In recent decades, the principal goals of participants in the field of radiation biologists have included defining dose thresholds for cancer and non-cancer endpoints to be used by regulators, clinicians and industry, as well as informing on best practice radiation utilization and protection applications. Importantly, much of this work has required an intimate relationship between "bench" radiation biology scientists and their target audiences (such as physicists, medical practitioners and epidemiologists) in order to ensure that the requisite gaps in knowledge are adequately addressed. However, despite the growing risk for public exposure to higher-than-background levels of radiation, e.g. from long-distance travel, the increasing use of ionizing radiation during medical procedures, the threat from geopolitical instability, and so forth, there has been a dramatic decline in the number of qualified radiation biologists in the U.S. Contributing factors are thought to include the loss of applicable training programs, loss of jobs, and declining opportunities for advancement. This report was undertaken in order to begin addressing this situation since inaction may threaten the viability of radiation biology as a scientific discipline.

In early 2011, a dialogue was initiated within the Board of Directors (BOD) of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) regarding the future of the basic sciences of the specialty, primarily focused on the current state and potential future direction of basic research within radiation oncology. After consideration of the complexity of the issues involved and the precise nature of the undertaking, in August 2011, the BOD empanelled a Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force (TF). The TF was charged with developing an accurate snapshot of the current state of basic (preclinical) research in radiation oncology from the perspective of relevance to the modern clinical practice of radiation oncology as well as the education of our trainees and attending physicians in the biological sciences. The TF was further charged with making suggestions as to critical areas of biological basic research investigation that might be most likely to maintain and build further the scientific foundation and vitality of radiation oncology as an independent and vibrant medical specialty. It was not within the scope of service of the TF to consider the quality of ongoing research efforts within the broader radiation oncology space, to presume to consider their future potential, or to discourage in any way the investigators committed to areas of interest other than those targeted. The TF charge specifically precluded consideration of research issues related to technology, physics, or clinical investigations. This document represents an Executive Summary of the Task Force report.