Podcasts about accommodations

Dan Schorr and Alyssa-Rae McGinn are joined by Brigid Harrington and Amy Fabiano, senior attorneys at Hunton Andrews Kurth, to discuss pregnancy accommodations and related issues (Episode 164) ---- Brigid Harrington: https://www.hunton.com/people/brigid-harrington Amy Fabiano: https://www.hunton.com/people/amy-fabiano Dan Schorr, LLC: https://danschorrllc.com/ Dan's fiction reading and writing Substack: https://danschorr.substack.com/ Dan Schorr Books: https://danschorrbooks.com/ 

We are joined in this episode by Stacey Shubitz, K-6 literacy consultant, a former elementary school teacher, and the co-founder of the Two Writing Teachers blog and podcast. Her forthcoming book, Make the School System Work for Your Child with Disabilities: Empowering Kids for the Future, empowers parents to navigate the special education system. In this episode, we talk openly about what it really takes to support a child with learning challenges in today's school system. Drawing from decades of experience on both sides of the table, Stacey shares why she wrote Make the School System Work for Your Child with Disabilities and what she wishes someone had told her when she was first trying to make sense of evaluations, IEP meetings, and endless paperwork. Our conversation centers on some of the practical mindset shifts that can help change everything for families, with Stacey explaining why leading with a child's strengths and not just their needs is so important for confidence and motivation. She also addresses disability language head-on, discussing why it is that naming disability isn't limiting but instead opens doors to services, legal protections, and access that families often don't realize they're entitled to. Throughout the episode, we highlight how knowledge of data, timelines, rights, and documentation can shift the power dynamic and help parents advocate more effectively. We offer some concrete guidance on when to push for evaluations, why waiting too long can do a lot of harm, and how to ask for progress data without feeling confrontational. Stacey also shares what makes IEP meetings feel collaborative instead of adversarial, from simple preparation strategies to small human touches that ease tension. Communication comes up again and again: how approaching teachers with curiosity, clarity, and respect can lead to better outcomes for kids! Stacey also speaks candidly about burnout, emotional exhaustion, and why joy isn't optional but protective. This conversation offers reassurance, realism, and a clear-eyed look at how parents can show up informed, empowered, and grounded while advocating for their children. Show Notes: [2:32] - Hear how Stacey's experiences with IEPs inspired her to help other parents. [4:04] - Stacey describes leading with strengths, not just challenges or disabilities. [6:03] - Highlighting positives alongside challenges helps children see themselves as capable. [9:42] - Stacey argues that children should know their rights and services so that they can advocate for themselves. [12:49] - It's so important for parents to monitor progress, request data, and push for evaluations when their child isn't advancing. [14:58] - Stacey adds that it's also essential to advocate firmly and request evaluations when interventions aren't producing results. [16:20] - Preparing for meetings with clarity, human touches, and understanding who's present can help make discussions more productive. [19:44] - Coming to meetings prepared with documents in advance helps balance power and supports advocacy. [23:04] - Stacey discusses how reviewing IEPs in advance can help ensure more effective teacher interactions. [25:00] - Approaching teachers with curiosity and gathering accurate information helps promote calm, productive conversations around school. [28:18] - Stacey gives an example of how being open about personal struggles allows teachers to provide better support for children. [30:33] - Stacey asserts that assuming positive intentions about teachers helps lead to collaboration and avoids unnecessary conflict. [32:07] - Stacey wishes that she had known sooner how important it is to read the procedural safeguards book to understand parental rights and timelines. [34:12] - Stacey expresses that she has learned that intentionally curating joy and connection can help prevent burnout. [37:05] - Joy is a legitimate form of intervention. Links and Related Resources: Stacey Shubitz - Make the School System Work for Your Child with Disabilities: Empowering Kids for the Future Episode 164: 5 Keys to Productive IEPs with April Rehrig Episode 238: Dismantling DEI and the Department of Education: How Changes Impact Your Child with Vickie Brett & Amanda Selogie Episode 246: Accommodations, Modifications, or Remediation? How to Know What Your Child Really Needs with Amy Cushner   Connect with Stacey Shubitz: Stacey's Website Email: stacey@staceyshubitz.com Stacey's Substack Two Writing Teachers Website  

In Episode 137 of Let's Talk Learning Disabilities, Laurie and Sydney discuss why many students and adults seek testing accommodations only when facing high-stakes exams such as the SAT, ACT, LSAT, MCAT, GRE, bar exam, or medical licensing tests. Requests often come from two groups: high-school students whose families are newly aware of the accommodations process, and older college or graduate students who are suddenly told--often by tutors or counselors--that extra time could help them. For many, this realization comes too late, triggering panic as they confront a complex and bureaucratic approval system they never knew existed.Resources:Contact info for the podcast: letstalklearningdisabilities@gmail.comE-Diagnostic Learning Website: https://ediagnosticlearning.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/eDiaglearning/Twitter: @diaglearningLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/diagnostic-learning-services/Instagram: @diaglearning

Jan. 8, 2026- In December, state law was strengthened to protect New Yorkers who request reasonable accommodations in public places, like at work. We explore the significance of this anti-retaliation measure and consider the merits of updating New York's paid medical leave program with Jesse Workman, a senior staff attorney with A Better Balance.

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Hope Rugo discuss advances in antibody-drug conjugates for various breast cancer types as well as treatment strategies in the new era of oral SERDs for HR-positive breast cancer. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Monty Pal. I'm a medical oncologist and vice chair of academic affairs here at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles. Today, I'm thrilled to be joined by Dr. Hope Rugo, an internationally renowned breast medical oncologist and my colleague here at City of Hope, where she leads the Women's Cancers Program and serves as division chief of breast medical oncology. Dr. Rugo is going to share with us exciting advances in antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) that are expanding treatment options in various breast cancer types. She'll also address some of the complex questions arising in the new era of oral SERDs (selective estrogen receptor degraders) that are revolutionizing treatment in the hormone receptor-positive breast cancer space. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode.  Dr. Rugo, welcome, and thanks so much for being on the podcast today. Dr. Hope Rugo: Thank you. Pleasure to be here. Dr. Monty Pal: So, I'm going to switch to first names if you don't mind.  The first topic is actually a really exciting one, Hope, and this is antibody-drug conjugates. I don't know if I've ever shared this with you, but I actually started my training at UCLA, I was a med student and resident there, and it was in Dennis Slamon's lab. I worked very closely with Mark Pegram and a handful of others. This is right around the time I think a lot of HER2-directed therapies were really evolving initially in the clinics. Now we've got antibody-drug conjugates. Our audience is well-familiar with the mechanism there but tell us about how ADCs have really started to reshape therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer. Dr. Hope Rugo: Yeah, I mean, this is a really great place to start. I mean, we have had such major advances in breast cancer just this year, I think really changing the paradigm of treating patients. But HER2-positive disease, we've been used to having sequenced success of new agents. And I think the two biggest areas where we've made advances in HER2-positive disease, which were remarkably advanced this year in 2025, have been in antibody-drug conjugates with trastuzumab deruxtecan and with new oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that have less of a target on EGFR and more on HER2, so they have an overall more tolerable toxicity profile and therefore a potentially better efficacy in the clinic. At least that's what we're seeing with these new strategies that we couldn't really pursue in the past because of toxicities of the oral TKIs. So, although our topic is ADCs, I'm going to include the TKI because it's so important in our thinking about treating HER2-positive disease. In the metastatic setting, we've seen these remarkable improvements in progression-free and overall survival in the second-line setting with T-DXd, or trastuzumab deruxtecan, compared to T-DM1. And then sequencing ADCs with giving T-DXd after T-DM1 was better than an oral tyrosine kinase or a trastuzumab combination with standard chemotherapy. That was DESTINY-Breast03 and DESTINY-Breast02. So, then we've had other trials since then, and T-DXd has moved into the early-stage setting, which I'll talk about in just a moment. But the next big trial for T-DXd in HER2-positive disease was moving it to the first-line setting to supplant what has become an established treatment for now quite a long time: the so-called CLEOPATRA regimen, which used the combined antibodies trastuzumab, pertuzumab with a taxane as first-line therapy. And then we've proceeded on with maintenance with ongoing HP for patients with responding or stable disease. And we'd seen long-term data showing, you know, at 8 years there was a group of patients whose cancers had never progressed and continued improved overall survival. So, T-DXd was studied in DESTINY-Breast09, either alone or in combination with pertuzumab compared to THP. The patient population had received a little bit more prior treatment, but interestingly, not a lot compared to CLEOPATRA. And they designed the trial to be T-DXd continued until progression with or without pertuzumab versus THP, which would go for six cycles and then stop around six cycles, and then stop and continue HP. Patients who had hormone receptor-positive disease could use hormone therapy, and this is one of the issues with this dataset because, surprisingly in this dataset and one other I'll mention, very few patients took hormone therapy. And even in the maintenance trial, the HER2CLIMB-05, less than 50% took hormone therapy as maintenance. This is kind of shocking to me and highlights an area of really important education, that outcome is improved when you add endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive HER2-positive metastatic disease in the maintenance phase, and it's a really important part of treatment. But suffice it to say, you know, you're kind of studying continued chemo versus stopping chemo in maintenance. And T-DXd, as we all expected, in combination with pertuzumab was superior to THP in terms of progression-free survival, really remarkably improved. And you could stop the chemo with toxicity, but most people continued it with T-DXd. Again, not a lot of people got hormone therapy, which is an issue, and you stop the chemo in the control arm. So, this has brought up a lot of interest in trying to use T-DXd as an induction and then go to maintenance, much as we do with the CLEOPATRA regimen with hormone therapy. But it brings up another issue. So first, T-DXd is superior; it's a great treatment. Not everybody needs to have it because we don't know whether it's better to give T-DXd first or second with progression - that we need a little bit longer follow-up. But just earlier this week, interestingly, the third week of December, the U.S. FDA approved T-DXd in the DESTINY-Breast09 approach with pertuzumab. So as I mentioned earlier, there was a T-DXd-alone arm; that arm has not yet reported. So very interesting, we don't know if you need pertuzumab or not. So what about the maintenance? That's the other area where we've made a huge advance here. So, we all want to stop chemo and we want to stop T-DXd. You don't want somebody being nauseated for two years while they're on treatment, and also there's a small number of patients with mostly de novo metastatic HER2-positive disease who are cured of their disease. We'd like to expand that, and I think these new drugs give us the opportunity to improve the number of patients who might be cured from metastatic disease. So the first maintenance study we saw was adding palbociclib, the CDK4/6 inhibitor, to endocrine therapy and HP, essentially. There, we had a remarkable improvement in progression-free survival difference of 15.2 months: 29 to 44 months, really huge. At San Antonio this year, we saw data with this oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor tucatinib, already showed it was great in a triplet, but as maintenance in combination with HP, it showed also a remarkable improvement in progression-free survival. But the numbers were all shifted down. So in PATINA, the control arm was in the 24-month range; here it was the tucatinib-HP arm that was in the 25 months and 16 months for control. So there was a differential benefit in ER-negative and ER-positive disease. So I think we're all thinking that our ideal approach moving forward would be to give T-DXd to most patients, we see how they do, and treat to best response. And then, stop the T-DXd, start HP, trastuzumab, pertuzumab for ER-negative, with tucatinib for ER-positive with palbociclib. We also have early data that suggests that both approaches may reduce the development of brain metastases, an issue in HER2-positive disease, and delay time to progression of brain metastases as seen in HER2CLIMB-05 in very early data - small numbers, but still quite intriguing that you might delay progression of brain metastases with tucatinib that clearly has efficacy in the brain.  So, I think that this is a hugely exciting advance for our patients, and these approaches are quickly moving into the early stage setting. T-DXd compared to standard chemo, essentially followed by THP, so a sequenced approach resulted in more pathologic complete responses than a standard THP-AC-type neoadjuvant therapy. T-DXd alone for eight cycles wasn't better, and that's interesting. We still need the sequenced non-cross-resistant chemo. But I think even more importantly, the data from DESTINY-Breast05 looking at T-DXd versus T-DM1 in patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy showed a remarkable improvement in invasive disease-free survival with T-DXd versus T-DM1, and quite early. It was a high-risk population, higher risk than the T-DM1 trial with KATHERINE, but earlier readout with a remarkable improvement in outcome. We expect to be FDA approved sometime in the first half of 2026. So then we'll get patients who've already had T-DXd who get metastatic disease. But my hope is that with T-DXd, maybe with tucatinib in the right group of patients or even sequenced in very high-risk disease, that we could cure many more patients with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer and cure a subset, a greater subset of patients with de novo metastatic disease. Dr. Monty Pal: That's brilliant. And you tackled so many questions that I was going to follow up with there: brain metastases, etc. That was sort of looming in my mind. I mean, general thoughts on an ADC versus a TKI in the context of brain mets? Dr. Hope Rugo: Yeah, it's an interesting question because T-DXd has shown quite good efficacy in this setting. And tucatinib, of course, had a trial where they took patients with new brain mets, so a larger population than we've seen yet for the T-DXd trials, and saw that not only did they delay progression of brain metastases and result in shrinkage of existing untreated brain mets, but that patients who develop a new brain met, they could stay on the same assigned treatment. They got stereotactic radiation, and then the patients who were on tucatinib with trastuzumab and capecitabine had a further delay in progression of brain mets compared to those on the placebo arm, even after treatment of a new one that developed on treatment. So, I think it's hard. I think most of us for a lot of brain mets might start with the tucatinib approach, but T-DXd is also a very important treatment. You know, you're kind of trading off a diarrhea, some liver enzyme elevations with tucatinib versus nausea, which you really have to work on managing because it can be long-delayed nausea, and this risk of ILD, interstitial lung disease, that's about 12%, with most but not all trials showing a mortality rate from interstitial lung disease of just under 1 percent. In the early-stage setting, it was really interesting to see that with T-DXd getting four cycles in the neoadjuvant setting, a lot less ILD noted than the patients who got up to 14 cycles, as I think they got a median of 10 cycles in the post-surgical setting, there was a little bit more ILD. But I think we're going to be better and better at finding this earlier and preventing mortality by just stopping drug and treating earlier with steroids. Dr. Monty Pal: And this ILD issue, it always seems to resurface. There are drugs that I use in my kidney cancer clinic, everolimus, common to perhaps the breast cancer clinic as well, pembrolizumab, where I think the pattern of pneumonitis is quite different, right? What is your strategy for recognizing pneumonitis early in this context? Dr. Hope Rugo: Well, it is, and you know, having done the very early studies in everolimus where we gave it in the neoadjuvant setting and we're like, "Hmm, the patient came in with a cough. What's going on?" You know, we didn't know. And you have mouth sores, you know, we were learning about the drug as we were giving it. What we don't do with everolimus and CDK4/6 inhibitors, for example, is grade 1 changes like radiation pneumonitis, we don't stop, we don't treat it. We only treat for symptoms. But because of the mortality associated with T-DXd, albeit small, we stop drug for grade 1 imaging-only asymptomatic pneumonitis, and some of us treat with a half dose of steroids just to try and hasten recovery. We've actually now published or presented a couple of datasets from trials, a pooled analysis and a real-world analysis, that have looked at patients who were retreated after grade 1 pneumonitis or ILD and tolerated drug very well and none of them died of interstitial lung disease, which was really great to see because you can retreat safely and some of these patients stayed on for almost a year benefiting from treatment. So, there's a differential toxicity profile with these drugs and there are risk factors which clearly have identified those at higher risk: prior ILD, for example. A French group said smoking; other people haven't found that, maybe because they smoked more in France, I don't know. And being of Japanese descent is quite interesting. The studies just captured that you were treated in Japan, but I think it's probably being of Japanese descent with many drugs that increases your risk of ILD. And, you know, older patients, people who have hypoxia, those are the patients. So, how do we do this? With everolimus, we don't have specific monitoring. But for T-DXd we do; we do every nine weeks to start with and then every 12 weeks CT scans because most of the events occur relatively early. Somebody who's older and at higher risk now get the first CT at six weeks. Dr. Monty Pal: This is super helpful. And I have to tell you, a lot of these drugs are permeating the bladder cancer space which, you know, is ultimately going to be a component of my practice, so thank you for all this. We could probably stay on this topic of HER2-positive disease forever. I'm super interested in that space still. But let me shift gears a little bit and talk about triple-negative breast cancer and this evolving space of HR-positive, HER2-low breast cancer. I mean, tell us about ADCs in that very sort of other broad area. Dr. Hope Rugo: So triple-negative disease is the absolute hardest subset of disease that we have to treat because if you don't have a great response in the early stage setting, the median survival is very short, you know, under two years for the majority of TNBCs, with the exception of the small percentage of low proliferative disease subsets. The co-question is what do we do for these patients and how do we improve outcome? And sacituzumab govitecan has been one strategy in the later line setting that was shown to improve progression-free and overall survival, the Trop-2 ADC. We had recently three trials presented with the two ADCs, sacituzumab govitecan and the other Trop-2 ADC that's approved for HR-positive disease, datopotamab deruxtecan. And they were studied in the first-line setting. Two trials with SG, sacituzumab govitecan, those trials, one was PD-L1 positive, ASCENT-04. That showed that SG with a checkpoint inhibitor was superior, so pembrolizumab was superior to the standard KEYNOTE-355 type of treatment with either a taxane or gemcitabine and carboplatin with pembrolizumab for patients who have a combined positive score for PD-L1, 10 or greater. So, these are patients who are eligible for a checkpoint inhibitor, and SG resulted in an improved progression-free survival.  The interesting thing about that dataset is that few patients had received adjuvant or neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibitor, which is fascinating because we give it to everybody now. But access is an issue and timing of the study enrollment was an issue. The other thing which I think we've all really applauded Gilead for is that there was automatic crossover. So, you could get from the company, to try and overcome some of the enormous disparities worldwide in access to these life-saving drugs, you could get SG through the company for free once you had blinded independent central review confirmation of disease progression. Now, a lot of the people who got the SG got it through their insurance, they didn't bill the company, but 80 percent of patients in the control arm received SG in the second-line setting. So that impacts your ability to look at overall survival, but it's an incredibly important component of these trials. So then at ESMO, we saw the data from SG and Dato-DXd in the first-line metastatic setting for patients who either had PD-L1-negative disease or weren't eligible for an immunotherapy. For the Dato study, TROPION-Breast02, that was 10 percent of the patients who had PD-L1-positive disease but didn't get a checkpoint inhibitor, and for the ASCENT-03 trial population it was only 1 percent. Importantly, the trials allowed patients who relapsed within a year of receiving their treatment with curative intent, and the Dato study, TB-02, allowed patients who relapsed while on treatment or within the first six months, and that was 15 percent of the 20 percent of early relapsers. The ASCENT trial, ASCENT-03, had 20 percent who relapsed between 6 and 12 months. The drugs were better than standard of care chemotherapy, the ADCs in both trials, which is very nice. Different toxicity profiles, different dosing intervals, but better than standard of care chemotherapy in the disease that's hardest for us to treat. And importantly, when you looked at the subset of early relapsers, those patients also did better with the ADC versus chemotherapy, which is incredibly important. And we were really interested in that 15 percent of patients who had early relapse. I actually think that six months thing was totally contrived, invented, you know, categorization and doesn't make any sense, and we should drop it. But the early relapsers were 15 percent of TB-02 and Dato was superior to standard of care chemo. We like survival, but the ASCENT trial again allowed the crossover to an approved ADC that improved survival and 80 percent of patients crossed over. In the Dato trial, they did not allow crossover, they didn't provide Dato, which isn't approved for TNBC but is for HR-positive disease, and they didn't allow, of course, pay for SG. So very few patients actually crossed over in their post-treatment data and in that study, they were able to show a survival benefit. So actually, I think in the U.S. where we can use approved drugs already before there's a fixed FDA approval, that people are already switching to use SG or Dato in the first-line setting for metastatic TNBC that's both PD-L1 positive for SG and PD-L1 negative for both drugs. And I think understanding the toxicity profiles of the two drugs is really important as well as the dosing interval to try and figure out which drug to use. Dr. Monty Pal: Brilliant. Brilliant. Well, I'm going to shift gears a little bit. ADCs are a topic, again, just like HER2-positive disease we could stay on forever. Dr. Hope Rugo: Huge. Yes. Dr. Monty Pal: But we're going to shift gears to another massive topic, which is oral SERDs. In broad strokes, right, this utilization of CDK4/6 inhibitors in the context of HR-positive breast cancer is obviously, you know, a paradigm that's been well established at this point. Where do we sequence in oral SERDs? Where do they fit into this paradigm? Dr. Hope Rugo: Ha! This is a rapidly changing area; we keep changing what we're saying every other minute. And I think that there are three areas of great interest. So one is patients who develop ESR1 mutations that allow constitutive signaling through the estrogen receptor, even when there's not estrogen around, and that is a really important mutation that is subclonal; it develops under the pressure of treatment in about 40 percent of patients. And it doesn't happen when you first walk in the door. And what we've seen is that oral SERDs as single agents are better than standard single-agent endocrine therapy in that setting. The problem that we've had with that approach is that we're now really interested in giving targeted agents with our endocrine therapies, not just in the first-line setting where CDK4/6 inhibitors are our standard of care with survival benefit for ribociclib and, you know, survival benefit in subsets with other CDK4/6 inhibitors, and abemaciclib with a numeric improvement. So we give it first line. The question is, what do you do in the second-line setting? Because of the recent data, we now believe that oral SERDs should be really given with a targeted agent. And some datasets which were recently presented, which I think have helped us with that, have been EMBER-3 and then the most recently evERA BC, or evERA Breast Cancer, that looked at the oral SERD giredestrant with everolimus compared to standard of care endocrine therapy with everolimus, where 100 percent of patients received prior CDK4/6 inhibitor and showed a marked improvement in progression-free survival, including in the subsets of patients with a short response, 6-12 months of prior response to CDK4/6 inhibitor and in those who had a PIK3CA pathway mutation. The thing is that the benefit looks like it's much bigger in the ESR1 mutant population, although response was better, PFS wasn't better in the wild type. So, we're still trying to figure that out. We also saw EMBER-3 with imlunestrant and abemaciclib as a second line. Not everybody had had a prior CDK4/6 inhibitor; they compared it to imlunestrant alone, but still the data was quite striking and seemed to cross the need for ESR1 mutations. And then lastly, we saw data from the single arms of the ELEVATE trial looking at elacestrant with everolimus and abemaciclib and showed these really marked progression-free survival data, even though single-arm, that crossed the mutation status. At least for the everolimus combination, abemaciclib analysis is still to come in the mutated subgroups. But really remarkable PFS, much longer.  Single-agent fulvestrant after CDK4/6 inhibitor AI has a PFS in like the three-month range and in some studies, maybe close to five months. These are all at 10-plus months and really looking very good. And so those questions are, is it ESR1 mutation alone? Is it all comers? We'd like all comers, right? We believe in the combination approach and we're learning more about combinations with drugs like capivasertib and other drugs as we move forward. Everybody now wants to combine their targeted agent with an oral SERD because they're clearly here to stay with quite remarkable data. The other issue, so the second issue in the metastatic setting is, does it make a difference if we change to an oral SERD before radiographic imaging evidence of progression? And that was the question asked in the SERENA-6 trial where patients had serial monitoring for the presence of ESR1 mutations in ctDNA. And those who had them without progression on imaging could be randomized to switch to camizestrant with the same CDK4/6 inhibitor or stay on their same AI CDK4/6 inhibitor. And they showed a difference in progression-free survival that markedly favored camizestrant. But interestingly, the people who were on the standard control arm had an ESR1 mutation, we think AIs don't work, they stayed on for nine more months. The patients who were on the camizestrant stayed on for more than 16 months. And they presented some additional subset data which showed the same thing: follow-up PFS data, PFS2, all beneficial in SERENA-6 at the San Antonio [Breast Cancer Symposium]. So, we're still a little bit unclear about that. They did quality of life, and pain was markedly improved. They had a marked delayed time to progression of pain in the camizestrant arm. So this is all a work in progress, trying to understand who should we switch without progression to an oral SERD based on this development of this mutation that correlates with resistance. And, you know, it's interesting because the median time to having a mutation was 18 months and the median time to switch was almost 24 months. And then there were like more than 3,000 patients who hadn't gotten a mutation, hadn't switched, and were still okay. So screening everybody is the big question, and when you would start and who you would change on and how this affects outcome. Patients didn't have access to camizestrant in the control arm, something we can't fix but we have experimental drugs. We're actually planning a trial, I hope in collaboration with the French group Unicancer, and looking at this exact question. You know, if you switch and you change the CDK4/6 inhibitor and then you also allow crossover, what will we see? Dr. Monty Pal: We're coming right to the tail end of our time here, and I could probably go on for another couple of hours with you here. But if you could just give us maybe one or two big highlights from San Antonio, any thoughts to leave our audience with here based on this recent meeting? Dr. Hope Rugo: Yeah, I mean, I talked about a lot of those new data already from San Antonio, and the one that I'd really like to mention which I think was, you know, there were a lot of great presentations including personalized screening presented from the WISDOM trial by my colleague Laura Esserman, fascinating and really a big advance. But lidERA was the big highlight, I think, outside of the HER2CLIMB-05 which I talked about earlier in HER2-positive disease. And this study looked at giredestrant, the oral SERD versus standard of care endocrine therapy as treatment for medium and high-risk early-stage breast cancer. And what they showed, which I think was really remarkable with just about a three-year median follow-up, was an improvement in invasive disease-free survival with a hazard ratio of 0.7. I mean, really quite remarkable and so early. It looked as though this was all driven by the high-risk group, which makes sense, not the medium risk, it's too early. And also that there was a bigger benefit in patients who were on tamoxifen compared to giredestrant versus AI, but for both groups, the confidence intervals didn't cross 1. There's even a trend towards overall survival, even though it's way too early. I think that, you know, really well-tolerated oral drug that could improve outcome in early-stage disease, this is the first advance we've seen in over two decades in the treatment of early-stage hormone receptor-positive disease with just endocrine therapy. I think we think that we don't want to give up CDK4/6 inhibitors because we saw a survival benefit with abemaciclib and a trend with giving ribociclib in the NATALEE trial. So we're thinking that maybe one approach would be to give CDK4/6 inhibitors and then switch to an oral SERD or to have enough data to be able to give oral SERDs with these CDK4/6 inhibitors for early-stage disease. And that's all in the works, you know, lots of studies going on. We're going to see a lot of data with both switching 8,000 patients with an imlunestrant switching trial, an elacestrant trial going on, and safety data with giredestrant with abemaciclib and soon to come ribociclib. So, this is going to change everything for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer, and I hope cure more patients of the most common subset of the most common cancer diagnosed in women worldwide. Dr. Monty Pal: Super exciting. It's just remarkable to hear how this has evolved since 25 years ago, which is really the last time I sort of dabbled in breast cancer.  Thank you so much, Hope, for joining us today. These were fantastic insights. Appreciate you being on the ASCO Daily News Podcast and really want to thank you personally for your remarkable contribution to the field of breast cancer. Dr. Hope Rugo: Thank you very much, and thanks for talking with me today. Dr. Monty Pal: You got it. And thanks a lot to our listeners today as well. You'll find links to all the studies we discussed today in the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinion of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Follow today's speakers:   Dr. Monty Pal @montypal Dr. Hope Rugo   @hoperugo Follow ASCO on social media:        ASCO on X  ASCO on Bluesky       ASCO on Facebook        ASCO on LinkedIn        Disclosures:     Dr. Monty Pal:    Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview   Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical   Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis   Dr. Hope Rugo:    Honoraria: Mylan/Viatris, Chugai Pharma   Consulting/Advisory Role: Napo Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Bristol Myer   Research Funding (Inst.): OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, Hoffman La-Roche AG/Genentech, In., Stemline Therapeutics, Ambryx  

