Podcasts about Amgen

On this week's episode, Eric Schmidt, Brad Loncar, Yaron Werber, Paul Matteis, and Nina Kjellson discuss impact of tariffs on biopharma relative to other sectors, FDA updates and bright spots, data, and fundraising. The episode opens with a conversation on tariffs and the upheaval and shifts at the FDA, including the departure of Peter Marks, former director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, which has the group concerned over loss of institutional memory, history, and the ability to meet deadlines. The conversation shifts to the measles outbreak, noting concerns about public health and future regulation due to HHS reorganization plans and perceived industry inaction. The group then discusses data, including Vaxcyte's underwhelming Phase 2b data, and hopes to avoid negative vaccine sentiment. Additionally, Eli Lilly's Phase 2 data for its siRNA-based therapeutic to lower lipoprotein(a) showed promising results and Amgen and Novartis are conducting their own Phase 3 trials for Lp(a). The episode concludes with a discussion on Isomorphic Labs, which raised over $600 million, with the group praising the investment in early-stage discovery science and expressed hope that it will facilitate the company's transformation of technology into drugs. *This episode aired on April 4, 2025.

In this episode of “This Is Purdue,” we're featuring the live Brands That Matter panel spotlighted at the Fast Company Grill during the annual SXSW Conference and Festivals in Austin, Texas.  Purdue President Mung Chiang took the stage as a panelist for “Innovating What Matters: Driving Pharma Forward,” along with Sean Bruich, senior vice president of artificial intelligence and data at Amgen, and Tatyana Kanzaveli, chief operating officer of Open Health Network.  This special panel discussion was sponsored by Purdue University — a four-time recipient of Fast Company's Brands That Matter distinction.  In this special recording moderated by Shibani Joshi, you will:  Learn about how the health care industry is using AI to improve the development and distribution of pharmaceuticals  Discover how Purdue and other pharmaceutical companies are leveraging cross-industry partnerships to drive innovation  Get to know how Purdue's partnership with Eli Lilly and Company and Merck & Co. Inc. is driving opportunities in America's Hard-Tech Corridor   Find out how technological advancements, including AI and research happening at Purdue, will shape the future of pharma  Don't miss this special live episode that brought together pharmaceutical industry experts at one of the nation's most esteemed festivals and conferences — SXSW.  

The pharmaceutical industry is on the brink of massive transformation driven by cutting-edge technology and strategic collaboration. Purdue University is on the forefront of Pharma 4.0 by partnering with pharmaceutical companies to pioneer advances in medicine and speed up the evolution of pharmaceutical manufacturing. In this custom episode, host Shibani Joshi chats with Sean Bruik, senior vice president of artificial intelligence and data at Amgen; Mung Chiang, president of Purdue University; and Tatyana Kanzaveli, CEO of Open Health Network, to discuss the role of cross-industry partnerships in driving innovation in the pharmaceutical industry.

This Day in Legal History: President Lincoln DiesOn this day in legal history, April 15, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln died from a gunshot wound inflicted the night before by actor and Confederate sympathizer John Wilkes Booth. The assassination occurred at Ford's Theatre in Washington, D.C., where Lincoln was watching a play with his wife. He was shot in the back of the head and never regained consciousness, dying the next morning at 7:22 a.m. His death was the first assassination of a U.S. president and triggered a constitutional transition of power during a critical moment in American history. Vice President Andrew Johnson was sworn in the same day, inheriting the enormous task of leading the country through the fragile early stages of Reconstruction.Legally, Lincoln's assassination set several precedents. It led to the use of military tribunals to try civilians involved in Booth's conspiracy, a decision that remains controversial in constitutional law. The event also underscored the importance of presidential succession, later clarified by the 25th Amendment. In the immediate aftermath, martial law and curfews were imposed in the capital, and a massive manhunt ensued for Booth and his co-conspirators. The killing intensified public sentiment against the South and complicated efforts to reunify the nation. Johnson's approach to Reconstruction diverged sharply from Lincoln's more conciliatory plans, shaping decades of legal and political conflict over civil rights. The assassination deeply impacted how the federal government approached both national security and executive protection. The tragedy marked not just the loss of a president, but a shift in the legal and political structure of post-Civil War America.As Lincoln's funeral train retraced the route that had carried him from obscurity in Illinois to the presidency, it served as a symbolic farewell to both the man and the future he might have shaped. Each stop along the way—cities draped in mourning, crowds in silent grief—marked not only the end of his political journey but also the shunting off of a potential trajectory for his second term. Had Lincoln lived, his vision for a more lenient and reconciliatory Reconstruction might have softened the bitter divisions that would later deepen under Andrew Johnson's combative leadership. Perhaps civil rights protections would have been implemented sooner, with Lincoln using his political capital and moral authority to push for more lasting equality. The possibility remains that a different course could have been taken—one that prioritized unity without compromising justice, and that may have led to a more inclusive and less violent post-war America.Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legally residing Salvadoran migrant in Maryland with a U.S. work permit, was wrongly deported to El Salvador in March, despite a judge's order blocking his removal. The Trump administration acknowledged the deportation was in error but has told a federal court it is not obligated to help him return from prison in El Salvador, interpreting a Supreme Court directive to "facilitate" his return as limited to removing domestic barriers—not assisting with his release abroad. A U.S. District Court judge had ordered the government to bring him back, a decision the Supreme Court upheld by rejecting the administration's appeal. However, a top immigration official has now argued the deportation order is moot, citing Abrego Garcia's alleged ties to MS-13, a group newly designated as a foreign terrorist organization. The State Department has confirmed that Abrego Garcia is "alive and secure" in a terrorism detention facility in El Salvador. Legal efforts continue, with Abrego Garcia's attorneys seeking more information from the government. The administration warns this could disrupt diplomatic talks, particularly with El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele visiting Washington. President Trump has said his administration would comply if ordered directly by the Supreme Court.Trump administration says it is not required to help wrongly deported man return to US | ReutersSandoz, a Swiss generic drugmaker, has filed a U.S. antitrust lawsuit against Amgen, accusing it of unlawfully maintaining a monopoly on its arthritis drug Enbrel. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Norfolk, Virginia, alleges that Amgen created a "thicket of patents" to block the entry of biosimilar competitors like Sandoz's Erelzi, which has been approved by the FDA since 2016 but has not launched in the U.S. Sandoz claims this strategy has kept its lower-cost alternative off the market, depriving patients of affordable options and causing the company to lose millions in potential monthly sales. Amgen has not yet commented on the lawsuit. Enbrel generated $3.3 billion in U.S. revenue in 2024 alone and is used to treat inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis. Sandoz argues that Amgen's patent practices violate federal antitrust laws by suppressing competition and artificially extending its market dominance. The company is seeking an injunction to stop Amgen from using its patent portfolio in this way, as well as financial damages for lost sales.Sandoz files U.S. antitrust lawsuit against Amgen over arthritis drug | ReutersThe U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has agreed to investigate recent changes at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including those influenced by the White House and the Department of Government Efficiency (DGE), led by Elon Musk. This probe follows a request from Senators Elizabeth Warren and Mark Warner, who raised concerns about the SEC's ability to fulfill its regulatory duties amid sweeping restructuring efforts. Since President Trump's return to office and the Republican takeover of the agency, the SEC has reduced staff, ended leases, and reorganized operations. It has also scaled back enforcement efforts and seen a wave of resignations as part of a broader federal downsizing initiative. The GAO confirmed that the request for an investigation falls within its authority, with the review expected to begin in about three months. Lawmakers stress the importance of understanding how these changes may be undermining the SEC's mission. The agency's funding, while approved by Congress, is sourced from transaction fees rather than taxpayer dollars. These developments coincide with market instability triggered by Trump's recent tariff announcement.US congressional watchdog to probe changes at the SEC, letter says | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Most Medical Affairs leaders know the truth: Counting MSLHCP interactions is easy, but it's meaningless. Vanity metrics are holding Field Medical back. In this episode of Transforming Medical Communications, Wesley Portegies is joined by Denise Clark, Regional Medical Director of the Rare Disease team at Amgen, to show you what to measure instead and how to finally prove your team's real impact. Denise brings a bold, disruptive perspective: activity is not impact. This conversation gives you the modern Field Medical playbook. It's not about doing more. It's about doing what moves the needle.

