What's next for nuclear medicine training?

RESTON, Va. The "Hot Topic" article in the October issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (JNM), titled Nuclear Medicine Training: What Now?, examines the role of nuclear medicine in the era of precision medicine and the need for training to evolve with the practice. An associated editorial presents an alternative view: "Is 16 Months of Specialized Nuclear Medicine Training Enough for Best Patient Care?" The two perspectives kick off a discussion that will unfold in coming issues of JNM.

Authors David Mankoff, MD, PhD, and Daniel A. Pryma, MD, at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, make the case for partnering with radiology. They emphasize the importance of collaborative, multi-disciplinary training and highlight two proposed options created by the nuclear medicine and radiology communities working together: the 16-month nuclear medicine training pathway embedded into a four-year diagnostic radiology residency and the traditional one-year nuclear radiology or nuclear medicine fellowship combined with tailored fourth-year training.

Presenting an alternative view, Johannes Czernin, MD, editor-in-chief of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, states, "Nuclear medicine originated in medicine and not in radiology," and adds, "In large parts of the world, nuclear medicine is independent and thriving." This has led to innovations in the field, especially in theranostics. Czernin credits Europe's dedicated five-year nuclear medicine training program for such advances. "Graduates of these programs are highly skilled experts that have shaped the field for more than a decade," he explains.

The discussion of best nuclear medicine training pathways will continue in future issues of JNM with several more perspectives, including one from the American Board of Nuclear Medicine and two from European points of view.