In this episode, Lisa and Annie discuss:Career planning when chronic health conditions or physical disabilities affect daily functioningSelf-advocacy and accommodations across education, training, and employmentAligning career choices with realistic capacity and long-term sustainabilityUsing real-world experiences and conversations to validate career fitKey Takeaways: College provides a structured environment where students can learn to articulate how their condition affects them, practice requesting accommodations, and build confidence navigating formal systems they will later encounter in the workplace.Accommodations support access but do not eliminate essential job functions, making it critical to assess whether the physical, cognitive, and stamina demands of a role can be met consistently over time.Hands-on validation through internships, clinicals, job shadows, and informational interviews reveals the lived reality of a job in ways that academic requirements alone cannot.Sustainable career planning requires honest conversations about energy limits, recovery time, and quality of life, rather than defaulting to paths that are technically possible but personally draining. “You have to be comfortable talking about your condition and your needs.” – Annie TulkinAbout Annie Tulkin: Annie Tulkin is the CEO and Founder of Accessible College, as well as an educator, author, and public speaker. She is an expert in college preparation and transition for students with physical disabilities and health conditions, and has worked in the disability field for her entire professional career. She holds degrees from DePaul University and the University of Wisconsin–Madison, was a Peace Corps Volunteer and Fulbright Fellow in Mongolia, and resides in Silver Spring, MD, with her husband and daughter.Episode References:Job Accommodation Network (JAN): https://askjan.org/Diabetes Link (formerly College Diabetes Network): https://thediabeteslink.org/Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation: https://www.christopherreeve.org/#099 Navigating College with Physical Disabilities and Health Conditions with Annie Tulkin: https://www.flourishcoachingco.com/podcast/099-navigating-college-with-physical-disabilities-and-health-conditions-with-annie-tulkin/Get Lisa's Free on-demand video: How-to guide for your teen to choose the right major, college, & career...(without painting themselves into a corner, missing crucial deadlines, or risking choices you both regret). flourishcoachingco.com/video Connect with Annie:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/accessiblecollege/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/accessiblecollege/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/annie-tulkin-3b66b719/Website: https://accessiblecollege.com/Connect with Lisa:Website: https://www.flourishcoachingco.com/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@flourishcoachingcoFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/flourishcoachingco/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/flourishcoachingco/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/flourish-coaching-co

Episode: Jason Staples and Stephen Carlson try to ruin your Nativity! Jason discusses Stephen's essay "The Accommodations of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem: Κατάλυμα in Luke 2:7." They also discuss when and how Mary and Joseph get married, the census in Luke 2:2, and ... (wait for it) ... the Spanish Inquisition.  Guest: Dr. Stephen Carlson is Associate Professor in the Biblical and Early Christian Studies program at the Australian Catholic University. He's the author of three books, The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor, 2007), which debunked the "Secret Gospel of Mark"; The Text of Galatians and its History (Mohr Siebeck, 2014), which applied state-of-the-art computer phylogenetic software he wrote himself to produce a family tree of ninety-two manuscripts and witnesses of Galatians; and Papias of Hierapolis' Exposition of Dominical Oracles (Oxford, 2021), the most complete edition of the fragments of Papias of Hierapolis, a second-century Christian commentator. He is also the author of numerous peer-reviewed journal articles, including his article on the so-called "inn" in Luke's infancy account (under discussion in this episode) and essays on the donkeys in Matthew's triumphal entry: Stephen C. Carlson, “‘The Jenny and the Colt' in Matthew's Messianic Entry, Part 1: Matthew 21:5 as a Reading of Zechariah 9:9 in Light of Mark 11:1-10,” in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, volume 81, number 1 (January 2019), pages 62-84 (link). Stephen C. Carlson, “‘The Jenny and the Colt' in Matthew's Messianic Entry, Part 2: Matthew 21:7 as a Reading of Mark 11:7 in Light of Zechariah 9:9,” in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, volume 81, number 2 (April 2019), pages 235-251 (link). HERE is a link to the article "Luke 2:2 and the Census."  

After surveying over 1,000 HR leaders, AbsenceSoft's 2026 State of Leave and Accommodations report revealed that the nature of leave and accommodations requests has fundamentally shifted in ways most compliance professionals aren't prepared for. For the third year running, caseloads continue climbing, but it's not just the volume that's changed. The types of requests employees are making, the tools HR teams are using to manage them, and the compliance risks lurking in seemingly helpful shortcuts are creating a perfect storm. If you're still managing your programs the way you did three years ago, or if you think AI is just a future concern, this conversation will change how you think about risk, resources, and what it takes to stay compliant in 2026.

40 Trips to France: Plus a French Christmas Feast with Annie & Elyse opens with host Annie Sargent welcoming back longtime traveler Janice Chung, who has now visited France 40 times. This episode explores why France keeps calling people back and how repeat travel changes the way you experience the country. Listen to this episode ad-free Janice explains why France feels like home to her. She talks about slowing down, speaking French even when it's imperfect, and choosing experiences over checklists. She shares how she plans trips around things that excite her. Sometimes it's a race, like the Adidas 10K in Paris. Sometimes it's a scenic train ride in the Ardèche. Other times it's simply walking for hours and letting the day unfold. Annie and Janice discuss favorite regions, especially lesser-known places like the Aveyron. They talk about beautiful villages, local food like aligot, and why these areas remain less touristy. Janice also explains how she mixes trains, rental cars, biking, and walking depending on where she goes. This episode also looks at how France has changed over the decades. Janice remembers dirtier streets, heavier smoking, and more car traffic. Today, she notices cleaner cities, contactless payments everywhere, and easier trip planning thanks to technology. Prices have gone up, especially in Paris, but great value still exists outside major cities. The episode ends with a festive magazine segment. Annie Sargent and Elyse Rivin talk about French Christmas traditions. They cover chocolate, foie gras, oysters, cheese, bûche de Noël, and how bakeries prepare for the holidays. It's practical, warm, and very French. If you love real conversations about travel, food, and life in France, this episode is for you. Subscribe to the Join Us in France Travel Podcast on your favorite podcast app, on Spotify, or on YouTube so you never miss an episode. Table of Contents for this Episode [00:00:16] Introduction and Welcome [00:00:31] Today on the podcast [00:00:49] Podcast supporters [00:01:20] Magazine segment [00:02:31] 40 Visits to France with Janice Chung [00:02:57] Why France Feels Like Home [00:04:02] Exploring Lesser-Known Regions [00:04:49] Unique Experiences in Ardèche [00:07:38] Running and Racing in France [00:08:53] Travel Preferences and Challenges [00:09:58] Biking Adventures in France [00:17:12] Changes in France Over the Years [00:22:14] Travel Duration and Cat Care [00:23:05] Discovering a Love for France [00:23:54] Starting a Travel Blog [00:25:22] Unique Travel Experiences [00:26:16] Booking Trips and Accommodations [00:28:14] Navigating French Language and Culture [00:29:55] Favorite French Foods [00:30:46] Travel Tips for First-Time Visitors [00:33:02] Cash and Contactless Payments [00:35:03] Booking accommodation [00:39:26] Medical Encounters in France [00:42:51] Final Thoughts and Future Plans [00:43:32] Christmas Foods with Elyse and Annie More episodes about Christmas in France #JoinUsInFrance, #FrancePodcast, #TravelFrance, #FrenchCulture, #ExploreFrance, #DiscoverFrance, #FranceTravelTips, #RealFrance, #Francophile, #FranceAdventures, #SlowTravelFrance, #FranceBeyondParis, #FrenchChristmas, #ChristmasInFrance, #RepeatTravel, #FranceLovers, #TravelPodcast, #FranceByTrain, #FranceFood, #LifeInFrance

Students in Special Education deserve to be considered and planned for in school safety operations. In this conversation, THINK+change learns about how schools can and do adapt their planning to make sure that all their students will be accounted for in an emergency.   Join us in learning from Brad Stiles, M.A., Emergency Response Outreach Consultant at Colorado Office of School Safety (OSS). He offers his take on where we are at now and what families and school staff should consider when advocating for their Special Education students.

This is a reposted episode. Originally published December 2024.In this episode of The Biblical Languages Podcast, Kevin takes us through the nuances of some key Christmas passages.Referenced Resources:- Kevin's video responding to Dan McClellan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v132jB0KO4&t=96s- (book) The Mother of the Infant King by Christophe Rico and Peter Gentry: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1498230164- (article) The Accommodations of Joseph and Mary in Bethlehem: Κατάλυμα in Luke 2.7 by Stephen Carleson: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/new-testament-studies/article/abs/accommodations-of-joseph-and-mary-in-bethlehem-in-luke-27/E60EB9AEE5215FC0C989DE635DC80A7B- (blog post) Jesus wasn't born in a stable—and that makes all the difference by Ian Paul: https://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/jesus-wasnt-born-in-a-stable-and-that-makes-all-the-difference/As always, this episode is brought to you by Biblingo, the premier solution for learning, maintaining, and enjoying the biblical languages. Visit ⁠biblingo.org⁠ to learn more and start your 10-day free trial. If you enjoy this episode, be sure to subscribe on your favorite podcast app and leave us a review. You can also follow Biblingo on social media @biblingoapp to discuss the episode with us and other listeners.