On the inaugural episode of ASCO Education: By the Book, Dr. Nathan Pennell and Dr. Don Dizon share reflections on the evolution of the ASCO Educational Book, its global reach, and the role of its new companion podcast to further shine a spotlight on the issues shaping the future of modern oncology. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Nathan Pennell: Hello, I'm Dr. Nate Pennell, welcoming you to the first episode of our new podcast, ASCO Education: By the Book. The podcast will feature engaging discussions between editors and authors from the ASCO Educational Book. Each month, you'll hear nuanced views on key topics in oncology featured in Education Sessions at ASCO meetings, as well as some deep dives on the advances shaping modern oncology. Although I am honored to serve as the editor-in-chief (EIC) of the ASCO Educational Book, in my day job, I am the co-director of the Cleveland Clinic Lung Cancer Program and vice chair for clinical research for the Taussig Cancer Center here in Cleveland. I'm delighted to kick off our new podcast with a discussion featuring the Ed Book's previous editor-in-chief. Dr. Don Dizon is a professor of medicine and surgery at Brown University and works as a medical oncologist specializing in breast and pelvic malignancies at Lifespan Cancer Institute in Rhode Island. Dr. Dizon also serves as the vice chair for membership and accrual at the SWOG Cancer Research Network. Don, it's great to have you here for our first episode of ASCO Education: By the Book. Dr. Don Dizon: Really nice to be here and to see you again, my friend. Dr. Nathan Pennell: This was the first thing I thought of when we were kicking off a podcast that I thought we would set the stage for our hopefully many, many listeners to learn a little bit about what the Ed Book used to be like, how it has evolved over the last 14 years or so since we both started here and where it's going. You started as editor-in-chief in 2012, is that right? Dr. Don Dizon: Oh, boy. I believe that is correct, yes. I did two 5-year stints as EIC of the Educational Book, so that sounds about right. Although you're aging me very clearly on this podcast. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I had to go back in my emails to see if I could figure out when we started on this because we've been working on it for some time. Start out a little bit by telling me what do you remember about the Ed Book from back in the day when you were applying to be editor-in-chief and thinking about the Ed Book. What was it like at that time? Dr. Don Dizon: You know, it's so interesting to think about it.  Ten years ago, we were both in a very different place in our careers, and I remember when the Ed Book position came up, I had been writing a column for ASCO. I had done some editorial activities with other journals for sure, but what always struck me was it was very unclear how one was chosen to be a part of the education program at ASCO. And then it was very unclear how those faculty were then selected to write a paper for the Educational Book. And it was back in the day when the Educational Book was completely printed. So, there was this book that was cherished among American fellows in oncology. And it was one that, when I was newly attending, and certainly two or three years before the editor's position came up, it was one that I referenced all the time. So, it was a known commodity for many of us. And there was a certain sense of selectivity about who was invited to write in it. And it wasn't terribly transparent either. So, when the opportunity to apply for editor-in-chief of the Educational Book came up, I had already been doing so much work for ASCO. I had been on the planning committees and served in many roles across the organization, and editing was something I found I enjoyed in other work. So, I decided to put my name in the ring with the intention of sort of bringing the book forward, getting it indexed, for example, so that there was this credit that was more than just societal credit at ASCO. This ended up being something that was referenced and acknowledged as an important paper through PubMed indexing. And then also to provide it as a space where we could be more transparent about who was being invited and broadening the tent as to who could participate as an author in the Ed Book. Dr. Nathan Pennell: It's going to be surprising to many of our younger listeners to learn that the Educational Book used to be just this giant, almost like a brick. I mean, it was this huge tome of articles from the Education Sessions that you got when you got your meeting abstracts book at the annual meeting. And you can always see people on the plane on the way out of Chicago with their giant books. Dr. Don Dizon: Yes. Dr. Nathan Pennell: That added lots of additional weight to the plane, I'm sure, on the way out. Dr. Don Dizon: And it was not uncommon for us to be sitting at an airport, and people would be reading those books with highlighters. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I fondly remember being a fellow and coming up and the Ed Book was always really important to me, so I was excited. We'll also let the listeners in on that. I also applied to be the original editor-in-chief of the Ed Book back in 2012, although I was very junior and did not have any real editorial experience. I think I may have been section editor for The Oncologist at that point. And I had spoken to Dr. Ramaswamy Govindan at WashU who had been the previous editor-in-chief about applying and he was like, “Oh yeah. You should absolutely try that out.” And then when Dr. Dizon was chosen, I was like, “Oh, well. I guess I didn't get it.” And then out of the blue I got a call asking me to join as the associate editor, which I was really always very thankful for that opportunity. Dr. Don Dizon: Well, it was a highly fruitful collaboration, I think, between you and I when we first started. I do remember taking on the reins and sort of saying, “You know, this is our vision of what we want to do.” But then just working with the authors, which we did, about how to construct their papers and what we were looking for, all of that is something I look back really fondly on. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I think it was interesting too because neither one of us had really a lot of transparency into how things worked when we started. We kind of made it up a little bit as we went along. We wanted to get all of the faculty, or at least as many of them as possible contributing to these. And we would go to the ASCO Education Committee meeting and kind of talk about the Ed Book, and we were thinking about, you know, how could we get people to submit. So, at the time it wasn't PubMed indexed. Most people, I think, submitted individual manuscripts just from their talk, which could be anywhere from full length review articles to very brief manuscripts. Dr. Don Dizon: Sometimes it was their slides with like a couple of comments on it. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And some of them were almost like a summary of the talk. Yeah, exactly. And so sort of making that a little more uniform. There was originally an honorarium attached, which went away, but I think PubMed indexing was probably the biggest incentive for people to join. I remember that was one of the first things you really wanted to get. Dr. Don Dizon Yeah. And, you know, it was fortuitous. I'd like to take all the credit for it, but ASCO was very forward thinking with Dr. Ramaswamy and the conversations about going to PubMed with this had preceded my coming in. We knew what we needed to do to get this acknowledged, which was really strengthening the peer review so that these papers could meet the bar to get on PubMed. But you know, within the first, what, two or three years, Nate, of us doing this, we were able to get this accepted. And now it is. If you look at what PubMed did for us, it not only increased the potential of who was going to access it, but for, I think the oncology community, it allowed people access to papers by key opinion leaders that was not blocked by a paywall. And I thought that was just super important at the time. Social media was something, but it wasn't what it is now. But anybody could access these manuscripts and it's still the case today. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I think it's hard to overstate how important that was. People don't realize this, but the Ed Book is really widely accessed, especially outside the US as well. And a lot of people who can't attend the meeting to get the print, well, the once print, book could actually get access to essentially the education session from the annual meeting without having to fly all the way to the US to attend. Now, you know, we have much better virtual meeting offerings now and whatnot. But at the time it was pretty revolutionary to be able to do that. Dr. Don Dizon: Yeah, and you know, it's so interesting when I think back to, you know, this sort of evolution to a fully online publication of the Ed Book. It was really some requests from international participants of the annual meeting who really wanted to continue to see this in print. At that time, it was important to recognize that access to information was not uniform across the world. And people really wanted that print edition, maybe not for themselves, but so that access in more rural areas or where access in the broadband networks were not established that they still could access the book. I think things have changed now. We were able, I think, in your tenure, to see it fully go online. But even I just remember that being a concern as we went forward. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Yeah, we continued with the print book that was available if people asked for it, but apparently few enough people asked for it that it moved fully online. One of the major advantages of being fully online now is of course, it does allow us to publish kind of in real time as the manuscripts come out in the months leading up to the meeting, which has been, I think, a huge boon because it can build momentum for the Education Sessions coming in. People, you know, really look forward to it. Dr. Don Dizon: Yeah, that was actually a concern, you know, when we were phasing out Ed Book and going to this continuous publication model where authors actually had the ability to sort of revise their manuscript and that would be automatically uploaded. You had a static manuscript that was fully printed, and it was no longer an accurate one. And we did have the ability to fix it. And it just goes to show exactly what you're saying. This idea that these are living papers was really an important thing that ASCO embraced quite early, I think. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And with the onset of PubMed indexing, the participation from faculty skyrocketed and almost within a couple of years was up to the vast majority of sessions and faculty participating. Now I think people really understand that this is part of the whole process. But at the time I remember writing out on my slides in all caps, “THIS IS AN EXPECTATION.” And that's about the best word I could give because I asked if we could make people do it, and they were like, no, you can't make people do it. Dr. Don Dizon: So right.  Actually, I don't think people are aware of the work on the back end every year when I was on as EIC, Nate and myself, and then subsequently Dr. Hope Rugo would have these informational sessions with the education faculty and we would tout the Ed Book, tout the expectation, tout it was PubMed indexed and tout multidisciplinary participation. So, we were not seeing four manuscripts reflecting one session. You know, this encouragement to really embrace multidisciplinary care was something that very early on we introduced and really encouraged people not to submit perspective manuscripts, but to really get them in and then harmonize the paper so that it felt like it was, you know, one voice. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I consider that after PubMed indexing, the next major change to the Ed Book, that really made it a better product and that was moving from, you know, just these short individual single author manuscripts to single session combined manuscript that had multiple perspectives and topics, really much more comprehensive review articles. And I don't even remember what the impetus was for that, but it was really a success. Dr. Don Dizon: Yeah, I mean, I think in the beginning it was more of a challenge, I think, because people were really not given guidance on what these papers were supposed to look like. So, we were seeing individual manuscripts come forward. Looking back, it really foreshadowed the importance of multidisciplinary management. But at the time, it was really more about ensuring that people were leaving the session with a singular message of what to do when you're in clinic again. And the goal was to have the manuscripts reflect that sort of consensus view of a topic that was coming in. There were certain things that people still argued would not fit in a multidisciplinary manuscript. You know, if you have someone who's writing and whose entire talk was on the pathology of thyroid cancer. Another topic was on survivorship after thyroid cancer. It was hard to sort of get those two to interact and cover what was being covered. So, we were still getting that. But you're right, at the end of my tenure and into yours, there were far fewer of those individual manuscripts. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And I think it's even made it easier to write because now, you know, you just have to write a section of a manuscript and not put together an entire review. So, it has helped with getting people on board. Dr. Don Dizon: Well, the other thing I thought was really interesting about the process is when you're invited to do an Education Session at ASCO, you're either invited as a faculty speaker or as the chair of the session. And the responsibility of the chair is to ensure that it flows well and that the talks are succinct based on what the agenda or the objectives were as defined by the education committee for that specific group. But that was it. So really being named “Chair” was sort of an honor, an honorific. It really didn't come with responsibility. So, we use the Ed Book as a way to say, “As chair of the session, it is your responsibility to ensure A, a manuscript comes to me, but B, that the content of that paper harmonizes and is accurate.” And it was very rare, but Nate, I think we got dragged into a couple of times where the accuracy of the manuscript was really called into question by the chair. And those were always very, very tricky discussions because everyone that gets invited to ASCO is a recognized leader in their field. Some of us, especially, I would probably say, dating back 10 years from today, the data behind Standards of Care were not necessarily evidence-based. So, there were a lot of opinion-based therapies. You know, maybe not so much in the medical side, but certainly some of it. But when you went to, you know, surgical treatments and maybe even radiotherapy treatments, it was really based on, “My experience at my center is this and this is why I do what I do.” But those kinds of things ended up being some of the more challenging things to handle as an editor. