discussions with patients regarding MC. There were significant improvements in the composite self-confidence index from pre- to post-webinar (2.7% vs 65.2%; P<.001), which persisted in the follow-up surveys (n=36; response rate, 34.9%). Conclusions: This multisite study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a novel curriculum focused on MC for oncology trainees. These findings can guide the design of a prospective, multi-institutional study to evaluate knowledge expansion, retention, and behavioral changes resulting from the intervention.
Submitted June 13, 2024; final revision received October 21, 2024; accepted for publication October 22, 2024.
R. Patell and P. Bindal contributed equally and are co-first authors.
I.M. Braun and D. Rangachari contributed equally and are co-last authors.
Author contributions: Study concept & design: Patell, Bindal, Freed, Braun, Rangachari. Developed curriculum: Patell, Bindal, Freed, Braun, Rangachari. Developed study instruments: Patell, Bindal, Freed, Schonberg, Rangachari. Piloted curriculum: Patell, Bindal, Buss, Braun, Rangachari. Collected & analyzed quantitative data: Patell, Bindal, Dodge, Rangachari. Performed qualitative analysis: Patell, Bindal, Schonberg. Original manuscript—drafting: Patell, Bindal, Dodge, Rangachari. Provided critical inputs: All authors. Original manuscript—revision: All authors.
Disclosures: Dr. Patell has disclosed serving as a consultant for Merck. Dr. LaCasce has disclosed serving as a scientific advisor for Genmab; and serving as a consultant for Pierre Fabre. Dr. Rangachari has disclosed serving as a consultant for and receiving honoraria from Teladoc Health, DynaMed, and AstraZeneca; receiving institutional grant/research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Novocure, Novartis, and AbbVie/Stemcentrx; and receiving travel fees from DAVA Oncology. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation, analysis, results, or discussion of this article.
Supplementary material: Supplementary material associated with this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2024.7084. The supplementary material has been supplied by the author(s) and appears in its originally submitted form. It has not been edited or vetted by JNCCN. All contents and opinions are solely those of the author. Any comments or questions related to the supplementary materials should be directed to the corresponding author.
Supplementary Materials
- Supplemental Materials (PDF 1.20 MB)
© 2019-2024 National Comprehensive Cancer Network