JCO PO author Dr. Shilpa Gupta at Cleveland Clinic Children's Hospital shares insights into her article, "Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 (FGFR3) Alteration Status and Outcomes on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICPI) in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma". Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Dr. Gupta discuss how FGFR3 combined with TMB emerged as a biomarker that may be predictive for response to ICPI in mUC. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Hello and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCO PO articles. I'm your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, podcast editor for JCO Precision Oncology and Associate Professor at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center. Today I am excited to be joined by Dr. Shilpa Gupta, Director of Genitourinary Medical Oncology at the Cancer Institute and co-leader of the GU Oncology Program at the Cleveland Clinic, and also lead author of the JCO PO article titled "Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 Alteration Status and Outcomes on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma." At the time of this recording, our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Shilpa, welcome again to the podcast. Thank you for joining us today. Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Thank you, Rafeh. Honor to be here with you again. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: It is nice to connect with you again after two years, approximately. I think we were in our infancy of our JCO PO podcast when we had you first time, and it has been an interesting journey since then. Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Absolutely. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, excited to talk to you about this article that you published. Wanted to first understand what is the genomic landscape of urothelial cancer in general, and why should we be interested in FGFR3 alterations specifically? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Bladder cancer or urothelial cancer is a very heterogeneous cancer. And while we find there is a lot of mutations can be there, you know, like BRCA1, 2, in HER2, in FGFR, we never really understood what is driving the cancer. Like a lot of old studies with targeted therapies did not really work. For example, we think VEGF can be upregulated, but VEGF inhibitors have not really shown definite promise so far. Now, FGFR3 receptor is the only therapeutic target so far that has an FDA approved therapy for treating metastatic urothelial cancer patients, and erdafitinib was approved in 2019 for patients whose tumors overexpressed FGFR3 mutations, alterations, or fusions. And in the landscape of bladder cancer, it is important because in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, about 70 to 80% patients can have this FGFR3. But as patients become metastatic, the alterations are seen in, you know, only about 10% of patients. So the clinical trials that got the erdafitinib approved actually used archival tumor from local cancer. So when in the real world, we don't see a lot of patients if we are trying to do metastatic lesion biopsies. And why it is important to know this is because that is the only targeted therapy available for our patients right now. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for giving us that overview. Now, on the clinical side, there is obviously some interesting data for FGFR3 on the mutation side and the fusion side. In your clinical practice, do you tend to approach these patients differently when you have a mutation versus when you have a fusion? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: We can use the treatment regardless of that. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: I recently remember I had a patient with lung cancer, squamous lung cancer, who also had a synchronous bladder mass. And the first thought from multiple colleagues was that this is metastatic lung. And interestingly, the liquid biopsy ended up showing an FGFR3-TACC fusion, which we generally don't see in squamous lung cancers. And then eventually, I was able to convince our GU colleagues, urologists, to get a biopsy. They did a transurethral resection of this tumor, ended up being primary urothelial and synchronous lung, which again, going back to the FGFR3 story, I saw in your paper there is a mention of FGFR3-TACC fusions. Anything interesting that you find with these fusions as far as biology or tumor behavior is concerned? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: We found in our paper of all the patients that were sequenced that 20% had the pathognomonic FGFR3 alteration, and the most common were the S249C, and the FGFR3-TACC3 fusion was in 45 patients. And basically I will say that we didn't want to generate too much as to fusion or the differences in that. The key aspect of this paper was that historically there were these anecdotal reports saying that patients who have FGFR alterations or mutations, they may not respond well to checkpoint inhibitors because they have the luminal subtype. And these were backed by some preclinical data and small anecdotal reports. But since then, we have seen that, and that's why a lot of people would say that if somebody's tumor has FGFR3, don't give them immunotherapy, give them erdafitinib first, right? So then we had this Phase 3 trial called the THOR trial, which actually showed that giving erdafitinib before pembrolizumab was not better. That debunked that myth, and we are actually reiterating that because in our work we found that patients who had FGFR3 alterations or fusions, and if they also have TMB-high, they actually respond very well to single agent immunotherapy. And that is, I think, very important because it tells us that we are not really seeing that so-called potential of resistance to immunotherapy in these patients. So to answer your question, yeah, we did see those differences, but I wouldn't say that any one marker is more prominent. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: The analogy is kind of similar to what we see in lung cancer with these mutations called STK11/KEAP1, which are also present in some other tumors. And one of the questions that I don't think has been answered is when you have in lung cancer, if you extrapolate this, where doublet or single agent immunotherapy doesn't do as well in tumors that are STK11 mutated. But then if you have a high TMB, question is does that TMB supersede or trump the actual mutation? Could that be one reason why you see the TMB-high but FGFR3 altered tumors in your dataset responding or having better outcomes to immunotherapy where potentially there is just more neoantigens and that results in a more durable or perhaps better response to checkpoint therapy? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: It could be. But you know, the patients who have FGFR alterations are not that many, right? So we have already seen that just patients with TMB-high respond very well to immunotherapy. Our last podcast was actually on that, regardless of PD-L1 that was a better predictor of response to immunotherapy. So I think it's not clear if this is adding more chances of response or not, because either way they would respond. But what we didn't see, which was good, that if they had FGFR3, it's not really downplaying the fact that they have TMB-high and that patients are not responding to immunotherapy. So we saw that regardless, and that was very reassuring. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: So if tomorrow in your clinic you had an individual with an FGFR3 alteration but TMB-high, I guess one could be comfortable just going ahead with immunotherapy, which is what the THOR trial as you mentioned. Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Yes, absolutely. And you know, when you look at the toxicity profiles of pembrolizumab and erdafitinib, really patients really struggle with using the FGFR3 inhibitors. And of course, if they have to use it, we have to, and we reserve it for patients. But it's not an easy drug to tolerate. Currently the landscape is such that, you know, frontline therapy has now evolved with an ADC and immunotherapy combinations. So really if patients progress and have FGFR3 alterations, we are using erdafitinib. But let's say if there were a situation where a patient has had chemotherapy, no immunotherapy, and they have FGFR3 upregulation and TMB-high, yes, I would be comfortable with using only pembrolizumab. And that really ties well together what we saw in the THOR trial as well. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Going to the clinical applications, you mentioned a little bit of this in the manuscript, is combination therapies. You alluded to it a second back. Everything tends to get combined with checkpoint therapy these days, as you've seen with the frontline urothelial, pembrolizumab with an ADC. What is the landscape like as far as some of these FGFR alterations are concerned? Is it reasonable to combine some of those drugs with immune checkpoint therapy? And what are some of the toxicity patterns that you've potentially seen in your experience? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: So there was indeed a trial called the NORSE trial. It was a randomized trial but not a comparative cohort, where they looked at FGFR altered patients. And when they combined erdafitinib plus cetrelimab, that did numerically the response rates were much higher than those who got just erdafitinib. So yeah, the combination is definitely doable. There is no overlapping toxicities. But unfortunately that combination has not really moved forward to a Phase 3 trial because it's so challenging to enroll patients with such kind of rare mutations on large trials, especially to do registration trials. And since then the frontline therapy has evolved to enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab. I know there is an early phase trial looking at a next generation FGFR inhibitor. There is a triplet combination looking in Phase 1 setting with a next generation FGFR inhibitor with EV-pembro. However, it's not a randomized trial. So you know, I worry about such kinds of combinations where we don't have a path for registration. And in the four patients that have been treated, four or five patients in the early phase as a part of basket trial, the toxicities were a lot, you know, when you combine the EV-pembro and an FGFR3 inhibitor, we see more and more toxicity. So the big question is do we really need the "kitchen sink" approach when we have a very good doublet, or unless the bar is so high with the doublet, like what are we trying to add at the expense of patient toxicity and quality of life is the big question in my mind. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Going back to your manuscript specifically, there could be a composite biomarker. You point out like FGFR in addition to FGFR TMB ends up being predictive prognostic there. So that could potentially be used as an approach to stratify patients as far as treatment, whether it's a single agent versus combination. Maybe the TMB-low/FGFR3 mutated require a combination, but the TMB-high/FGFR mutated don't require a combination, right? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: No, that's a great point, yeah. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: But again, very interesting, intriguing concepts that you've alluded to and described in this manuscript. Now, a quick take on how things have changed in the bladder cancer space in the last two years. We did a podcast with you regarding some biomarkers as you mentioned two years back. So I really would like to spend the next minute to two to understand how have things changed in the bladder cancer space? What are some of the exciting things that were not there two years back that are in practice now? And how do you anticipate the next two years to be like? Maybe we'll have another podcast with you in another two years when the space will have changed even more. Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Certainly a lot has happened in the two years, you know. EV-pembro became the universal frontline standard, right? We have really moved away from cisplatin eligibility in metastatic setting because anybody would benefit from EV-pembro regardless of whether they are candidates for cisplatin or not, which historically was relevant. And just two days ago, we saw that EV-pembro has now been approved for localized bladder cancer for patients who are cisplatin ineligible or refusing. So, you know, this very effective regimen moving into earlier setting, we now have to really think of good treatment options in the metastatic setting, right? So I think that's where a lot of these novel combinations may come up. And what else we've seen is in a tumor agnostic trial called the DESTINY-PanTumor trial, patients who had HER2 3+ on immunohistochemistry, we saw the drug approval for T-DXd, and I think that has kind of reinvigorated the interest in HER2 in bladder cancer, because in the past targeting HER2 really didn't work. And we still don't know if HER2 is a driver or not. And at ESMO this year, we saw an excellent study coming out of China with DV which is targeting HER2, and toripalimab, which is a Chinese checkpoint inhibitor, showing pretty much similar results to what we saw with EV-pembro. Now, you know, not to do cross-trial comparisons, but that was really an amazing, amazing study. It was in the presidential session. And I think the big question is: does that really tell us that HER2-low patients will not benefit? Because that included 1+, 2+, 3+. So that part we really don't know, and I think we want to study from the EV-302 how the HER2 positive patients did with EV and pembro. So that's an additional option, at least in China, and hopefully if it gets approved here, there is a trial going on with DV and pembro. And lastly, we've seen a very promising biomarker, like ctDNA, for the first time in bladder cancer in the adjuvant setting guiding treatment with adjuvant atezolizumab. So patients who were ctDNA positive derived overall survival and recurrence-free survival benefit. So that could help us select moving forward with more studies. We can spare unnecessary checkpoint inhibitors in patients who are not going to benefit. So I think there is a lot happening in our field, and this will help do more studies because we already have the next generation FGFR inhibitors which don't have the toxicities that erdafitinib comes with. And combining those with these novel ADCs and checkpoint inhibitors, you know, using maybe TMB as a biomarker, because we really need to move away from PD-L1 in bladder cancer. It's shown no utility whatsoever, but TMB has. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, thank you so much, Shilpa, for that tour de force of how things have changed in bladder cancer. There used to be a time when lung and melanoma used to lead this space in terms of the number of approvals, the biomarker development. It looks like bladder cancer is shifting the trend at this stage. So definitely exciting to see all the new changes that are coming up. I'd like to spend another minute and a half on your career. You've obviously been a leader and example for many people in the GU space and beyond. Could you, for the sake of our early career especially, the trainees and other listeners, describe how you focused on things that you're currently leading as a leader, and how you shaped your career trajectory over the last 10 years? Dr. Shilpa Gupta: That's a really important question, Rafeh, and you and I have had these discussions before, you know, being an IMG on visas like you, and being in different places. I think I try to make the most of it, you know, instead of focusing on the setbacks or the negative things. Like tried to grab the opportunities that came along. When I was at Moffitt, got to get involved with the Phase 1 trial of pembrolizumab in different tumor types. And just keeping my options open, you know, getting into the bladder cancer at that time when I wanted to really do only prostate, but it was a good idea for me to keep my options open and got all these opportunities that I made use of. I think an important thing is to, like you said, you know, have a focus. So I am trying to focus more on biomarkers that, you know, we know that 70% patients will respond to EV-pembro, right? But what about the remaining 30%? Like, so I'm really trying to understand what determines hyperprogressors with such effective regimens who we really struggle with in the clinic. They really don't do well with anything we give them after that. So we are doing some work with that and also trying to focus on PROs and kind of patient-reported outcomes. And a special interest that I've now developed and working on it is young-onset bladder cancer. You know, the colorectal cancer world has made a lot of progress and we are really far behind. And bladder cancer has historically been a disease of the elderly, which is not the case anymore. We are seeing patients in their 30s and 40s. So we launched this young-onset bladder cancer initiative at a Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network meeting and now looking at more deep dive and creating a working group around that. But yeah, you know, I would say that my philosophy has been to just take the best out of the situation I'm in, no matter where I am. And it has just helped shape my career where I am, despite everything. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, thank you again. It is always a pleasure to learn from your experiences and things that you have helped lead. Appreciate all your insights, and thank you for publishing with JCO PO. Hopefully we will see more of your biomarker work being published and perhaps bring you for another podcast in a couple of years. Dr. Shilpa Gupta: Yeah, thank you, Rafeh, for the opportunity. And thanks to JCO PO for making these podcasts for our readers. So thanks a lot. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcast. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. DISCLOSURES Dr. Shilpa Gupta Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Company: BioNTech SE,  Nektar Consulting or Advisory Role: Company: Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Merck, Foundation Medicine, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Medarex, Natera, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen Research Funding: Recipient: Your Institution Company: Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation, Merck, Roche/Genentech, EMD Serono, Exelixis, Novartis, Tyra Biosciences, Pfizer, Convergent Therapeutics, Acrivon Therapeutics, Flare Therapeutics, Amgen Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Company: Pfizer, Astellas Pharma, Merck    

Supporting students with dyslexia doesn't have to feel overwhelming! In this episode, we're sharing science-backed dyslexia support strategies to help struggling readers build confidence and fluency. Learn how to use multisensory instruction, structured phonics, and effective accommodations to create a dyslexia-friendly learning environment.*Note: Since this episode first aired, The International Dyslexia Association released a new and updated version of their definition of dyslexia. You can find that definition here.In this episode, we'll talk about:What dyslexia really is (and what it isn't).Why phonemic awareness and phonics are essential for dyslexic learners.How to use multisensory techniques to improve reading skills.Accommodations that help dyslexic students succeed in the classroom.Show LinksDyslexia TrainingInternational Dyslexia Association's List of Accommodations & ModificationsJoin Malia on Instagram.Become a Science of Reading Formula member!Rate, Review, and FollowIf you loved this episode, please take a minute to rate and review my show! That helps the podcast world know that this show is worth sharing with other educators just like you.Scroll to the bottom, tap to rate with five stars, and select "Write a Review". Then let me know what you loved most about the episode!While you're there, be sure to follow the podcast. I'm adding a bunch of bonus episodes to the feed and I don't want you to miss out! 

In this week's episode of Chasing the Rabbit, the team kicks things off with Christmas stories, family traditions, and even a few Waffle House memories as they talk about the funny “accommodations” families make during the holidays.Then we shift gears into something that matters deeply for every believer and every family: how to get into the Bible with confidence.Eric and Jeremy recap their recent “How to Bible” event, walking through Bible translations, reading levels, study tools, apps, and how parents can disciple their kids by helping them choose (and actually use) the right Bible. Whether you're trying to build better habits, help your kids engage Scripture, or simply want a lighthearted Christmas-season episode, this one delivers a fun and meaningful conversation.Listen, laugh, and be encouraged as we make room—both in our homes and in our hearts—for Jesus this Christmas season.

HOUR 3: Are people abusing disability accommodations? Disney seems to think so. full 2080 Mon, 08 Dec 2025 22:00:00 +0000 tspt0S3jDEsyQiBJG3A6k71jVUxHTUsA news The Dana & Parks Podcast news HOUR 3: Are people abusing disability accommodations? Disney seems to think so. You wanted it... Now here it is! Listen to each hour of the Dana & Parks Show whenever and wherever you want! © 2025 Audacy, Inc. News False https://playe

