Beyond the Manuscript: How Social Media Is Redefining the Modern Oncologist

In 1983, the internet as we know it today and its commercial-use capacity were born.¹ Occurring just 4 years before the launch of ONCOLOGY, the internet’s advent changed the way clinicians communicated and worked with each other. At the time, it was touted as a wealth of information at everyone’s fingertips, and it was easy to see the impact on the oncology field.

Without the internet, CancerNetwork, which launched almost 20 years later in the early 2000s, would not exist as it does today: working side by side with ONCOLOGY to bring the latest practical research to multidisciplinary clinicians worldwide and creating a community for all facets of cancer care.

As the internet developed, avenues for conducting research became increasingly accessible. In a 1999 article published in ONCOLOGY, Pergament et al discussed how clinical oncology and the internet could be used together.² In the review, the authors sought to find out what type of cancer information was being disseminated on the web, to use internet-derived material that patients brought to the clinic as a stepping stone for patient education, and to become active participants on the web.²

In a commentary published in that same issue, Nancy Seybold, MD, reviewed the article and noted, “The most useful and important statement that this article makes is that ignoring the internet or resisting its intrusion into the patient-physician relationship is a strategy that, while appealing to the overworked clinician, is doomed to failure. The authors also correctly point out that oncologists can establish enriched relationships with well-informed patients.”³

But how would CancerNetwork/ONCOLOGY better disseminate information and connect clinicians and patients? Enter social media. Today the patient-physician relationship that Pergament et al outlined in 1999 is even more prevalent, driven by the rapid development, use, and uptake of social media across all oncology fronts.

A study published in Clinical Oncology in 2023 on social media and oncology best practices delves into the Latin derivation of the word social, which the authors note includes friend, comrade, or ally.⁴ Therefore, the foundations of social media rely on communications and sharing ideas between peers, as well as developing a community.

Now, with the click of a button or a simple search term, the latest advances in oncology are readily available through one app or another. Leading oncologists, sometimes dubbed “onco-influencers,” have taken to these channels to highlight their own or others’ research in the space, collaborate with colleagues, and even strengthen that patient connection.

Paolo Tarantino, MD, PhD; and Nicholas James Hornstein, MD, PhD, both onco-influencers in their respective disease states, spoke with ONCOLOGY about how social media has changed the trajectory of their careers. Although incredibly useful, social media can have a dark side, including an increased reliance on artificial intelligence (AI), which can lead to easily circulated information that may be inaccurate.

Building the Digital Brand

For early-career clinicians, it is vital to consider all avenues for increasing their impact across the oncology space. For the emerging generation, it helps set the stage and create a “digital resume” to showcase their hard work through clinical trials or media interviews.

Hornstein, a medical oncologist at Northwell Health and member of the ONCOLOGY gastrointestinal cancer editorial advisory board, decided to get involved with social media because he found an outlet to educate colleagues and patients. “Not only can I educate, but I also get information from it,” he said. “It quickly, through my training, became an asset in terms of helping me see what other people were doing. Instead of just going on NCCN or reading the latest publications, [I was now] being a part of a conversation. It felt like I was being informed in a different way.”

In 2018, Tarantino, a clinical research fellow at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and member of the ONCOLOGY breast cancer editorial advisory board, was a resident at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, Italy. His boss convinced him to open a Twitter (now X) account, and at first, he was hesitant. However, he quickly discovered “a world of ideas, data, and opinions,” which led him to put a face to the science behind the posts, further humanizing social media.

The SMARTY study examined social media’s role among medical oncologists and fellows, with findings published in JCO Global Oncology.⁵ The 116 oncologists who completed the survey were classed as highly social (n = 36), social skeptic (n = 36), or moderately social (n = 44).

Those who were highly social noted that social media played a prominent role in their relationships with patients (4.56 ± 1.44) and colleagues (5.17 ± 1.40), and they used it to interact with the scientific community (5.36 ± 1.25). The social skeptic gave limited importance to social media for interactions with patients (2.25 ± 1.23) and colleagues (3.53 ± 1.75), and considered it an irrelevant use of time with colleagues (2.36 ± 1.66); however, they were open to its potential benefits for health promotion strategies. The moderately social user placed less importance on social media interaction with patients (3.14 ± 1.60) and colleagues (4.52 ± 1.47) and liked to limit interactions on the platforms to clinical topics (1.89 ± 1.20).

