Oncology Peer Review On-The-Go

Sarah Poland, MD, lead author of a recently published article in the journal ONCOLOGY titled Advances in Immunotherapy for Breast Cancer, highlighted key findings from her review in a conversation with CancerNetwork®.1 Throughout the discussion, she spoke about: Shifting Perspectives on Immunogenicity: Historically, breast cancer was considered a “cold,” poorly immunogenic tumor due to low tumor mutational burden (TMB) and few tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). Poland highlighted how clinical research has shifted this perspective, particularly through the study of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), which often exhibits higher PD-L1 expression and immune infiltration.Key Clinical Milestones: The review highlighted foundational data that established immunotherapy as a standard of care: Early-Stage TNBC: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-522 trial (NCT03036488) established pembrolizumab (Keytruda) plus chemotherapy as a standard neoadjuvant treatment for stage II to III TNBC.2 Metastatic TNBC: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 trial (NCT02819518) demonstrated the benefit of pembrolizumab in PD-L1–positive metastatic disease.3 Managing Toxicity and Rechallenge: Poland addressed the feasibility of pembrolizumab rechallenge after an immune-related adverse effect (irAE), emphasizing that while possible, it requires a highly individualized approach based on the severity and timing of the initial toxicity.The Future Landscape: Beyond PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, the discussion covered emerging technologies that are poised to redefine treatment: Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs): Exploration of novel combinations of ADCs with immunotherapy. Emerging Modalities: The potential role of bispecific antibodies and vaccine trials utilizing tumor antigens. Subtype Expansion: Emerging evidence supporting the efficacy of immunotherapy in hormone receptor–positive and HER2-positive subtypes, moving beyond the traditional focus on TNBC. Unmet Educational Needs: Poland emphasized the importance of resources that connect providers and patients, particularly in translating complex trial data into clinical practice and addressing patient concerns regarding the newest therapies and trials.Poland is from the Department of Medicine in the Section of Hematology/Oncology at The University of Chicago.References1.        Poland S, de Oliveira Andrade M, Nanda R. Advances in immunotherapy for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2026;40(1):8-15. doi:10.46883/2026.259210612.        Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, et al. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(9):810-821. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa19105493.        Cortes J, Rugo HS, Cescon DW, et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(3):217-226. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2202809

At the 2026 Tandem Meetings, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of experts who presented on key developments and advancements across hematologic oncology. As part of different oral presentations and poster sessions, researchers and clinicians shared updated findings that may influence the management of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), leukemia, lymphoma, and other blood cancer types.First, Fernando Duarte, head of the Bone Marrow Transplant Service at Walter Cantídio University Hospital (HUWC), hematologist and professor at the Federal University of Ceará, and president of the Brazilian Society of Cell Therapy and Bone Marrow Transplant, highlighted his presentation analyzing trends associated with allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) among patients with MDS or myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and other types of MDS. Data from the Brazillian SBTMO and CIBMTR registry revealed that patients receiving allo-HCT for MDS/MPN were typically older with worse performance statuses. Additionally, MDS/MPN independently predicted worse overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival outcomes.Next, Alfonso Molina, MD, MPH, a third-year Hematology and Medical Oncology fellow at Stanford University, detailed results from a phase 1 trial (NCT05507827) assessing Orca-T, an investigational allogeneic T-cell immunotherapy, among those with high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). Treatment with Orca-T yielded disease-free survival and OS in all (100%) 18 evaluable patients after a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 3-35), which occurred without graft failure, significant graft-versus-host-disease, or severe CAR-mediated toxicity.Finally, Irtiza N. Sheikh, DO, an assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics - Patient Care, Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Section of the Division of Pediatrics at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discussed his presentation exploring differences in outcomes with lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi; liso-cel) across various treatment settings and patient populations with large B-cell lymphoma. Data demonstrated that among patients younger than 50 years old, liso-cel produced enduring responses across real-world and clinical trial settings, which were comparable to outcomes in overall populations. References Duarte FB, Garcia YDO, Hamerschlak N, et al. Comparative outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms and other myelodysplastic syndromes: Brazilian Sbtmo/CIBMTR registry analysis. Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Presentation 63. Molina A, Shiraz A, Kanegai A, et al. Mature outcomes from the phase I trial of Orca-T and allogeneic CD19/CD22 CAR-T cells for adults with high-risk B-ALL. Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Presentation 31. Sheikh IN, Patel K, Perales MA, et al. Clinical outcomes of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in YOUNGER PATIENTS (Pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Poster 210.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Manoj Bhasin, PhD, MS, spoke about findings from a study in which he and colleagues developed a single-cell atlas characterizing the dysregulation of the bone marrow immune microenvironment in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Findings published in Nature Cancer showed that the immune system has a broad, treatment-independent influence on outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.Bhasin began by detailing the background and methodology of his study, in which an Immune Atlas of multiple myeloma helped generate profiles of 1,397,272 single cells from the bone marrow of 337 patients with newly diagnosed disease to characterize immune and hematopoietic cell populations. He also broke down specific analyses of certain aspects of the immune microenvironment, such as signaling evaluations demonstrating active intercellular communication involving a proliferation-inducing ligand and B cell maturation antigen potentially associated with tumor growth and survival.Looking ahead, Bhasin described a need to research additional factors, including those beyond the bone marrow, which may help clinicians further optimize therapeutic strategies for patients with multiple myeloma.“Maybe the biggest thing we want to say from this study is that the immune system is a critical player in the outcome of multiple myeloma, its emergence, and its therapeutic response. It is not a byproduct; it is a major driver of the outcomes,” Bhasin stated. “[Not] all high-risk multiple myeloma lesions are the same. We should look at the immune imprints of them, further comprehensively study them, and then help in designing immune therapies that fix the immune dysregulation that is associated with each cytogenetic alteration [instead of] thinking that all high-risk cytogenetic lesions of myeloma are all the same.”Bhasin is a professor in the Department of Pediatrics and in the Department of Biomedical Informatics at Emory University School of Medicine, and director of Genomics, Proteomics, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology and the Aflac Director of the Single Cell Biology Program at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta.ReferencePilcher WC, Yao L, Gonzalez-Kozlova E, et al. A single-cell atlas characterizes dysregulation of the bone marrow immune microenvironment associated with outcomes in multiple myeloma. Nat Cancer. 2026;7:224-246. doi:10.1038/s43018-025-01072-4

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Ram Prakash Thirugnanasambandam, MBBS, discussed the evolving roles that artificial intelligence (AI)–based tools may play in palliative care and the management of different hematologic malignancies. He spoke in the context of a publication he authored, The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Palliative Oncology: Zeroing in on Hematologic Malignancies,which was featured in the November/December 2025 issue of the journal ONCOLOGY®.Thirugnanasambandam, a fellow of Internal Medicine, Hospice and Palliative Medicine, and Geriatric Medicine at the University of Miami, outlined the paper's aim to explore how AI can assist with patient-centric goals of care like symptom management as well as decision-making support among clinicians. In the context of palliative medicine, AI has demonstrated utility as a supportive tool that can help with marking patients who may benefit from a palliative care conversation. Such tools have also assisted with identifying symptoms such as pain, dyspnea, anxiety, or psychosocial distress, allowing providers to form a more proactive approach to patient care.According to Thirugnanasambandam, implementing AI into one's workflow may help accurately predict disease subtypes and burdens among patients with leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma. He noted that predictive analytic capabilities may also facilitate effective management of cytopenias, transplant-related needs, infections, and other treatment-related toxicities.Thirugnanasambandam also discussed some of the ethical considerations surrounding the growth of AI-based tools, highlighting information privacy concerns and potentially biased datasets as notable issues with these platforms. Although AI may assist with decision-making, Thirugnanasambandam stated that it ultimately cannot replace a human's nuanced clinical judgment and empathy.“I want readers to take away a sense of balance,” Thirugnanasambandam said regarding his publication. “We've done the article to help clinicians be more comfortable in engaging with AI. We need to apply it critically, not as replacing judgment or decision-making skills, but more as an adjunct.”

Emphasizing the evidence-based nature of medicine, Nathan Goodyear, MD, explained that integrative oncology uses many of the same parameters and key clinical thresholds among patients undergoing treatment for a diagnosis of cancer that his conventional oncologist colleagues use.In this episode of Oncology on the Go, Goodyear, an integrative medicine physician at the Williams Cancer Institute, discussed key clinical efficacy and safety thresholds that integrative oncologists use for flagship integrative therapies, emerging localized and combinatory immunotherapy options in this clinical landscape, and a focus on reestablishing trust through patient-doctor relationships.Regarding clinical thresholds, he explained that integrative care uses guidelines such as the CTCAE to follow adverse effects (AEs). RECIST criteria are also employed to ascertain clinical outcomes and utilize imaging to gauge responses in a way that is not arbitrary but translatable.Next, Goodyear discussed combinatory regimens with immunotherapy backbones, such as pulsed electric fields (PEF) with intratumoral immunotherapy, as well as anti-CD40/CpG immunotherapies, to help generate an intratumoral response prior to resection, particularly in “immune desert” tumors. He noted how these strategies may also mitigate the possibility of postoperative recurrence.Finally, he touched upon the evolving role of doctors as collaborators with their patients as opposed to a paternalistic and authoritative role over the course of their treatment. Driven by growing demands for a greater desire to preserve quality of life during care, Goodyear explained that his institution aims to “innovate, elevate, and empower” by bringing emergent innovative strategies to patients, elevating their immune system through immune responses, and empowering patients to undergo the healing process in tandem with a reduction of AEs.Goodyear concluded by reiterating the importance of patient-centric care, particularly as it pertains to the restoration of trust in medicine, as well as a return to a doctor's intended rule as a healer.For more expert-level discussions across the oncology paradigm, check out the newest podcast series on CancerNetwork®, RadOnc on the Run. Join host and ONCOLOGY® editor-at-large Brandon Mancini, MD, MBA, FACRO, as he speaks with colleagues about the latest advancements and hottest research in the radiation oncology space. 

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Kandace P. McGuire, MD, and Paschalia Mountziaris, MD, PhD, highlighted the use of L-Dex bioimpedance spectroscopy as a method for detecting lymphedema earlier in patients who undergo surgery for breast cancer. The experts discussed seamlessly integrating this novel modality into standard vitals workflows and detailed other considerations for improving long-term survivorship outcomes via proactive lymphatic care.McGuire began by breaking down why detection of lymphedema typically occurs later after its development, describing how a sentinel lymph node biopsy and additive radiation can cause lymphatic damage and obstruction that correspond with symptoms months to years down the road. At her institution, bioimpedance spectroscopy, the use of a small electrical signal measuring “bioimpedance”, is employed at various points before and after breast cancer surgery to easily determine the likelihood of developing lymphedema through a nursing visit. According to Mountziaris, having a noninvasive method like this provides a “valuable tool” for informing patients of their risks of experiencing lymphedema.The experts also discussed a need to develop a more nuanced method for detecting potential lymphedema among patients with a higher body mass index and spoke about fostering communication across the breast surgery oncology team, the plastic/reconstructive team, and physical rehabilitation specialists to monitor abnormal fluid changes in patients. Looking ahead, they emphasized making bioimpedance spectroscopy more accessible as a key goal in lymphedema care.“We are privileged that McGuire and I have a great team and that I have the equipment that we're able to provide these things for our patients. From my standpoint, some of these patients appear—to me, by measurements, and everything else—to have been cured of their lymphedema after these interventions,” Mountziaris stated. “Getting an L-Dex score on them is just another way to demonstrate that we did bring them to stage 0 or no lymphedema.”McGuire is professor of surgery and chief of breast surgery at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Massey Cancer Center. Mountziaris is assistant professor of surgery in the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at VCU Massey Cancer Center.ReferenceVCU Massey now offers new technology for early detection of lymphedema. News release. December 8, 2025. Accessed January 14, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/2ktfzf5k