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Jason Westin discuss the federal funding climate for cancer research and the persistent problem of drug shortages, two of the major concerns facing the oncology community in 2026. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I am your host, Dr. Monty Pal. I am a medical oncologist and vice chair of academic affairs at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Los Angeles. There are always multiple challenges facing oncologists, and today, we discuss two of them that really stand out for 2026: threats to federal funding for cancer research and the persistent problem of drug shortages. I am thrilled to welcome Dr. Jason Westin, who believes that one way to meet these challenges is to get oncologists more involved in advocacy, and he will share some strategies to help us meet this moment in oncology. Dr. Westin is a professor in the Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, but he actually wears a lot of hats within ASCO. He is a member of the Board of Directors and has also previously served as chair of ASCO's Government Relations Committee. And he is also one of the inaugural members of ASCO's Political Action Committee, or PAC. He has testified before Congress about drug shortages and many other issues. Dr. Westin, I am really excited to have you on the podcast today and dive into some of these elements that will really impact our community in 2026. Thanks so much for joining us today. Dr. Jason Westin: Thank you for having me. Dr. Monty Pal: You've had such a range of experience. I already alluded to you testifying before Congress. You've actually run for office before. You wear so many different hats. I'm used to checking my PubMed every other day and seeing a new paper out from you and your group, and you publish in the New England Journal [of Medicine] on practice-setting standards and the diseases that you treat. But you've also done all this work in the domain of advocacy. I can't imagine that balancing that is easy. What has sort of motivated you on the advocacy front? Dr. Jason Westin: Advocacy to me is another way to apply our skills and help more people than just those that you're sitting across from at the time. Clinical research, of course, is a tool to try and take what we know and apply it more broadly to people that you'll never meet. And advocacy, I think, can do the same thing, where you can have a conversation with a lawmaker, you can advocate for a position, and that hopefully will help thousands or maybe even more people down the road who you'd never get to directly interact with. And so, I think it's a force multiplier in the same way that research can be. And so, I think advocacy is a wonderful part of how doctors care for our patients. And it's something that is often difficult to know where to start, but once people get into advocacy, they can see that the power, the rewarding nature of it is attractive, and most people, once they get going, continue with that through the rest of their career. Dr. Monty Pal: So, I'll ask you to expand on that a little bit. We have a lot of our younger ASCO members listening to this podcast, folks that are just starting out their careers in clinical practice or academia. Where does that journey begin? How do you get to the point that you're testifying in front of Congress and taking on these bigger sort of stances for the oncology community? Dr. Jason Westin: Yeah, with anything in medicine and in our careers, you have to start somewhere. And often you start with baby steps before you get in front of a panel of senators or other high-profile engagement opportunities. But often the first setting for junior colleagues to be engaged is doing things – we call them "Hill Days" – but basically being involved in kind of low-stakes meetings where you're with a group of peers, some of whom have done this multiple times before, and can get engaged talking to members of representatives' offices, and doing so in a way where it's a natural conversation that you're telling a story about a patient in your clinic, or that you're telling a personal experience from a policy that impacted your ability to deliver optimal care. It sounds stressful, but once you're doing it, it's not stressful. It's actually kind of fun. And it's a way that you can get comfort and skill with a group of peers who are there and able to help you. And ASCO has a number of ways to do that, both at the federal level, there's the Hill Day where we each April have several hundred ASCO members travel to Capitol Hill. There's also state engagement that can be done, so-called visiting at home, when representatives from the U.S. Congress or from state legislators are back in district. You can meet with your own representatives on behalf of yourself, on behalf of your organization, and advocate for policies in a way that can be beneficial to your patients. But those initial meetings that are in the office often they're low stakes because you could be meeting not with the representative but with their staff. And that staff sometimes is as young or even younger than our junior colleagues. These sometimes can be people in their 20s, but they're often extremely knowledgeable, extremely approachable, and are used to dealing with people who are new to advocacy. But they actually help make decisions within the office. So it's not a waste of time. It's actually a super useful way to engage. So, it's that first step of anything in life. The activation energy is always high to do something new. But I'd encourage people who are listening to this podcast already having some level of interest about it to explore ways that they could engage more. Dr. Monty Pal: You know, I have to tell you, I'm going to riff on what you just said for a second. ASCO couldn't make it any easier, I think, for folks to participate and get involved. So, if you're listening to this and scratching your head and thinking, "Well, where do I begin? How do I actually sign on for that meeting with a local representative?" Go to the ASCO ACT Network website. And I'll actually talk to our producer, Geraldine, to make sure we've got a link to that somewhere associated with this podcast after it's published, Jason, but I actually keep that on my browser and it's super easy. I check in there every now and then and see if there's any new policy or legislation that ASCO, you know, is sort of taking a stance on, and it gives me some fodder for conversation with my local representatives too. I mean, it's just an awesome, awesome vehicle. I'm going to segue right from there right to the issues. So, you and I are both at academic centers. You know, I think this is something that really pervades academia and enters into implications for general clinical practice. There's been this, you know, massive sort of proposal for decreased funding to the NCI and to the NIH and so forth. Tell us what ASCO is doing in that regard, and tell us perhaps how our community can help. Dr. Jason Westin: We live in interesting times, and I think that may be an understatement x 100. But obviously investments in research are things that when you're at an academic center, you see and feel that as part of your daily life. Members of Congress need to be reminded of that because there's a lot of other competing interests out there besides investing in the future through research. And being an elected representative is a hard job. That is something where you have to make difficult choices to support this, and that may mean not supporting that. And there's lots of good things where our tax dollars could be spent. And so, I'm sympathetic to the idea that there's not unlimited resources. However, ASCO has done an excellent job, and ASCO members have led the charge on this, of stating what research does, what is the benefit of research, and therefore why should this matter to elected representatives, to their staff, and to those people that they're elected to serve. And ASCO has led with a targeted campaign to basically have that message be conveyed at every opportunity to elected representatives. And each year on Hill Day, one of the asks that we have is to continue to support research: the NCI, NIH, ARPA-H, these are things that are always in the asks to make sure that there's appropriate funding. But effectively playing offense by saying, "It's not just a number on a sheet of paper, this is what it means to patients. This is what it means to potentially your loved ones in the future if you are in the opposite situation where you're not on the legislative side, but you're in the office receiving a diagnosis or receiving a difficult piece of news." We only have the tools we have now because of research, and each breakthrough has been years in the making and countless hours spent funded through the engine of innovation: clinical research and translational research. And so ASCO continues to beat that drum. You mentioned earlier the ACT Network. Just to bring that back again is a very useful, very easy tool to communicate to your elected representatives. When you sign up on the ASCO ACT website, you get emails periodically, not too much, but periodically get emails of, "This is a way you can engage with your lawmakers to speak up for this." And as you said, Monty, they make it as easy as possible. You click the button, you type in your address so that it figures out who your elected representatives are, and then it will send a letter on your behalf after like five clicks to say, "I want you to support research. I want you to vote for this particular thing which is of interest to ASCO and by definition to members of ASCO." And so the ACT Network is a way that people listening can engage without having to spend hours and significant time, but just a few clicks can send that letter to a representative in Congress. And the question could be: does that matter? Does contacting your senator or your elected representative do anything? If all they're hearing is somebody else making a different argument and they're hearing over and over again from people that want investments in AI or investments in something else besides cancer research, whatever it is, they may think that there's a ground shift that people want dollars to be spent over here as opposed to at the NIH or NCI or in federally funded research. It is important to continue to express the need for federal funding for our research. And so, it really is important for folks to engage. Dr. Monty Pal: 100%. One of the things that I think is not often obvious to a lot of our listeners is where the support for clinical trials comes from. You know, you've obviously run the whole gamut of studies as have I. You know, we have our pharmaceutical company-sponsored studies, which are in a particular bucket. But I would say that there's a very important and critical subset of studies that are actually government funded, right? NCI-funded clinical trials. If you don't mind, just explain to our audience the critical nature of the work that's being done in those types of studies and if you can, maybe compare and contrast the studies that are done in that bucket versus perhaps the pharmaceutical bucket. Dr. Jason Westin: Both are critical, and we're privileged that we have pharma studies that are sponsored and federally funded clinical research. And I think that part of a healthy ecosystem for us to develop new breakthroughs has a need for both. The pharma sponsored studies are done through the lens of trying to get an approval for an agent that's of interest so that the pharma company can then turn around and use that outside of a clinical trial after an FDA approval. And so those studies are often done through the lens of getting over the finish line by showing some superiority over an existing treatment or in a new patient population. But they're done through that lens of kind of the broadest population and sometimes relatively narrow endpoints, but to get the approval so that then the drug can be widely utilized. Clinical trials done through cooperative groups are sometimes done to try and optimize that or to try and look at comparative things that may not be as attractive to pharma studies, not necessarily going for that initial approval, but the fine tuning or the looking at health outcomes or looking at ensuring that we do studies in representative populations that may not be as well identified on the pharma sponsored trials, but basically filling out the gaps in the knowledge that we didn't gain from the initial phase 3 trial that led to the approval. And so both are critical. But if we only do pharma sponsored trials, if we don't fund federally supported research and that dries up, the fear I have, and many others have, is that we're going to be lacking a lot of knowledge about the best ways to use these great new therapies, these new immune therapies, or in my team, we do a lot of clinical trials on CAR T-cell therapies. If we don't have federally funded research to do the important clinical studies, we'll be in the dark about the best ways to use these drugs, and that's going to be a terrible shame. And so we really do need to continue to support federal research. Dr. Monty Pal: Yeah, there are no softball questions on this podcast, but I think everybody would be hard pressed to think that you and I would come on here and say, "Well, no, we don't need as much money for clinical trials and NCI funding" and so forth. But I think a really challenging issue to tackle, and this is something we thought to ask you ahead of the podcast, is what to do about the general climate of, you know, whether it's academic research or clinical practice here that seems to be getting some of our colleagues thinking about moving elsewhere. I've actually talked to a couple of folks who are picking up and moving to Europe for a variety of considerations, other continents, frankly. The U.S. has always been a leader when it comes to oncology research and, one might argue, research in general. Some have the mindset these days that we're losing that footing a little bit. What's your perspective? Are you concerned about some of the trends that you're seeing? What does your crystal ball tell you? Dr. Jason Westin: I am highly concerned about this. I think as you said, the U.S. has been a leader for a long time, but it wasn't always. This is not something that's preordained that the world-leading clinical research and translational research will always be done in the United States. That is something that has been developed as an ecosystem, as an engine for innovation and for job development, new technology development, since World War II. That's something that through intentional investments in research was developed that the best and brightest around the world, if they could choose to go anywhere, you wanted them to come to work at universities and academic places within the United States. And I think, as you said, that's at risk if you begin to dry up the investment in research or if you begin to have less focus on being engaged in research in a way that is forward thinking, not just kind of maintaining what we do now or only looking at having private, for profit sponsored research. But if you don't have the investment in the basic science research and the translational research and the forward-thinking part of it, the fear is that we lose the advantage and that other countries will say, "Thank you very much," and be happy to invest in ways to their advantage. And I think as you mentioned, there are people that are beginning to look elsewhere. I don't think that it's likely that a significant population of researchers in the U.S. who are established and have careers and families – I don't think that we're going to see a mass exodus of folks. I think the real risk to me is that the younger, up-and-coming people in undergraduate or in graduate school or in medical school and are the future superstars, that they could either choose to go into a different field, so they decide not to go into what could be the latest breakthroughs for cancer patients but could be doing something in AI or something in a different field that could be attractive to them because of less uncertainty about funding streams, or they could take that job offer if it's in a different country. And I think that's the concern is it may not be a 2026 problem, but it could be a 2036 or a 2046 problem that we reap what we sow if we don't invest in the future. Dr. Monty Pal: Indeed, indeed. You know, I've had the pleasure of reviewing abstracts for some of our big international meetings, as I'm sure you've done in the past too. I see this trend where, as before, we would see the preponderance of large phase 3 clinical trials and practice setting studies being done here in the U.S., I'm seeing this emergence of China, of other countries outside of the U.S. really taking lead on these things. And it certainly concerns me. If I had to sort of gauge this particular issue, it's at the top of my list in terms of what I'm concerned about. But I also wanted to ask you, Jason, in terms of the issues that are looming over oncology from an advocacy perspective, what else really sort of keeps you up at night? Dr. Jason Westin: I'm quite concerned about the drug shortages. I think that's something that is a surprisingly evergreen problem. This is something that is on its face illogical that we're talking about the greatest engine for research in the world being the United States and the investment that we've made in drug development and the breakthroughs that have happened for patients all around the world, many of them happen in the United States, and yet we don't necessarily have access to drugs from the 1970s or 1980s that are cheap, generic, sterile, injectable drugs. This is the cisplatins and the vincristines and the fludarabine type medications which are not the sexy ones that you see the ads in the magazine or on TV at night. These are the backbone drugs for many of our curative intent regimens for pediatrics and for heme malignancies and many solid tumors. And the fact that that's continuing to be an issue is, in my opinion, a failure to address the root causes, and those are going to require legislative solutions. The root causes here are basically a race to the bottom where the economics to invest in quality manufacturing really haven't been prioritized. And so it's a race to the cheapest price, which often means you undercut your competitor, and when you don't have the money to invest in good manufacturing processes, the factory breaks down, there's no alternative, you go into shortage. And this has been going on for a couple of decades, and I don't think there's an end in sight until we get a serious solution proposed by our elected officials. That is something that bothers me in the ways where we know what we should be doing for our patients, but if we don't have the drugs, we're left to be creative in ways we shouldn't have to do to figure out a plan B when we've got curative intent therapies. And I think that's a real shame.  There's obviously a lot of other things that are concerning related to oncology, but something that I have personally had experience with when I wanted to give a patient a CAR T-cell, and we don't have a supply of fludarabine, which is a trivial drug from decades ago in terms of the technology investments in genetically modified T-cells, to not then have access to a drug that should be pennies on the dollar and available at any time you want it is almost like the Air Force investing in building the latest stealth bomber, but then forgetting to get the jet fuel in a way that they can't use it because they don't have the tools that they need. And so I think that's something that we do need to have comprehensive solutions from our elected officials. Dr. Monty Pal: Brilliantly stated. I like that analogy a lot. Let's get into the weeds for a second. What would that proposal to Congress look like? What are we trying to put in front of them to help alleviate the drug shortages? Dr. Jason Westin: We could spend a couple hours, and I know podcasts usually are not set up to do that. And so I won't go through every part. I will direct you that there have been a couple of recent publications from ASCO specifically detailing solutions, and there was a recent white paper from the Senate Finance Committee that went through some legislative solutions being explored. So Dr. Gralow, ASCO CMO, and I recently had a publication in JCO OP detailing some solutions, more in that white paper from the Senate Finance. And then there's a working group actually going through ASCO's Health Policy Committee putting together a more detailed proposal that will be published probably around the end of 2026. Very briefly, what needs to happen is for government contracts for purchasing these drugs, there needs to be an outlay for quality, meaning that if you have a manufacturing facility that is able to deliver product on time, reliably, you get a bonus in terms of your contract. And that changes the model to prioritize the quality component of manufacturing. Without that, there's no reason to invest in maintaining your machine or upgrading the technology you have in your manufacturing plant. And so you have bottlenecks emerge because these drugs are cheap, and there's not a profit margin. So you get one factory that makes this key drug, and if that factory hasn't had an upgrade in their machines in 20 years, and that machine conks out and it takes 6 months to repair or replacement, that is an opportunity for that drug to go into shortage and causes a mad dash for big hospitals to purchase the drug that's available, leaving disparities to get amplified. It's a nightmare when those things happen, and they happen all the time. There are usually dozens, if not hundreds, of drugs in shortage at any given time. And this has been going on for decades. This is something that we do need large, system-wide fixes and that investment in quality, I think, will be a key part. Dr. Monty Pal: Yeah, brilliantly said. And I'll make sure that we actually include those articles on the tagline for this podcast as well. I'll talk to our producer about that as well.  I'm really glad you mentioned the time in your last comment there because I felt like we just started, but in fact, I think we're right at our close here, Jason, unfortunately. So, I could have gone on for a couple more hours with you. I really want to thank you for these absolutely terrific insights and thank you for all your advocacy on behalf of ASCO and oncologists at large. Dr. Jason Westin: Thank you so much for having me. I have enjoyed it. Dr. Monty Pal: Thanks a lot. And many thanks to our listeners too. You can find more information about ASCO's advocacy agenda and activities at asco.org. Finally, if you value the insights that you heard today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks so much. ASCO Advocacy Resources: Get involved in ASCO's Advocacy efforts: ASCO Advocacy Toolkit Crisis of Cancer Drug Shortages: Understanding the Causes and Proposing Sustainable Solutions, JCO Oncology Practice Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers:     Dr. Monty Pal   @montypal   Dr. Jason Westin @DrJasonWestin   Follow ASCO on social media:      @ASCO on X     ASCO on Bluesky    ASCO on Facebook      ASCO on LinkedIn      Disclosures:     Dr. Monty Pal:    Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview   Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical   Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis   Dr. Jason Westin: Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Kite/Gilead, Janssen Scientific Affairs, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene/Juno, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Abbvie, MorphoSys/Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Abbvie, Chugai Pharma, Regeneron, Nurix, Genmab, Allogene Therapeutics, Lyell Immunopharma Research Funding: Janssen, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, MorphoSys/Incyte, Genentech/Roche, Allogene Therapeutics

The US has a huge problem with everyone needing special accommodations in secondary education.

December 3 marks the International Day of Persons with Disabilities, an annual observance established by the United Nations in 1992. The 2025 theme is "fostering disability inclusive societies for advancing social progress". In this episode, we examine India's Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, and the principle of reasonable accommodation. Under Section 2(y), reasonable accommodation means "any necessary and appropriate modification and/or adjustment" that enables PwDs to enjoy their rights equally with others, without imposing a "disproportionate or undue burden."Yet despite clear policy mandates, it remains treated as a "nice to have" by many organisations and public institutions. Why do implementation gaps persist? What costs—physical, emotional, and social—do employees with disabilities bear? And what will it take to move beyond tick-box compliance toward genuine inclusion? Guest: Amran Ali, Executive Director, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), and a prominent voice in the disability rights movement. Host: Vibha B Madhava Recorded by Jude Weston and Tayyab Hussain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When I learned of Lauren Tetenbaum's work around workplace menopause advocacy, I knew I wanted her to come on the show.  Talking about menopause at work is long overdue.  When there is something that directly impacts 50% of our population, 100% of us are impacted in some way.  We need to be talking about menopause at work.  Period.  Lauren Tetenbaum, LCSW, JD, PMH-C is a licensed clinical social worker, women's rights advocate, writer, and mom dedicated to supporting and empowering women through life transitions. With experience as both a lawyer and a psychotherapist, Lauren specializes in counseling women navigating identity shifts related to motherhood, career, and reproductive health. Lauren frequently contributes thought leadership to media and professional organizations; she is the author of the 2025 book Millennial Menopause: Preparing for Perimenopause, Menopause, and Life's Next Period.  Listen in to hear Lauren share: Why reproductive healthcare is a workplace issue The perimenopause/menopause symptoms that impact women at work Accommodations workplaces can make that support women in perimenopause/menopause (that benefit others too!) Benefits that workplaces can easily add to improve healthcare access for midlife women When and how to prepare for perimenopause instead of waiting for it to “hit you” in a way that profoundly impacts your life The costs we are seeing for employers who are choosing to NOT address menopause in the workplace How men can advocate for menopause friendly policies, education, and accommodations in the workplace Links Mentioned:  Connect with Lauren: millennialmenopause.com Get Lauren's book: Millennial Menopause Lauren on IG: @thecounselaur: https://www.instagram.com/thecounselaur/ Lauren on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurenatetenbaum/ Organization: Let's Talk Menopause Organization: The Menopause Society [Dec 9th and Jan 8th] Shameless Rising: a 2-part workshop series to release the noise, reclaim your voice, and reignite your vision in 2026: saradean.com/rising [Open Enrollment] Join Sara's Aligned Leadership Incubator: saradean.com/aligned Hire me to speak: saradean.com/speaking Coach with me: https://saradean.com/executive-coaching-services Connect with me on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/saradeanspeaks Watch Shameless Leadership episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@saradeanspeaks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Pressure is rising on DEI programs, but the smartest companies aren't retreating—they're getting clearer. In this episode, Bill Banham welcomes global inclusion expert Dean Delpeache back to the show to unpack the legal, cultural, and practical forces reshaping workplace equity and belonging. From U.S. executive orders to multinational ripple effects, Dean breaks down what's actually changing inside organizations and what's just media noise.We explore a critical reframing: equity isn't about engineering outcomes—it's about ensuring access. Accommodations, transparent processes, and consistent selection criteria do more than satisfy compliance; they unlock performance. Dean details how teams can move away from identity quotas while still expanding the pipeline through intentional sourcing: partnerships with veteran groups, disability organizations, and community networks that widen opportunity without promising a numeric end state. The result is defensible, humane hiring that holds up under scrutiny.One of the most inspiring threads is the rise of neurodiversity at work. We talk candidly about shedding stigma, normalizing accommodations, and redesigning interviews to assess real job skills. Dean shares simple, high-impact changes—like structured questions, work samples, and clearer expectations—that help candidates shine and help managers make better decisions. We also dig into how leaders can host courageous conversations about race, belonging, and systemic barriers, using ERGs and time-boxed dialogues to turn discomfort into progress.We close with the data that ties it all together: belonging drives advocacy. When people feel included, they're dramatically more likely to recommend their employer, fueling talent attraction more credibly than any ad spend. If you're navigating DEI rollbacks, stakeholder pressure, or global alignment, this conversation offers a roadmap: document fairness, widen access, train inclusive leaders, and amplify belonging. If this resonates, subscribe, share with your team, and leave a review telling us what you'll try first.Support the showFeature Your Brand on the HRchat PodcastThe HRchat show has had 100,000s of downloads and is frequently listed as one of the most popular global podcasts for HR pros, Talent execs and leaders. It is ranked in the top ten in the world based on traffic, social media followers, domain authority & freshness. The podcast is also ranked as the Best Canadian HR Podcast by FeedSpot and one of the top 10% most popular shows by Listen Score. Want to share the story of how your business is helping to shape the world of work? We offer sponsored episodes, audio adverts, email campaigns, and a host of other options. Check out packages here. Follow us on LinkedIn Subscribe to our newsletter Check out our in-person events

