Cancer Genomics – 2025 review results

Current priority areas

• 10 Year Health Plan for England: fit for the future
• Science in healthcare: Delivering the NHS Long Term Plan – The Chief Scientific Officer’s strategy

Stakeholder feedback

Feedback collecting through the Curriculum Library survey collected between January 2024 and November 2025. All stakeholder feedback is presented verbatim.

Programme

• Due to the nature of genomics funding/provision, with only 7 regional hubs and no site providing all services the curriculum delivery needs more guidance. In the genomics specialities centralised leaning needs to be provided for  each test specific or cancer type specific TA, the STP should consider commissioning centralised learning content with the ability to access example test data and report it to cover the TAs which expect reporting. currently content delivery is much to variable based on training centre which is not disclosed when accepting a post, there is also a very high travel requirement which affects accessibility for anyone with caring needs and is not adequately covered by a training budgets.
• The nature of the rotation modules for this speciality could be revised, potentially swapping either the Introduction to Haematology (S-HT-R1) or Introduction to Histopathology (S-H-R1) modules for the Introduction to Genetics, Genomics & Molecular Science (S-G-R1). This is because Cancer Genomics STP trainees are employed in a Genomics laboratory, yet currently don’t have the opportunity to explore the whole laboratory services and functions. The Introduction to Genetics, Genomics and Molecular Science module introduces key themes and concepts of a modern genetic laboratory (for example Quality (S-G-R1 TA1) in more detail than the Introduction to Cancer Genomics module, meaning that trainees who do not complete S-G-R1 may lack a fundamental understanding of these concepts.
• The cancer genomics trainee’s would benefit from a short amount of time in the RD team – looking at the importance of constitutional cytogenetic chromosome abnormalities and how they impact HO cytogenetics.
• These comments apply across all the cohorts and focuses on HO content of the Speciality modules. The revised curriculum 2022 has a poor distribution of Haem-onc diseases across the two specialist modules (HM1 and HM2) compared to the original one. The two most complex diseases, AML and ALL are in HM1, together with significant other content: CML, MPN and BMT. Taking on both AML and ALL so early on is a large ask for the trainees for their first specialist module. They must learn many core concepts and a wide range of techniques. This module has been awarded 10 credits. HM2 content is made up of the simpler chronic disease pathways which are less onerous to learn, and there are also less new techniques to learn at this stage. This module has been awarded 15 credits, which does not seem to make sense.

S-CG-R1 Introduction to Cancer Genomics

• no feedback received

S-CG-S1 Solid Cancers 1

• no feedback received

S-CG-S2 Haematological Malignancies 1

Module aim

• The distribution of diseases between the two specialist modules: HM1 and HM2 seems an odd balance. The two most difficult and complex diseases are covered in HM1 which has an overall lower number of credits than HM2. From the point of view of building knowledge about haematological malignancies, it would make more sense to start with less complex diseases such as CML/MPN and possibly CLL/LPD including lymphoma. At the very least, it would be better to have AML and MDS in the same module (they are currently in different modules with AML coming before MDS, which is counter-intuitive). As it currently stands, these modules are difficult to deliver, and it is also more difficult than it needs to be for the trainees to absorb and understand the information being given.

Training activities

• 1 – This is more generic feedback on the entire module and also curriculum. There is far too much content on the heamato-oncology side that can be reasonably delivered in the timescale required. Suggest a throrough review of the content to make it more manageable – this is feedback I have collated from trainers and the trainees themselves. Suggest select a couple of disorders to allow them to fully embed in service deliver of a couple rather than skimming surface of all. This is adding a lot of unecessary pressure to trainees and trainers.

S-CG-S3 Solid Cancers 2

Module aim

• This module covers a lot of cancer types and it feels like there is a mountain of content to cover. This is in direct contrast to the Solid Cancers 1 module which felt quite light, with only 2 cancer types to focus on. To help balance the demands of the STP over the last two years, I feel it may be beneficial to move one or two of the cancer types addressed in the Solid Cancers 2 module to the Solids 1 module.

Training activities

• 6
  • training activity task – It would be great to see a wider focus on pharmacogenomics, not just for this TA, but elsewhere in the module/curriculum. It would also be good to see more pharmacogenomics and personalised medicine in the Bioinformatics (Genomics), Cancer Genomics and Genomics specialisms, as this is an increasingly important topic.
• 12
  • training activity task – This is currently set at an ETA, most of the clinical scientists in departments will not be able to achieve an ETA in this as they are annual events. It should be a DTA I also don’t feel that the quality training activities should be in this module at all, they fit in professional foundations. The genomic candidates are not expected to do this – it should be equal across the board. This stands for 12, 13, 14 and 15. They should all be DTAs.
  • training activity type – The quality training activities in this module should be aligned and all at a DTA, I agree they need an awareness but expectation of an ETA is not achievable.
• 13
  • training activity task – My department does not feel that this training activity (along with training activities 14 +15) are best placed within the specialist module and would sit better in the professional foundations module. Also, this is a duplication of training activity 13 in the Solid cancer 2 module, it seems a duplication of work.
• 14
  • training activity task – My GLH does not feel that this training activity (together with training activity 13 and 15) are best placed within the specialist module and would sit better in the professional foundations module.
  • training activity type – We are unclear why this activity is an ETA when the task in question is not one which we would reasonably expect a registered Clinical Scientist to be able to do as defined by the ETA. They would be much better placed as a DTA.
• 15
  • training activity task – My GLH (including Oxford, Salisbury and Southampton) does not feel that this training activity (together with training activity 13 and 14) are best placed within the specialist module and would sit better in the professional foundations module. This is also a duplication of training activity 15 for the HM2 module which seems like an unnecessary duplication of effort.
  • training activity type – We are unclear why this activity is an ETA when the task in question is not one which we would reasonably expect a registered Clinical Scientist to be able to do as defined by the ETA. They would be much better placed as a DTA.