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Nathan Goodyear, MD, provided an overview of how to implement integrative modalities that may effectively supplement standard-of-care oncologic therapies. Beyond the use of intravenous vitamin C and other flagship strategies at his institution, Goodyear addressed potential misconceptions and biases surrounding integrative oncology and discussed how to re-engage patients back into evidence-based care.Goodyear, an integrative oncologist at the Williams Cancer Institute, described how conventional modalities like surgery and radiotherapy may damage the immune system during cancer treatment, and how integrative strategies aim to re-engage and stimulate areas like the gut microbiome to safeguard patient quality of life. He touched upon how practices such as fecal transplantation, fasting, and intratumoral pulsed electric field (PEF) therapy can convert unresponsive diseases into “hot” tumors that immunologically react to treatment.Looking across the medical field entirely, Goodyear described how certain “camps” may perceive integrative oncology as an “alternative” form of medicine. Citing an article published in JAMA Network Open showing how patient trust in US hospitals decreased from 71.5% in 2020 to 40.1% in 2024, Goodyear noted how such divisiveness among healthcare providers may have played a role in losing the support of patients.   As part of mitigating the prejudicial, marginalizing attitudes towards integrative care as well as the infighting among physicians, Goodyear emphasized building bridges across holistic care, conventional oncology, and other fields to properly advance the treatment of patients. Having an open dialogue and debating the science behind new integrative modalities, he explained, will help in advocating for patients and establishing trust in their care teams.“We must re-engage with [patients] through the science, through public debate and discourse with other doctors; that will re-engage the patient,” Goodyear stated. “More importantly, I think that will re-engage the patient's trust in doctors. When we restore a doctor-patient relationship, medicine is going to get better, and patients are going to get better.”ReferencePerlis RH, Ognyanova K, Uslu A, et al. Trust in physicians and hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic in a 50-state survey of US adults. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(7):e2424984. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.24984

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Jose G. Trevino, II, MD, FACS, spoke about the current state of the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) paradigm as well as next steps for improving the prognosis of patients who present with this disease. Throughout the discussion, Trevino outlined the roles that surgical oncologists can play in disease management, the different demographic and socioeconomic drivers of disparate patient outcomes, and translational research focusing on factors like the tumor microenvironment.Trevino stressed the idea of pancreatic cancer care as a “team science,” rejecting a “silo mentality” that involves handing off a patient from one department to the next. Because surgical approaches by themselves have remained “limited” in pancreatic cancer for the past 20 to 30 years, he emphasized continued collaboration with medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and translational scientists to enhance patient quality of life. Regarding disparities, Trevino noted the importance of recognizing various barriers to treatment access among those in rural communities as well as unequal outcomes across different racial and ethnic groups of patients, including worse survival among Black populations. Additionally, in the face of continuously rising PDAC incidence, he stressed additional training across the board on how to detect the red flags associated with disease.“…There has to be a ton of education for our patients and our physicians who see patients on a primary level to know what those red flags are when a patient comes to their clinic. Early detection of early lesions that could eventually turn into pancreatic adenocarcinoma is going to be the key to survival, ultimately. [If we] catch it before it becomes a cancer, we solve a huge problem,” Trevino stated. “Early detection of early lesions is key.”Trevino is chair of the Division of Surgical Oncology and an associate professor in the Department of Surgery at VCU School of Medicine as well as surgeon-in-chief and Walter Lawrence, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Oncology at VCU Massey Cancer Center.

After the 2025 American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting had passed, the  data were out, and the hematologist/oncologists of the world had time to digest the practice changes that awaited them upon their returns home. Rahul Banerjee, MD, FACP, and Brooke Adams, PharmD, BCOP, took part in an X Spaces discussion hosted by CancerNetwork® in collaboration with The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) to highlight these potential changes. Adams and Banerjee discussed abstracts from the meeting, including the phase 3 MajesTEC-3 trial (NCT05083169), which evaluated teclistamab-cqyv (Tecvayli) plus daratumumab (Darzalex) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who progressed on at least 1 prior line of therapy.1 A significant progression-free survival benefit was observed with the experimental combination compared with standard of care in this population. They also discussed data from cohort A of the phase 2 IFM2021-01 trial (NCT05572229), which evaluated subcutaneous teclistamab in combination with subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Results demonstrated that the combination was effective and safe in the frontline treatment of patients who were ineligible for transplant.2 The discussion also covered the broader treatment landscape, as the experts compared the use of bispecific antibodies with BCMA-directed CAR T-cell therapies. Frontline bispecific strategies for transplant-ineligible populations were also topics of conversation, as well as post-transplant consolidation with bispecifics. Ultimately, they stated that multiple myeloma care is undergoing a paradigm shift toward deeper minimal residual disease negativity, possible treatment de‑escalation, and even serious use of the word “cure” for the disease. Banerjee is an assistant professor in the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and Adams is a clinical pharmacist in the Department of Stem Cell Transplant and Cellular Therapy and coordinator of the PGY-2 Oncology Residency at Orlando Health. Both are also members of the ASTCT content committee. References Mateos M-V, Bahlis N, Perrot A, et al. Phase 3 randomized study of teclistamab plus daratumumab versus investigator's choice of daratumumab and dexamethasone with either pomalidomide or Bortezomib (DPd/DVd) in patients (Pts) with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): Results of majestec-3. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 2):LBA-6. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-LBA-6 Manier S, Lambert J, Marco M, et al. A phase 2 study of teclistamab in combination with daratumumab in elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: the IFM2021-01 teclille trial, cohort A. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):367. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-367

This episode of the collaborative podcast between Oncology on the Go and the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), hosted by Daniel C. McFarland, DO, features Michelle B. Riba, MD, and focuses on integrating psychosocial care into oncology for clinicians. The discussion emphasizes that psychosocial issues profoundly impact both quality of life and cancer-related outcomes, making their assessment an integral part of care, not merely ancillary. The distress thermometer was developed by the NCCN in the late 1990s as a 0-to-10 scale, dubbed the "fifth vital sign". The term "distress" was chosen over psychiatric labels to capture the wide array of patient concerns, including pain, fatigue, sleep, spiritual, practical, and family issues. Distress screening is now mandated at regular appointments in all cancer centers in the US. Clinicians are encouraged to screen for more specific issues like depression (linked to poor adherence and survival), anxiety (which can impede treatment adherence), and substance use. Oncologists are the doctors most able to consider a patient's totality of symptoms, and their role is integral to supporting psychosocial referrals. To address the practical delivery of care, the collaborative care model is being advocated as a public health, population-based approach. Key components include: Use of a standardized screening tool. Management by a dedicated care manager. Weekly consultation between the care manager and a consultant psychiatrist for triage and treatment advice. The model allows oncologists to bill for care and learn more about these issues while ensuring patients receive evidence-based treatments. The clinicians concluded that fundamentally, mental health needs to be aligned alongside cancer care. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Riba is director of the PsychOncology Program, a clinical professor, and the associate chair for Integrated Medical and Psychiatric Services in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, and psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY.

At the 2025 American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting & Exposition (ASH), CancerNetwork® sat down with a variety of researchers and clinicians to discuss potential advancements across hematologic oncology care. These experts shared their findings related to investigational therapeutic regimens and strategies that may prove impactful across different multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and leukemia populations. First, Krina K. Patel, MD, MSc, highlighted findings from the phase 2 iMMagine-1 study (NCT05396885) assessing treatment with anitocabtagene autoleucel (anito-cel) among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. According to Patel, an associate professor in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, the novel cellular therapy elicited an overall response rate (ORR) of 96% and a stringent complete response or CR rate of 74% among the evaluable patients. She also discussed how anito-cel's unique mechanism of action may show efficiency compared with other cellular therapy products while reducing the risk of cytokine release syndrome and other delayed toxicities. Next, Manali Kamdar, MD, spoke about data from a long-term follow-up phase 2/3 study (NCT03435796) based on the phase 3 TRANSFORM trial (NCT03575351) evaluating lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel; Breyanzi) vs standard-of-care therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Long-term follow-up showed that liso-cel continued to elicit improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival across this population. Kamdar, the clinical director of Lymphoma Services at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, touched upon the patient subpopulations who are most suitable to receive liso-cel while emphasizing the agent's curative potential in the second-line setting. Finally, Wei Ying Jen, BM BCh, MA, MMed, MRCP, FRCPath, detailed results from the phase 1/2 SAVE trial (NCT05360160), which showed responses with an all-oral combination of revumenib (Revuforj), decitabine/cedazuridine (Inqovi), and venetoclax (Venclexta) for patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Jen, an assistant professor in the Department of Leukemia in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, noted how an all-oral regimen may offer an “advantage” compared with standard intensive chemotherapy, which requires patients to travel to the hospital to undergo an infusion. References Patel K, Dhakal B, Kaur G, et al. Phase 2 registrational study of anitocabtagene autoleucel for the treatment of patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: updated results from iMMagine-1. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):256. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-256 Kamdar M, Solomon S, Arnason J, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus standard of care (SOC) for second-line relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL): First Results from long-term follow-up of TRANSFORM. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):3710. doi.10.1182/blood-2025-3710 Jen WY, DiNardo CD, Short NJ, et al. Phase II study of the all-oral combination of revumenib (SNDX-5613) with decitabine/cedazuridine (ASTX727) and venetoclax (SAVE) in newly diagnosed AML. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):47. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-47

In the most recent ONCOLOGY On the Go hosted in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, Daniel C. McFarland, DO, spoke with Charles S. Kamen, PhD, MPH, about health equity for sexual and gender minority groups in oncology.  Sexual and gender minority groups, who constitute approximately 9.3% of the US population, experience significant and preventable disparities across all stages of the cancer care continuum, according to Kamen.1 He detailed how these inequities are largely driven by minority stress: the chronic psychological and emotional burden resulting from anticipated and experienced prejudice, discrimination, and stigma within health care settings.2 McFarland and Kamen highlighted that a lack of comprehensive sexual and gender minority training in medical education often leaves clinicians feeling unprepared, compounding the patient's anxiety and mistrust. The path to correcting these disparities requires a fundamental shift to cultural humility: the readiness to acknowledge one's own lack of knowledge and learn directly from the patient's lived experience. The most critical, actionable step discussed was the systematic, safe, and affirmative collection of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) data.3 Kamen emphasized that SOGI data is a clinical tool, not just a demographic marker. When collected routinely—ideally non-verbally via intake forms—SOGI data are used to: Ensure Biologically Appropriate Surveillance: Confirming that all necessary cancer screenings are offered based on the patient's existing organs, regardless of current gender identity. Facilitate Relationship-Centered Care: Appropriately recognizing and engaging the patient's partners and chosen family; a critical component of sexual and gender minority support networks. Tailored Psychosocial Navigation: Moving beyond a general "disparities mindset" to an "equity mindset" by using SOGI data to connect patients with LGBTQ-specific psychosocial resources that directly address discrimination-related distress drivers. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Kamen is an associate professor in the Department of Surgery, Cancer Control (SMD) and holds joint appointments as an associate professor at the Center for Community Health and Prevention and the Department of Psychiatry (SMD) at the University of Rochester Medical Center.  References 1.        Jones JM. LGBTQ+ identification in U.S. rises to 9.3%. News release. Gallup. February 20, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/48n8j8bd 2.        Minority stress. American Psychological Association. Updated November 15, 2023. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/5n888ynr Learning resources — collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/4btrn5y3

As part of a visit to Georgia Cancer Center in Augusta, Georgia, CancerNetwork spoke with a variety of experts and faculty members regarding ongoing research and future initiatives dedicated to improving outcomes across different patient populations. These conversations touched upon potential developments in diseases including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), multiple myeloma, and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). First, Girindra Raval, MD, an associate professor in the Department of Medicine: Hematology and Oncology of the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, discussed current studies at his institution that may help optimize treatment for patients with lung cancer. This research ranged from retrospective trials analyzing how demographic features may influence outcomes to biomarker-based assessments intended to augment the efficacy of immunotherapy. Looking towards the future, Raval stated that determining how to sequence and de-escalate treatment amidst several available therapeutic options will be a key concern in the field. Additionally, Amany Keruakous, MD, director of Myeloma Research at Georgia Cancer Center and assistant professor in the Department of Medicine: Hematology and Oncology at the Medical College of Georgia of Augusta University, detailed strategies for mitigating current challenges in multiple myeloma care. She emphasized fostering collaborative relationships between colleagues in community settings and academic institutions to help reduce barriers to treatment access among patients. Furthermore, she noted the importance of conducting additional clinical trials at community centers.  Finally, Daniel Peters, MD, an assistant professor at the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University and bone marrow transplant & cellular therapy faculty member at Georgia Cancer Center, focused on key developments across the AML space. At his institution, Peters and colleagues are evaluating potential drivers of immune dysfunction, which may inform less intensive cellular therapy approaches or determine who is suitable to receive autologous types of treatment. Peters also discussed how additional research set for presentation at meetings like the 2025 American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting and Exposition (ASH) may affirm a shift away from 7+3 intensive chemotherapy for patients who are younger and fit with newly diagnosed AML. 