In this episode, Hailey starts exploring Pierce County in the fall. Located right along the infamous Great River Road, this county welcomes visitors with stunning fall colors and a community spirit that's hard to beat. And once you're here, you'll see that the magic doesn't stop with the leaves changing…Pierce County has a special kind of charm all year round!The Bobber is brought to you by Something Special from Wisconsin: https://www.somethingspecialwi.com/Read the blog here: https://discoverwisconsin.com/a-year-of-adventure-begins-in-pierce-county-this-fall/Pierce County: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/; Trimbelle Recreation Area: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/community/county_parks/trimbelle_recreation_area.php; Kinnickinnic State Park: https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/topic/parks/kinnickinnic; Swede Pickings: https://swedepickings.com/; Young Acres: https://www.youngacres.com/; Ellsworth Cooperative Creamery: https://www.ellsworthcheese.com/; Maiden Rock Mercantile: https://www.maidenrockmercantile.com/; Vino in the Valley: https://vinointhevalley.com/; Orange Dragon Art Gallery: https://www.orangedragonartgallery.org/; Aim Joy: https://aimjoyboutique.com/; The Harbor Hotel: https://vinointhevalley.com/; The Cove Guest House: https://thecoveofprescott.com/; The Port of Prescott Hotel: https://theportofprescott.com/; Muddy Waters: https://www.muddywatersbarandgrill.biz/; Two Rivers: https://www.tworiversbar.com/; Snowmobile Trail System: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/community/county_parks/snowmobile_trail_system.php Nugget Lake County Park: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/community/Nugget_Lake_Park.php; Trimbelle River: https://www.kiaptuwish.org/our-rivers/trimbelle-river/; Rush River: https://www.kiaptuwish.org/our-rivers/rush-river/; Klaas-Jonas Community Pool: https://www.ellsworth.k12.wi.us/o/klaas-jonas/; Falls Theatre: https://www.fallstheatre.com/; Freedom Park: https://www.freedomparkwi.org/; Winter Market: https://www.tattersalldistilling.com/winter-market/; Ellsworth Farmers Market: http://www.ellsworthfarmersmarket.com/; Pierce County Historical Association: https://piercecountyhistorical.org/; Kilkarney Hills: https://www.kilkarneyhills.com/; Ellsworth Country Club: https://www.ellsworthcountryclub.com/; Clifton Highlands: https://www.cliftonhighlands.com/ Crystal Cave: https://www.acoolcave.org/ Lee-Kay Family Educational County Forest: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/community/county_parks/lee-kay_family_educational_county_forest.php River City Sweets: https://www.rivercitysweetswi.com/; River Falls Days: https://rfchamber.com/riverfallsdays/; Pierce County Fair: https://www.co.pierce.wi.us/departments/fair/index.php; Cheese Curd Festival: https://www.cheesecurdfestival.com/ Prescott Daze: https://www.prescottdaze.com/; The Bobber: https://discoverwisconsin.com/the-bobber-blog/The Cabin Podcast: https://the-cabin.simplecast.com. Follow on social @thecabinpodShop Discover Wisconsin: shop.discoverwisconsin.com. Follow on social @shopdiscoverwisconsinDiscover Wisconsin: https://discoverwisconsin.com/. Follow on social @discoverwisconsinDiscover Mediaworks: https://discovermediaworks.com/. Follow on social @discovermediaworksFriends of the Wisconsin Great River Road: https://www.wigrr.com/Wisconsin DOT: https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/home.aspx

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.This episode is part of my initiative to provide access to important court decisions  impacting employees in an easy to understand conversational format using AI.  The speakers in the episode are AI generated and frankly sound great to listen to.  Enjoy!A top performer with a life-threatening migraine condition built a 15-year career, earned awards, and worked remotely with a documented accommodation—until a post-merger culture shift demanded office presence and everything changed. We walk you through the allegation-filled timeline: the hot leads routed to younger men in the New York office, the confrontation that preceded a stroke doctors tied to job stress, and the series of decisions that, the complaint says, turned a medical safeguard into a career liability.We dig into the mechanics of discrimination and retaliation claims: how account assignments can become tools of pretext, why a disputed Citadel loss matters years later, and what it means when a PIP leans on contested narratives despite recent high performance. You'll hear how the continuing violations doctrine can bridge older incidents into a timely hostile environment claim, and why plausibility at the motion-to-dismiss stage hinges on a minimal inference—not courtroom proof. The distinction between granting an ADA accommodation and honoring it in practice sits at the core: resources withheld for remote staff, an ultimatum to attend training in person despite written permission, and the message that office presence equals opportunity.We also examine leadership statements that allegedly acknowledged past bias, rapid promotions for younger male colleagues, and the juxtaposition of a 2023 sales excellence award with a 2024 PIP. The legal stakes are high: timeliness defenses, comparator debates, and whether penalizing a stroke survivor's accommodation can be seen as extreme and outrageous conduct. Ultimately, we ask a broader question many workplaces face now: when office-first culture collides with health, is performance enough to protect an employee whose life depends on remote work?If this deep dive helped you see the issues more clearly, follow the show, share this episode with a colleague, and leave a quick review telling us where you stand on accommodations versus culture. Your take might shape a future mailbag. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer: For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice.

As managers and employees, how can we ensure that we support equitable disability accommodations for everyone? The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) offers a wealth of protections, but many workers and leaders are unaware of what these protections entail. Luckily, there are experts like Rachel Shaw out there to shed light on their intricacies and help educate us all.Rachel is a leading strategist in workplace inclusion and disability compliance and the author of “The Disabled Workforce: What the ADA Never Anticipated.” She joins me to add clarity to the laws in place to protect people with disabilities—including mental health and pregnancy—and ensure we have access to an equitable work environment that allows us all to be productive contributors, whatever differences of ability we might experience in our lifetimes. Understand your rights and responsibilities around disability inclusion:The most proactive and effective way to ask for an accommodation;The essential accommodation process every organization needs to develop;How much it really costs companies to approve employee requests;What's missing from the ADA and how it's being addressed.Related Links:Connect with Rachel Shaw on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/rachel-shaw-00037745/Learn more about Rachel's work - https://rachelshaw.com/Buy “The Disabled Workforce” - https://www.amazon.com/Disabled-Workforce-What-Never-Anticipated/dp/1544708599Episode 390, How to Manage ADHD in the Workplace - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode390Episode 460, Balancing Work with a Complicated Pregnancy - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode460Episode 123, Pursuing a Promotion While Pregnant - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode123Episode 335, What do mom-friendly Workplaces look like and how to create them - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode335   Episode 311, How to Talk About Marital Status, Parental Status, and Pregnancy in the Interview - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode311Episode 315, How to Talk About Disability or Chronic Illness in the Job Interview - https://www.bossedup.org/podcast/episode315LEVEL UP: a Leadership Accelerator for Women on the Rise - https://www.bossedup.org/levelupBossed Up Courage Community - https://www.facebook.com/groups/927776673968737/Bossed Up LinkedIn Group - https://www.linkedin.com/groups/7071888/ Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

There is a specific moment in the life of a Human Resources professional that is fraught with a peculiar kind of tension. It happens when a door opens, an employee sits down, and they say, simply, "I need something to change."We like to think of the workplace as a rational machine, governed by clear inputs and outputs. But what happens when the machine encounters the messy, unpredictable reality of the human body? In this episode of Human Solutions, we explore the "messiest corner of HR": the medical accommodation.Host Pete Wright and AIM HR Solutions' Terry Cook take us into the labyrinth of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It turns out, the difference between a lawsuit and a success story often hinges on things we rarely think about—the precise wording of a job description, the speed of a reply, and the strange social dynamics of an office chair.We explore why the most dangerous thing a manager can do is try to be "nice" without a process, why "undue hardship" is much harder to prove than you think, and the uncomfortable silence HR must maintain when the rest of the staff starts asking why that guy got to work from home.It is a conversation about the friction between compassion and compliance, and why, sometimes, the best way to help a human being is to strictly follow the rules.In this episode, we cover:The "Magic Words" Myth: Why an employee never actually has to say "disability" or "accommodation" to trigger a legal obligation.The Interactive Process: Why the answer isn't "yes" or "no," but rather a conversation about what is safe and essential.The Trap of Benevolence: How granting a request off the books can create a precedent that makes future equity impossible.The Paradox of the Chair: A look at how a $1,000 ergonomic chair can disrupt the morale of an entire department—and why morale doesn't count as an "undue hardship".The Manager's Dilemma: How to train supervisors to handle the frustration of not being allowed to know why their employee is being treated differently.Links & NotesThe Job Accommodation Network (JAN): A critical toolkit for understanding workplace accommodations.AskJAN.orgCompliance Resources:ADA.govEEOC: Employer ResponsibilitiesAIM HR Helpline: For AIM members dealing with complex accommodation scenarios.Phone: 800-470-6277Email: helpline@aimnet.org AIM HR Solutions Training CatalogAIM members can reach the HR Helpline at 800-470-6277 or helpline@aimnet.org for inquiries Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. (EST). Email requests will be responded to within 24 hours. 

Sooner or later, most households will experience health or mobility issues of some kind. An injury, illness, or age-related loss of mobility will often exacerbate existing clutter problems. In episode #281 of The Clutter Fairy Weekly, Gayle Goddard, professional organizer and owner of The Clutter Fairy in Houston, Texas, explores steps we can take to plan ahead for changes and accommodations that injury, illness, or disability can necessitate in our homes.Show notes: https://cfhou.com/tcfw281The Clutter Fairy Weekly is a live webcast and podcast designed to help you clear your clutter and make space in your home and your life for more of what you love. We meet Tuesdays at noon (U.S. Central Time) to answer your decluttering questions and to share organizing tools and techniques, success stories and “ah-hah!” moments, seasonal suggestions, and timeless tips.To participate live in our weekly webcast, join our Meetup group, follow us on Facebook, or subscribe to our mailing list. You can also watch the videos of our webcast on YouTube.Support the show

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.Think your medical condition or disability doesn't “count” because it isn't visible or permanent? That assumption costs careers. We dig into how disability rights actually work on the ground, why silence helps employers more than employees, and the simple forms of “notice” that trigger your legal protections. From anxiety and migraines to Crohn's, postpartum depression, and recovery from surgery, the coverage is broader than most people think—and the bar for “substantially limits” is intentionally low.We walk through the ADA's three-part definition of disability, highlight how major life activities include concentration, communication, and working, and explain why timing often exposes retaliation. You'll hear practical language you can use with a manager or HR, how to document requests and meetings, and what a good faith interactive process looks like when it's done right. We also share a free resource—the Job Accommodation Network at askjan.org—that can join the conversation and help identify workable accommodations like flexible schedules, remote options, adjusted metrics, or short-term leave.Real-world patterns matter: denials without analysis, discipline after medical leave, and “regarded as” mistakes can all expose employers to liability. We unpack court trends that favor inclusion, including protections for temporary and episodic conditions and mental health. If you've been pushing through symptoms and blaming yourself for “performance,” it's time to flip the script. Accommodations are rights, not favors, and early, clear communication can protect both your health and your job. If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a colleague who needs it, and leave a review to help more workers find the support they deserve. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer: For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice.

You are listening to a presentation given at the 2025Michigan Conference Cedar Lake Campmeeting. We pray you will be blessed!