During the conversation, Hornstein noted that having a social presence may not be for everyone, and that the SMARTY study findings showed that different personalities view social media very differently. However, regarding anyone hesitant to put themselves out there, Hornstein said, “You might have experiences that inform your practice that other people don’t have. You’re your own person, and your thoughts are valuable, and they deserve to be shared and part of the conversation.”

Collaboration Without Borders

With the launch of Facebook in 2004, one of the world’s first forms of social media, a platform was built to “make the world more open and connected.”⁶ Now, 22 years later, social media retains that connection and has developed across many offshoots.

The rise of onco-influencers was no different. A section of the oncology clinician population sought to engage with colleagues and patients from around the world, and they accomplished this by sharing ideas across social networks and by increasing collaborations across the cancer care continuum.

Tarantino found these connections he had made invaluable, as they helped him adapt to moving from Italy to the US, knowing he already had some familiar faces waiting at Dana-Farber. He also believed in the ability to create a face with science and in helping the audience know there is someone behind the researcher.

“You [don’t] see people’s faces or people’s behavior on the articles on PubMed, but when you combine the scientific output with a presence in social media, this merges into a more [engaging] entity somehow. I did find that it was easier to understand what my work was, what my line of research was, and somehow my scientific persona, thanks to social media,” Tarantino said.

Hornstein found lifelong friends and collaborators through social media, rounding out a trio with Timothy J. Brown, MD, an assistant professor at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and Udhayvir S. Grewal, MBBS, an assistant professor at Emory University School of Medicine. Known on X as @TheGutOncLab, their group has 20 publications pending. If we put this in perspective, 40 years ago, would have taken years of in-person networking and correspondence by physical mail or phone.

This advance in his research would not have been possible if Hornstein had never set up a Twitter account. He even joked, “I text them probably more than I text my wife.”

The Human Side Of Social Media

Looking back at that early ONCOLOGY publication by Pergament et al, it is clear that the internet and social media are still designed with building connections with patients or colleagues as a foundational aspect.

The difficulty sometimes lies with patients who follow onco-influencers whose posts are created in a “data-heavy manner,” said Tarantino. “This does raise some challenges because…most of the way these tweets and posts are created is in a science-heavy manner, with all the curves and figures that are not so easy to interpret and sometimes can be misinterpreted. There are some risks, and it’s important to be aware of those.”

As mentioned, social media is about building community, and Hornstein noted that interacting with patients and patient advocates across platforms is a true highlight. Allowing for the dissemination of information and education is critically important. He sees it as a way for patients to become better informed and learn about topics their providers may not discuss.

Sometimes, however, having instant access through social media can feel as though you are never able to turn work off, and it always follows you home.

Hornstein noted that it comes down to what you truly value, whether that is conducting research in a laboratory or looking at social media for a connection. If social media is a passion, then you will find time for it throughout your day.

Tarantino commented that real life happens outside of social media; something everyone is guilty of is staring down at their phones rather than interacting with others. For example, he often sees this occurring during conferences.

“This is particularly important for meetings; you see a lot of people, rather than looking up at the slides that are being presented or listening to the presenter, with their head down, posting a tweet. I’m also guilty of that. I do that, but I’ve been trying to do that less lately…because I realized that quality is more important than quantity in these tweets. I tend to prefer posting a couple of tweets over a day, trying to distill whatever I learned…that day, rather than post each and every slide that is presented. The balance is different for each one of us.”

The community-building aspect of creating content at meetings drew Hornstein to continue informing during some of the busiest conference and meeting days. While burnout from the constant access and need to put content out there can loom, Hornstein finds the reward in networking and community.

AI and Opportunities for Misinformation

Not everything on social media should be taken at face value or deemed as correct. These days, with the integration of AI, it can be difficult to tell what is real and what is not as you scroll through your feed.