In a collaborative podcast with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society hosted by Daniel C. McFarland, DO, guests Louis P. Voigt, MD, and Yesne Alici, MD, discussed the ethical and clinical complexities of assessing decision-making capacity (DMC) in oncology, emphasizing its role as the ethical core of person-centered care. The discussion began by dissecting modern medicine's need for formal DMC assessment. Voigt framed DMC as a fundamental issue of patient rights and respect, asserting that every human being has absolute rights and that the integrity of a person requires honoring their self-determination. He advocated for clinicians to act as professionals, earn trust, customize their approach based on individual needs through precision medicine, and demonstrate humility by re-explaining information when a patient cannot summarize their understanding. Alici provided a detailed clinical framework for DMC, defining it as a person's ability to decide on the specific issue at hand while appreciating the foreseeable consequences. She outlined the 4 key elements, or pillars, of the assessment: the patient's ability to understand the information, to appreciate the risks and benefits, to provide a rationalization for the decision to ensure no delusional thinking interferes, and to communicate a consistent choice. She clarified that DMC is decision-specific and time-dependent, emphasizing that conditions like dementia, schizophrenia, major depression, or even a central nervous system malignancy do not automatically mean a patient lacks capacity; it must be assessed for each situation and may be restored if cases like delirium are reversible. She cautioned that clinicians must be mindful of potential mislabeling when patients with aphasia interact, as simple gestures may not fully represent informed consent. Finally, the experts addressed the crucial implications that follow an assessment of incapacity. Voigt highlighted that a lack of DMC is not a "stop sign"; decisions must still be made, requiring the health care team to look to a designated proxy or the patient's next-of-kin. He stressed the need for hospitals to establish system-wide processes and workflows to prepare all stakeholders for these contingencies and help patients become familiar with advanced directives, thereby reducing the immense emotional burden placed on surrogates who must perform substituted judgment. McFarland concluded that being aware of DMC elevates the quality of care, reinforces an ethical climate, and enhances the entire organization. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being a psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Voigt is an intensivist and chair of the Ethics Committee at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). Alici is vice chair of Clinical Operations in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, clinical director, associate attending psychiatrist, and medical director of the Biobehavioral Health Clinic at MSKCC. 

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Michael Barish, PhD, spoke about an investigational CAR T-cell therapy that he and colleagues are developing as a treatment for patients with glioblastoma. He and his team designed the agent to harness chlorotoxin, an amino acid peptide toxin component of scorpion venom, as a vehicle for intratumoral delivery of therapy for this patient population. Barish, a chair in the Department of Neurosciences/Developmental & Stem Cell Biology at City of Hope, discussed the background and mechanisms surrounding this novel compound, which he and colleagues evaluated as part of a phase 1 trial (NCT04214392). Early findings published in Cell Reports Medicine showed that among 4 patients with recurrent glioblastoma, 3 (75%) achieved a best response of stable disease. Additionally, the chlorotoxin-directed cellular therapy was found to be well-tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities. Although responses were not as strong as Barish and colleagues had hoped, he described how the study nevertheless demonstrated the safety and feasibility of this CAR T-cell therapy formulation.  After establishing the safety of the novel agent in patients with recurrent glioblastoma, Barish highlighted how next steps for research included engineering different versions of the chlorotoxin and modifying the T cells that express the chimeric receptor. He stated these reconfigurations may help yield additional power and efficacy of the cellular therapy in future studies. Overall, Barish noted how the potential therapeutic application of the neurotoxin represented a “proof of principle.” “[V]enoms of many invertebrates are, in fact, very powerful biologically. In a sense, evolution has honed them to be relatively specific. Neurobiology is very much driven by the specificity of different toxins for different ion channels,” Barish stated. “This idea—that one could use biological products efficiently this way for something as heterogeneous as glioblastoma—might be an example of how it could be more efficacious for other solid tumors as well.” Reference Barish ME, Aftabizadeh M, Hibbard J, et al. Chlorotoxin-directed CAR T cell therapy for recurrent glioblastoma: interim clinical experience demonstrating feasibility and safety. Cell Rep Med. 2025;6(8):102302. doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2025.102302.

The latest episode of Oncology On the Go focused on survivorship and supportive care. Stemming from conversations with leading clinicians in the field, the compilation highlights gaps and educational insights into multiple areas.  Covering topics like nutrition, oncodermatology, body image, sexual health, and mortality, these conversations explored how to truly optimize multidisciplinary cancer care.   Declan Walsh, MD, chair of the Department of Supportive Oncology at Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute: 1:01-2:44: What is the importance of developing and managing supportive care at major oncology centers, and how can it be adapted across the US? 2:45-4:19: Supportive care is one piece of the multidisciplinary team. How can clinicians work with supportive care specialists to ensure that patients are receiving all the help that they need? Denise Reynolds, RD, of Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute: 4:20-5:46: Some adverse effects (AEs) include severe nausea and vomiting. What nutritional strategies do you recommend to ensure adequate intake? 5:47-7:29: Taste and smell changes are common AEs. What advice do you give to patients to help cope and combat them? Adam Friedman, MD, FAAD, professor and chair of dermatology, director of the Residency Program, and director of translational research at George Washington Medical Faculty Associates in Washington, DC: 7:30-9:24: Your study found that a significant proportion of respondents, including those who have been previously treated for cancer, would decline anti-cancer therapies due to dermatologic AEs like hair loss. What are some crucial communication strategies oncologists should employ to address this? 9:25-11:37: What should all oncology clinicians know about how to manage mild to moderate dermatologic AEs? 11:38-24:54: Daniel C. McFarland, DO, the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center; a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer; and the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®, spoke with different psycho-oncology colleagues regarding topics like body image, sexual health, and mortality. These colleagues included Michelle Fingeret, PhD, founder of Fingeret Psychology Services; Christian J. Nelson, PhD, chief of Psychiatry Service, attending psychologist, and codirector of the Psycho-Oncology of Care and Aging Program at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and William S. Breitbart, MD, attending physician and the Jimmie C. Holland Chair in Psycho-Oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. All psycho-oncology episodes are now available on our website.  Reference Menta N, Vidal SI, Whiting C, Azim SA, Desai S, Friedman A. Perceptions and knowledge of dermatologic side effects of anti-cancer therapies: a pilot survey. J Drugs Dermatol. 2025;24(8):e57-e58.

Following a fruitful European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2025 for gastrointestinal malignancies, CancerNetwork® organized an X Spaces discussion hosted by 3 experts. They were Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, an assistant professor at the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine of Hofstra University and Northwell Health; Timothy Brown, MD, an assistant professor in the Department of Internal Medicine and the associate program director of the Hematology & Oncology Fellowship at UT Southwestern Medical Center; and Udhayvir S. Grewal, MD, an assistant professor in the Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Emory University School of Medicine. Each doctor focused on a specific disease type, highlighting the most important abstracts in colorectal cancer, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and upper gastrointestinal cancers. The Phase 3 MATTERHORN Trial (NCT04592913) Results from MATTERHORN demonstrated that adding durvalumab (Imfinzi) to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin (folinic acid), oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) improved overall survival (OS) compared with FLOT plus placebo in patients with resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, regardless of pathological status.1 In the intention-to-treat population, the median OS was not reached in either arm, and the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.63-0.96; P = .021). Notably, the improvement was observed regardless of PD-L1 status; in patients with PD-L1–positive disease, the HR was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.63-0.99), and in patients with PD-L1–negative disease, the HR was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.41-1.50). “This, I believe, will seal durvalumab plus FLOT as the standard of care for resectable [gastric/GEJ] cancers,” said Brown. The Observational ASPEN Study (NCT03084770) The ASPEN study showed that active surveillance was a safe approach for patients with low-grade, asymptomatic, nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) fewer than 2 centimeters in size.2 Of the 1000 patients enrolled in the trial, 20 patients died, of whom 18 underwent active surveillance and 2 underwent surgery. Nineteen of the deaths were unrelated to pancreatic NETs; 1 death in the surgery arm was related to a pancreatic NET. After surgery, 5 patients had disease relapse or progression. With a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR, 25-60), the OS analysis showed a P value of 0.530.  “This really settles the debate on whether or not to surgically operate on patients with a [pancreatic NET] size of [fewer] than 2 centimeters and shows that active surveillance is a safe option for these patients with pancreatic NETs [fewer] than 2 centimeters in size and non-functional NETs,” said Grewal.  Data From the Phase 2/3 FOxTROT (NCT00647530) and Phase 2 NICHE-2 (NCT03026140) Trials Neoadjuvant nivolumab (Opdivo) plus ipilimumab (Yervoy) achieved a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in long-term outcomes, including responses and survival, compared with chemotherapy strategies in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) locally advanced colon cancer.3 In NICHE-2, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab achieved a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 100% compared with 80% (95% CI, 73%-85%) with all chemotherapy strategies in FOxTROT (P

As part of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2025, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of experts about key takeaways from different late-breaking abstracts, oral presentations, and other sessions focused on potential advancements across cancer care. Presenting investigators highlighted updated results from clinical trials evaluating novel therapeutic strategies across different cancer populations, including breast cancer and lung cancer.  Phase 3 VIKTORIA-1 Trial Sara A. Hurvitz, MD, FACP, the Smith Family Endowed Chair in Women's Health and senior vice president and director of the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutch Cancer Center, and tumor chair in breast oncology for the ONCOLOGY® editorial advisory board, first discussed findings from the phase 3 VIKTORIA-1 trial (NCT05501886). Her presentation highlighted how VIKTORIA-1 was “the first study to demonstrate a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival [PFS] with PAM inhibition” for patients with PIK3CA wild-type advanced breast cancer. Data from the trial showed that gedatolisib plus fulvestrant (Faslodex) and palbociclib (Ibrance) produced a median PFS of 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.2-16.6) vs 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.3) with fulvestrant alone (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.17-0.35; P

In a discussion with CancerNetwork®, Anne Chiang, MD, PhD, spoke about the current treatment landscape for those with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) as well as next steps for elevating the quality of care among patients. She began by outlining the evolution of therapeutic standards in the field, with atezolizumab (Tecentriq)- and durvalumab (Imfinzi)-based regimens emerging as key frontline strategies and lurbinectedin (Zepzelca) and tarlatamab-dlle (Imdelltra) demonstrating utility as second-line therapies.  Regarding novel treatments that may hold promise in the SCLC field, Chiang, an associate professor of medicine in the Section of Medical Oncology at Yale School of Medicine, highlighted her work on the phase 2 SWOG S2409 PRISM trial (NCT06769126). Here, Chiang and colleagues plan to collect tissue from more than 800 patients undergoing frontline induction therapy with chemoimmunotherapy to inform subsequent biomarker-directed treatment, which may help elucidate factors of disease heterogeneity in the process. The conversation also focused on considerations for improving the care of those with lung cancer in community-based settings, as Chiang emphasized spreading knowledge of therapeutic advances to a broader patient population. She noted that there is “still a bit of nihilism about the prognosis” of patients with SCLC, describing a need to further leverage the field's understanding of biology to impart the benefits of immunotherapy to more patients. Chiang also detailed the importance of employing patient-reported outcomes to hear directly from the patient, which may ensure their inclusion in the shared decision-making process and optimize strategies for mitigating potential adverse effects during treatment. “Understanding and leveraging the biology is important. We are going to need to understand how to sequence therapies, and that involves understanding which patients are at higher risk,” Chiang stated regarding future initiatives in the field. “We need to look at high-risk populations—for example, patients with brain metastases—and understand which therapies are especially useful for them.”