Authors Drs. Jessica Ross and Alissa Cooper share insights into their JCO PO article, "Clinical and Pathologic Landscapes of Delta-Like Ligand 3 and Seizure-Related Homolog Protein 6 Expression in Neuroendocrine Carcinomas"  Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Drs. Ross and Cooper discuss the landscape of Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) and seizure-related homolog protein 6 (SEZ6) across NECs from eight different primary sites. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Hello and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCO PO articles. I'm your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, podcast editor for JCO PO and an Associate Professor at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center. Today, I'm excited to be joined by Dr. Jessica Ross, third-year medical oncology fellow at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, as well as Dr. Alissa Cooper, thoracic medical oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School. Both are first and last authors of the JCO Precision Oncology article entitled "Clinical and Pathologic Landscapes of Delta-like Ligand 3 and Seizure-Related Homolog Protein 6 or SEZ6 Protein Expression in Neuroendocrine Carcinomas." At the time of this recording, our guest disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Jessica and Alissa, welcome to our podcast, and thank you for joining us today. Dr. Jessica Ross: Thanks very much for having us. Dr. Alissa Cooper: Thank you. Excited to be here. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: It's interesting, a couple of days before I decided to choose this article, one of my GI oncology colleagues actually asked me two questions. He said, "Rafeh, do you know how you define DLL3 positivity? And what is the status of DLL3 positivity in GI cancers, GI neuroendocrine carcinomas?" The first thing I looked up was this JCO article from Martin Wermke. You might have seen it as well, on obrixtamig, a phase 1 study, a DLL3 bi-specific T-cell engager. And they had some definitions there, and then this article came along, and I was really excited that it kind of fell right in place of trying to understand the IHC landscape of two very interesting targets. Since we have a very broad and diverse audience, especially community oncologists, trainees, and of course academic clinicians and some people who are very interested in genomics, we'll try to make things easy to understand. So my first question for you, Jessica, is: what is DLL3 and SEZ6 and why are they important in neuroendocrine carcinomas? Dr. Jessica Ross: Yeah, good question. So, DLL3, or delta-like ligand 3, is a protein that is expressed preferentially on the tumor cell surface of neuroendocrine carcinomas as opposed to normal tissue. It is a downstream target of ASCL1, and it's involved in neuroendocrine differentiation, and it's an appealing drug target because it is preferentially expressed on tumor cell surfaces. And so, it's a protein, and there are several drugs in development targeting this protein, and then Tarlatamab is an approved bi-specific T-cell engager for the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in the second line. SEZ6, or seizure-like homolog protein 6, is a protein also expressed on neuroendocrine carcinoma cell surface. Interestingly, so it's expressed on neuronal cells, but its exact role in neuroendocrine carcinomas and oncogenesis is actually pretty poorly understood, but it was identified as an appealing drug target because, similarly to DLL3, it's preferentially expressed on the tumor cell surface. And so this has also emerged as an appealing drug target, and there are drugs in development, including antibody-drug conjugates, targeting this protein for that reason. Dr. Alissa Cooper: Over the last 10 to 15 years or so, there's been an increasing focus on precision oncology, finding specific targets that actually drive the cancer to grow, not just within lung cancer but in multiple other primary cancers. But specifically, at least speaking from a thoracic oncology perspective, the field of non-small cell lung cancer has completely exploded over the past 15 years with the discovery of driver oncogenes and then matched targeted therapies. Within the field of neuroendocrine carcinomas, including small cell lung cancer but also other high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas, there has not been the same sort of progress in terms of identifying targets with matched therapies. And up until recently, we've sort of been treating these neuroendocrine malignancies kind of as a monolithic disease process. And so recently, there's been sort of an explosion of research across the country and multiple laboratories, multiple people converging on the same open questions about why might patients with specific tumor biologies have different kind of responses to different therapies. And so first this came from, you know, why some patients might have a good response to chemo and immunotherapy, which is the first-line approved therapy for small cell lung cancer, and we also sort of extrapolate that to other high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. What's the characteristic of that tumor biology? And at the same time, what are other targets that might be identifiable? Just as Jesse was saying, they're expressed on the cell surface, they're not necessarily expressed in normal tissue. Might this be a strategy to sort of move forward and create smarter therapies for our patients and therefore move really into a personalized era for treatment for each patient? And that's really driving, I think, a lot of the synthesis of this work of not only the development of multiple new therapies, but really understanding which tumor might be the best fit for which therapy. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for that explanation, Alissa. And as you mentioned, these are emerging targets, some more further along in the process with approved drugs, especially Tarlatamab. And obviously, DLL3 was something identified several years back, but drug development does take time, and readout for clinical trials takes time. Could you, for the sake of our audience, try to talk briefly about the excitement around Tarlatamab in small cell lung cancer, especially data that has led to the FDA approval in the last year, year and a half? Dr. Alissa Cooper: Sure. Yeah, it's really been an explosion of excitement over, as you're saying, the last couple of years, and work really led by our mentor, Charlie Rudin, had identified DLL3 as an exciting target for small cell lung cancer specifically but also potentially other high-grade neuroendocrine malignancies. Tarlatamab is a DLL3-targeting bi-specific T-cell engager, which targets DLL3 on the small cell lung cancer cells as well as CD3 on T cells. And the idea is to sort of introduce the cancer to the immune system, circumventing the need for MHC class antigen presentation, which that machinery is typically not functional in small cell lung cancer, and so really allowing for an immunomodulatory response, which had not really been possible for most patients with small cell lung cancer prior to this. Tarlatamab was tested in a phase 2 registrational trial of about 100 patients and demonstrated a response rate of 40%, which was very exciting, especially compared with other standard therapies which were available for small cell lung cancer, which are typically cytotoxic therapies. But most excitingly, more than even the response rate, I think, in our minds was the durability of response. So patients whose disease did have a response to Tarlatamab could potentially have a durable response lasting a number of months or even over a year, which had previously not ever been seen in this in the relapsed/refractory setting for these patients. I think the challenge with small cell lung cancer and other high-grade neuroendocrine malignancies is that a response to therapy might be a bit easier to achieve, but it's that durability. The patient's tumors really come roaring back quite aggressively pretty quickly. And so this was sort of the most exciting prospect is that durability of response, that long potential overall survival tail of the curve really being lifted up. And then most recently at ASCO this year, Dr. Rudin presented the phase 3 randomized controlled trial which compared Tarlatamab to physician's choice of chemotherapy in a global study. And the choice of chemotherapy did vary depending on the part of the world that the patients were enrolled in, but in general, it was a really markedly positive study for response rate, for progression-free survival, and for overall survival. Really exciting results which really cemented Tarlatamab's place as the standard second-line therapy for patients with small cell lung cancer whose disease has progressed on first-line chemo-immunotherapy. So that has been very exciting. This drug was FDA approved in May of 2024, and so has been used extensively since then. I think the adoption has been pretty widespread, at least in the US, but now in this global trial that was just presented, and there was a corresponding New England Journal paper, I think really confirms that this is something we really hopefully can offer to most of our patients. And I think, as we all know, that this therapy or other therapies like it are also being tested potentially in the first-line setting. So there was data presented with Tarlatamab incorporated into the maintenance setting, which also showed exciting results, albeit in a phase 1 trial, but longer overall survival than we're used to seeing in this patient population. And we await results of the study that is incorporating Tarlatamab into the induction phase with chemotherapy as well. So all of this is extraordinarily exciting for our patients to sort of move the needle of how many patients we can keep alive, feeling functional, feeling well, for as long as possible. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Very exciting session at ASCO. I was luckily one of the co-chairs for the session that Dr. Rudin presented it, and I remember somebody mentioning there was more progress seen in that session for small cell lung cancer than the last 30, 35 years for small cell, very exciting space and time to be in as far as small cell lung cancer. Now going to this project, Jessica, since you're the first author and Alissa's the last, I'm assuming there was a background conversation that you had with Alissa before you embarked on this project as an idea. So could you, again, for other trainees who are interested in doing research, and it's never easy to do research as a resident and a fellow when you have certain added responsibilities. Could you give us a little bit of a background on how this started and why you wanted to look at this question? Dr. Jessica Ross: Yeah, sure. So, as with many exciting research concepts, I think a lot of them are derived from the clinic. And so I think Alissa and I both see a good number of patients with small cell, large cell lung cancer, and then high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas. And so I think this was really born out of a basic conversation of we have these drugs in development targeting these two proteins, DLL3 and SEZ6, but really what is the landscape of cancers that express these proteins and who are the patients that really might benefit from these exciting new therapies. And of course, there was some data out there, but sort of less than one would imagine in terms of, you know, neuroendocrine carcinomas can really come from anywhere in the body. And so when you're seeing a patient with small cell of the cervix, for example, like what are the chances that their cancer expresses DLL3 or expresses SEZ6? So it was really derived from this pragmatic, clinically oriented question that we had both found ourselves thinking about, and we were lucky enough at MSK, we had started systematically staining patients' tumors for DLL3, tumors that are high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas, and then we had also more recently started staining for SEZ6 as well. And so we had this nice prospectively collected dataset with which to answer this question. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Excellent. And Alissa, could you try to go into some of the details around which patients you chose, how many patients, what was the approach that you selected to collect the data for this project? Dr. Alissa Cooper: This is perhaps a strength but also maybe a limitation of this dataset is, as Jesse alluded to, our pathology colleagues are really the stars of this paper here because we were lucky enough at MSK that they were really forethinking. They are absolute experts in the field and really forward-thinking people in terms of what information might be needed in the future to drive treatment decision-making. And so, as Jesse had said, small cell lung cancer tumor samples reflexively are stained for DLL3 and SEZ6 at MSK if there's enough tumor tissue. The other high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas, those stains are performed upon physician request. And so that is a bit of a mixed bag in terms of the tumor samples we were able to include in this dataset because, you know, upon physician request depends on a number of factors, but actually at MSK, a number of physicians were requesting these stains to be done on their patients with high-grade neuroendocrine cancers of of other histologies. So we looked at all tumor samples with a diagnosis of high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma of any histology that were stained for these two stains of interest. You know, I can let Jesse talk a bit more about the methodology. She was really the driver of this project. Dr. Jessica Ross: Yeah, sure. So we had 124 tumor samples total. All of those were stained for DLL3, and then a little less than half, 53, were stained for SEZ6. As Alissa said, they were from any primary site. So about half of them were of lung origin, that was the most common primary site, but we included GI tract, head and neck, GU, GYN, even a few tumors of unknown origin. And again, that's because I think a lot of these trials are basket trials that are including different high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas no matter the primary site. And so we really felt like it was important to be more comprehensive and inclusive in this study. And then, methodologically, we also defined positivity in terms of staining of these two proteins as anything greater than or equal to 1% staining. There's really not a defined consensus of positivity when it comes to these two novel targets and staining for these two proteins. But in the Tarlatamab trials, for some of the correlative work that's been done, they use that 1% cutoff, and we just felt like being consistent with that and also using a sort of more pragmatic yes/no cutoff would be more helpful for this analysis. Dr. Alissa Cooper: And that was a point of discussion, actually. We had contemplated multiple different schemas, actually, for how to define thresholds of positivity. And I know you brought up that question before, what does it mean to be DLL3 positive or DLL3 high? I think you were alluding to prior that there was a presentation of obrixtamig looking at extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinomas, and they actually divvied up the results between DLL3 50% or greater versus DLL3 low under 50%. And they actually did demonstrate differential efficacy certainly, but also some differential safety as well, which is very provocative and that kind of analysis has not been presented for other novel therapies as far as I'm aware. I could be wrong, but as far as I'm aware, that was sort of the first time that we saw a systematic presentation of considering patients to be, quote unquote, "high" or "low" in these sort of novel targets. I think it is important because the label for Tarlatamab does not require any DLL3 expression at all, actually. So it's not hinging upon DLL3 expression. They depend on the fact that the vast majority of small cell lung cancer tumors do express DLL3, 85% to 90% is what's been demonstrated in a few studies. And so, there's not prerequisite testing needed in that regard, but maybe for these extra-pulmonary, other histology neuroendocrine carcinomas, maybe it does matter to some degree. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Definitely agree that this evolving landscape of trying to understand whether an expression for something actually really does correlate with, whether it's an immune cell engager or an antibody-drug conjugate is a very evolving and dynamically moving space. And one of the questions that I was discussing with one of my friends was whether IHC positivity and the level of IHC positivity, as you've shown in one of those plots where you have double positive here on the right upper corner, you have the double negative towards the left lower, whether that somehow determines mRNA expression for DLL3. Obviously, that was not the question here that you were looking at, but it does kind of bring into question certain other aspects of correlations, expression versus IHC. Now going to the figures in this manuscript, very nicely done figures, very easy to understand because I've done the podcast for quite a bit now, and usually what I try to do first is go through the figures before I read the text, and and a lot of times it's hard to understand the figures without reading the text, but in your case, specifically the figures were very, very well done. Could you give us an overview, a quick overview of some of the important results, Jessica, as far as what you've highlighted in the manuscript? Dr. Jessica Ross: Sure. So I think the key takeaway is that, of the tumors in our cohort, the majority were positive for DLL3 and positive for SEZ6. So about 80% of them were positive for DLL3 and 80% were positive for SEZ6. About half of the tumors were stained for both proteins, and about 65% of those were positive as well. So I think if there's sort of one major takeaway, it's that when you're seeing a patient with a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma, the odds are that their tumor will express both of these proteins. And so that can sort of get your head thinking about what therapies they might be eligible for. And then we also did an analysis of some populations of interest. So for example, we know that non-neuroendocrine pathologies can transform into neuroendocrine tumors. And so we specifically looked at that subset of patients with transformed tumors, and those were also- the majority of them were positive, about three-quarters of them were positive for both of these two proteins. We looked at patients with brain met samples, again, about 70% were positive. And then I'd say the last sort of population of interest was we had a subset of 10 patients who had serial biopsies stained for either DLL3 or SEZ6 or both. In between the two samples, these patients were treated with chemotherapy. They were not treated with targeted therapy, but interestingly, in the majority of cases, the testing results were concordant, meaning if it was DLL3 positive to begin with, it tended to remain DLL3 positive after treatment. And so I think that's important as well as we think about, you know, a patient who maybe had DLL3 testing done before they received their induction chemo-IO, we can somewhat confidently say that they're probably still DLL3 positive after that treatment. And then finally, we did do a survival analysis among specifically the patients with lung neuroendocrine carcinomas. We looked at whether DLL3 expression affected progression-free survival on first-line platinum-etoposide, and then we looked at did it affect overall survival. And we found that it did not have an impact or the median progression-free survival was similar whether you were DLL3 positive or negative. But interestingly, with overall survival, we found that DLL3 positivity actually correlated with slightly improved overall survival. These were small numbers, and so, you know, I think we have to interpret this with caution, for sure, but it is interesting. I think there may be something to the fact that five of the patients who were DLL3 positive were treated with DLL3-targeting treatments. And so this made me think of, like in the breast cancer world, for example, if you have a patient with HER2-positive disease, it initially portended worse prognosis, more aggressive disease biology, but on the other hand, it opens the door for targeted treatments that actually now, at least with HER2-positive breast cancer, are associated with improved outcomes. And so I think that's one finding of interest as well. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Definitely proof-of-concept findings here that you guys have in the manuscript. Alissa, if I may ask you, what is the next important step for a project like this in your mind? Dr. Alissa Cooper: Jesse has highlighted a couple of key findings that we hope to move forward with future investigative studies, not necessarily in a real-world setting, but maybe even in clinical trial settings or in collaboration with sponsors. Are these biomarkers predictive? Are they prognostic? You know, those are still- we have some nascent data, data has been brewing, but I think that we we still don't have the answers to those open questions, which I think are critically important for determining not only clinical treatment decision-making, but also our ability to understand sequencing of therapies, prioritization of therapies. I think a prospective, forward-looking project, piggybacking on that paired biopsy, you know, we had a very small subset of patients with paired biopsies, but a larger subset or cohort looking at paired biopsies where we can see is there evolution of these IHC expression, even mRNA expression, as you're saying, is there differential there? Are there selection pressures to targeted therapies? Is there upregulation or downregulation of targets in response not just to chemotherapy, but for example, for other sort of ADCs or bi-specific T-cell engagers? I think those are going to be critically important future studies which are going to be a bit challenging to do, but really important to figure out this key clinical question of sequencing, which we're all contemplating in our clinics day in and day out. If you have a patient, and these patients often can be sick quite quickly, they might have one shot of what's the next treatment that you're going to pick. We can't guarantee that every patient is going to get to see every therapy. How can you help to sort of answer the question of like what should you offer? So I think that's the key question sort of underlying any future work is how predictive or prognostic are these biomarkers? What translational or correlative studies can we do on the tissue to understand clinical treatment decision-making? I think those are the key things that will unfold in the next couple of years. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: The last question for you, Alissa, that I have is, you are fairly early in your career, and you've accomplished quite a lot. One of the most important things that comes out from this manuscript is your mentorship for somebody who is a fellow and who led this project. For other junior investigators, early-career investigators, how did you do this? How did you manage to do this, and how did you mentor Jessica on this project with some of the lessons that you learned along the way, the good and other things that would perhaps help other listeners as they try to mentor residents, trainees, which is one of the important things of what we do in our daily routine? Dr. Alissa Cooper: I appreciate you calling me accomplished. Um, I'm not sure how true that is, but I appreciate that. I didn't have to do a whole lot with this project because Jesse is an extraordinarily smart, driven, talented fellow who came up with a lot of the clinical questions and a lot of the research questions as well. And so this project was definitely a collaborative project on both of our ends. But I think what was helpful from both of our perspectives is from my perspective, I could kind of see that this was a gap in the literature that really, I think, from my work leading clinical trials and from treating patients with these kinds of cancers that I really hoped to answer. And so when I came to Jessica with this idea as sort of a project to complete, she was very eager to take it and run with it and also make it her own. You know, in terms of early mentorship, I have to admit this was the first project that I mentored, so it was a great learning experience for me as well because as an early-career clinician and researcher, you're used to having someone else looking over your shoulder to tell you, "Yes, this is a good journal target, here's what we can anticipate reviewers are going to say, here are other key collaborators we should include." Those kind of things about a project that don't always occur to you as you're sort of first starting out. And so all of that experience for me to be identifying those more upper-level management sort of questions was a really good learning experience for me. And of course, I was fantastically lucky to have a partner in Jesse, who is just a rising star. Dr. Jessica Ross: Thank you. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, excellent. It sounds like the first of many other mentorship opportunities to come for you, Alissa. And Jessica, congratulations on your next step of joining and being faculty, hopefully, where you're training. Thank you again, both of you. This was very insightful. I definitely learned a lot after I reviewed the manuscript and read the manuscript. Hopefully, our listeners will feel the same. Perhaps we'll have more of your work being published in JCO PO subsequently. Dr. Alissa Cooper: Hope so. Thank you very much for the opportunity to chat today. Dr. Jessica Ross: Yes, thank you. This was great. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so as you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Disclosures: Dr. Alissa Jamie Cooper Honoraria Company: MJH Life Scienes, Ideology Health, Intellisphere LLC, MedStar Health, Physician's Education Resource, LLC,  Gilead Sciences, Regeneron, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Novartis,  Research Funding: Merck, Roche, Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Abbvie, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences

Learn more at TheCityLife.org

Want to learn more about Vodyssey or start your STR journey. Book a call here:https://meetings.hubspot.com/vodysseystrategysession/booknow?utm_source=vodysseycom&uuid=80fb7859-b8f4-40d1-a31d-15a5caa687b7Contact Ross:https://itineraryboss.com/https://www.instagram.com/rossalcorn33/?hl=enhttps://www.youtube.com/@ItineraryBosshttps://www.linkedin.com/in/rossalcornru/https://open.spotify.com/show/1mmMJ6z3JdEOUJKUjLh8bD?si=fd290a47a091494dTALKED ABOUT SERVICE:https://www.rakuten.com/FOLLOW US:https://www.facebook.com/share/g/16XJMvMbVo/https://www.instagram.com/vodysseyshawnmoorehttps://www.facebook.com/vodysseyshawnmoore/https://www.linkedin.com/company/str-financial-freedomhttps://www.tiktok.com/@vodysseyshawnmoore

Author Reuben A. Buford May discusses the article, "Antiblack Discrimination in Public Accommodations: Differential Drink Pricing in Urban Nightclubs" published in Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World.

College can feel overwhelming for students with ADHD, but support exists. In this episode, I talk with Hannah Choi—executive function coach and communications specialist at Beyond Booksmart. Hannah shares her personal ADHD story and practical tools to help college students build independence, manage their time, and advocate for what they need. From study strategies that actually work to understanding accommodations, we unpack how to set students up for a smoother transition into college.Whether you're a student, parent, or educator, you'll walk away with actionable strategies. We also explore gap years, what colleges are required to provide under ADA, and how executive function coaching builds confidence beyond academics.Meet Hannah Choi Hannah Choi, MA, is an executive function coach and Communications and Engagement Specialist at Beyond Booksmart. She helps college students and adults strengthen time management, task initiation, and self-advocacy skills. Hannah hosts the Focus Forward podcast, leads webinars, and facilitates motivation and accountability programs. She holds degrees in Psychology and American Sign Language from the University of Rochester and a Master's in Education from UC Santa Barbara. Hannah lives in Connecticut with her family. Episode Highlights [0:00] What studying really looks like with ADHD [2:26] Hannah's ADHD discovery and coaching path [11:09] Study strategies that build self-regulation [13:37] How to start practicing self-advocacy [15:52] Accommodations: from 504 to college [21:06] Top executive function skills before college [23:38] Managing all that “free time” [26:33] Building independence (without overparenting) [29:55] The case for gap years and transition programs [35:41] How EF skills impact life after graduation [38:50] Getting unstuck: motivation + task initiation [46:35] Final takeaway: it's never too late to change Connect with Hannah Choi:Instagram: @beyondbooksmartcoaching Website: https://www.beyondbooksmart.com/ Focus Forward Podcast: https://www.beyondbooksmart.com/podcast Thank you for tuning into "SuccessFULL with ADHD." If this episode has impacted you, remember to rate, follow, share, and review our podcast. Your support helps us reach and help more individuals navigating their journeys with ADHD.