Another element of a module

• Prostate cancer should be included within this module.

S-CG-S4 Haematological Malignancies 2

Training activities

• 13
  • training activity task – My GLH does not feel that this training activity (together with training activity 14 and 15) are best placed within the specialist module and would sit better in the professional foundations module. Also this training activity is duplicated with training activity 15 in the Solid cancer 2 module which seems a unnecessary duplication of effort.
  • training activity type – Although we agree that this training activity is a DTA, we think the other training activities, 14 and 15 are perhaps better suited to an ETA.

Changes made

Module level changes

Programme level changes

• no changes made

Proposed changes – changes not made

Periodic review

This specialty curriculum requires significant change beyond the scope of an annual review.

Response – no

Rationale

Please provide an overview of the rationale for why the proposed changes are needed or why changes were not needed, with reference to stakeholder feedback.

Response

Five key changes have been recommended as part of this annual review:

1. Move ALL from Haem 1 to Haem 2
2. Move MDS from Haem 2 to Haem 1
3. Move Lung cancer to Solid 1
4. Merge the histopathology focused TA in Solid 1 and Solid 2 into a single TA in Solid 1
5. Remove generic quality/professional practice TAs where these are already covered in the Professional Foundations module, and downgrade the remaining to DTA.

Rationale for changes

1 and 2 – Redistribution of Haematological Malignancies TAs: Stakeholder feedback emphasised the need for MDS training to be delivered before, or alongside, AML, reflecting the clinical continuum where clonal haematopoiesis and MDS may precede AML (although each may also occur independently).

Currently, with the exception of ALL, Haem 1 focuses on myeloid malignancies, while Haem 2 focuses on lymphoid disease, aside from MDS. Moving MDS into Haem 1 and ALL into Haem 2 will create clearer myeloid, and lymphoid focused modules.

This restructuring is expected to:

• support conceptual understanding of myeloid vs lymphoid malignancies
• improve alignment with learning objectives
• support training centres in planning and delivering rotations

3 – Rebalancing Solid Tumour TAs: Feedback highlighted a significant imbalance between Solid 1 and Solid 2. Solid 1 currently covers two tumour types with relatively straightforward molecular pathology TAs, whereas Solid 2 includes a broader range of tumours and more complex concepts and techniques.

To improve balance, Lung cancer will move into Solid 1. CRC, MM and Lung are core tumour types routinely delivered across most service providers, while much of Solid 2 content remains more specialist.

This change is expected to improve planning, delivery and completion of solid tumour rotations.

4 – Histopathology-Focused Training Activities: TA3 in Solid 1 and Solid 2 currently require histopathology rotations. There is no expectation that cancer genomics trainees will be competent in morphological assessment of cellularity or tumour content, and centres report that arranging histopathology rotations during the specialist years is challenging and disruptive.

Ideally, this content would be delivered during first-year histopathology rotations as OTAs. This will change will considered as part of a periodic review. In the interim, TA3 in Solid 1 and Solid 2 will be merged into a single TA3 in Solid 1.

This is expected to:

• reduce the burden of arranging external rotations
• release time in the final year for specialist training

5 – Generic Professional Practice TAs: S3-TA14 (audit) has been removed as this is covered in Professional Foundations. Stakeholder feedback also suggested that generic healthcare science TAs (TA12–15 in S-CG-S3 and TA13–15 in S-CG-S4) would be more appropriately placed in the core years. This will be considered at periodic review.

While these remain important areas of competence, trainees will continue to undertake these activities as registered scientists. Repeating them to ETA level in the final year is not always feasible given competing training demands. Therefore, these TAs will be downgraded from ETA to DTA where appropriate, pending periodic review.

Final note

All stakeholder feedback from multiple sources has been considered in this annual review. There is currently insufficient evidence to justify removing any specialist TA, and the exemplar cancers remain core to the discipline. It is recognised that some centres may find delivery of specialist content challenging, and a supportive approach will be taken to facilitate delivery where needed.

I confirm I have reviewed the Reflective Practice Guidance for ETAs and DTAs and have made any changes necessary.

Specialty Lead Editor signature: Dr Oluwatosin Taiwo
Date: 3 January 2026

Change control - completed by the school

Programme structure

Completed by: Chris Fisher
Date: 16 January 2026

Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) mapping

• Changes made to learning outcomes do not result in material change to the meaning of the learning outcomes.  Mapping revisited for 13.06, undertake or arrange investigations as appropriate, dues to change in the core curriculum.  HCPC mapping maintained.

Completed by: Chris Fisher
Date: 16 January 2026