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Jorge Cortes, MD, explored the evolution of the chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) landscape. Specifically, he highlighted how the development of ibrutinib (Gleevec) paved the way for other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and described where research must go next in terms of implementing fixed-duration therapy and targeting genetic abnormalities. Cortes, the director, and Cecil F. Whitaker Jr., GRA Eminent Scholar Chair in Cancer at the Georgia Cancer Center, began by detailing the standards of care that existed before the development of imatinib. He noted that many patients did “not have great options,” as neither interferon nor transplant was associated with “good” outcomes.  Following its approval for patients with CML in 2001, imatinib became what Cortes described as a “groundbreaker” in the field. He explained how imatinib's newfound status as a standard of care in CML would signal the advancement of a second generation of TKIs, which included agents like dasatinib (Sprycel), nilotinib (Tasigna), and bosutinib (Bosulif). Even with the subsequent development of third-generation TKIs, Cortes stated that researchers are continuing to improve and innovate to help provide patients with enhanced quality of life. Looking towards the future, Cortes observed 2 major goals to achieve in CML research. The first objective is to stop therapy more effectively and give a greater portion of patients a more precisely defined duration of treatment. He noted that approximately 25% to 30% of patients today can effectively discontinue therapy without having to resume treatment, which wasn't even considered a possibility in the field 20 years ago. Moreover, he emphasized that finding the therapeutic options that work best in a subset of patients with recently discovered genetic abnormalities may yield a breakthrough. “In terms of whether we are getting closer to a cure, I think we are. We can stop therapy effectively in some patients, which is equivalent to a cure,” Cortes said. “If [a patient has] done well, and you can stop therapy and the disease doesn't come back, that's essentially what we think about as a cure. We are there, just not on as many patients as we want.” Reference Center for Drug Evaluation and Research: Application Number: NDA 21-335. FDA. May 10, 2001. Accessed October 6, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/44xh2u9j

In a special co-branded episode between Oncology On the Go, hosted by CancerNetwork®, and the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT)'s program, ASTCT Talks, for American Pharmacists Month, a panel of oncology pharmacists discussed optimal strategies for using cellular therapies as treatment for patients with solid tumors. The panel included Brooke Adams, PharmD, BCOP, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy at the Orlando Health Cancer Institute in Orlando, Florida; Natalie Brumwell, PharmD, BCOP, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in cellular therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York; and Bryant A. Clemons, PharmD, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in hematology, blood and marrow transplantation, and cellular therapy at the University of Kentucky's Markey Cancer Center in Lexington, Kentucky. The discussion focused on the use of the first commercially available tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) for patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma, lifileucel (Amtagvi), which the FDA granted accelerated approval status to in February 2024.1 The panelists first reviewed supporting data from the phase 2 C-144-01 trial (NCT02360579), in which lifileucel demonstrated an objective response rate of 31.5% (95% CI, 21.1%-43.4%), and a median duration of response that was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 4.1 months-NR) at the time of the approval. Additionally, the group highlighted considerations for dosing interleukin-2 (IL-2), including management of toxicities and when to hold or discontinue further doses.  Following a thorough breakdown of the proper conditions for using lifileucel in melanoma, the panelists concluded by discussing how to build upon an “exciting time for cellular therapy in solid tumors.” As part of optimizing the dosing of lifileucel and other cellular therapies in these patient populations, the experts exchanged ideas on how practices can collaborate across institutions and departments to expand access to novel treatments while helping providers develop comfort in administering these agents. Reference FDA grants accelerated approval to lifileucel for unresectable or metastatic melanoma. News release. FDA. February 16, 2024. Accessed September 30, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/2kweca6x

In a conversation with CancerNetwork® following the FDA approval of the gemcitabine intravesical system (Inlexzo; formerly TAR-200) for patients with high-risk, Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), Gary Steinberg, MD, discussed how this regulatory decision may impact the treatment paradigm. Steinberg, a professor in the Department of Urology at Rush University, highlighted an unmet need for those with BCG-unresponsive, high-grade NMIBC. With a different mechanism of action compared with prior therapeutic choices in the field, he stated that the gemcitabine intravesical system may allow patients and physicians to benefit tremendously. Based on supporting data from the phase 2 SunRISe-1 trial (NCT04640623), he described how the gemcitabine intravesical system may replace prior standards such as intravesical gemcitabine plus docetaxel. The conversation also touched upon considerations for preventing the risk of progression to metastatic disease with delayed cystectomy, as Steinberg emphasized following up with patients via cystoscopies, urinary cytologies, CT scans, or MRI imaging after treatment with the intravesical system. Steinberg also detailed strategies for mitigating urinary frequency, dysuria, and other toxicities associated with the therapy. He noted a “fine line” regarding bladder medication administration to older patient populations, as these practices may cause adverse effects such as dry mouth, constipation, and blurry vision. Looking ahead, Steinberg illustrated a need to clarify the immunologic effects of regimens like the gemcitabine intravesical system, which can inform the use of additional therapeutic combinations down the road. He highlighted how other novel agents like cretostimogene grenadenorepvec (CG0070) may further improve outcomes in the NMIBC landscape. “One of the key questions that we all need to ask with all our treatments is not about the patients who respond, but about the patients who do not respond,” Steingerg stated regarding the potential next steps for research. “We can begin to understand mechanisms of resistance so that we can target those mechanisms of resistance and treat them better.” Reference U.S. FDA approval of INLEXZO (gemcitabine intravesical system) set to transform how certain bladder cancers are treated. News release. Johnson & Johnson. September 9, 2025. Accessed September 22, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/4zjz22z7

In the recent episode of Oncology-on-the-Go, in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), Daniel C. McFarland, DO, welcomes William S. Breitbart, MD, to discuss how clinicians can address patients' existential concerns. While oncologists often focus on treatment and the drive for life, the core concern for many patients remains mortality. Breitbart's work in meaning-centered therapy provides a framework for these difficult conversations. Breitbart emphasizes that patients grappling with fear, uncertainty, and depression may not always express it directly. The goal of meaning-centered therapy is to help patients find a sense of purpose and peace, even as they face a terminal illness. This approach is not about eliminating suffering, but about helping patients find meaning in their experiences. The conversation covers the practical application of these principles, including how to bring up topics of death and dying, and the importance of validating a patient's fears without resorting to platitudes. The discussion also touches on the concept of “existential guilt,” which Breitbart links to the human awareness of one's own existence and mortality. He notes that many clinicians are drawn to oncology or psycho-oncology because of their own personal experiences with death and illness. Overall, the episode is a reminder for oncologists and their multidisciplinary team members to look beyond the treatment and its clinical outcomes, and engage in human conversations that can significantly improve a patient's quality of life, emotional support, and overall well-being. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®; Breitbart is an attending physician and the Jimmie C. Holland Chair in Psycho-Oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. 

At the Society of Hematologic Oncology 2025 Annual Meeting, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of experts about notable clinical developments and trial results across the hematologic oncology landscape. Throughout the meeting, clinicians and researchers discussed the latest data and initiatives in myelofibrosis, multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and other types of blood cancer. Francesca Palandri, MD, PhD, an adjunct professor in the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences at the University of Bologna in Bologna, Italy, shared insights from a session focused on exploring predictive markers for the efficacy of ruxolitinib (Jakafi) among patients with myelofibrosis.1 Noting variance in response rates as well as possibilities of disease progression or treatment discontinuation associated with ruxolitinib, Palandri emphasized the importance of assessing predictors of response to better orient clinical decision-making strategies regarding the agent's use. She also highlighted how factors such as cytopenic phenotype, higher peripheral blast counts, and higher burden of disease may impact response rates and survival among patients. Additionally, Sundar Jagannath, MD, a professor of Medicine specializing in hematology and medical oncology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and The Tisch Cancer Institute, spoke about his presentation on potentially defining a cure in the management of multiple myeloma.2 He described the importance of “chang[ing] the dialogue” in multiple myeloma to give hope to patients and encourage physicians to engage in patient care more optimally. By defining a cure in multiple myeloma, Jagannath stated, it may be possible to offer more finite durations of treatment and stop therapy with the confidence that patients will not relapse. Finally, Adam J. Olszewski, MD, an associate professor of medicine at The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, discussed his work on the phase 3 SUNMO trial (NCT05171647).3 Findings from this presentation showed that mosunetuzumab-axgb (Lunsumio) plus polatuzumab vedotin-piiq (Polivy; M-Pola) reduced the risk of progression or death by 59% vs rituximab (Rituxan) with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx) in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Olszewski also outlined next steps for refining treatment strategies in this patient population. References Palandri F. Predictive markers for ruxolitinib in MF. Presented at the Society of Hematologic Oncology 2025 Annual Meeting; September 3-6, 2025; Houston, TX. Jagannath S. Is it time to say “CURE” in multiple myeloma? Presented at the Society of Hematologic Oncology 2025 Annual Meeting; September 3-6, 2025; Houston, TX. Westin J, Zhang H, Kim W, et al. Mosunetuzumab plus polatuzumab vedotin is superior R-GemOx in transplant-ineligible patients with R/R LBCL: primary results of the phase III SUNMO trial. Presented at the Society of Hematologic Oncology 2025 Annual Meeting; September 3-6, 2025; Houston, TX. Abstract ABCL-1492.

In this episode, CancerNetwork® spoke with Joseph S. Wallins, MD, MPH, cardiology fellow at Weill Cornell Medicine, about a review of cardiotoxicities associated with breast cancer treatment he coauthored in the June 2025 issue of ONCOLOGY® titled, “Cardio-Oncology Considerations for Breast Cancer: Risk Stratification, Monitoring, and Treatment.” Therein, he touched upon data for risk stratification tools for oncologists, as well as the development of cardiovascular testing for individual treatment regimens. Wallins discussed the basis for conducting the systemic review as well as noteworthy cardiotoxicities associated with specific classes of breast cancer therapies. Specifically, he highlighted an increase in cancer remission and survivorship for breast cancer, which has, in turn, created alternative health risks impacting survival outcomes, such as cardiovascular risks. Citing a study showing a nearly 2-fold risk in cardiovascular-related fatalities for breast cancer survivors vs the general population, he suggested that the review was warranted to identify cardiotoxicities, strategies for preventing and managing them, and tools for risk stratification and monitoring. Wallins further outlined considerations for optimizing risk stratification and monitoring strategies in patients at risk of experiencing cardiovascular toxicities as well as treatments that may help with their prevention or mitigation. To that end, he discussed identifying patients who are at a higher risk before initiating treatment and outlined risk assessment tools that serve to do so. Furthermore, he suggested that patients who experience a greater than moderate risk for cardiovascular issues should undergo cardioprotective strategies and have in-depth conversations with providers regarding treatment risks. He concluded by highlighting future steps to enhance cardiovascular outcomes for patients with breast cancer, among additional key takeaways. Of note, Wallins expressed that genetic testing may help elucidate cardiomyopathy-associated genes while calling for a more personalized approach to risk stratification and more sensitive and specific imaging techniques to better identify at-risk patients. Finally, he emphasized a need for upfront risk assessment to identify patients at a higher risk who could benefit from additional testing as well as more pronounced collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists. Reference Bradshaw PT, Stevens J, Khankari N, Teitelbaum SL, Neugut AI, Gammon MD. Cardiovascular disease mortality among breast cancer survivors. Epidemiology. 2016;27(1):6-13. doi:10.1097/EDE.0000000000000394

In a recent episode of the Oncology-on-the-Go podcast in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), host Daniel C. McFarland, DO, was joined by Christian J. Nelson, PhD, to discuss the often-overlooked subject of sexual health issues for men after cancer treatment. The discussion emphasized the importance of a nuanced approach to men's health, particularly in the context of genitourinary cancers like prostate and testicular cancer. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®. He opened the conversation by highlighting that while cancer's physical effects are well-documented, the mental and emotional toll is equally significant and often underappreciated in male patients. He highlighted that the field of psycho-oncology, which began with breast cancer, is now expanding to address men's specific needs. Men, he noted, are less likely to seek mental health support, yet have a higher risk of suicide, particularly at key moments in their cancer journey like diagnosis and recurrence. Nelson, chief of Psychiatry Service, attending psychologist, and codirector of the Psycho-Oncology of Care and Aging Program at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, underscored that cancer treatments, especially for prostate cancer, often have profound adverse effects (AEs) that impact a man's sense of self and masculinity.  He detailed the effects of radical pelvic treatments and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which can lead to urinary incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and changes in sexual function and body image. These AEs can lead to feelings of being "broken," "inadequate," or "deflated." The pair discussed the "double-edged sword" of normalizing cancer, where patients are told their prognosis is good but are left unprepared for the life-altering AEs. This can lead to a sense of cognitive dissonance and isolation. The conversation stressed the need for clinicians to proactively normalize discussions about sexual health, making it clear that these are standard and expected aspects of the cancer experience. Both clinicians suggested that establishing a trusting relationship with patients is paramount and that referrals to psycho-oncology should be framed as an essential, not optional, component of treatment. They also recommend that clinicians consistently check in with their male patients about emotional and sexual well-being, even long after treatment has ended, to ensure they're coping with the lasting impacts of their experience. 