Findings from a 2024 study published in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians revealed that 28% of patients reported that a lot of the health information on social media was false or misleading and 36% reported that some of it was.⁷

Findings from the study highlighted it as the most viewed platform in 2025, with 84% of US adults noting they use it; this was followed by Facebook (71%), Instagram (50%), and X (21%).⁸ Results from various studies conducted across these social networks showed that videos and posts contained several misleading results. Now with AI and even deepfakes, the landscape of social media can appear less trustworthy than it once was.

“AI tools are here, they will increasingly be here, and individuals need to learn how to adapt to them, how to integrate them, and how to watch out for them as well,” said Hornstein. “There’s some responsibility in using these tools to vet them, to look at the output, and [not] set these things up in an automated fashion, without review or understanding. It’s scary.”

Tarantino has seen AI more from the angle of helping to write posts, but to him, that takes the personality out of what is being published. He tries to avoid AI because he wants his voice to be heard on social platforms. He is also selective about whom he follows to limit that misinformation on his personal feeds.

Hornstein leans into his community and having a level of accountability. Sometimes he revisits past posts, and although he doesn’t edit them, he adds a new comment to further clarify their meaning or relevance so his audience can better understand them. He also calls out those who create content for audiences, ensuring they are accountable for what they produce.

2026 and Beyond: The Social Media Road Map

Among the 5.66 billion active social media users worldwide, the average daily time spent scrolling on apps is 2 hours and 40 minutes, and about 90% of consumers rely on social media for trends and culture updates.⁹ According to Sprout Social, social media trends in 2026 are geared toward the complex and influential. Audiences will continue to seek human interaction in AI-dominated fields, and these social media platforms will outrank Google as search engines.

Hornstein and his ideas about evolving social media strategy follow the trends. Most consumers don’t want to see what an institution is putting out; they want to hear the thoughts of the individuals working inside it. “It’s just a question of making sure it’s your voice and what you actually want to be doing, because just having somebody come to you and say, ‘Hey, you should have a social media presence, and you need to make x number of posts a month,’ that’s a recipe for burnout. That’s a recipe for bad content and just adding more noise to the information space.”

Tarantino brought the conversation back full circle in that social media will continue to shape and fulfill a need to connect broadly. Although there will be good, bad, and ugly associated with social media, it does have the power to change lives.

When Tarantino looks at the growth he has experienced from 2018 to the present and his current onco-influencer status, it has turned his world upside down in the best ways. “If you don’t have a [X]…or LinkedIn account, a Roon account, or any other account on social media, make sure to create one because it changed my life. It changed many people’s lives, improving [them] in many ways, and I would recommend it to everybody.”

References

1. A brief history of the internet. Online Library Learning Center, University System of Georgia. Accessed February 11, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/3tywbmt6

2. Pergament D, Pergament E, Wonderlick A, Fiddler M. At the crossroads: the intersection of the Internet and clinical oncology. Oncology (Williston Park). 1999;13(4):577-586.

3. Seybold N. At the crossroads: the intersection of the internet and clinical oncology. CancerNetwork. April 1, 1999. Updated November 11, 2020. Accessed February 11, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/2fzekdvc

4. Wang L, Katz MS, Song Y. Social media and oncology: the good, the bad and the ugly. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2023;35(3):143-146. doi:10.1016/j.clon.2022.11.005

5. Battaiotto E, Valenza C, Garutti M, et al. Role of social media for medical oncologists and medical oncology fellows (SMARTY): an Italian cross-sectional study. JCO Glob Oncol. 2025;11:e2400445. doi:10.1200/GO-24-00445

6. Facebook’s letter from Mark Zuckerberg - full text. Guardian. February 1, 2012. Accessed February 11, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/yjhum5fs

7. Fillon M. The social media cancer misinformation conundrum. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(1):3-4. doi:10.3322/caac.21710

8. Social media fact sheet. Pew Research Center. November 20, 2025. Accessed February 11, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/ykfdh3wk

9. 120+ must-know social media marketing statistics for 2026. Sprout Social. February 9, 2026. Accessed February 11, 2026. https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-statistics/