Abstract 4767: Regional strategies for expanding the evolving continuum of Physical Sciences-Oncology Network (PS-ON) research advocacy experiences

• Published in: Cancer research (Chicago, Ill.) Ill.), 2018-07, Vol.78 (13_Supplement), p.4767-4767
• Main Authors: Samson, Susan, Zahir, Nastaran, Judge, Sheila M., Cornew, Stuart, Riter, Bob, Francoeur, Jeri, Meyn, Anne, Cynkin, Laurie, Northey, Jason J., Weaver, Valerie M., Baas, Carole
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0008-5472; 1538-7445
• DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2018-4767

Background: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Physical Sciences-Oncology Network (PS-ON), initiated in 2009, is an interdisciplinary hub currently consisting of eighteen regions across the nation to support the emergence of new scientific frontiers, principles, and opportunities within physical sciences and oncology. Based on the belief that the increasing momentum for cross-disciplinary connectivity between biologists, physicists, mathematicians, chemists, biomedical engineers, and oncologists would be enriched and enhanced by vigorous and diverse public and/or advocacy support, the PS-ON leadership, at program inception, incorporated the advocate voice in setting a national research agenda. Methods: While the regional advocacy programs operate independently and utilize multilevel, multimethod strategies to expand the evolving umbrella of research advocacy experiences, they are connected through an administrative structure that communicates NCI program priorities to enhance capacity in the approaches utilized across the eighteen PS-ON regions. Impact: As integral team members, advocates bring real-time diverse patient experiences, diverse professional expertise, and concerns into pioneering, innovative research practices. PS-ON regional engagement/communication strategies include: 1) integrating advocate perspectives to shape basic science research agendas, 2) developing conceptual models/roadmaps to holistic engagement focusing on organizational foundations and best practice strategies, 3) applying guiding frameworks and toolkits for setting the terms of principled engagement/shared governance/bidirectional collaboration, 4) implementing education, outreach, and professional development programs for early-stage investigators, students, and patient communities, and 5) translating, communicating and disseminating laboratory innovations into society. Discussion: To better understand and fully address the complexities of intersecting physical sciences and oncology advocacy engagement, we explore the unique culture and guidelines set by selected participating institutions. Meeting key challenges regarding programmatic scope and policy impact requires a shift to a new, rapidly evolving paradigm. In parallel to incentives and policy measures created through federal and professional organizations, we offer recommendations for strengthening regional programs and encouraging equitable partnerships for advocates at earlier stages of research to help propel conver