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Geraldine O'Sullivan Coyne, MD, MRCPI, PhD, spoke about her new appointment as the principal investigator and director of Clinical Research at the Northwell Health unit of the Southern Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics (START) Center for Cancer Research. Based on a strategic partnership formed between Northwell Health and START in May 2024, she will oversee early-phase clinical trial development at New York's first START research site at the R.J. Zuckerberg Cancer Center in New Hyde Park. Coyne began by sharing her excitement to put all her efforts into making the unit a “good opportunity” to consider patients who reside in community settings for enrollment in new clinical trials. Although large academic centers may offer possibilities for enrolling in trials, Coyne highlighted how many patients may need to travel or leave their social networks behind as they undergo treatment, thus illustrating a need for expanded options in the community setting. “Having the privilege to be able to bring trial opportunities into the community—into the heart of the community—is what we are aiming to do,” Coyne stated about her new role. “We do believe that this will [allow] patients to access novel and powerful therapies that are now increasingly part of a personalized treatment paradigm for patients with advanced malignancies.” Emphasizing the pursuit of early-phase clinical investigations, Coyne described how the new unit may leverage START's expertise to advance novel molecules across all stages of the drug development pipeline up to regulatory approval. She noted that being able to safely create and refine new therapeutic approaches in the community setting lies at the heart of a successful collaboration between Northwell Health and START. “A lot of the excitement surrounding the START unit and Northwell Health collaboration with them is exploring these novel molecules that will hopefully continue to build on the pursuit in oncology drug development, which has been finding better and more targeted therapies for patients in their treatment journey,” Coyne said. Reference Olt B. Northwell names Geraldine O'Sullivan Coyne, MD, PhD, to lead clinical trials at new START center. News release. Northwell Health. July 22, 2025. Accessed August 12, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/bdcua8ck

In the inaugural podcast episode created in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), Daniel C. McFarland, DO, and Michelle Fingeret, PhD, explored the critical, yet often overlooked, issue of body image in patients with cancer. McFarland opened the discussion by acknowledging the significant psychosocial challenges clinicians face and highlighted the therapeutic power of the patient-oncologist relationship, which extends beyond medical treatments. Fingeret defined body image as a person's total relationship with their body, encompassing not only appearance but also function and sensory experiences. She emphasized that body image changes are universal experiences for patients with cancer that affect all aspects of their lives. Despite their prevalence, Fingeret suggested that many clinicians feel ill-equipped to address these issues, and that patients are often reluctant to raise the topic due to feelings of shame or a desire not to "burden" their health care providers. The discussion delved into the spectrum of body image concerns, ranging from mild distress to severe functional impairment. Fingeret distinguished between clinical body dysmorphic disorder and other changes patients experience, stressing that their distress is a valid reaction to actual bodily alterations. She provided a framework for clinicians to assess a patient's concerns, urging them to listen carefully to the language patients use. Patients may describe their bodies with inflammatory words like "deformed" or use avoidance strategies, such as refusing to look in a mirror. Fingeret noted how these are important cues that signal a need for a deeper conversation. Practical advice was also offered on how to initiate these conversations. Instead of normalizing a patient's concerns with platitudes like "Your hair will grow back," clinicians should validate their feelings by creating a safe space for them to talk openly. Simple, curious questions—such as "How does that make you feel?" or "Have you looked at yourself in the mirror?"—can open the door to a more meaningful dialogue. The goal of intervention, Fingeret explained, is not to force the patient to love their body, but to help them achieve a greater level of body image acceptance. The conversation concluded with a focus on redefining success. McFarland noted that patients often hope to "go back to where they were before," an unrealistic goal. Fingeret reinforced this point, stating that a key part of the work is helping patients develop flexible, realistic expectations. Success is often found in incremental progress, such as reducing avoidance behaviors or finding more fulfillment in social relationships, rather than in the complete elimination of body image distress. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head and neck and lung cancer. He is also the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Fingeret is the founder of Fingeret Psychology Services and specializes in body image and cancer. 

In a conversation with CancerNetwork® at the 2025 National Immune Cell Effector Therapy (ICE-T) Conference, Tiba Al Sagheer, PharmD, BCOP, BCACP; Rebecca Gonzalez, PharmD, BCOP, FASTCT; and Syeda Saba Kareem PharmD, BCOP, spoke about their presentations on managing adverse effects (AEs) across different hematologic malignancy populations. At the meeting, Al Sagheer, Gonzalez, and Kareem presented their ideas for treating patients with lymphoma, leukemia, and multiple myeloma, respectively. Al Sagheer is a Pharmacy Quality Improvement Coordinator and Transplant/Cellular Therapy and Hematology Clinical Pharmacy Specialist at Miami Cancer Institute of Baptist Health South Florida. Gonzalez is a clinical pharmacy specialist in Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Immunotherapy at Moffitt Cancer Center. Kareem is a clinical pharmacy supervisor in Malignant Hematology at Moffitt Cancer Center. Across different disease states, the presenters outlined the most common toxicities associated with CAR T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, and other novel immunotherapies. Additionally, they described strategies for reducing the severity of AEs such as cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome as well as other oral, dermatological, and nail toxicities. Other key considerations for preserving quality of life among those receiving cellular therapy included risk stratifying patients based on tumor burden and inflammatory markers at baseline to inform prophylactic measures. Each presenter shared key takeaways for treating patients who experience treatment-related AEs based on their individual presentations. Al Sagheer emphasized that it is not “one size fits all” when it comes to therapy, as providers must tailor their use of specific drugs, prophylactic measures, and anti-infective medication to each individual patient. Kareem noted that cellular therapy represents an evolving field, as toxicity mitigation strategies will continue to change over time as new data emerge. Finally, Gonzalez underscored the intimate nature of the cellular therapy field, which presents opportunities to collaborate with other institutions and receive guidance on managing complex cases.  References Al Sagheer T. Mastering the management of adverse effects from cellular therapies in lymphoma. Presented at the 2025 National Immune Cell Effector Therapy (ICE-T) Conference; July 26, 2025; Orlando, FL. Gonzalez R. Navigating the challenges: managing adverse effects of cellular therapies in ALL. Presented at the 2025 National Immune Cell Effector Therapy (ICE-T) Conference; July 26, 2025; Orlando, FL. Kareem SS. Management of adverse events of CAR-T and T-cell engagers in myeloma. Presented at the 2025 National Immune Cell Effector Therapy (ICE-T) Conference; July 26, 2025; Orlando, FL.

In a discussion with CancerNetwork®, Jacob Sands, MD, assistant professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, thoracic oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and investigator of the phase 2 TROPION-Lung05 trial (NCT04484142) and phase 3 TROPION-Lung01 trial (NCT04656652), which supported the accelerated approval of datopotamab deruxtecan-dlnk (dato-DXd; Datroway) in pretreated EGFR-mutant metastatic NSCLC in June 2025, discussed safety and efficacy considerations for the agent's use.1-3 He began by outlining a combined cohort of the TROPION-Lung05 and TROPION-Lung01 trials, which collectively showed an efficacy benefit with dato-DXd in patients with EGFR-mutant disease vs docetaxel. In the combined cohort, the median progression-free survival with dato-DXd reached 5.8 months, and the median overall survival was 15.6 months. Additional efficacy data revealed an objective response rate of 45% (95% CI, 35%-54%) and a median duration of response of 6.5 months (95% CI, 4.2-8.4).  Furthermore, Sands highlighted the most common toxicities observed with dato-DXd in this population, which included stomatitis, interstitial lung disease (ILD), and ocular toxicities. He also reviewed management strategies to mitigate their incidence and severity. Specifically, remedies include prophylaxis, oral hygiene, and dose reductions for stomatitis; using preservative-free eye drops and ophthalmology visits for ocular toxicity management and prevention; and monitoring for any incidence of high-grade ILD. He then touched upon next steps for research in this disease state, including the phase 2 ORCHARD trial (NCT03944772) evaluating dato-DXd with osimertinib (Tagrisso) in the second-line setting after progression on osimertinib and the phase 3 TROPION-Lung15 trial (NCT06417814), which is evaluating chemotherapy vs dato-DXd alone or with osimertinib.4,5 Sands concluded by discussing the implications for toxicity management in patients who experience responses that exceed median outcomes, suggesting that the toxicity profile may be more severe for this group. Emphasizing the broadness of outcomes with any drug, he expressed that patients with experiences that deviate from the observed median outcome are an important consideration for clinical practice. References Sands J, Ahn MJ, Lisberg A, et al. Datopotamab deruxtecan in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with actionable genomic alterations: results from the phase II TROPION-Lung05 study. J Clin Oncol. Published online January 6, 2025. doi:10.1200/JCO-24-01349 Ahn MJ, Tanaka K, Paz-Ares L, et al. Datopotamab deruxtecan versus docetaxel for previously treated advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: the randomized, open-label phase III TROPION-Lung01 study. J Clin Oncol. Published online September 9, 2024. doi:10.1200/JCO-24-01544  FDA grants accelerated approval to datopotamab deruxtecan-dlnk for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer. News release. FDA. June 23, 2025. Accessed July 29, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/mtay7ab9 Yu HA, Goldberg SB, Le X, et al. Biomarker-directed phase II platform study in patients with EGFR sensitizing mutation-positive advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer whose disease has progressed on first-line osimertinib therapy (ORCHARD). Clin Lung Cancer. 2021;22(6):601-606. doi:10.1016/j.cllc.2021.06.006 A study to investigate the efficacy and safety of dato-DXd with or without osimertinib compared with platinum based doublet chemotherapy in participants with EGFR-mutated locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (TROPION-Lung15). ClinicalTrials.gov. Updated July 16, 2025. Accessed July 29, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/56z3dmsp

At the 2025 Kidney Cancer Research Summit hosted by KidneyCAN, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of leading experts about key developments in the research and management of kidney cancer. Throughout the meeting, presenters shared their findings related to updated clinical trial results, personalized cancer vaccines, potential biomarkers of interest, and other advancements in the field. Thomas Powles, MBBS, MCRP, MD, discussed outcomes from a quality-adjusted survival time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis of the phase 3 LITESPARK-005 trial (NCT04195750), in which investigators evaluated treatment with belzutifan (Welireg) vs everolimus (Afinitor) among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Powles, a professor of genitourinary oncology, lead for Solid Tumor Research, and director of Barts Cancer Institute at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, Queen Mary University of London, stated that these data demonstrate how belzutifan is more active and better tolerated than everolimus in this patient population. David A. Braun, MD, PhD, assistant professor at Yale School of Medicine and member of the Center of Molecular and Cellular Oncology within the Yale Cancer Center, detailed his presentation on a personalized neoantigen cancer vaccine as a treatment for those with RCC. Based on his presentation, Braun highlighted how neoantigen vaccines may effectively yield T-cell responses in patients, illustrating a need for additional, larger studies to elucidate the clinical activity of this modality in an adjuvant setting. Additionally, Wenxin (Vincent) Xu, MD, a medical oncologist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, spoke about his presentation on how kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) may serve as a prognostic biomarker of response to therapy in patients with RCC. His research posed questions on how KIM-1 can inform the use of adjuvant therapy or specific therapeutic combinations like nivolumab (Opdivo) plus ipilimumab (Yervoy) for this patient population. Eric Jonasch, MD, gave an overview of his presentation focused on the Kidney Cancer Research Consortium, a research partnership spanning 7 institutions dedicated to facilitating mechanistic, hypothesis-testing clinical trials in RCC. Jonasch, a professor in the Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology of the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, described how this collaboration aims to link identifiable biological characteristics of RCC subtypes to specific treatment strategies while developing predictive biomarkers. KidneyCAN is a nonprofit organization with a mission to accelerate cures for kidney cancer through education, advocacy, and research funding. You can learn more about KidneyCAN's work here: https://kidneycan.org/ References 1. Powles T, de Velasco G, Choueiri TK, et al. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis of belzutifan versus everolimus in previously treated advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): LITESPARK-005 (LS-005). Presented at the 2025 Kidney Cancer Research Summit; July 17-18, 2025; Boston, MA. Abstract 13. 2. Braun DA. Personalized vaccines in kidney cancer: a journey from concept to clinic. Presented at the 2025 Kidney Cancer Research Summit; July 17-18, 2025; Boston, MA. 3. Xu W. From bench to bedside: advancing KIM-1 as a tool for clinical decision-making. Presented at the 2025 Kidney Cancer Research Summit; July 17-18, 2025; Boston, MA. 4. Jonasch E. Building the infrastructure for discovery: a clinical trial consortium to accelerate kidney cancer research. Presented at the 2025 Kidney Cancer Research Summit; July 17-18, 2025; Boston, MA.

