Alginate-based hydrogels are well-known materials for drug delivery. However, their sensitivity towards chelators and burst release remain concerns. Polyelectrolyte coatings have been proposed to control drug release from hydrogels, but it remains unclear how the types of coating influence the release kinetics of drugs with varying ionic properties. Hence, we explored combinations of natural (chitosan, alginate) and synthetic (polyethyleneimine [PEI], polyacrylic acid [PAA]) polyelectrolytes to modulate the release kinetics of alginate-based hydrogel beads. Rhodamine B (RhB, cationic) and trypan blue (TB, anionic) were used as model drugs. PAA resulted in a less porous coating, and PEI effectively reduced swelling. While uncoated beads showed burst release, polyelectrolyte coatings slowed release to varying degrees. Chitosan+alginate and chitosan+PAA coatings showed limited impact on RhB release. In contrast, PEI+alginate and PEI+PAA coatings significantly reduced RhB release from 86% (uncoated) to 61% and 6% after 4 days, respectively. Alginate–TB displayed inherently slower release across all systems, with polymer coatings further reducing cumulative release from 49% (uncoated) to 7% in PEI+PAA-coated beads. Overall, polyelectrolyte coatings had a greater influence on the anionic payload, and PEI+PAA-coated beads emerged as promising carriers for controlled release of both cationic and anionic drugs.

Effective teamwork and communication are critical during medical emergencies, particularly in oncology, yet health care professionals are often trained separately, creating challenges for interprofessional collaboration. Evidence-based frameworks like Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) offer structured tools to optimize team performance. This study describes a simulation-based program, the Clinical Medical Emergency Team Training Simulation (CMETTS), designed to instill foundational teamwork skills in early-stage learners. First-year medical students and newly graduated nursing residents participated in an interprofessional simulation involving medical emergency scenarios followed by structured debriefing sessions guided by TeamSTEPPS principles. We evaluated the program’s effectiveness using pre- and postsimulation surveys assessing self-reported knowledge, confidence, and overall satisfaction with the training. A total of 110 trainees (21 medical students, 89 nursing residents) completed the evaluation. The simulation was exceptionally well-received, with more than 95% of participants from both groups rating the experience positively and agreeing they would recommend it to colleagues. After the simulation, there were statistically significant increases in both self-reported knowledge (P < .001) and confidence (P < .001) for all participants. While nursing residents demonstrated higher baseline scores, both groups showed significant individual learning gains, indicating the program’s value for learners at different professional stages. The CMETTS program is an effective educational intervention for introducing foundational teamwork and communication skills to early-stage medical and nursing trainees. By providing a safe, realistic environment for practicing interprofessional collaboration, this simulation helps prepare future health care professionals for the demands of team-based care and ultimately aims to enhance patient safety.

During an initial oncologic encounter, care providers must convey information and plans with confidence and empathy. First-year medical students often lack opportunities to develop the skills necessary for these challenging encounters. We developed a novel simulation-based training designed to prepare early-level medical students to demonstrate empathy, communicate care plans, and deliver bad news during initial oncologic patient visits. Medical students in a summer research program participated. The session included a didactic, followed by 2 simulated patient encounters: a young woman with lymphoma and an older man with rectal cancer. Students rotated through roles as primary provider, secondary provider, family member, and observer. Each simulation was followed by a faculty-led debriefing. We collected postsession feedback using a mixed-methods evaluation. The activity lasted approximately 2 hours. Of the 54 participants, 49 (91%) completed the evaluation. The results were highly positive, with 100% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing that the simulation helped them apply knowledge practically and that they would use these skills in future practice. Qualitative feedback highlighted improvements in communication skills, the importance of empathy, and the need for adaptability. Participants identified the debriefing sessions, standardized patients, and active participation as the most valuable components. This simulation is effective for preparing medical students for the complexities of initial oncologic patient encounters. It provides a safe environment for the practice and refinement of essential clinical and interpersonal skills, fostering a more empathetic and competent approach to patient care.

Physician-scientists are critical to advancing evidence-based medicine and research, yet the number of trainees is declining. Limited programs for early research exposure contribute to this decreasing trend. Thus, the Medical Students Summer in Oncology at Anderson Research (Med Students SOAR) program, funded by the National Cancer Institute, was developed to provide medical students with immersive experiences in clinical and research oncology. The program engaged 25 students for 8–10 weeks mentored by MD Anderson faculty, focusing on research skill development, clinical integration, and interprofessional collaboration. To evaluate the impact on students, pre- and post- program surveys were conducted using questions on a 5-point Likert scale where higher scores correspond to higher satisfaction. All scores were analyzed using statistical software. The students reported high satisfaction and meaningful impact, particularly faculty mentor interactions (87%, 20/23), mentor engagement frequency (87%, 20/23), and mentor communication (78%, 18/23). Furthermore, students (91–100%) reported that their mentors provided career guidance and professional networking. The students showed significant gains in career knowledge (4.1→4.4, p =.04), self-efficacy in research (3.8→4.3, p =.007), and science identity (3.9→4.2, p =.06). There was also a significantly higher career intention to pursue a research career (3.4→3.8, p =.013) and a significant decrease in the experience of imposter phenomenon (2.4→2.0, p =.007). After a one-year follow up survey of 15 respondents, all continued in research activities where they garnered fifteen journal publications (six first-author), eight conference proceedings, and numerous ongoing manuscripts. The Med Students SOAR program demonstrated that structured, mentored oncology research program enhanced medical students’ skills, career knowledge, and engagement in cancer research.