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And those are the– I'll use “fun” in a broad sense. You know, every once in a while, you get an article where it really does take a lot of hands-on work from the editor to work with the author to try to revise it and make it a suitable academic manuscript. But you know what? I can't think, at least in recent years, of any manuscripts that we turned down. They just sometimes needed a little TLC. Dr. Don Dizon: Yeah. And I think the other important thing it reminds me of is how great it was that I wasn't doing this by myself. Because it was so great to be able to reach out to you and say, “Can you give me your take on this paper?” Or, “Can you help me just join a conference call with the authors to make sure that we're on the same page?” And then on the rare example where we were going to reject a paper, it was really important that we, as the editorial team, and I include our ASCO shepherder, through the whole process. We had to all agree that this was not salvageable. Fortunately, it happened very rarely. But I've got to say, not doing this job alone was one of the more important facets of being the EIC of ASCO's Educational Book. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Well, it's nice to hear you say that. I definitely felt that this was a partnership, you know, it was a labor of love. So, I want to go to what I consider sort of the third major pillar of the changes to the Ed Book during your tenure, and that was the introduction of a whole new kind of manuscript. So up to, I don't know, maybe seven or eight years ago, all the articles were authored just by people who were presenting at the Annual Meeting. And then you had an idea to introduce invited manuscripts. So take me through that. Dr. Don Dizon: Yeah, well, you know, again, it went to this sort of, what can people who are being asked to sort of lead ASCO for that year, what can they demonstrate as sort of a more tangible contribution to the Society and to oncology in general? And I think that was the impetus to use the Ed Book for everyone who was in a leadership position to make their mark. That said, I was here, and I was either president of the society or I was Education Program Chair or Scientific Program Chair, and they got to select an article type that was not being covered in the annual meeting and suggest the authors and work with those authors to construct a manuscript. Never did any one of those folks suggest themselves, which I thought was fascinating. They didn't say, “I want to be the one to write this piece,” because this was never meant to be a presidential speech or a commemorative speech or opportunity for them as leaders. But we wanted to ensure that whatever passion they had within oncology was represented in the book. And again, it was this sort of sense of, I want everyone to look at the Ed Book and see themselves in it and see what they contributed. And that was really important for those who were really shepherding each Annual Meeting each year for ASCO that they had the opportunity to do that. And I was really pleased that leadership really took to that idea and were very excited about bringing ideas and also author groups into the Educational Book who would not have had the opportunity otherwise. I thought that was just really nice. It was about inclusiveness and just making sure that people had the opportunity to say, “If you want to participate, we want you to participate.” Dr. Nathan Pennell: Yeah, I agree. I think the ASCO leadership jumped on this and continues to still really appreciate the opportunity to be able to kind of invite someone on a topic that's meaningful to them. I think we've tried to work in things that incorporate the presidential theme each year in our invited manuscript, so it really allows them to put kind of a stamp on the flavor of each edition. And the numbers reflect that these tend to be among our more highly read articles as well. Dr. Don Dizon: You know, looking back on what we did together, that was something I'm really, really quite proud of, that we were able to sort of help the Educational Book evolve that way. Dr. Nathan Pennell: I agree. You brought up briefly a few minutes ago about social media and its role over time. I think when we started in 2012, I had just joined Twitter now X in 2011, and I think we were both sort of early adopters in the social media. Do you feel like social media has had a role in the growth of the Ed Book or is this something that you think we can develop further? Dr. Don Dizon: When we were doing Ed Book together, professional social media was actually a quite identified space. You know, we were all on the same platform. We analyzed what the outcomes were on that platform and our communities gathered on that platform. So, it was a really good place to highlight what we were publishing, especially as we went to continuous publishing.  I don't remember if it was you or me, but we even started asking our authors for a tweet and those tweets needed work. It was you. It was you or I would actually lay in these tweets to say, “Yeah, we need to just, you know, work on this.” But I think it's harder today. There's no one preferred platform. Alternate platforms are still evolving. So, I think there are opportunities there. The question is: Is that opportunity meaningful enough for the Ed Book to demonstrate its return on an investment, for example? What I always thought about social media, and it's still true today, is that it will get eyes on whatever you're looking at far beyond who you intended to see it. So, you know, your tweets regarding a phase 3 clinical trial in lung cancer, which were so informative, were reaching me, who was not a lung oncologist who doesn't even see lung cancer and getting me more interested in finding that article and more and more pointing to the Educational Book content that speaks to that piece, you know. And I think coupling an impression of the data, associating that with something that is freely accessed is, I think, a golden opportunity not only for our colleagues, but also for anyone who's interested in a topic. Whether you are diagnosed with that cancer or you are taking care of someone with that cancer, or you heard about that cancer, there are people who would like to see information that is relevant and embedded and delivered by people who know what they're talking about. And I think our voices on social media are important because of it. And I think that's where the contribution is. So, if we had to see what the metric was for any social media efforts, it has to be more of the click rates, not just by ASCO members, but the click rates across societies and across countries. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Yeah, social media is, I mean, obviously evolving quite a bit in the last couple of years. But I do know that in terms the alt metrics for the track access through social media and online, the ones that are shared online by the authors, by the Ed Book team, do seem to get more attention. I think a lot of people don't like to just sit with a print journal anymore or an email table of contents for specific journals. People find these articles that are meaningful to them through their network and oftentimes that is online on social media. Dr. Don Dizon: Yes, 100%. And you know what I think we should encourage people to do is look at the source. And if the Ed Book becomes a source of information, I think that will be a plus to the conversations in our world. We're still dealing with a place where, depending on who sponsored the trial, whether it was an industry-sponsored trial, whether it was NCI sponsored or sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, for example, access to the primary data sets may or may not be available across the world, but the Ed Book is. And if the Ed Book can summarize that data and use terms and words that are accessible no matter what your grade level of education is. If we can explain the graphs and the figures in a way that people can actually easily more understand it. If there's a way that we structure our conversations in the Ed Book so that the plethora of inclusion/exclusion criteria are summarized and simplified, then I think we can achieve a place where good information becomes more accessible, and we can point to a summary of the source data in places where the source is not available. Dr. Nathan Pennell: One of the other things that I continue to be surprised at how popular these podcasts are. And that gives you an opportunity pretty much the opposite. Instead of sort of a nugget that directs you to the source material, you've got a more in-depth discussion of the manuscript. And so, I'm delighted that we have our own podcast. For many years, the Ed Book would sort of do a sort of a “Weird Al takeover” of the ASCO Daily News Podcast for a couple of episodes around the Annual Meeting, and I think those were always really popular enough that we were able to argue that we deserved our own podcast. And I'm really looking forward to having these in-depth discussions with authors. Dr. Don Dizon: It's an amazing evolution of where the Ed Book has gone, right? We took it from print only, societally only, to something that is now accessed worldwide via PubMed. We took it from book to fully online print. And now I think making the content live is a natural next step. So, I applaud you for doing the podcast and giving people an opportunity actually to discuss what their article discusses. And if there's a controversial point, giving them the freedom and the opportunity to sort of give more nuanced views on what may not be something that there's 100% consensus over. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Yes. Well, I hope other people enjoy these as well. Just want to highlight a few of the things that have happened just in the couple years since you stepped down as editor-in-chief. One of them, and I don't know if you noticed, but last year we started adding manuscripts from the ASCO thematic meetings, so ASCO GI and ASCO GU, something we had certainly talked about in the past, but had lacked bandwidth to really do. And they seem to be pretty widely accessed. Dr. Don Dizon: That's fantastic. Yes, I do remember talking about the coverage of the thematic meetings and you're right, this takes a long time to sort of concentrate on the Annual Meeting. It may seem like everything happens in the span of like eight weeks. Dr. Nathan Pennell: It does feel like that sometimes. Dr. Don Dizon: Right? But this is actually something that starts a year before, once the education program is set. We're in the room when they set it. But then it's really chasing down manuscripts and then making sure that they're peer reviewed because the peer review is still really important, and then making sure that any revisions are made before it's finalized and goes to press. That is a many months process. So, when we're trying to introduce, “Oh, we should also do ASCO GU or-,” the question was, how do you want to do that given this very, very involved process going forward? So, I'm glad you were able to figure it out. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Well, it's challenging. I don't think people realize quite the compressed timeline for these. You know, the Education Session and authors and invited faculty are picked in the fall, and then basically you have to start turning in your manuscripts in February, March of the following year. And so, it's a really tight turnaround for this. When we talk about the ASCO thematic meetings, it's an even tighter window. Dr. Don Dizon: Right, exactly. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And so, it's challenging to get that moving, but I was really, really proud that we were able to pull that off. Dr. Don Dizon: Well, congratulations again. And I think that is a necessary step, because so much of what's going on in the various disease management sites is only covered cursorily through the Annual Meeting itself. I mean, there's just so much science breaking at any one time that I think if we want to comprehensively catalog the Year in Review in oncology, it kind of behooves us to do that. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Some other things that are coming up because we now have manuscripts that are going to be coming in year-round, and just to kind of make it easier on the editorial staff, we're going to be forming an editorial board. And in addition to our pool of reviewers who get ASCO points, please feel free to go online to the ASCO volunteer portal and sign up if you are interested in participating. So, moving forward, I'm really excited to see where things are going to go. Dr. Don Dizon: Well, that's great. That's great. And I do remember talking about whether or not we needed to have an editorial board. At least when I was there, having this carried by three people was always better than having it carried by one person. And I think as you expand the potential for submissions, it will be very helpful to have that input for sure. And then it gives another opportunity for more members to get involved in ASCO as well. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Absolutely. People want involvement, and so happy to provide that. Dr. Don Dizon: Yes. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Is there anything we didn't cover that you would like to mention before we wrap up? Dr. Don Dizon: Well, I will say this, that ASCO and through its publications not only has had this real emphasis on multidisciplinary management of cancers, especially where it was relevant, but it also always had a stand to ensure representation was front and center and who wrote for us. And I think every president, every chair that I've worked with naturally embraced that idea of representation. And I think it has been a distinct honor to say that during my tenure as EIC, we have always had a plethora of voices, of authors from different countries, of genders, that have participated in the construction of those books. And it stands as a testament that we are a global community and we will always be one. Dr. Nathan Pennell: Well, thank you for that. And I'm happy to continue that as we move forward. Well, Don, thank you. It's been great speaking with you. You played such a pivotal role in the Ed Book's evolution and I'm so glad you were able to join me for our inaugural episode. Dr. Don Dizon: Well, I'm just tickled that you asked me to be your first guest. Thank you so much, Nate. Dr. Nathan Pennell: And I also want to thank our listeners for joining us today. We hope you'll join us again for more insightful views on topics you'll be hearing at the Education Sessions from ASCO meetings throughout the year, as well as our periodic deep dives on advances that are shaping modern oncology. Have a great day. 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. Follow today's speakers:   Dr. Nathan Pennell  @n8pennell @n8pennell.bsky.social   Dr. Don Dizon @drdondizon.bsky.social  Follow ASCO on social media:   @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter)   ASCO on Bluesky  ASCO on Facebook   ASCO on LinkedIn   Disclosures:  Dr. Nathan Pennell:      Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Cota Healthcare, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Amgen, G1 Therapeutics, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Viosera, Xencor, Mirati Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi/Regeneron     Research Funding (Inst): Genentech, AstraZeneca, Merck, Loxo, Altor BioScience, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Jounce Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Heat Biologics, WindMIL, Sanofi  Dr. Don Dizon: Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Midi, Doximity Honoraria: UpToDate, American Cancer Society Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Kronos Bio, Immunogen Research Funding (Institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb          