In this episode, CancerNetwork® spoke with breast oncologists Heather McArthur, MD; Erika Hamilton, MD; Hope Rugo, MD; and Paolo Tarantino, MD, PhD, about advances in breast cancer. These developments included recent drug approvals and ongoing research for therapeutic approaches, particularly in the areas of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and CDK4/6 inhibitors, based on presentations they gave at the 25th Annual International Congress on the Future of Breast Cancer (IBC) East in New York City. Initially, McArthur, Komen Distinguished Chair in Clinical Breast Cancer Research at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, discussed immunotherapy use in high-risk triple-negative and HER2-positive disease, the evolving role of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition in HER2-negative breast cancer, and potentially transformative advancements in early breast cancer treatment.  She highlighted the FDA approval for pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer, promising clinical trials in estrogen receptor (ER)–positive high-risk early-stage breast cancer, and data from an investigator-initiated trial to treat HER2-positive disease. Additionally, she highlighted an 8.5% improvement in pathological complete response with pembrolizumab added to immunotherapy in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-756 trial (NCT03725059), adding that a further event-free survival benefit may complicate the landscape for CDK4/6 inhibition based on lung and liver toxicities associated with the coadministration of these inhibitors with immunotherapy.1 McArthur expressed further excitement for ADC-based combinations for triple-negative disease, as well as in the high-risk residual disease setting. In addition, she highlighted potential advancements in de-escalation strategies and further considerations for ADCs in the HER2-positive and hormone receptor (HR)–positive spaces. Then, Hamilton, director of Breast Cancer and Gynecologic Cancer Research at the Sarah Cannon Research Institute, highlighted emerging therapies for early breast cancer, as well as her use of datopotamab deruxtecan-dlnk (dato-DXd; Datroway) and fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (T-DXd; Enhertu) given their recent approvals in various breast cancer subtypes. She also touched upon challenges with respect to the implementation of new therapies for early breast cancer into clinical practice. She initially highlighted new data from the phase 3 VERITAC-2 trial (NCT05654623) presented at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.2 Specifically, findings showed that vepdegestrant, an oral proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC), exhibited an efficacy advantage over fulvestrant (Faslodex) in patients with ESR1-mutant ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic disease. Moreover, she highlighted data from the phase 3 DESTINY-Breast09 (NCT04784715) of T-DXd in various combinations for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.3 Hamilton further highlighted her implementation of T-DXd into clinical practice, citing her use of the agent in patients with metastatic disease, including those with HER2-low and HER2-ultralow breast cancer. She further differentiated dato-DXd from T-DXd, suggesting that they were different classes of drugs due to their different targets: TROP2 vs HER2. She concluded by highlighting an unmet need regarding sustained benefit from endocrine therapy in HR-positive disease, as well as for ADC sequencing and mechanisms of resistance. Afterward, Rugo, division chief of Breast Medical Oncology, Women's Cancer Program Director, and professor in the Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research at City of Hope, discussed efficacy and safety considerations for CDK4/6 inhibitors in early breast cancer treatment. Specifically, she highlighted their high tolerability despite adverse effects and costs associated with their use. Rugo further touched upon a reduction of recurrence rates associated with CDK4/6 inhibition, although longer-term follow-up data were warranted to optimize the duration of therapy and elucidate survival outcomes. Finally, Tarantino, a research fellow at the Dana-Farber Institute, concluded by discussing sequencing strategies for ADCs, as well as which breast cancer settings or patient populations will experience the greatest impact with this treatment modality. Tarantino discussed his use of the “sandwich strategy,” where he switches the mechanism of action of treatment after using a TOPO1 ADC. Furthermore, Tarantino highlighted data from the DESTINY-Breast09 and phase 3 ASCENT-04 (NCT06100874) trials, which displayed the enhanced efficacy of 2 ADC combination therapies.4 He concluded by discussing future considerations for combining multiple ADCs. References 1. Cardoso F, O'Shaughnessy J, Liu Z, et al. Pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in high-risk, early-stage, ER+/HER2- breast cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med. 2025;31(2):442-448. doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03415-7 2. Hamilton E, De Laurentiis M, Jhaveri K, et al. Vepdegestrant, a PROTAC estrogen receptor (ER) degrader, vs fulvestrant in ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative advanced breast cancer: results of the global, randomized, phase 3 VERITAC-2 study. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA1000. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA1000 3. Tolaney S, Jiang Z, Zhang Q, et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) + pertuzumab (P) vs taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) for first-line (1L) treatment of patients (pts) with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (a/mBC): interim results from DESTINY-Breast09. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA1008. 4. Tolaney SM, de Azambuja E, Kalinsky K, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) + pembrolizumab (pembro) vs chemotherapy (chemo) + pembro in previously untreated PD-L1–positive advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Primary results from the randomized phase 3 ASCENT-04/KEYNOTE-D19 study. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA109. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA109

Following the FDA approval of taletrectinib (Ibtrozi) for patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), CancerNetwork® spoke with Jorge Nieva, MD, about how this regulatory decision may impact the treatment paradigm for this disease. The approval was supported by findings from the phase 2 TRUST-I trial (NCT04395677) and the phase 2 TRUST-II trial (NCT04919811). The total efficacy population included 157 patients who had no prior treatment with a ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and 113 who were previously treated with a ROS1 TKI. Topline results showed an objective response rate (ORR) of 90% (95% CI, 83%-95%) in TRUST-I and 85% (95% CI, 73%-93%) in TRUST-II among patients who had no prior treatment. Of those with pretreated disease, the respective ORRs were 52% (95% CI, 39%-64%) and 62% (95% CI, 46%-75%) in each study population. According to Nieva, an associate professor of clinical medicine at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, taletrectinib may offer advantages over other therapies in the ROS1-positive metastatic NSCLC space based on its improved central nervous system (CNS) toxicity profile and “excellent” response and progression-free survival data. He stated that taletrectinib would become the go-to first-line agent in his practice. Additionally, he discussed strategies for mitigating toxicities related to taletrectinib such as nausea and diarrhea, and highlighted the need for additional research to improve immunotherapy options in NSCLC.  “I'm very happy that we have choices for patients, and I'm very happy that we have such a wide variety of drugs, but we still need to do better, and we need to find better ways of using these agents because they're still not cures for the majority of patients,” Nieva stated. “While these drugs can be helpful at debulking tumors, we still need to do a lot more work [to do] on making this a disease of the past for those patients who have it.” Reference FDA approves taletrectinib for ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer. News release. FDA. June 11, 2025. Accessed July 8, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/yc4f379m

The medical oncology board examinations are a pivotal time in a clinician's career. However, preparing for and taking this exam comes as a crucial moment when residents/fellows begin their transition to attending.  While in theory, the process of taking an exam and then beginning a new job sounds simple, it is quite complex. The hematology/oncology boards require rigorous preparation. The exam is followed by the new attending position, where clinicians, for the first time, are on their own, making treatment decisions and leading a team.  ONCOLOGY® spoke with leading clinicians as well as those who are just beginning their careers about this time, and how they handled studying while experiencing personal and professional changes. Eric K. Singhi, MD, assistant professor in the Department of General Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, and assistant professor in the Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, focused on: ·      His transition from fellow to attending (0:58) ·      Where students should focus their efforts on studying (2:11) ·      Advice he would give to those currently studying (2:47) Nicholas James Hornstein, MD, PhD, assistant professor at Northwell Health Cancer Institute, discussed:  ·      Studying for the boards while balancing a new career (3:18) ·      Specific study areas the exam focuses on (5:43) Marc J. Braunstein, MD, associate professor in the Department of Medicine at NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine, fellowship program director in hematology/oncology at NYU Langone Health - Long Island, and codirector of the Hematology-Oncology System at NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine, highlighted: ·      How to prepare fellows for the career transition (7:11) ·      Advice he gives about this transition (8:17) Nerea M. Lopetegui-Lia, MD, assistant professor in the College of Medicine at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center-The James, spoke about: ·      Best review practices for the exam (9:01) ·      Advice she would give to those studying (10:15) MinhTri Nguyen, MD, a medical oncologist with Stanford Medicine, focused on:  ·      As a leadership coach, helping prepare residents/fellows for the career transition (11:36) ·      Advice he would give to those studying (14:34)

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Benjamin Golas, MD, spoke about the current treatment landscape for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, discussing how the use of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) may offer improvements in clinical outcomes. Golas is the chief of Surgical Oncology of the Central Region for Hackensack Meridian Health. According to Golas, standard therapeutic approaches include combining cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), which may cause collateral damage to healthy tissue while eliciting toxicities such as nausea, vomiting, and bone marrow suppression. Additionally, certain surgical procedures may last up to 14 hours and confer an extensive morbidity profile, thereby increasing complication rates. Golas described how PIPAC, a minimally invasive laparoscopic technique, may help avoid pain and other adverse effects associated with surgery while facilitating more direct delivery of chemotherapy in the peritoneal cavity. He noted that treatment with PIPAC typically takes 45 minutes to an hour, allowing some patients to return home on the same day of the procedure.  Although clinicians are still learning the correct indications for PIPAC, Golas stated that any patient with peritoneal carcinomatosis should be a candidate to receive treatment with this strategy. Furthermore, he described how the next steps for improving outcomes in this population include finding new ways to incorporate PIPAC into more extensive treatment plans for patients.  “PIPAC is a new treatment and a new potential option that doesn't replace systemic chemotherapy, but I do think it can work in conjunction with systemic chemotherapy. We can offer this bimodal approach where we're directly treating the peritoneal disease and offering [intravenous] chemotherapy,” Golas stated. “We clearly have a long way to go in terms of clinical trials and learning what the best ways are to use this. But there are patients out there who will benefit from that, so I think referral to a center that focuses and has expertise in PIPAC for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis is critical.”

In the wake of the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, CancerNetwork® put together an X Spaces discussion hosted by Stephen Liu, MD, and Joshua Sabari, MD, to highlight the most intriguing and practice-changing lung cancer abstracts. Discussed topics ranged from long-term follow-up with commonplace therapies to an analysis of what time of day is the best to administer immunochemotherapy.  Liu, an associate professor of Medicine at Georgetown University, and the director of Thoracic Oncology and head of Developmental Therapeutics at the Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Sabari, an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine, and the director of High Reliability Organization Initiatives at the Perlmutter Cancer Center, shared expert insights on the latest non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) breakthroughs. Trials of note that they discussed included: The phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial (NCT05740566) - Tarlatamab (Imdelltra) versus chemotherapy (CTx) as second-line (2L) treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC): primary analysis of Ph3 DeLLphi-304.1 The phase 3 IMforte trial (NCT05091567) - Lurbinectedin (Zepzelca; lurbi) + atezolizumab (Tecentriq; atezo) as first-line (1L) maintenance treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): primary results of the phase 3 IMforte trial.2 The phase 3 CheckMate 816 trial (NCT02998528) - Overall survival with neoadjuvant nivolumab (Opdivo; NIVO) + chemotherapy (chemo) in patients with resectable NSCLC in CheckMate 816.3 The phase 3 PACIFIC15 trial (NCT05549037) - Randomized trial of relevance of time-of-day of immunochemotherapy for progression-free and overall survival in patients with non–small cell lung cancer.4 The phase 3 Beamion LUNG-1 trial (NCT04886804) - Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) evaluating physical functioning and symptoms in patients with pretreated HER2-mutant advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results from the Beamion LUNG-1 trial.5 The phase 3 ARTEMIA trial (NCT06472245) - Phase 3 trial of the therapeutic cancer vaccine OSE2101 versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer and secondary resistance to immunotherapy. References Rudin C, Mountzios G, Sun L, et al. Tarlatamab versus chemotherapy (CTx) as second-line (2L) treatment for small cell lung cancer (SCLC): primary analysis of Ph3 DeLLphi-304. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA8008. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA8008 Paz-Ares L, Borghaei H, Liu SV, et al. Lurbinectedin (lurbi) + atezolizumab (atezo) as first-line (1L) maintenance treatment (tx) in patients (pts) with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): primary results of the phase 3 IMforte trial. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):8006. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.8006 Forde PM, Spicer JD, Provencio M, et al. Overall survival with neoadjuvant nivolumab + chemotherapy in patients with resectable NSCLC in CheckMate 816. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA8000. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA8000 Zhang Y, Huang Z, Zeng L, et al. Randomized trial of relevance of time-of-day of immunochemotherapy for progression-free and overall survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):8516. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.8516 Sabari JK, Nadal E, Hendriks L, et al. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) evaluating physical functioning and symptoms in patients with pretreated HER2-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results from the Beamion LUNG-1 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):8620. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.8620 Liu SV, Guibert C, Tostivint EP, et al. Phase 3 trial of the therapeutic cancer vaccine OSE2101 versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and secondary resistance to immunotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):TPS8651. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.TPS8651

In the third edition of a special podcast series, CancerNetwork® spoke with Daniel Morgensztern, MD; Mary Ellen Flanagan, NP; and Janelle Mann, PharmD, BCOP, about optimal strategies for incorporating different therapeutic agents into lung cancer care. As part of the latest discussion, the group highlighted the relevant efficacy data, administration protocols, and toxicity management considerations associated with TROP2-directed antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Morgensztern is a professor of Medicine and the clinical director of Thoracic Oncology in the Division of Oncology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Flanagan is a nurse practitioner in the Division of Thoracic Oncology at Washington University. Mann is a clinical oncology pharmacist at Siteman Cancer Center of Washington University School of Medicine and manager of Clinical Pharmacy Services at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. Morgensztern opened the discussion by highlighting the characteristics of prominent TROP2-targeting ADCs in NSCLC management, which included sacituzumab govitecan-hziy (Trodelvy), datopotamab deruxtecan-dlnk (Datroway), and sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT). Additionally, he reviewed data from clinical trials assessing these ADCs across different NSCLC populations, including the phase 3 EVOKE-01 trial (NCT05089734) showing a numerical overall survival (OS) improvement with sacituzumab govitecan vs docetaxel. Regarding the safety profiles of these ADCs, Flanagan described the unique toxicities associated with the agents' payloads as well as potential off-target effects. On top of myelosuppression, fatigue, and diarrhea, she stated that these therapies may cause more visceral organ toxicities like keratitis of the eye and interstitial lung disease. According to Flanagan, some prophylactic measures in the event of certain toxicities include frequent salt and baking soda mouth rinses as well as oral dexamethasone.  Mann then outlined the dosing variability considerations and supportive care measures surrounding the use of agents like sacituzumab govitecan. She emphasized continuously re-educating patients about expected toxicities and supportive care strategies as they undergo these infusion-based therapies to help avoid surprise instances of ocular toxicity, diarrhea, and other adverse effects. Reference Paz-Ares LG, Juan-Vidal O, Mountzios GS, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan versus docetaxel for previously treated advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: the randomized, open-label phase III EVOKE-01 study. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(24):2860-2872. doi:10.1200/JCO.24.00733