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Pauline Funchain discuss the latest efforts to diagnose, prevent, and treat the series of immune-related adverse events that have emerged in the era of immunotherapy. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I am Monty Pal, a medical oncologist, professor and vice chair of medical oncology at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Los Angeles, California. Now, it is probably no surprise to this audience that immunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape for multiple cancer types. It remains a pillar of modern oncology. Having said that, I think we have all been baffled by certain toxicities that we run into in the clinic. Today, I am delighted to be joined by Dr Pauline Funchain to discuss some of the checkpoint inhibitor toxicities that people struggle with most. And we will also touch on some side effects of immunotherapy beyond checkpoint inhibitors: CAR-T cells, bispecifics, so on and so forth. Dr Funchain is a dear friend, and she is an associate professor and associate director of cancer research training and education at the Stanford Cancer Institute. She is co-director of the Immunotherapy Toxicity Program and the Skin Cancer Genomics Program at Stanford, where she also serves as associate program director of hematology and oncology fellowship. Dr. Funchain is also the co-founder of ASPIRE, and we are going to talk about that a little bit today, the Alliance for the Support and Prevention of Immune-Related Events. FYI for listeners, if you are interested in our disclosures, they are available at the transcript of this episode. Pauline, thanks so much for joining us today. Dr. Pauline Funchain: Monty, thank you for this invitation. It is always great to talk. Dr. Monty Pal: So, for the audience, Pauline and I know each other from my days as a fellow at City of Hope. She was a resident at Harbor UCLA and a stellar resident at that. It has just been amazing to sort of see your career grow and blossom and to witness all the cool things that you are doing. ASPIRE, in particular, sort of caught my eye. So again, for listeners, this is the Alliance for the Support and Prevention of Immune-Related Events. Can you tell us a little bit briefly about the genesis of that, how that came about? Dr. Pauline Funchain: So, there was a bunch of us who were really struggling, I mean, all of us have struggled with these immune-related adverse events, these irAEs. You know, they are new disease states, and even though they look like autoimmune diseases, they tend to need a whole lot more steroid than autoimmune diseases do and they do not totally present in the same way. And in fact, you know, Triple-M, or Triple-M overlap syndrome, is a completely new irAE, a new immune state that we have never had before the advent of checkpoint inhibitor. And so a Triple-M, for those of you who are not as familiar, that is the constellation of myocarditis, myositis, and myasthenia gravis, something that never occurs as a natural autoimmune disease. So we were starting to realize that there were some major differences with these irAEs and autoimmune diseases. We could not treat them the right way. We really needed to learn more about them. And a bunch of us who had interest in this said, "Look, we really need to be all in one space to talk about what we are doing," because all of our treatments were our own little homegrown brews, and we needed to really get together and understand how to treat these things, how to diagnose them, and then learn more about them. So, Dr. Alexa Meara from Ohio State, Dr. Kerry Reynolds from Mass Gen, we put together this research consortium, brought together all of our irAE friends, got our best subspecialists together in a research consortium, which is now only about a year and a half old. And we made this research consortium, the Alliance for Support of Prevention of Immune-Related Events, and we reached out to ASCO, and ASCO was so kind to grant us a [Alliance for Support and Prevention of Immune-Related adverse Events (ASPIRE)] Community of Practice. So we met for the first time as a Community of Practice at the ASCO Annual Meeting just this past June and really got an ASCO community together to really think about how to again, diagnose, prevent, treat irAEs. Dr Monty Pal: This is interesting to me. The ASCO Community of Practice phenomenon is something that I was not super familiar with. Can you explain to our listenership what is the ASCO Community of Practice model? If you have particular interests, how do you sort of get one started? Dr Pauline Funchain: Yeah, so ASCO has an entire page on their Community of Practice. There are multiple Community of Practice groups or COPs. There are ones for Supportive Oncology and Survivorship. There is Women in Oncology. There is a group for International Medical Graduates. And there is about, I think 10 or 12 now that have a physical presence at ASCO but also a virtual presence on the ASCO Community of Practice site. So, if you were interested in any one of these, and you can see them on the ASCO Communities of Practice sites, you would ask to become a member. Once granted membership, then there is a whole webpage of postings and conversations that people can have. You can get email digests of conversations that happen on the website, and then you can anchor it with in-person participation at the Annual Meeting. Dr Monty Pal: That is awesome, and I can think of so many different foci within oncology that really sort of deserve a Community of Practice. This definitely being one of them. You know, it strikes me as being so interesting. I mean, the checkpoint inhibitors have been around for a while now. I think when you and I were in training, gosh, back then, these were just a little bit of a pipe dream, right? But having said that, I would probably say that more than half of my kidney cancer practice is either on checkpoint inhibitors, and the vast majority have been on one at some point in their past, right? With that in mind, you know, we have all treated a lot of patients with these drugs. Why is it that we still struggle to manage the toxicities? And just to take that one step further, what are some of the toxicities that, perhaps through ASPIRE or through your experience, people struggle with the most? Dr Pauline Funchain: So, I think we are still struggling with these because again, they are new disease states, right? This is what we all experienced with COVID, a brand-new virus and a brand-new syndrome. We now have 20-plus of these as irAEs. And what we have realized about them is the immune activation that happens with these is so much more than what we have seen with autoimmune diseases. So for instance, if you have a Crohn's or ulcerative colitis, you will top out at 40 to 60 milligrams of prednisone if a Crohn's flare or ulcerative colitis flare happens. But for our severe IR colitises, you know, it is at least 1 mg per kg, often goes up to 2 mg per kg. We, in some cases, have done 1 gram pulses if we are worried that somebody is going to perforate. So that was sort of like the first 5 years of treating irAE, and then now in the sort of second 5 years of treating irAE, we have realized that that is a lot of immunosuppression, and we might be able to get away with less with the newer biologics that are on board. So, we are struggling to try to get the data for some of these irAEs that we knew, we have known for a while, but to try to get newer treatments that may immunosuppress less so that you may still be able to retain that tumor response. And in fact, some of the preclinical studies suggest that some of these biologics may actually synergize with the immunotherapy and actually make the immunotherapy more effective from a tumor perspective and calm down the irAE as sort of the bystander effect. So we are still trying to optimize those. Getting up trials in the space has been very difficult. That is one of the reasons for the genesis of ASPIRE because we realized we needed to band together to have a bigger voice in that realm. Then there are other things that are brand new. So we talked about Triple-M. So Triple-M, again, with Triple-M or any myocarditis or myasthenia, I mean, there is about a 50% chance of death from irAE based on the literature. I think we are getting better at recognizing this, and so at Stanford we have some data to say that if you serially follow troponin, that maybe your outcomes are better. You can potentially lower the percentage of cases that are fatal because you can catch them early. I mean, this is all preliminary data, but again, these are all things that are evolving, and we do not all have the right answer. I mean, even the serial troponin thing, I think, is pretty controversial. And in fact, at one of our quarterly Zoom meetings that we are doing in ASPIRE in December is going to sort of flush out that controversy about serial troponin measuring and what is the best thing to use? Would you use something like abatacept or would you use ruxolitinib? Which one is better? I think there is a lot of controversy still about these things. Dr Monty Pal: You have really piqued my curiosity here because you think about the cons of treating irAEs, right? And I worry exactly about what you had mentioned, right, which is, "Gosh, what is going on with this tumor in terms of immunosuppression?" But you think about some of the newer agents, you mentioned ruxolitinib, I have heard of dasatinib, for instance, in this setting. Frankly speaking, a lot of these, as you point out, are really thought of as being also anticancer drugs. So you have really got me thinking about the potential synergy between perhaps suppressing an irAE and augmenting antitumor activity, which I think is very interesting. Am I on the right track with that? Dr Pauline Funchain: I think so, but you will find that a lot of people will not even go there because they are worried about how much immunosuppression you are going to cause. I am at heart a geneticist, but I think an immunologist will happily tell you that the immune system is very complex. There are multiple pathways, and these drugs do not all target the same immune pathways. So if we understand a little bit more about the pathways we are targeting and pick apart the pathways that are really, really tumor relevant and the other pathways that are not tumor relevant, you may be able to piece together a better marriage of tumor response and irAE control. Dr Monty Pal: Kind of on this topic, and again, leaning on your background in genetics, where are we in terms of predicting these irAEs? I mean, you would think the holy grail would be picking out a snip or something of this for it, right, that could potentially identify that patient who is going to get Triple-M or, you know, at the very least a significant high-grade irAE event. Are we anywhere closer to that in 2025? Dr Pauline Funchain: There have been data published. There have been some big GWAS studies. All of the effect sizes are pretty small. So there are some prediction algorithms, but none of them are clinically useful. And I think when you look at the odds ratios, they will increase risk by maybe 20%. I think one of the things that we found in a very small series and supported anecdotally is something as easy as family history of autoimmune disease is probably more predictive at this point than any of those types of markers. I think we will get there, but we are not anywhere near where we would like to be. Things like TMB also, actually, there is some good data about higher TMB, higher risk of irAE too. Dr Monty Pal: Interesting. I see all this data coming through, IL-8 polymorphisms, etc. And I just wondered if any of that was ready for prime time. But I mean, this is a good message for the practicing clinician. Sounds like we are not quite there yet. And I could probably keep you on for another entire podcast to talk about this topic, but let us see if we can at least skim the surface. I never thought I would see the day when BiTEs and CAR-Ts were entering into my kidney cancer practice, but in fact, it is really become central to a lot of our clinical trials in RCC these days. I would be lying if I did not say that I was not struggling with the toxicities and so forth associated with these drugs. Can you give us a quick primer, maybe just good resources that people can go to for managing toxicity with BiTEs and with CAR and with some of these novel therapeutic modalities that we are using in the oncology clinics? Dr Pauline Funchain: I know there is a recently published toxicity manual for BiTEs in hematologic malignancies, I think it was in Blood. CAR-T is covered in many irAE guidelines. So ASCO guidelines actually has a CAR-T [cell therapy guideline], and I would be remiss not to point out that actually ASCO has a, I am a little biased, but a wonderful guideline on irAE that is actually being updated as we speak. We are hoping for publication next year. I find the format of that, there are many guidelines out there, actually. There is ASCO, SITC, ESMO has a guideline for irAE, but I find the formatting of the ASCO guideline to be much easier to flip through during clinic, just because of the visual format of the tables. But that is going to be updated next year. And with CAR-T, there is now multiple publications also in terms of guidelines. But what I will say about bispecifics and CAR-T, so they have very similar toxicities in terms of the cytokine release and also with the ICANS, so the neurotoxicity. But what we have been finding that is really interesting with BiTEs and CAR-T, and actually even with TIL, cytokine release is very similar to some of the IL-2 toxicities but not identical that we see with TIL treatment. But now we are starting to see overlap. So patients who have been treated with immunotherapy and then go on to get a bispecific or then go on to get TIL, so I have seen some colitises that have occurred after the fact. Some of the newer CAR-Ts without checkpoint have been causing some really interesting, probably not in a good way, but interesting biologically, colitises that are really refractory. So we are starting to see some overlap, and again, I think this field is just evolving constantly. Dr Monty Pal: Yeah, no, I almost think I need to go back to that fellowship that you and I did together 20 years ago and, you know, and see if I could repeat some coursework on CAR-T management.  You know, Pauline, I could probably keep you on the horn for hours, but this has just been terrific. Thank you so much for sharing all of your insights with us today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast. Dr Pauline Funchain: Thank you for the invitation. It was wonderful to talk about this, and it was wonderful to catch up a little bit, Monty. Dr Monty Pal: Same here, same here. And thanks to our listeners too. If you value the insights you heard today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions.  Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers:      Dr. Monty Pal    @montypal   Dr. Pauline Funchain @FunchainMD Follow ASCO on social media:       @ASCO on Twitter      ASCO on Bluesky     ASCO on Facebook       ASCO on LinkedIn     Disclosures: Dr. Monty Pal:     Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview    Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical    Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis    Dr. Pauline Funchain: Consulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Replimune, Sanofi/Regeneron, Immunocore, Tempus Research Funding (Inst.): Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, IDEAYA Biosciences, Linnaeus Therapeutics Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck

When your child struggles with OCD, it's natural to want to ease their distress, but those well-meaning “helping” moments can actually feed OCD's control. In this episode, Natasha breaks down how to pull back accommodations safely and effectively, without creating unnecessary conflict or fear.You'll learn:What OCD accommodations really are and how they sneak into daily routinesWhy reducing them helps your child gain long-term confidenceHow to involve your child in the processWhat to do (and not do) when emotions run highHow to stay consistent and supportive as your child builds resiliencePulling back OCD accommodations isn't about being tough — it's about helping your child take their power back from OCD, one small step at a time.Get in-depth OCD support in my FREE parenting series starting this week. You can register at www.ATparentingsurvivalseries.comLinks mentioned in the show:Get a PDF handout of today's episodeSPACE Treatment Study Guide CourseEli Lebowitz's book Breaking Free of Child Anxiety and OCD & Alec Pollard's book When a Love On Won't Seek Mental Health TreatmentSPACE Treatment website, Alec Pollard's website, YouTube video on compulsive reassurance, YouTube video on compulsive confessing, Podcast on developing effective incentive plans***This podcast episode is sponsored by NOCD. NOCD provides online OCD therapy in the US, UK, Australia and Canada. To schedule your free 15 minute consultation to see if NOCD is a right fit for you and your child, go to https://go.treatmyocd.com/at_parentingThis podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be used to replace the guidance of a qualified professional. Parents, do you need more support?

Welcome back to the Bar Exam Toolbox podcast! Today, we're speaking with Chris Fromm - National Director of Curriculum and Assessment at Themis Bar Review - about strategies for tackling multiple-choice questions on the bar exam, including the upcoming NextGen format. We discuss how to manage your time effectively, leverage practice tools, and seek support during the challenging bar prep period. Note: This episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review – the gold standard in bar exam preparation. With this special promotion, you can save $1,000 on any 2026 Themis Bar Review course using the code BAREXAMTB1000 at checkout. (This offer is valid until December 1st, 2025.) In this episode, we discuss: Why are multiple-choice questions stress-inducing for many people? Tips for approaching multiple-choice questions on the bar exam Effective time management and scheduling Turning to your support network for help Accommodations and focus strategies Six-option questions on the NextGen exam Resources: Themis Bar Review (https://www.themisbar.com/) Podcast Episode 18: Strategies for Mastering the MBE (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-18-strategies-for-mastering-the-mbe/) Podcast Episode 244: Spaced Repetition and Memorization During Bar Prep (w/Gabe Teninbaum) (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-244-spaced-repetition-and-memorization-during-bar-prep-w-gabe-teninbaum/) Podcast Episode 261: Quick Tips – Bar Exam Accommodations Basics (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-261-quick-tips-bar-exam-accommodations-basics/) Practice a Full Bar Exam Session – Go for the Gold (https://barexamtoolbox.com/practice-a-full-bar-exam-session-go-for-the-gold/) How to Plan Your Bar Exam Study Day for Maximum Success (https://barexamtoolbox.com/how-to-plan-your-bar-exam-study-day-for-maximum-success/) Manage Expectations Before Bar Prep Begins: Keeping Friends & Family on Your Side (https://barexamtoolbox.com/manage-expectations-before-bar-prep-begins-keeping-friends-family-on-your-side/) Download the Transcript (https://barexamtoolbox.com/episode-332-mastering-bar-exam-multiple-choice-questions-w-chris-fromm-from-themis/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on  Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-pass-bar-exam-less-stress/id1370651486) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Bar Exam Toolbox website (https://barexamtoolbox.com/contact-us/). Finally, if you don't want to miss anything, you can sign up for podcast updates (https://barexamtoolbox.com/get-bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-updates/)! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

In this podcast recorded at our recent Corporate Labor and Employment Counsel Exclusive® seminar, Tae Phillips (shareholder, Birmingham), Jim Paul (shareholder, St. Louis/Tampa), and Scott Kelly (shareholder, Birmingham) continue their discussion of the EEOC's evolving enforcement priorities—this time addressing religious discrimination, harassment, and accommodations in the workplace. Jim (who is co-chair of the firm's Disability Access Practice Group) examines recent trends, including the rise in religious accommodation requests, the impact of federal executive orders, and the challenges employers face in navigating religious and political overlap in employee requests. The conversation highlights the complexities of accommodating diverse religious beliefs while maintaining compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and fostering a respectful work environment.

The Push-Pull of ADHD and Autism: Stretching Without Breaking In this candid conversation, Patricia Young (she/her) and B Lourenco (she/her) dive deep into the realities of living with ADHD, autism, and other forms of neurodivergence. They explore the push-pull between self-accommodation and stretching ourselves, how shame and internalized ableism impact daily life, and what it means to create realistic support systems at home, in relationships, and in the workplace. Expect raw honesty, relatable stories, and practical insights for navigating neurodivergent life. WHAT YOU'LL HEAR IN THIS EPISODE · The ongoing "driver's seat battle" between ADHD and autism. · The push-pull between making accommodations and stretching ourselves beyond comfort. · Parenting a neurodivergent young adult while balancing when to push and when to allow rest. · Task initiation struggles — from making banana bread to cooking meals. · Body doubling as a powerful tool to reduce shame and spark motivation. · The "crisper/rotter" effect — guilt over wasted food and executive dysfunction. · Financial and practical impacts of task initiation challenges. · How privilege plays into having options like prepared or frozen meals when cooking feels impossible. · The cost of pushing through fatigue and flares with conditions like POTS and MCAS. · "Future me" thinking — and the difficulties neurodivergent folks have with impermanence. · Shame as the "ice cream scoop" on top of disability struggles. · Why diagnosis matters: language helps reduce shame and prevent repeating harmful patterns. · How powerlessness, and an attempt to gain autonomy can show up in small, reactive choices (like leaving a Facebook group). · Sensory sensitivities in family systems — how lack of accommodations can lead to dysfunction. · Practical accommodations for noise-sensitive parents and their kids. · Workplace challenges: 40-hour weeks, return-to-office pressures, and capitalism's rigidity. · Creative problem-solving in disabled and neurodivergent communities. · The deep fear of being uncared for and alone if we can't keep up. · Hyper-independence and isolation in the ADHD/autistic community. · Internalized ableism and the "shoulds" that drive shame and burnout. · Neurodivergence as a dynamic disability — what's possible one day isn't always possible the next. · Radical acceptance as a path toward reducing judgment and finding relief. SOUND BITES · "It begs the question of, okay, is that okay? Can we just say that's how it is?" – B Lourenco · "Instead of putting our energy into addressing the gap, folks will take the great divide and then put a scoop of shame on top of it." – B Lourenco · "All the terrible things that we tell ourselves… if I didn't have that awareness, I'd just keep repeating these patterns." – Patricia Young · "In order to truly accommodate ourselves, we have to acknowledge that it's as hard as it is and that we're as disabled as we are." – B Lourenco · "Sometimes I have to ask myself, what if what you're going through is exactly where you need to be?" – Patricia Young SENSITIVITY IS NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE FOR; IT'S HOW YOUR BRAIN IS WIRED You are not broken. You were shaped by systems that weren't built for you. You deserve rest, joy, and support exactly as you are. TOPICS COVERED (please adjust for addition of introduction) 00:00 Navigating Neurodivergence: A Personal Journey 02:59 Understanding Accommodations: Balancing Needs and Expectations 05:48 The Push-Pull of Task Initiation and Self-Care 08:33 Shame and Support: The Role of Community 11:35 The Impact of Environment on Neurodivergent Individuals 14:26 Workplace Challenges: The Struggle for Accommodations 17:16 Building Bridges: Community and Creative Solutions 20:00 Radical Acceptance: Embracing Our Reality 22:48 The Journey of Self-Discovery and Identity 25:42 The Dynamic Nature of Neurodivergence 29:02 Finding Joy in the Present Moment 31:47 The Bigger Picture: Building a Better Future 34:47 Conclusion: Resources and Future Endeavors PODCAST HOST Patricia Young (she/her) was a Licensed Clinical Social Worker for over 17 years, but she is now exclusively providing coaching. She knows what it's like to feel like an outcast, misfit, and truthteller. Learning about the trait of being a Highly Sensitive Person (HSP), then learning she is AuDHD with a PDA profile, OCD and RSD, helped Patricia rewrite her history with a deeper understanding, appreciation, and a sense of self-compassion. She created the podcasts Unapologetically Sensitive and Unapologetically AuDHD to help other neurodivergent folks know that they aren't alone, and that having a brain that is wired differently comes with amazing gifts, and some challenges. Patricia works online globally working individually with people, and she teaches Online Courses for neurodivergent folks that focus on understanding what it means to be a sensitive neurodivergent. Topics covered include: self-care, self-compassion, boundaries, perfectionism, mindfulness, communication, and creating a lifestyle that honors you Patricia's website, podcast episodes and more: www.unapologeticallysensitive.com PODCAST GUEST B Lourenco, MA, LMHC (she/her) is a licensed mental health counselor, educator, advocate, and activist. B has been working in community support for nearly 20 years and is committed to social change on all system levels. Seeing mental health advocacy as a way to serve the community, she earned a Master of Arts degree in Clinical Psychology, with a Systems Emphasis, in 2015 and began her private practice, B Lourenco Therapy in 2017. B has also worked in the public school system, providing support to students with behavioral issues that made attending school challenging for them. Highly trained in Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), B became a district-wide expert in supporting neurodivergent students. It was during this work that she began to be critical of the medical models of support for neurodivergence, including ABA. Making the shift from the medical to the Neurodiversity-affirming model has allowed her to finally identify her own neurodivergence, including Autism and ADHD. Combining her lived experience of neurodivergence, along with years of anti-oppression work, B is passionate about helping others untangle themselves from harmful practices and align themselves with those that instead support marginalized communities. In addition to CE events for healthcare providers, she has also been a speaker on panels and podcasts, and also facilitates community based workshops. https://www.blourencotherapy.com LINKS Cascadia Training: https://cascadia-training.com Imani Barbarin—crutches_and_spice IG https://www.instagram.com/crutches_and_spice/ To write a review in itunes: click on this link https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/unapologetically-sensitive/id1440433481?mt=2 select "listen on Apple Podcasts" chose "open in itunes" choose "ratings and reviews" click to rate the number of starts click "write a review" Website--www.unapologeticallysensitive.com Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/Unapologetically-Sensitive-2296688923985657/ Closed/Private Facebook group Unapologetically Sensitive-- https://www.facebook.com/groups/2099705880047619/ Instagram-- https://www.instagram.com/unapologeticallysensitive/ Youtube-- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOE6fodj7RBdO3Iw0NrAllg/videos?view_as=subscriber Tik Tok--https://www.tiktok.com/@unapologeticallysensitiv Unapologetically AuDHD Podcast-- https://unapologeticallysensitive.com/unapologeticallyaudhd/ e-mail-- unapologeticallysensitive@gmail.com Show hashtag--#unapologeticallysensitive Music-- Gravel Dance by Andy Robinson www.andyrobinson.com

