Dr. Zaky is a board certified Radiation Oncologist. She received a Bachelor’s of Science in Biomedical/Electrical Engineering at Marquette University. She worked in research and development as an Engineer, and eventually received a Masters of Science in Immunology from Albany Medical College. Her research thesis focused on a novel therapy to treat hormone-receptor positive breast cancer. She continued to study breast cancer with her research during her Radiation Oncology residency; she integrated her research in the laboratory with her clinical research in triple-negative breast cancer. Since completing residency, she has worked as a general radiation oncologist, and her special interests include breast cancer, skin cancer, CNS tumors and stereotactic radiotherapy.

Clinical Focus

  • Radiation Oncology

Academic Appointments

Boards, Advisory Committees, Professional Organizations

  • Chair of the Guidelines Committee, ASTRO (2020 - Present)
  • Vice Chair of the Guidelines Committee, ASTRO (2017 - 2020)
  • Guidelines Committee Member, ASTRO (2014 - Present)
  • Member, ASTRO (2010 - Present)

Professional Education

  • Residency: Emory University Radiation Oncology Residency (2010) GA
  • Internship: Emory University Internal Medicine Primary Care Residency (2006) GA
  • Medical Education: Albany Medical College (2005) NY
  • Board Certification: American Board of Radiology, Radiation Oncology (2012)

All Publications

  • External Beam Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Symptomatic Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Practical radiation oncology Alcorn, S., Cortés, Á. A., Bradfield, L., Brennan, M., Dennis, K., Diaz, D. A., Doung, Y. C., Elmore, S., Hertan, L., Johnstone, C., Jones, J., Larrier, N., Lo, S. S., Nguyen, Q. N., Tseng, Y. D., Yerramilli, D., Zaky, S., Balboni, T. 2024


    This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for palliative external beam radiation therapy (RT) in symptomatic bone metastases.The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) convened a task force to address 5 key questions regarding palliative RT in symptomatic bone metastases. Based on a systemic review by the Agency for Health Research and Quality, recommendations using predefined consensus-building methodology were established; evidence quality and recommendation strength were also assessed.For palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases, RT is recommended for managing pain from bone metastases and spine metastases with or without spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Regarding other modalities with RT, for patients with spine metastases causing spinal cord or cauda equina compression, surgery and postoperative RT are conditionally recommended over RT alone. Furthermore, dexamethasone is recommended for spine metastases with spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Patients with non-spine bone metastases requiring surgery are recommended postoperative RT. Symptomatic bone metastases treated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy in 1 fraction (800 cGy/1fx), 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Spinal cord or cauda equina compression in patients ineligible for surgery and receiving conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 1600 cGy/2fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 3000 cGy/10fx. Symptomatic bone metastases in selected patients with good performance status without surgery or neurological symptoms/signs are conditionally recommended SBRT over conventional palliative RT. Spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, 2400 cGy/6fx, or 2000 cGy/8fx; non-spine bone metastases re-irradiated with conventional RT are recommended 800 cGy/1fx, 2000 cGy/5fx, or 2400 cGy/6fx. Determination of an optimal RT approach/regimen requires whole person assessment, including prognosis, previous RT dose if applicable, risks to normal tissues, quality of life, cost implications, and patient goals and values. Relatedly, for patient-centered optimization of treatment-related toxicities and quality of life, shared decision-making is recommended.Based on published data, the ASTRO task force's recommendations inform best clinical practices on palliative RT for symptomatic bone metastases.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2024.04.018

    View details for PubMedID 38788923

  • Demographic trends among ASTRO clinical practice guideline task force participants from 2010-2022. International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics Kamran, S. C., Pompa, I. R., Niemierko, A., Dawes, S. L., Zaky, S. S., Deville, C. J. 2022


    PURPOSE: ASTRO has produced evidence-based clinical practice guidelines since 2009. It is unknown whether task force members for these guidelines are representative of the diversity of the radiation oncology field, particularly in comparison to the ASTRO membership demographics. We sought to characterize the demographic composition of all task force members to date.METHODS: The author list for ASTRO-led published guidelines from 2010-2022 was assessed. Main practice location/institution was extracted from the guideline publication. Self-identified gender and race/ethnicity was obtained from the ASTRO membership database. Years of experience was measured as the number of years post-Board Certification at time of guideline development. For US-based physicians, gender was confirmed with the National Provider Identifier database. Proportions of task force members overall and by individual guideline were described by gender, underrepresented-in-medicine (URM) status, geography (US versus Int'l), US-region (if US-based), years of experience (separated into ≤5 years including residents, 6-12 years, and >12 years), and type of practice. Proportions for gender, URM, and geography were compared to ASTRO membership demographics.RESULTS: Between 2010-2022, there were 25 guideline task forces, with a total of 366 participants; 233 men, 126 women, and 7 unknown gender. There were more men than women serving on most individual task force topics, with 28% of all task forces having >80% composition of men. Of those with self-identified race/ethnicity, 9/204 (4.4%) were underrepresented in medicine (URM), which was lower in proportion to URM self-identified ASTRO members (336/3277, 10.3%, p=0.007). Most participants were based in the US (n=323, 88.3%), had >12 years of experience (n=141, 38.5%) and were from academic institutions (n=302, 82.5%). Community practitioners were less likely to be women or URM.CONCLUSION: Improved data collection and more intentional efforts are needed to ensure that the diversity of guidelines task forces is representative of ASTRO membership and the specialty.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.10.031

    View details for PubMedID 36368435

  • The Evolution and Future of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Report From the ASTRO Methodology Work Group on Behalf of the Guideline Subcommittee. Practical radiation oncology Zaky, S., Cabrera, A. R., Bradfield, L., Harkenrider, M. M., Kruser, T. J., Sher, D. J., Simone, C. B., Smith, G., Petit, J. 2020

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2020.04.015

    View details for PubMedID 32654976

  • In Reply to the American Academy of Dermatology Letter Regarding: Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline. Practical radiation oncology Bradfield, L. n., Likhacheva, A. n., Petit, J. H., Zaky, S. n., Devlin, P. M. 2020

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2020.01.010

    View details for PubMedID 32035246

  • Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: Executive Summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. Practical radiation oncology Likhacheva, A., Awan, M., Barker, C. A., Bhatnagar, A., Bradfield, L., Brady, M. S., Buzurovic, I., Geiger, J. L., Parvathaneni, U., Zaky, S., Devlin, P. M. 2019


    PURPOSE: This guideline reviews the evidence for the use of definitive and postoperative radiation therapy (RT) in patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC).METHODS: The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a task force to address 5 key questions focused on indications for RT in the definitive and postoperative setting for BCC and cSCC, as well as dose-fractionation schemes, target volumes, basic aspects of treatment planning, choice of radiation modality, and the role of systemic therapy in combination with radiation. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.RESULTS: The guideline recommends definitive RT as primary treatment for patients with BCC and cSCC who are not surgical candidates while conditionally recommending RT with an emphasis on shared decision-making in those situations in which adequate resection can lead to a less than satisfactory cosmetic or functional outcome. In the postoperative setting, a number of indications for RT after an adequate resection are provided while distinguishing the strength of the recommendations between BCC and cSCC. One key question is dedicated to defining indications for regional nodal irradiation. The task force suggests a range of appropriate dose-fractionation schemes for treatment of primary and nodal volumes in definitive and postoperative scenarios. The guideline also recommends against the use of carboplatin concurrently with adjuvant RT and conditionally recommends the use of systemic therapies for unresectable primaries where treatment may need escalation.CONCLUSIONS: Defining the role of RT in the management of BCC and cSCC has been hindered by a lack of high-quality evidence. This document synthesizes available evidence to define practice guidelines for the most common clinical situations. We encourage practitioners to enroll patients in prospective trials and to approach care in a multidisciplinary fashion whenever possible.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2019.10.014

    View details for PubMedID 31831330

  • Palliative thoracic radiation therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: 2018 Update of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Evidence-Based Guideline PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY Moeller, B., Balagamwala, E. H., Chen, A., Creach, K. M., Giaccone, G., Koshy, M., Zaky, S., Rodrigues, G. 2018; 8 (4): 245–50


    To revise the recommendation on the use of concurrent chemotherapy (CC) with palliative thoracic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) made in the original 2011 American Society for Radiation Oncology guideline on palliative thoracic radiation for lung cancer.Based on a systematic PubMed search showing new evidence for this key question, the task force felt an update was merited. Guideline recommendations were created using a predefined consensus-building methodology supported by American Society for Radiation Oncology-approved tools for grading evidence quality and recommendation strength.Although few randomized clinical trials address the question of CC combined with palliative thoracic EBRT for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a strong consensus was reached among the task force on recommendations for incurable stage III and IV NSCLC. For patients with stage III NSCLC deemed unsuitable for curative therapy but who are (1) candidates for chemotherapy, (2) have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 0 to 2, and (3) have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, administration of a platinum-containing chemotherapy doublet concurrently with moderately hypofractionated palliative thoracic radiation therapy is recommended over treatment with either modality alone. For patients with stage IV NSCLC, routine use of concurrent thoracic chemoradiation is not recommended.Optimal palliation of patients with incurable NSCLC requires coordinated interdisciplinary care. Recent data establish a rationale for CC with palliative thoracic EBRT for a well-defined subset of patients with incurable stage III NSCLC. For all other patients with incurable NSCLC, data remain insufficient to support this treatment approach.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2018.02.009

    View details for Web of Science ID 000436836900016

    View details for PubMedID 29625898