CancerNetwork®, in collaboration with The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT), organized an X Space hosted by Rahul Banerjee, MD, FACP; Taha Al-Juhaishi, MD; and Muhammad Salman Faisal, MD. This expert panel convened to discuss key presentations and abstracts of interest at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting featuring noteworthy developments in modalities like CAR T-cell therapy and transplantation across multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and other disease types. Banerjee is an assistant professor in the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Washington. Al-Juhaishi is the associate director of the Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation and Cell Therapy Program at Oklahoma University Health Stephenson Cancer Center and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine. Faisal is a hematologist/oncologist at Oklahoma University Health Stephenson Cancer Center and serves as an ambassador for ASCO. The group highlighted several late-breaking abstracts, plenary sessions, and poster presentations focused on significant clinical trial data and other findings across the hematologic oncology landscape. Topics of interest included the following: ·       Phase 1b/2 CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207, NCT05201781) o   Long-term follow-up showed that approximately one-third (33%; n = 32) of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma maintained progression-free status for at least 5 years following a single infusion of ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel; Carvykti).  o   An equal likelihood of progression-free survival occurred in patients with high-risk cytogenetics or extramedullary plasmacytomas. o   With a median follow-up of 61.3 months, the median overall survival (OS) with cilta-cel was 60.7 months (95% CI, 41.9-not evaluable [NE]). ·       Real-world axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; Yescarta) use o   Across inpatient and outpatient treatment settings, safety and efficacy outcomes were comparable for patients who received axi-cel for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. o   Multivariate analysis showed no associations between intended care setting and cytokine release syndrome or immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. o   Investigators noted that these real-world data support the consideration of axi-cel in appropriate outpatient settings. ·       Phase 1b/2 NEXICART-2 trial (NCT06097832) o   Investigators assessed NXC-201, a sterically optimized CAR T construct, as a treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory light chain amyloidosis, a population with no FDA-approved options. o   Among 12 patients who received the agent at 450 x 106 cells, 100% achieved rapid and deep hematologic responses at a median time to first and best response of 7 and 26 days, respectively.  o   With a median follow-up of 121 days (range, 29-289), no hematologic relapses or progression had occurred. References 1. Voorhees P, Martin T, Lin Y, et al. Long-term (≥5 year) remission and survival after treatment with ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) in CARTITUDE-1 patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):7507. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.7507 2. Furqan F, Hemmer M, Tees M, et al. Trends and outcomes by inpatient and outpatient infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) in the US for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):7023. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.7023 3. Landau H, Hughes C, Rosenberg A, et al. Safety and efficacy data from Nexicart-2, the first US trial of CAR-T in R/R light chain (AL) amyloidosis, Nxc-201. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 16):7508. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.7508

In this episode, CancerNetwork® spoke with Eric Winer, MD,  director of the Yale Cancer Center; president and physician-in-chief at Smilow Cancer Hospital; deputy dean for cancer research, Alfred Gilman Professor of Pharmacology, and Professor of Medicine at Yale School of Medicine; and chair of the association board for the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), about the current state of oncologist burnout, steps that can be taken to ameliorate it, and how it currently impacts professionals in the field. Causes of workplace burnout that authors identified in a paper published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in January 2025 included the use of electronic health records, staffing levels, payer authorizations, hours worked, and age. Additionally, published results from the survey revealed a 14% increase in the rate of oncologists who experienced workplace burnout from 2013 to 2023 (P

Ahead of the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of oncology experts about the late-breaking abstracts, plenary sessions, and other key presentations that may shift the paradigm across different cancer care fields. They highlighted anticipated clinical trial results that may transform the standard of care for gynecologic malignancies, lung cancer, and other disease types. Rachel N. Grisham, MD, section head of Ovarian Cancer and director of Gynecologic Medical Oncology at MSK Westchester of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, shared her anticipation of findings from the phase 3 ROSELLA trial (NCT05257408) assessing relacorilant plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. She stated she was excited to see if the data may represent a new opportunity for this patient population. Next, MinhTri Nguyen, MD, a medical oncologist and hematologist at Stanford Health Care, highlighted a few breast cancer presentations to look out for. These topics included a plenary session on data from the phase 3 SERENA-6 study (NCT04964934) evaluating camizestrant in combination with CDK4/6 inhibitors for those with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer harboring emergent ESR1 mutations. Additionally, Eric K. Singhi, MD, assistant professor in the Department of General Oncology in the Division of Cancer Medicine, and assistant professor in the Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, spoke about a range of potentially practice-changing results in the lung cancer field. For example, he described a session focused on primary results of the phase 3 IMforte trial (NCT05091567) assessing lurbinectedin (Zepzelca) plus atezolizumab (Tecentriq) for those with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). According to Singhi, data from IMforte may shift the paradigm of maintenance therapy for this SCLC population. In the world of head and neck cancer, Douglas R. Adkins, MD, associate professor of Internal Medicine, Division of Oncology, Section of Medical Oncology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri, highlighted the session on the phase 3 NIVOPOSTOP GORTEC 2018-01 trial (NCT03576417). Investigators of this study evaluated nivolumab (Opdivo) in combination with chemoradiotherapy for those with resected head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Adkins noted his excitement to see how these data may impact the standard of care, particularly for patients in Europe, where investigators conducted the study. As part of an Oncology Decoded discussion, Benjamin Garmezy, MD, the associate director of genitourinary research and executive cochair of the Genitourinary Cancer Research Executive Committee at Sarah Cannon Research Institute (SCRI) and medical oncologist at SCRI Oncology Partners specializing in genitourinary cancers, discussed key abstracts in bladder cancer. One specific presentation included additional findings from the phase 3 NIAGARA trial (NCT03732677), which may show how circulating tumor DNA can influence treatment decision-making regarding perioperative durvalumab (Imfinzi) for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Viviana Cortiana, MS4, and Yan Leyfman, MD, spoke about their manuscript titled “Artificial Intelligence in Cancer Care: Addressing Challenges and Health Equity,” which they published in the April 2025 issue of ONCOLOGY®. Cortiana is a medical student in the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences at the University of Bologna. Leyfman is a resident physician from the Icahn School of Medicine of the Mount Sinai Health System. Cortiana highlighted how artificial intelligence (AI)–based tools may mitigate the overdiagnosis of cancers, although she noted a need to validate these devices with diverse and high-quality datasets to avoid the risk of biased models. Additionally, she described how developing population-specific AI models may improve predictive accuracy in diagnosis as well as treatment planning, which can especially benefit patients in low- and middle-income countries. As part of ethically applying the use of AI to oncology and delivering equitable cancer care, Leyfman emphasized core pillars such as data security, transparency, clinical validation, and combatting algorithmic bias. Furthermore, he stated that potential applications of these tools include mobile diagnostics, cloud-based platforms, and remote consultation, which can help increase access to care. Regarding the potential next steps in the field, he highlighted that global partnerships with parties such as tech companies, governments, and non-governmental organizations may assist with the funding and deployment of AI tools, especially for underserved regions. “The future of AI in oncology is increasingly promising, not just in pushing the boundaries of what's possible in cancer care but also making sure that more precise and more accessible worldwide therapies are available,” Leyfman stated. “AI has the potential to fundamentally change how we detect, treat, and monitor [cancer], but realizing that promise, especially in a way that's equitable, will require collaboration, validation, thoughtful implementation, and a commitment to leaving no patient behind.”

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Viviana Cortiana, MS4, medical student in the Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences at the University of Bologna, and Yan Leyfman, MD, a resident physician from the Icahn School of Medicine of the Mount Sinai Health System, discussed their publication in the March 2025 issue of ONCOLOGY titled “Expanding horizons in T-cell lymphoma therapy: a focus on personalized treatment strategies.” Throughout the discussion, the authors spoke about the current lymphoma landscape, CAR T-cell therapy, and the evolving understanding of the tumor microenvironment. Specifically, Cortiana covered a shift from histology-based classification to molecular tumor type classification using next-generation sequencing, as well as a growing interest in biomarker-driven therapies. Regarding the limited efficacy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in T-cell lymphoma, she listed potential advances in combination therapies for angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), which include combining P13K and HDAC inhibition as well as CD30- and TRBC1-targeting CAR T-cell therapies. Furthermore, Leyfman discussed strategies that “reprogram” the microenvironment to address malignant T cells, particularly through epigenetic and adoptive cell therapies. Leyfman concluded by discussing future implications for T-cell lymphoma treatment, emphasizing an emergence of precision medicines and armored CAR engineering strategies. Authors of the manuscript published in ONCOLOGY outlined the available treatment options for peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), which include targeted therapies through EZH2 inhibition, chemotherapy with CHOP, CAR T-cell therapies, and allogenic stem cell transplantation. Additionally, they highlighted encouraging results from clinical trials evaluating epigenetic-targeted therapies through the identification of molecular aberrations, which can help tailor treatments to individual patients.  Furthermore, the article explored limitations of chemotherapy as well as autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), which may not be feasible for older patients or those with comorbidities. Authors suggested that targeted therapies may enhance tumor specificity while reducing systemic toxicity. Given the risks associated with ASCT, they emphaisized a focus on the incorporation of optimized treatment strategies, such as novel pharmaceuticals and combination therapies, into clinical practice for patients with PTCL.

In a special co-branded episode between Oncology On the Go hosted by CancerNetwork® and the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT)'s program ASTCT Talks, Nora M. Gibson, MD, MSCE, and Taha Al-Juhaishi, MD, spoke about real-world applications of betibeglogene autotemcel (beti-cel; Zynteglo) as a treatment for patients with beta (β)-thalassemia. They spoke in the context of a study that Gibson presented at the 2025 Tandem Meetings, which evaluated patients who received commercial beti-cel in a single-center cohort following the agent's FDA approval in August 2022. Nora is a fourth-year fellow in bone marrow transplant and cellular therapy at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), with a background in clinical research and epidemiology. Al-Juhaishi is the Associate Director of the Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation and Cell Therapy Program at Oklahoma University Health Stephenson Cancer Center and an assistant professor of Medicine at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine. Findings from Gibson's study revealed that among 10 patients who underwent stem cell collection at CHOP from 2022 to 2024, beti-cel yielded consistent red blood cell transfusion independence, with investigators noting prolonged platelet engraftment time and high platelet transfusion requirements. Beyond these findings, the conversation focused on how beti-cel compares with other currently available gene therapies for patients with hemoglobin disorders as well as non-curative therapies like allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Gibson and Al-Juhaishi also discussed strategies for mitigating occlusive disease and other potential toxicities associated with beti-cel. “It's a really exciting time to be working in this field where we finally have really good options for these patients. From our experience and from clinical trials, beti-cel and likely exagamglogene autotemcel [Casgevy]...are very effective, curative therapies for thalassemia in the real-world setting, and we've seen very similar results in sickle cell disease,” said Gibson. “These therapies have been really life-changing for our patients, and they've had a huge reduction in their symptoms and a huge reduction in their burden of health care that's required.” References 1. Gibson NM, Friedman DF, Elgarten CW, et al. Post-approval, real-world experience with betibeglogene autotemcel for transfusion-dependent beta thalassemia. Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. 2025;31(2):S254. doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2025.01.386. 2. FDA approves first cell-based gene therapy to treat adult and pediatric patients with beta-thalassemia who require regular blood transfusions. News Release. FDA. August 17, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/3vrkk8kz

In an interview with CancerNetwork®, William Kennedy, MD, a neuro-radiation oncologist at the Ivy Brain Tumor Center, provided expert insights into the current state of radiosurgery for central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Highlighting a diverse array of available radiosurgery platforms, he explained that institutions like the Ivy Brain Tumor Center frequently use noninvasive surgical techniques with complex monitoring systems. Kennedy further underscored the critical importance of having a nuanced understanding of each technology's capabilities and limitations, as well as those of the practicing oncologist. Emphasizing a high patient volume and a wide variety of cases at his own practice, he suggested that the expertise of the staff at the Ivy Brain Tumor Center positions them at the forefront of radiosurgery development. According to Kennedy, novel therapeutic strategies under development at Ivy Brain Tumor Center include the investigational agent AZD1390, which is being assessed in combination with radiotherapy after surgery for patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent glioblastoma. Despite the benefits that technology provide for research advancement and treatment, Kennedy posited that the multidisciplinary team is essential in ensuring the successful delivery of novel radiosurgery techniques. This integrated approach ensures that each patient benefits from an individualized plan that leverages the full potential of modern radiosurgery. “[D]espite all the great technologies that we have here at Ivy, what I think makes this place great, what makes me proud to work here, and what means the most for our patients is how closely we providers communicate with each other and how closely knit of a team we are,” Kennedy stated. “Being available, showing up to the tumor board, always picking up the phone when your colleague calls to discuss a tough case, and never being afraid to ask for help—all those things I have learned since I have been in practice here. Those are what make the difference, more than anything.”