For this episode of the show, we are joined by Amy Cushner! Amy has dedicated more than 30 years to the Shelton School and a lifetime to advocating for neurodivergent individuals, infusing passion, humor, and wisdom into every stage she graces. From classrooms in Dallas to conferences in China, she has become a sought-after voice championing inclusive, strengths-based approaches across both education and business.. In this episode, Amy breaks down the important differences between accommodations, modifications, and remediation in the education system, explaining how these terms are often used interchangeably but have distinct purposes that can significantly impact a child's learning journey. Amy discusses the historical context, which traces back to Thomas Jefferson's vision for public education and the challenges of the "Goldilocks effect," ensuring the right fit for every student. She highlights why it's so important to understand the “magic number” that determines when remediation is provided, highlighting that the need for support does not disappear just because a student falls short of the threshold. Amy stresses the importance of understanding important distinctions as they have major implications for a student's educational journey, particularly when it comes to college and career choices, and she also emphasizes the crucial role of early intervention and the empowerment of students to self-advocate, using visual cues and clear communication about their accommodations. Throughout our conversation, Amy shares some valuable insights and practical advice for parents and educators, highlighting the need for a collaborative approach and the recognition that every child's learning journey is unique.  Show Notes: [3:21] - Amy Cushner traces public education's evolution from Jefferson to modern challenges in individualized learning. [6:54] - Students often get accommodations when remediation or intervention is truly required. [7:12] - Amy criticizes rigid “magic number” cutoffs for remediation, calling them unfair and financially motivated. [9:13] - Accommodations, Amy explains, provide classroom access without altering expectations or content. [11:18] - Amy contrasts accommodations with modifications, which lower expectations to match processing or cognitive challenges. [13:54] - Amy highlights knowing accommodation vs. modification and likens it to learning another country's customs. [15:12] - Remediation can help develop missing skills caused by neurological learning differences, not intellectual deficits. [17:31] - Research shows us that remediation builds entirely new neural pathways, effectively rewiring students' brains. [20:17] - When schools won't fund remediation, parents have to seek external diagnoses and licensed therapists. [23:19] - Hear how true remediation requires trained therapists. [26:45] - Remediation needs to be paired with accommodations like audiobooks for full access. [27:39] - Amy explains how modifications alter curriculum expectations, influencing future school and college options. [30:02] - Amy suggests that teachers can use accommodations across the board to help build learning from the ground up. [32:32] - Starting instruction too high frustrates students, while accommodations let them build confidence gradually. [34:59] - Educational advocates help parents navigate laws, testing, and school obligations, helping to ease parental burdens. [38:10] - Timely intervention prevents years of lost learning caused by eligibility cutoffs. [41:21] - Amy encourages early remediation and teaching children to self-advocate for their accommodations. [44:29] - Honest conversations can help kids avoid developing inaccurate, damaging narratives about struggles. [45:48] - Amy reframes nonstandard brains as strengths that offer unique ways of seeing the world. [47:02] - What is the best way to get in touch with Amy Cushner? Links and Related Resources: “How to Initiate a Special Education Assessment” Episode 109: “IEP and 504 Plan Q&A with Vickie Brett and Amanda Selogie” Episode 164: “5 Keys to Productive IEPs with April Rehrig” Episode 218: “Understanding IEPs and 504 Plans: Which One Is Right for Your Child? - Marisol Chianello”   Connect with Us: Get on our Email List Book a Consultation Get Support and Connect with a ChildNEXUS Provider Register for Our “When Struggles Overlap” Live Webinar Email Dr. Wilson: drkiwilson@childnexus.com    Connect with Amy Cushner: Amy's LinkedIn Page Phone: 972-855-8949 Email: amy@aceservice.org   

In this episode of Ogletree Deakins' Litigation Lens podcast series, shareholders Michael Nail (Greenville) and Fiona Ong (Baltimore) dissect a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals case concerning an accommodation request brought under the Rehabilitation Act. The speakers explain why the Seventh Circuit found the employer's alternative accommodation reasonable in a case involving a VA hospital employee's request for parking and scooter storage amid COVID-19-related entrance changes. Michael and Fiona—emphasize that accommodations must be effective, not perfect—and cover the interactive process, changing accommodations without proving undue hardship, and damages considerations.

Interviewees: Matthew Sullivan, PhD, Assistant Director of Disability Resources, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis Suchita “Suchi” Rastogi, PhD. MPH Candidate, University of Illinois Chicago; CEO, Disability in Medicine Mutual Mentorship Program Interviewer: Lisa Meeks, PhD, MA, Guest Editor, Academic Medicine Supplement on Disability Inclusion in Undergraduate Medical Education Description: In this episode of Stories Behind the Science, Dr. Lisa Meeks talks with Matt Sullivan (Washington University School of Medicine) and Suchita “Suchi” Rastogi (UIC; DM3P) about their paper, “Standardized Language for Clinical Accommodations in U.S. Undergraduate Medical Training: Results From a National Modified Delphi Consensus Study,”part of the Academic Medicine supplement on Disability Inclusion in UME. Their conversation explores how a grassroots idea—born from students' lived experiences and practitioners' urgent need for clarity—grew into the first national, evidence-based language guide for clinical accommodations. Together, they unpack how a modified Delphi process brought students, Disability Resource Professionals, and leaders together to build consensus around the precise language that transforms intention into implementation. The trio discuss how language and word choices can make the difference between support and confusion, and how transparent, shared language strengthens trust and access for all. Dr. Meeks, Sullivan, and Rastogi also reflect on the collaborative model that made this project possible—one that centers disabled voices, encourages vulnerability in leadership, and demonstrates how clarity in communication is the foundation of equity. Listeners will come away with practical takeaways for institutions and leaders: audit your accommodation templates, build structured partnerships between DRPs and Student Affairs, and engage students as co-creators in designing accessible clinical environments. Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ooJ5TP8V8s4t35EECoWHNTta7qqwbKlx-Fgu_WIiPG4/edit?usp=sharing Bios: Matt Sullivan PhD Dr. Sullivan is the Assistant Director of Disability Resources, At Washington University in St. Louis, and serves as DR's liaison to WashU's School of Medicine, acting as the primary contact for SoM faculty/staff, students, and prospective students.  In this role, Matt works closely with all parties to create an accessible and inclusive educational environment for disabled students pursuing their degrees within Health Sciences and Medicine. Dr. Sullivan is a research-oriented practitioner dedicated to promoting disability awareness and inclusion within the higher education environment.  In his student affairs roles, Dr. Sullivan has experience providing leadership and direction for a variety of programs and services in the areas of disability, testing, tutoring, Supplemental Instruction, and academic coaching.  Working in the field of disability services for more than a decade, Matt has dedicated his time and energy to the education and development of students, faculty, and staff surrounding the intersectionality of disability with race, culture, gender, and other prominent identity factors. Suchita “Suchi” Rastogi PhD Suchi is an MPH student at the University of Illinois Chicago and CEO of the Disability in Medicine Mutual Mentorship Program (DM3P). A former MD-PhD student at Stanford University, she advocates for accessible medical education and leads community-based efforts to promote disability inclusion and peer mentorship. As a South Asian disability activist, she values health equity and compassionately designed systems that serve all people with dignity. She believes everyone deserves respect, access to material resources, and psychosocial support. These values compel her to improve healthcare and public health infrastructure for disabled patients, increase disability representation in medicine, and shift attitudes towards persons with disability. To accomplish this, she 1) run a mentorship program (DM3P) for healthcare professionals with disability, 2) conducts disability health equity research, and 3) advocates for evidence-based policies that center accessibility. Key Words: Clinical accommodations · Disability inclusion · Medical students · Disability Resource Professionals ADA Resources: Article from Today's Talk: Dhanani Z, Rastogi S, Sullivan M, Betchkal R, Poullos P, Meeks LM. Standardized Language for Clinical Accommodations in U.S. Undergraduate Medical Training: Results From a National Modified Delphi Consensus Study.Academic Medicine. 2025;100(10S):S92–S97. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000006150 Read the full article here → Equal Access for Students with Disabilities: The Guide for Health Science and Professional Education (2nd Ed). Meeks LM, Jain NR, & Laird EP. Springer Publishing, 2020. Read here → The Docs With Disabilities Podcast: https://www.docswithdisabilities.org/docswithpodcast

On this episode of The Steve Dangle Podcast, 00:00 Leafs beat the Preds 54:45 A great Ducks giveaway 1:02:30 Rangers lose at home again 1:11:00 The Sharks owner speaks 1:25:30 A Sharks giveaway 1:28:00 Adam's Pittsburgh fat guy corner 1:42:00 Accommodations for NHLers at the Olympics Donate to Steve's Easter Seals page: https://eastersealsontario.akaraisin.com/ui/lindros2025/p/078df4e3c0c444d59a551259d78a749e Donate to Adam's Easter Seals page: https://eastersealsontario.akaraisin.com/ui/lindros2025/p/12938347f56e4b2eab06c3a423a727f6 Donate to Jesse's Easter Seals page: https://eastersealsontario.akaraisin.com/ui/lindros2025/p/f58403a20caa4b47a17e19cf86c198d9 Visit this episode's sponsors: Grab a pack today.  Visit your local Tim Hortons, or download the Tims App, to start collecting Tim Horton's NHL Hockey Trading Cards. Grab your EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal by going to https://nordvpn.com/dangle to get a Huge Discount off your NordVPN Plan + 4 additional months on top! It's completely risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee! Hope in Every Step is more than a walk — it's a movement. Held this year at Spencer Smith Park in Burlington on November 1st, the event brings our community together to stand against gender-based violence. Visit https://hope-in-every-step.raiselysite.com/donate for more information. Join us at The Rec Room: https://sdpn.ticketspice.com/sdp-x-the-rec-room Join Drew & Stew Pick Em' ➡️ https://app.sparc.fun/point-spread/dspe Check out https://sdpn.ca/events to see The Steve Dangle Podcast live! Subscribe to the sdpn YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@sdpn?sub_confirmation=1Join - SDP VIP: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0a0z05HiddEn7k6OGnDprg/join Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/thestevedanglepodcast Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/sdpvip/subscribe - Follow us on Twitter: @Steve_Dangle, @AdamWylde, & @JesseBlake Follow us on Instagram: @SteveDangle, @AdamWylde, & @Jesse.BlakeJoin us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/MtTmw9rrz7 For general inquiries email: info@sdpn.ca Reach out to https://www.sdpn.ca/sales to connect with our sales team and discuss the opportunity to integrate your brand within our content! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this week's episode of Special Education for Beginners, we're continuing our October series all about writing IEPs that are clear, meaningful, and truly connected.So far this month, we've talked about how your Present Levels (PLAAFPs) act as the blueprint of the IEP and how to use that information to write strong, measurable goals. Now we're moving one step further — connecting those goals to the services, accommodations, and supports that make them work in practice.If you've ever caught yourself copying last year's IEP just to “save time,” you're not alone. But today, we're hitting reset and walking through five simple steps to make sure every service and accommodation in your IEP is backed by data and directly connected to your student's current needs.In this episode, you'll learn:✅ How to use data from the Present Levels to guide your decisions✅ What questions to ask yourself before adding or adjusting services✅ How to ensure every support ties back to an IEP goal✅ Why alignment matters for both compliance and student success✅ Tips for knowing when it's time to remove outdated accommodations or servicesPlus, I'm sharing how AI tools can actually help you pull out student strengths and needs more efficiently — without replacing your professional judgment. If you want to try this for yourself, check out my resource Using AI to Write IEPs: Identifying Strengths and Needs, which walks you step-by-step through how to use AI responsibly to analyze data and identify key areas for growth. And if you're looking for more support with goal writing, my IEP Goal and PLAAFP Forms are designed to simplify the process while keeping your writing precise, professional, and personalized.

Parents often rely on their usual parenting strategies to help their child with OCD — but those same strategies can actually backfire. In this episode, I break down the most common approaches parents try and explain why they don't work when it comes to OCD.If you've ever felt stuck, repeating the same things without progress, this episode will help you understand why and what to do differently.To get the PDF handout that supplements this episode go to www.natashadaniels.com/episode440✨ Get 50% off all my courses and workshops until December 18, 2025 11:59pm in honor of OCD Awareness Week. Go to AT Parenting Survival School and use the coupon code OCDAWARENESS2025.Links mentioned in podcast:Podcast: Validation vs Accommodations in OCDPodcast: Developing Effective Incentive PlansReel: Distraction vs Refocusing***This podcast episode is sponsored by NOCD. NOCD provides online OCD therapy in the US, UK, Australia and Canada. To schedule your free 15 minute consultation to see if NOCD is a right fit for you and your child, go tohttps://go.treatmyocd.com/at_parentingThis podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be used to replace the guidance of a qualified professional.Parents, do you need more support?

Thanks for joining me, Holly Blanc Moses - The Mom/Neurodivergent Therapist, on The Autism ADHD Podcast. Is a neurodivergent student in your life struggling at school?  You're not alone—and there ARE supports that actually work. In this episode, I'm breaking down 5 game-changing school accommodations based on what parents, therapists, and educators are searching for most: communication supports, sensory regulation, executive functioning help, and more. These aren't vague suggestions—they're real examples you can implement in the classroom, recommend in evaluations, or request in IEP and 504 meetings. These 5 supports help in the areas of communication, regulation, executive functioning, writing, social interaction and mental health!  Perfect For: Parents preparing for IEP or 504 meetings and advocating for your child's needs. Therapists identifying school supports that will help clients emotionally, socially and academically. Educators looking for practical classroom strategies that work.  

This week on the Power of Owning Your Career Podcast, host Simone Morris welcomes Charlotte Dales, co-founder and CEO of Inclusively, for a lively and insightful discussion on charting your own course and building inclusive workplaces. Charlotte shares her remarkable journey—from banking at Deutsche Bank to starting successful companies and sparking positive change after being inspired by her cousin's achievements. Tune in for actionable tips on handling rejection, planning bold career moves, leveraging technology for growth, and embracing a mindset that keeps you in the driver's seat—no matter where you're starting from. Episode Highlights & Timestamps: [00:00] Intro to Charlotte & Overview of Inclusively [00:03] Charlotte's early career aspirations and pivot to finance [00:07] If your career were a book—Charlotte's title & philosophy [00:08] The formula for owning your career: key ingredients and mindsets [00:10] Stories of rejection, resilience, and not taking no for an answer [00:17] Strategies for self-advocacy and pitching yourself [00:19] Game-changing career resources (including Blinkist & AI) [00:22] Realizing you're in the driver's seat: the London story [00:23] Charlotte's parting words on perseverance and choice [00:24] How to connect with Charlotte and Inclusively Learn More & Get Involved: Learn more about host Simone E. Morris: LinkedIn Apply or recommend a guest: Become a Guest on the Show Looking for career support from Simone? Visit 52 Tips for Owning Your Career Connect with Charlotte: Inclusively: Website Charlotte Dales on LinkedIn: LinkedIn Follow & Subscribe: Follow us on social @simonemorrisent for updates & success tips! Subscribe for more inspiring guests and actionable career episodes.

Beau Martonik heads to Nebraska for an early-season deer camp with Thomas & Nate Krick (Identical Draw), Ben Dettamanti (Shed Crazy), Joel Burham (Whitetail Fit), and Josh Ilderton (The Untamed). The crew dives into what makes deer camp special—camaraderie, laughs, and lessons learned along the way. From spider stick pranks and quicksand mishaps to scouting strategies and close encounters, this episode of the East Meets West Hunt podcast captures the spirit of chasing whitetails together. Topics: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:04:11 – Introductions 00:06:30 – The Idea Behind This Camp 00:11:13 – Ben's Whitetail Perspective 00:13:07 – Spider Stick Shenanigans 00:15:25 – The Food Sources Debate 00:21:05 – The Quicksand Experience 00:23:41 – The Last Stand 00:29:07 – Ben's Shed Tour 00:32:05 – Nate's Buck 00:51:03 – Guest Switch - Josh Ilderton and Joel Burham 00:55:21 – Camp Life and Accommodations 01:00:22 – Hunting Timber vs. Agriculture 01:15:31 – Evening Strategies 01:22:36 – Wrapping Up the Adventure Resources: Joel Burham (Whitetail Fit) - YouTube and IG Identical Draw - YouTube and IG The Untamed - YouTube and IG Shed Crazy - YouTube and IG Instagram:   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@eastmeetswesthunt⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@beau.martonik⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Facebook:   ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠East Meets West Outdoors⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Shop Hunting Gear and Apparel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.eastmeetswesthunt.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube: Beau Martonik - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQJon93sYfu9HUMKpCMps3w⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Partner Discounts and Affiliate Links: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.eastmeetswesthunt.com/partners⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Amazon Influencer Page ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.amazon.com/shop/beau.martonik⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices