Back to research feed

Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research

September 25, 2026 · via Europe PMC

Developing Effective, Evidence-Based Training for Cancer Team Science Leadership for National Impact.

Flowers CR, Chang S, Lee HY, Hawk ET.

Journal ArticleAbstract only — full text under license

AI summary — for doctors, generated from the abstract only

Cancer research leaders identified team leadership, conflict resolution and team evaluation as the biggest gaps in team science leadership training, and no existing training targets cancer research specifically.

What was studied

A perspective combining a structured literature review (53 articles) with surveys of 58 NCI-funded cancer research leaders and 68 mid-career faculty on team science leadership training needs.

Key findings

  • No published articles on team science leadership training for cancer research
  • Key skills: team leadership, strategic planning, grant writing, translational leadership, communication, mentorship and conflict resolution
  • Mid-career faculty wanted training on large grants, shared resources and interdependencies, preferably in person

Clinical relevance

This is mainly relevant to academic cancer center leadership and workforce development, with no direct implications for patient care.

Who should care

Medical Oncology

Limitations

Survey-based needs assessment with modest samples; no evaluation of training outcomes.

Leading large cancer research teams requires skills that current training rarely teaches.

This is an AI-generated summary of the published abstract, not a clinical recommendation. It may not reflect the full text or subsequent updates — verify against the original source before acting on it.

Abstract

A 2025 National Academies' report, The Science and Practice of Team Science, identified critical gaps in leadership development and highlighted evidence-based best practices and infrastructure needs to enhance team science. This brief perspective addresses team science approaches needed to overcome the complexities of cancer biology, carcinogenesis, and the processes for advancing cancer knowledge and clinical practice to effectively develop novel interventions. To define evidence-based leadership education programs rooted in the National Academies' report and tailored for cancer researchers, we conducted a survey-based educational needs assessment and performed a structured literature review using Medical Subject Headings terms for cancer and team science. The review identified 53 articles with few focused on team science leadership and none on team science leadership training for cancer research. Survey responses from 58 national cancer research leaders involved in NCI P30 CCSG (n=45), P01 (n=18), U54 (n=18), and P50 SPORE (n=16) programs identified key skills for successful team science leadership: team leadership, strategic planning, grant planning/writing, translational/clinical leadership, science communication, mentorship, and conflict resolution. Cancer research leaders identified the biggest gaps in current training as: team leadership, conflict resolution, team evaluation/metrics, systems thinking and analysis, and institutional navigation. From 68 mid-career faculty representing the audience for training, self-assessments revealed developing/managing large research grants, managing shared resources, and interdependencies as the most desired topics for training with most preferring training in‑person. Delivering structured training in the competencies of team science will better prepare established, independent investigators to lead larger complex, multi-component cancer research programs.

DOI

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-26-1008

PMID

42788965

Research metadata (titles, abstracts, authors, publication dates) is sourced from Europe PMC, which aggregates content from PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and other providers under the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM/NCBI). NLM does not claim copyright on abstracts; the original journal publishers or authors may hold rights to the full articles. AI-generated summaries are derived only from the abstract, never the full text, and are always labeled as AI-generated.

Want more like this?

Browse more from the feed. A free account unlocks the full feed, saving and communities.

Back to the research feed

Create a free account · Sign in