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Oluwadamilola “Lola” Fayanju, MD, MA, MPHS, FACS, discussed the key findings from a study she published in JAMA Network Open, which demonstrated that most patients with inflammatory breast cancer do not receive all available types of guideline-concordant care they are eligible for. Additionally, data showed disparities regarding receipt of modality-specific therapy among patients who were Black, Asian, Hispanic, or other racial minority populations. Based on these findings, Fayanju highlighted potential next steps for mitigating these gaps in care for certain patients with breast cancer. These strategies included revising stringent inclusion criteria for clinical trial enrollment, which may disproportionately exclude racial minority populations who have higher rates of diabetes or other medical conditions. Fayanju also emphasized educating clinicians across different oncology specialties to recognize how different populations present with inflammatory breast cancer and better understand the context in which patients receive treatment. “I hope [the study] makes some people angry…Frustration can be a wonderful fuel,” Fayanju stated regarding her research. “[By] recognizing that there isn't as much guideline-concordant care receipt amongst all people as there should be and the hope that's provided when we achieve concordant care, we can mitigate and eliminate racial disparities. I hope [that] will motivate people to think about how we can get more guideline-concordant care to more people and how we can incorporate diverse populations in the development of guidelines for concordant care at the beginning. Then, how can we also develop treatments that achieve efficacious results across diverse populations?” Fayanju is the Helen O. Dickens Presidential Associate Professor, chief in the Division of Breast Surgery at Penn Medicine, surgical director of Rena Rowan Breast Center, director of Health Equity Innovation at Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation (PC3I), and senior fellow at Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (LDI), Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. Reference Tadros A, Diskin B, Sevilimedu V, et al. Trends in guideline-concordant care for inflammatory breast cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(2):e2454506. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54506

The International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS) deemed April 9th, 2025, the first-ever World Psycho-Oncology Day (WPOD). This day was meant to spread awareness of the importance of prioritizing psychosocial care for patients with all types of cancer as well as to honor Jimmie C. Holland, MD. Prior to WPOD, CancerNetwork® spoke with Cristiane Decat Bergerot, PhD, BS, MS, a psychologist and the head of supportive care at Grupo Oncoclinicas in Brazil, and a member of IPOS, about the importance of psychosocial care and the impact it has on patients with cancer. As stated by Bergerot and listed on the official IPOS website, the primary goals of WPOD are as follows: raise awareness, honor Jimmie Holland, engage stakeholders, promote action, and support fundraising efforts.1 These goals are geared towards paying homage to the history of psycho-oncology and pushing for a more advanced future. “We aim to empower patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals, fostering a future where psychosocial support is an integral part of oncology worldwide,” Bergerot said.  Psycho-oncology has become more prevalent as a cancer care field since Jimmie C. Holland, MD, worked to help found it in the 1970s. Holland, a “pioneer” of psycho-oncology, was the first ever Chief of Psychiatry Services—a department that was the first of its kind anywhere in the world—at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and a founding member of IPOS.  Bergerot stated that, in her work, she sees that patients who receive psychological support exhibit improved pain management and quality of life. Trials now focus more on end points such as quality of life and patient-reported outcomes, and guidelines have emerged to create standards of care. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology each offer guidelines that detail how to manage patient distress as they progress through cancer therapy.2,3 Distress screenings and earlier recommendations for palliative care have also become more standard in treatment.  As for the future, Bergerot highlighted that psychosocial care needs to be more integrated into care as a necessary, rather than optional, component. New developments around the world, however, have created a landscape where telehealth and new research demonstrate the potential to help psycho-oncology grow rapidly.  References 1.        World Psycho-Oncology Day (WPOD). IPOS. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/43c9rr2c 2.        Distress during cancer care. NCCN. 2024. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/ycxxvnmt 3.        Andersen BL, Lacchetti C, Ashing K, et al. Management of anxiety and depression in adult survivors of cancer: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(18):3426-3453. doi:10.1200/JCO.23.00293

CancerNetwork® visited Sibley Memorial Hospital of Johns Hopkins Medicine to speak with a variety of experts about therapeutic advancements and ongoing research initiatives across several different cancer fields. As part of each discussion, clinicians highlighted how collaboration across different departments has positively impacted treatment planning, decision-making, and outcomes at their institution. These experts included the following: ·      Rachit Kumar, MD, an assistant professor of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and a radiation oncologist specializing in genitourinary and gastrointestinal cancers at Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center for Sibley Memorial Hospital and Suburban Hospital; ·      Michael J. Pishvaian, MD, PhD, director of Gastrointestinal, Developmental Therapeutics, and Clinical Research Programs, and associate professor of Oncology at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine; ·      Nina Wagner-Johnston, MD, a professor of Oncology and the director of Lymphoma Drug Development at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University, director of Hematologic Malignancies National Capital Region, and co-director of Clinical Research for Hematologic Malignancies; ·      Valerie Lee, MD, an assistant professor of Oncology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a medical oncologist at Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Sibley Memorial Hospital; ·      Armine Smith, MD, the director of urologic oncology at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Sibley Memorial Hospital, and an assistant clinical professor of Urology at the Brady Urological Institute of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; ·      Pouneh Razavi, MD, the director for Breast Imaging in the National Capital Region and an instructor in Radiology and Radiological Science; ·      and Curtiland Deville Jr., MD, medical director of the Johns Hopkins Proton Therapy Center and clinical director of Radiation Oncology at Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Sibley Memorial Hospital. Altogether, their insights demonstrated how multidisciplinary teamwork has improved outcomes ranging from patient survival to healthcare resource utilization across a wide range of diseases including breast cancer, gastrointestinal cancer, genitourinary cancer, hematologic malignancies, and others.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Leticia Nogueira, PhD, MPH, highlighted the findings and implications of a study she published that evaluated how exposure to wildfires affected post-operative length of stay (LOS) among patients who were recovering from surgery for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data from this study showed that patients who underwent curative-intent surgery at facilities exposed to a wildfire disaster experienced a longer LOS compared with similar patients who received treatment during times when no disasters occurred. According to data published in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, the LOS was 7.45 days (SE, 0.22) for patients treated at facilities without wildfire exposure vs 9.42 days (SE, 0.25) among those who underwent surgery at facilities with exposure (P

In the second edition of a special podcast series, CancerNetwork® spoke with Daniel Morgensztern, MD; Mary Ellen Flanagan, NP; and Janelle Mann, PharmD, BCOP, about the best practices for incorporating recently approved bispecific antibodies into cancer care. This discussion focused on clinical trial results, administration protocols, and adverse effect (AE) management strategies related to the use of tarlatamab-dlle (Imdelltra) for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Morgensztern is a professor of Medicine and the clinical director of Thoracic Oncology in the Division of Oncology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. Flanagan is a nurse practitioner in the Division of Thoracic Oncology at Washington University. Mann is a clinical oncology pharmacist at Siteman Cancer Center of Washington University School of Medicine and manager of Clinical Pharmacy Services at Barnes-Jewish Hospital. The conversation opened with Morgensztern highlighting tarlatamab's mechanism of action as an agent that targets DLL3. He then reviewed prior efficacy data that the therapy demonstrated in the phase 1 DeLLphi-300 trial (NCT03319940) and the phase 2 DeLLphi-301 trial (NCT05060016). Of note, the FDA approved tarlatamab as the first available T-cell engager immunotherapy for patients with extensive-stage SCLC who have progressed on prior platinum-containing chemotherapy in May 2024 based on data from the DeLLphi-301 trial. Additionally, Flanagan detailed strategies for monitoring and mitigating the most common AEs associated with tarlatamab in this patient population, which include cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome. Mann then outlined considerations for properly dosing and administering the agent, highlighting factors that clinicians should keep in mind when continuing treatment in an inpatient or outpatient setting. The group also spoke about clinical decision-making related to patients who have brain metastases, which included processes for adjusting the dose of tarlatamab and sequencing the bispecific agent with radiotherapy. Reference FDA grants accelerated approval to tarlatamab-dlle for extensive stage small cell lung cancer. News release. FDA. May 16, 2024. Accessed March 14, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/48k34rw5

Molecular differences in the profiles of low grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) and high-grade SOC substantiate the need to find unique, differentiated treatment options for each epithelial ovarian cancer subtype, according to Kathleen N. Moore, MD, MS. CancerNetwork® spoke with Moore, Virginia Kerley Cade Endowed Chair of Cancer Development, associate director of Clinical Research at the Stephenson Cancer Center, director of the Oklahoma TSET Phase I Program and professor in the Section of Gynecologic Oncology the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, about distinguishing low grade serous ovarian cancer from other types of ovarian cancer, current treatment options and clinical trials evaluating new regimens, as well as managing treatment in younger patients with or those seeking to preserve fertility. Moore began by differentiating LGSOC from high grade SOC, stating that this disease typically occurred in younger patients and was primarily characterized by MAP kinase alterations, specifically KRAS and BRAF mutations. She then discussed the emergence of endocrine therapies in this indication owing to the presence of estrogen receptors. Additionally, first line treatment was discussed, with the standard of care defined by primary cytoreduction followed by paclitaxel and carboplatin. She then highlighted multiple clinical trials assessing alternative treatment in this indication, particularly involving the use of letrozole (Femara). Other clinical trials evaluated the use of CDK4/6 inhibition plus fulvestrant or BRAF and MEK inhibition with letrozole, with Moore emphasizing the potential for these studies to shift the treatment paradigm in the frontline setting. Furthermore, she suggested that CDK4/6 inhibition may help enhance responses in patients with recurrent LGSOC. Moore then highlighted treatment concerns for younger patients and those seeking to preserve fertility, while expressing the importance of understanding a patient's goals, which may help optimize outcomes. She concluded by reiterating the importance of designing trials and tailoring treatment considering the molecular profile of LGSOC.

In a recent episode of Oncology on the Go, several oncologists discussed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncology care, 5 years later. Each doctor discussed a different aspect of multidisciplinary care, including medical oncology, radiation oncology, and epidemiology. CancerNetwork® spoke with leading clinicians including:  ·      Aditya Bardia, MD, MPH, FSCO, professor in the Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, and director of Translational Research Integration at the University of California Los Angeles Health Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center; ·      Ritu Salani, MD, director of Gynecologic Oncology at the University of California Los Angeles, and ONCOLOGY® editorial advisory board member; ·      Scarlett Lin Gomez, PhD, MPH, a professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), and co-leader of the Cancer Control Program at UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center ·      Marwan F. Fakih, MD, professor in the Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics Research, associate director for Clinical Sciences, medical director of the Briskin Center for Clinical Research, division chief of GI Medical Oncology, and co-director of the Gastrointestinal Cancer Program at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center; ·      Elizabeth Zhang-Velten, MD, a radiation oncologist at Keck Medicine of University of Southern California;  ·      Frances Elain Chow, MD, neuro-oncologist at the University of Southern California (USC) Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center ·      James Yu, MD, MHS, FASTRO, assistant professor adjunct, Department of Radiation Oncology, Smilow Cancer Hospital at Saint Francis Hospital, and ONCOLOGY® editorial advisory board member.  The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted routine cancer care in a number of ways. Many patients were unable to receive timely screening, diagnosis, and treatment, Fakih noted. Additionally, Bardia stated that the pandemic led to a decrease in the number of patients participating in clinical trials. One of the most significant changes in oncology care, according to Salani, has been the increased use of telehealth. Telehealth has allowed patients to receive care from the comfort of their own homes, which has been especially beneficial for patients who live in rural areas or who have difficulty traveling. Telehealth has also made it easier for patients to connect with their doctors and to receive support from other members of their care team.  For Gomez, the COVID-19 pandemic also highlighted the importance of addressing the structural and social drivers of health. These are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age that can affect their health. For example, people who live in poverty or who lack access to healthy food are more likely to develop cancer. The pandemic has led to a renewed focus on addressing these disparities. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on oncology care. However, it has also led to a number of positive changes, such as the increased use of telehealth and the focus on addressing the structural and social drivers of health. In the years to come, it will be important to continue to build on these changes in order to improve the lives of patients with cancer.