Ignacio Vacchiano, responsable de distribución en España de Leverage Shares, hace balance de la sesión en Estados Unidos, mirando a compañías como Goldman Sachs, GM y Amgen.

Wall Street responded positively to Trump's announcements over the weekend of temporary exemptions for electronics and possibly autos. Muted session, longer-term uncertainty remains. S&P 500 up 0.79%, NASDAQ up 0.64%. Dow recovered from some midday softness to end the session closer to the high, up 312 points. All sectors up.  Real Estate was largest winner, rate sensitive sector, benefitted from US yields falling after last week's rise. Mood was cautious, defensive sectors did well, Utilities and Consumer Non-Cyclicals. Apple (+2.21%) largest winner of Big Tech, most to gain from electronics temporary tariff relief. Amgen (+2.78%) up despite antirust suit over US patient access to Erelzi. Pfizer (+0.96%) stopped development of obesity pill over liver injury risk. Resources mixed, oil flat, copper up amid China stimulus hopes and a declining dollar. Other metals like aluminium and zinc down.   ASX to rise. SPI Futures up 18 points (+0.23%).Gold down 0.39%, still near record highs. US dollar (-0.40%) down again, status as safe haven is taken a bruising. Bitcoin up 1.36%.European markets up, all major markets recorded gains >2%. Euro Stoxx up 2.69%, Germany up 2.85%. More modest gains in Asia. Japan up 0.88%, HK up 2.40%.Bond yields gave up some of last week's gains and stabilised, US 10Y dropped 11.4bps, US 2Y dropped 11.7bps.Want to invest with Marcus Today? The Managed Strategy Portfolio is designed for investors seeking exposure to our strategy while we do the hard work for you.If you're looking for personal financial advice, our friends at Clime Investment Management can help. Their team of licensed advisers operates across most states, offering tailored financial planning services.  Why not sign up for a free trial? Gain access to expert insights, research, and analysis to become a better investor.

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma and Biotech world.Pharma stocks had a turbulent day after Trump's tariff pause, with some stocks making a late-day recovery. However, there are concerns about potential FDA budget cuts that could severely impact drug access in the US. Biotech leaders are calling on Senator Cassidy to take action in response to these cuts, which have already caused delays and uncertainty in the regulatory process. Experts are warning that jeopardizing the FDA user fees program could have dire consequences.In other news, nonprofit organizations are playing a key role in driving innovation in healthcare. Tempest is currently seeking funding for a late-stage liver cancer asset, while Amgen's Uplizna has shown promising results in treating myasthenia gravis.Upcoming events include webinars on AI and regulation in drug development, as well as strategies for navigating the biotech downturn. On a less positive note, several biopharma companies have announced layoffs, including Vincerx and Reckitt Benckiser.Overall, the industry is facing challenges but also opportunities for growth and advancement.

This episode covers: Cardiology This Week: A concise summary of recent studies Current indications for pulmonary vein isolation Conduction system pacing EHRA 2025 scientific highlights Host: Susanna Price Guests: Haran Burri, Isabel Deisenhofer, Helmut Puererfellner, Emma Svennberg Want to watch that episode? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1803   Disclaimer ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsors. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC.   Declarations of interests Stephan Achenbach, Nicolle Kraenkel and Susanna Price have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Haran Burri has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: institutional research and fellowship support or speaker honoraria from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Microport. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Isabel Deisenhofer has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: speaker honoraria and travel grants from Abbott Medical, Biosense-Webster, Boston Scientific, BMS, Volta Medical, and research grant (for the institution) from Abbott Medical and Daiichi Sankyo. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Helmut Puererfellner has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: speaker fees, honoraria, consultancy, advisory board fees, investigator, committee member, etc., including travel funding related to these activities for the following companies: Abbott, Biotronik, Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Rafael Damborenea, profesor de Economía en Eude Bussines School, pone el foco en Wall Street mirando a Amgen, Merck, Microsoft, Tesla y las chinas cotizadas en EEUU.

Send us a textDr. Kilian Kelly, Ph.D. is Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of Cynata Therapeutics ( https://cynata.com/ ), a stem cell and regenerative medicine company that is known for its proprietary Cymerus platform, for the scalable and consistent production of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based therapies.Unlike traditional MSC therapies that rely on multiple donors, the Cymerus manufacturing process ensures that cells for therapeutic use can be produced in virtually limitless quantities from a single donor – making the opportunities endless and attractive from a manufacturing standpoint. The company has completed Phase I studies for Graft vs Host disease & Diabetic Foot Ulcers and have a number of Phase II, and even have a Phase III clinical trial, in progress.Dr. Kelly has over 20 years' experience in biopharmaceutical research and development, including almost 15 years focused on the development of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) based therapies. He joined Cynata in March 2014, initially as Vice President, Product Development, then Chief Operating Officer from May 2019, and since July 2023 has been CEO & MD. At Cynata, he has overseen all stages of the development of the Cymerus induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived MSC technology, including the first completed clinical trial of any iPSC-derived product worldwide.Dr. Kelly previously held positions at Biota Pharmaceuticals, Mesoblast Limited, Kendle International, Amgen and AstraZeneca. Dr. Kelly holds a Masters in Pharmacy degree from the Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, a Ph.D. in Pharmaceutical Sciences from Strathclyde University, Glasgow, and he is a Graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD), Melbourne. He is a member of the International Society for Cell and Gene Therapy (ISCT), the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR), the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the AICD.Dr. Kelly also serves on the ISCT Asia-Pacific Industry Committee, the ISSCR Best Practices Working Group for the Development of PSC-Derived Therapies and the Industry Interface Committee of the Center for Commercialization of Regenerative Medicine (CCRM) Australia.#KilianKelly #CynataTherapeutics #InducedPluripotentStemCells #MesenchymalStemCells #Immunomodulation #Immunoregulation #Mesenchymoangioblasts #GraftVersusHostDisease #GVHD #MSC #iPSC #IschaemicHeartDisease #Osteoarthritis #AcuteRespiratoryDistressSyndrome #ARDS #Inflammation #Secretome #Paracrine #RegenerativeMedicine #DiabeticWounds #KidneyTransplantation #ProgressPotentialAndPossibilities #IraPastor #Podcast #Podcaster #ViralPodcast #STEM #Innovation #Technology #Science #ResearchSupport the show

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma e Biotech world. The FDA is facing a potential "catastrophic collapse" due to massive layoffs that are endangering its user fee program, which provides nearly half of its yearly funding. More than half of the senior leadership at the agency has left, leading to a lack of communication, transparency, and human decency. The agency is at risk of losing its funding and ability to support its operations and employee salaries. In other news, Amgen has won an expansion for Uplizna as the first drug for IgG4-related disease, Lilly has made a pact with Sangamo worth a potential $1.4 billion, and Trilink offers custom guide RNAs for CRISPR workflows. The cell and gene therapy sector has seen a 30% investment surge despite market challenges.

LIVE from Transform 2025 in Las Vegas! Amira Barger is an award-winning Executive Vice President of Communications and Head of DEI Advisory at Edelman, providing senior reputation management and polycultural counsel to clients across the globe. Recently named Woman of the Year by Women Health Care Executives, Top 100 Executives by Involve People, Top CMOs of 2024 by the CMO Alliance, Top 50 Global DEI Professionals by OnConferences, Top 100 People Leaders by Mogul, Fearlessly Authentic Leader by Leaderology, and 30 under 40 in Healthcare Innovation by Business Insider – Amira is a scholar, practitioner and thought leader who brings more than 20 years of experience in strategic communications that reach stakeholders, mobilize the community and inspire action. Amira has global experience in pharma/healthcare communications, corporate branding, web and social media, M&A experience, media relations, team management, sustainability/social impact, reputation management, and DEI. Throughout her career, Amira has utilized these competency areas for clients such as: CVS Health, Eli Lilly, Walgreens, Hologic, Genentech, Pfizer, GSK/Haleon, BMS, Zoetis, Alkermes, Regeneron, Amgen, Medtronic, Children's Miracle Network, Kaiser Permanente, First 5 Los Angeles, Covered California, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FEMA, and California Community Colleges. Adam and Amira discuss: - How does “niceness” in workplace culture hold back real DEI progress, and what should leaders do instead? - Challenging Workplace Norms to Advance DEI and Justice - Empowering Women in Leadership - Valuing the Whole Human - "How can leaders move beyond surface-level well-being initiatives to truly create workplaces that honor employees as whole humans, not just workers? Connect with Amira: https://www.linkedin.com/in/amirabarger/ Live from Transform 2025, we're bringing you an exclusive podcast series packed with insights from some of the brightest minds in hiring, talent strategy, and workforce transformation! In this series, we've got incredible guests from Okta, Tubi, Edelman, Greenhouse, Findem, and more, sharing how top organizations are rethinking hiring, culture, and talent acquisition in today's fast-changing world. Greenhouse combines a structured, data-driven hiring approach with AI-embedded workflows that empower recruiters to focus on strategic, high-impact work. From sourcing top talent to personalizing the candidate experience, Greenhouse streamlines and optimizes the entire hiring process. This ensures that every hire is the right hire—eliminating bias, creating fairness, and helping teams make smarter, faster decisions. Over 7,500 companies, including HubSpot, Duolingo, and J.D. Power, trust Greenhouse to build better teams and turn talent into a strategic advantage. Want to learn how today's top companies are winning the talent game? Tune in now and visit Greenhouse.com to transform the way you hire. Thanks for listening. Please follow us on Instagram @NHPTalent and X @AdamJPosner. Visit www.thePOZcast.com for all episodes

Dr. Vamsi Velcheti and Dr. Charu Aggarwal discuss the evolution of ctDNA as a critical tool in precision oncology and its implications for lung cancer management, including its potential role in the early-stage setting. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Hello. I am Dr. Vamsi Velcheti, your guest host for the ASCO Daily News Podcast today. I am a professor of medicine and director of thoracic medical oncology at the Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone Health.  The management of small cell lung cancer has rapidly evolved over the past few decades, and today, molecular testing and biomarker testing for lung cancer are absolutely critical in terms of designing treatment options for our patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Today, I'm delighted to be joined by Dr. Charu Aggarwal for a discussion on ctDNA (circulating tumor DNA) and the role of ctDNA in lung cancer management. Dr. Aggarwal is the Leslye Heisler Professor of Lung Cancer Excellence and section chief of thoracic and head and neck oncology at University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center.  You'll find our full disclosures in the transcript of that episode.  Dr. Agrawal, it's great to have you on the podcast today. Thank you for being here. Dr. Charu Aggarwal: Thank you for having me. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Let's start off with setting the stage for ctDNA technology. These technologies have rapidly evolved from experimental conceptual stage to essential clinical tools for day-to-day clinical practice. Could you briefly discuss how recent advancements in ctDNA technologies are shaping our approach to precision medicine, especially in lung cancer? Dr. Charu Aggarwal: Absolutely. And you know, I think we need to just level set a little bit. What exactly is circulating tumor DNA? This is a way to assess exactly that. Every tumor sheds little pieces of tumor-derived DNA into the bloodstream, and this occurs in a variety of solid tumors. But now we have the technology to be able to derive this DNA that's actually being shed from the tumor into the bloodstream, these minute fragments of DNA, take them out, amplify them and sequence them with a variety of different mechanisms. They can be DNA sequencing alone, they can be DNA and RNA sequencing, they can be whole transcriptome sequencing. The technology, as you rightly pointed out, Dr. Velcheti, has significantly improved from just being able to look at circulating tumor DNA to now being able to amplify it, sequence it, and use it to offer personalized therapy. I think lung cancer is definitely the poster child for such an approach as we have a lot of data that has shown clinical utility and validity of being able to use circulating tumor DNA next-generation gene sequencing to guide therapy. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: There have been so many technological leaps. It's really impressive how far we've come to advance these sequencing platforms. Recent advances with AI and machine learning are also playing important roles in interpreting ctDNA data. How are these computational advances really enhancing clinical decision-making in day-to-day clinical practice? Dr. Charu Aggarwal: I think while we have firmly established the role of ctDNA in the management of patients with metastatic lung cancer, some of the approaches that you talked about are still experimental. So let me backtrack a little bit and set the stage for how we use ctDNA in clinical practice right now. I think most patients, when they come in with a new diagnosis of stage IV lung cancer, we want to test for biomarkers. And this should actually be the established standard. Now included in the NCCN guidelines and actually also international guidelines, is to consider using blood-based testing or plasma-based testing to look for biomarkers, not just tissue-based testing which had been our historical standard, but to use these plasma guided approaches to identify the seven to nine biomarkers that may be truly implicated in either first- or second-line therapy that are called as your immediately actionable mutations.  What you're talking about is AI computational methods. I think there's a lot of excitement about how we can use genomic signatures that are derived from either tissue or ctDNA-based biomarker testing, combine it with radiomic features, combine it with histologic features, look at H & E patterns, use AI algorithmic learning to be able to actually predict recurrence scores, or can we actually come up with predictive signatures that may be extremely helpful?  So, I think some of the techniques and technologies that you're talking about are incoming. They are provocative. I think they're very exciting, but very early. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: I think it's really amazing how many advances we have with these platforms. You know, the challenge really is the significant gap in terms of uptake of molecular testing. Even today, in 2025, there are significant gaps in terms of all metastatic lung cancer patients being tested for all biomarkers.  So, why do you think there's such a challenge in testing patients with lung cancer? In most academic practices, we try to achieve 100% testing for all our patients, but we know from recent studies that that's not the case across the country. What do you think the gaps are? Dr. Charu Aggarwal: Biomarker testing is so essential, like you pointed out, for us to be able to guide the right therapy for our patients. And we see this in our practice every day as you and I see patients with lung cancer, that a large proportion of our patients either don't get tested or they start therapy before their test results come back. So, I think this is a real problem.  However, to add some optimism to this problem, I do think that we are making a move in the right direction. So, four or five years ago, there was a lot of data being presented at national meetings, including ones from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, where we saw that, nationally, the rates of biomarker testing were probably in the rate of 40 to 50%. However, now with the availability of both tissue and plasma, I do think that the rates of biomarker testing are increasing. And if you were to survey a sample or even perform retrospective data research, I believe that the number is closer to 70% of all patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.  And you know, you asked why is it not 100%? I think there are many reasons. I think the number one reason is tissue availability. Many times, the biopsies are small, or the tumor is very necrotic. So, either the tissue quantity itself is small, or the tissue quantity is insufficient to perform gene sequencing. And that's exactly where plasma comes in. When you don't have tissue availability, we have shown, as have others, that you can use plasma effectively to increase the proportion of patients who are not only tested but also receive the right therapy. I think there are also other barriers, including inertia. You know, I think this is both patient and physician inertia, where patients want to get started quickly, they don't want to wait. Physicians are very busy and sometimes want to be able to deliver treatment as soon as possible. We have seen there are some institutional barriers. Not every institution has in-house gene sequencing testing. So how do you really operationalize, send out these tests in a fast, efficient manner so that you get results back? Is it a pathologist who sends out the test? Is it the medical oncologist? Is it the pulmonologist or the interventionalist? I think there is this need to develop reflex testing mechanisms which some institutions do really well and some don't. And then finally, there are financial implications as well. How do we do this in a most cost-efficient fashion?  So there are many barriers, but I'm happy to say that we are making a move in the right direction as we are understanding that it's important to do it, it's easy to do it maybe with a value add of plasma, and finally, as you said, you know, as these technologies become more available, they're actually getting more cost-effective. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Dr. Aggarwal, you've been at the cutting edge of these advanced platforms and testing. So, what do you do in UPenn? How do you handle all these barriers and what is your workflow for patients in University of Pennsylvania? Dr. Charu Aggarwal: One of the things that I mentioned to you was there may be institutional barriers when it comes to gene sequencing. So, we actually, several years ago now, instituted a very robust reflex testing paradigm where almost all of our patients, regardless of stage, with a non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer diagnosis, would automatically be reflexively sent to our molecular pathology lab where they would get gene sequencing both for the DNA as well as with an RNA fusion-based platform. And the reason we did this was because we wanted to expedite and reduce the turnaround time. We also wanted to ensure that we were not just doing DNA testing, which I think is really important for our listeners here. There are many fusions as well as certain skipping mutations like MET exon 14 that may be missed on DNA testing alone. So, it's really incredibly important to run both DNA and RNA samples.  So, we do this routinely, and based on our research and others, what we also do routinely is that we send concurrent tissue and liquid biopsies or plasma MGS testing upon initial diagnosis. For example, if a patient comes in with a diagnosis of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer, their tissue might already be at my molecular pathology lab based on the reflex mechanism that I just described to you. But upon their initial meeting with me, we will send off plasma. And I will tell you this, that Penn is not just one institution, right? We have a large network of sites. And as part of my research, one of the things that we wanted to do was implement wide scale means to improve biomarker testing. And we have done this with the use of technology like you mentioned, Dr. Velcheti: How can we actually use AI? How can we leverage our electronic medical record to identify these patients? So, we have a nudge-based mechanism which actually facilitates the pending of orders for biomarker testing for patients with new diagnosis of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. And we are looking at our rates of biomarker testing but also rates of completion of biomarker testing before first-line therapy started. So many of our participating sites are clusters for our randomized control trial to increase molecular testing. And I'm really excited about the fact that we're able to implement it not just at our main satellite, downtown Penn Hospital, but also across our community. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: I think that's great. Thank you so much for those insights, Dr. Aggarwal. I think it's so important because having the best technology is just not enough. I think implementation science is actually a real thing. And I think we need to all learn from each other, advance these things.  So, I want to ask you about the new emerging paradigm in terms of using ctDNA. Of course, in the metastatic setting, we've been using ctDNA for molecular profiling for a while now. But the recent data around monitoring early-stage disease, especially post-operative monitoring, is an exciting area. There are a lot of opportunities there. Could you please talk us through the emerging data in lung cancer and how do we incorporate ctDNA-based monitoring MRD or should we even do that right now? Is the data ripe enough for us to kind of deploy this in a clinical setting? Dr. Charu Aggarwal: I think using ctDNA in the early-stage setting is our next frontier in lung cancer. I think naturally we have been able to successfully deploy this in the stage 4 setting. It made a meaningful difference in the lives of our patients, and we are a little bit behind the A ball in terms of how MRD is used in lung cancer. Because, you know, colorectal cancer has already done large-randomized trials based on ctDNA and MRD. It's routinely used in hematological malignancy. So, it makes sense that we should start to use it.  However, when I say this, I say this with excitement, but also a little bit of gentle caution saying that we actually don't quite have the prospective randomized data just yet on how to deploy. Yes, intuitively we would say that if you detect ctDNA and MRD, that patient is at higher risk. So, we identify that, but we actually don't know what to do with the second part of that information once you identify a patient with high risk. Are there other techniques that we can then come in with or other drugs that we can come in with to modify that risk? And that's the thing that I think we don't have right now. The other thing that we don't have right now is the timing of the assay, when to use it. Is it to be tested in the pre-op setting? Is the post-op test the best timing, or is it monitoring and dynamics of ctDNA that are most important? And the third thing I will say in terms of precautionary cause is that we don't know which test just yet. There are actually a few commercially available tests out in the market right now. We know about them and I'm sure our community colleagues know about them. Some of them even have Medicare approval. However, many of these tests are currently tissue informed. We don't have tissue uninformed tests. And what does that mean? Tissue uninformed means that you actually take a piece of tumor tissue, you sequence that tumor and based on the gene profile of that tumor, you actually design a panel that can then be used to track the mutations in the blood-based pack. This requires, as the name implies, a tumor. So can this be used in the pre-op setting is a large question. Because coming back to the idea of tissue availability, you and I both know that when we get FNAS and we use it for PDL-1 testing and we use it for gene sequencing, there often isn't enough tissue left for us to then either do whole genome sequencing or even whole transcriptome sequencing, which may be required to build some of these assays.  I think the future lies in this idea of tumor uninformed assays because if we could go to a blood only or a plasma only approach using novel signatures like proteomics or methylation, I think that's where the future is. But we're still a little bit early in the discovery stages of those, as well as to come are the validation stages so that we can be confident that these blood-only assays may actually give us an answer.  So, with those three cautionary notes, I would say that optimism is still very high. I think ctDNA MRD is the right place to think about. We need to do this for our patients to better identify high-risk patients and to think about means to escalate treatment for them. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, I completely agree, and I think with all the changes and evolution of treatments in the management of early-stage lung cancer now with neoadjuvant and adjuvant, there's really a need for an escalation and de-escalation of therapies post-operatively. And I think it's a huge opportunity. I think we all could learn from our colorectal colleagues. I think they've done a really good job at actually doing prospective trials in this setting. I think we're kind of a little behind here.  Dr. Charu Aggarwal: I think in the metastatic setting there are ongoing trials to look at this exact question. How do you choose an appropriate first-line therapy, a monitor ctDNA at the six-week trial? It's being evaluated in a trial called the “Shedders” trial, where if patients are still ctDNA positive at six weeks, then you can escalate treatment because they haven't “cleared” their ctDNA. There has been a lot of research that has shown that lack of ctDNA clearance in the metastatic setting may be a poor prognostic factor. We and others have shown that if you do clear your ctDNA or if you have a reduction in ctDNA load overall, that that is directly related to both an improved progression-free survival and overall survival. This has been shown with both tissue informed and uninformed assays. So I think it's very clear that yes, you can track it. I think the question is: Can you apply that data to the early-stage setting? And that's an open research question. A lot of groups are looking at that and I think it's completely reasonable, especially to determine duration of therapy, to determine optimal timing, optimal timing of scans even. And I think these are just such interesting questions that will be answered in the future. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: And also like a kind of early detection of resistance patterns that might inform early initiation of combination strategies. And I think it's a lot of opportunities I think yet to be explored. A lot of exciting things to come and I'm sure we'll kind of see more and more data in the next few years.  Dr. Aggarwal, thank you so much for sharing your fantastic insights today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast. It's been a pleasure to have you on the podcast today. Hope to see you at ASCO. Dr. Charu Aggarwal: Thank you so much. This was great and I remain so excited by all of the possibilities to improve outcomes for our patients. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Thank you to all the listeners for your time today. If you value the insights that you hear from the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review and subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Thank you so much. 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. Follow today's speakers:  Dr. Vamsidhar Velcheti  @VamsiVelcheti  @vamsivelcheti.bsky.social Dr. Charu Aggarwal @CharuAggarwalMD   Follow ASCO on social media:  @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter)  ASCO on Bluesky ASCO on Facebook  ASCO on LinkedIn    Disclosures: Dr. Vamsidhar Velcheti:  Honoraria: Glavanize Therapeutics Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, GSK, Amgen, Taiho Oncology, Novocure, Takeda, Janssen Oncology, Picture Health, Regeneron Research Funding (Inst.): Genentech, Trovagene, Eisai, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Alkermes, NantOmics, Genoptix, Altor BioScience, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Atreca, Heat Biologics, Leap Therapeutics, RSIP Vision, GlaxoSmithKline  Dr. Charu Aggarwal: Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo/AstraZeneca, Regeneron/Sanofi, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda, Arcus Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Novocure, Abbvie Speakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca (an immediate family member) Research Funding (Inst): Merck Sharp & Dohme, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Daiichi Sankyo/AstraZeneca, Lilly@Loxo, Candel Therapeutics  

The US stock was mixed overnight. The Dow closed mostly flat, down -0.03% to 41,989 points. Nike was the top performer, up 2.02%. While pharma companies were all sold off, with the three worst performing stocks including Johnson & Johnson down -7.59%, Merck down -2.94%, and Amgen down -1.49%. Johnson & Johnson has just had a federal judge reject a $10b class action settlement over cancer claims relating to its baby powder.

This episode of Don't Miss a Beat, recorded at the American College of Cardiology (ACC) 2025 Annual Scientific Sessions, explores the evolving landscape of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) treatment, focusing on the implementation of combination therapies. Hosts Steve Greene, MD, and Muthiah Vaduganathan, MD, MPH, discuss the transition from a previously limited treatment landscape to a new era with multiple proven therapeutic options. To open the episode, Greene argues in favor of rapid-sequence implementation of HFpEF therapies, drawing parallels to the established 4-pillar guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). He highlights 3 key classes of medications—SGLT2 inhibitors, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and incretin-based therapies—as the foundation of HFpEF treatment. He emphasizes the importance of early and aggressive therapy initiation to maximize clinical benefits and reduce the risk of delayed or missed treatment opportunities among this population. Vaduganathan acknowledges the strength of the data supporting combination therapy but suggests a more risk-based approach, considering the broad clinical variability among HFpEF patients. He advocates for prioritizing rapid implementation in high-risk patients, such as those recently hospitalized, while allowing a more measured approach for lower-risk individuals. The discussion also touches on the role of phenotyping in tailoring treatment decisions, with GLP-1 receptor agonists being particularly relevant for patients with obesity and ARNi potentially benefiting those with mildly reduced ejection fraction. Looking ahead, the hosts preview upcoming trials, including CONFIDENCE and CONFIRMATION, which will evaluate combination therapy strategies in chronic kidney disease and HFpEF populations. They also discuss the potential of fixed-dose combination therapies to simplify implementation and improve adherence. The episode closes with both experts agreeing on the need for a structured, evidence-based approach to HFpEF treatment while emphasizing the importance of translating trial data into real-world practice. Relevant disclosures for Vaduganathan include Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and others. Relevant disclosures for Greene include Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Cytokinetics, and others. Chapters 00:00-Intro 02:30-Argument for Rapid Sequencing 05:32-Argument Against Rapid Sequencing 10:00-Argument for Risk-Based Sequencing 14:25-Pillars of GDMT in HFpEF

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma e Biotech world.Sanofi and Alnylam have received FDA approval for the first RNAi treatment for hemophilia, with the drug, Qfitlia, indicated for both hemophilia A and B. This approval is significant as it can be given regardless of the presence of neutralizing antibodies against clotting factors VIII or IX. However, the sudden departure of FDA director Peter Marks has caused uncertainty in the biopharma industry. In other news, Vertex has cut a diabetes asset but analysts remain optimistic about their phase III option. Lilly's RNA silencer has shown promising results in lowering a key cardiovascular biomarker. Trilink is offering custom guide RNAs for CRISPR workflow to accelerate therapy discoveries. Despite market challenges, the cell and gene therapy sector has seen a 30% investment surge. Companies like Amgen, Aldeyra, and Argenx are among those with upcoming FDA actions. Arbutus has announced layoffs, while big pharmas are pushing boundaries in radiopharmaceuticals. Michelle Werner of AltoRNA is focused on making better drugs. Safety questions are looming in Duchenne as Dyne and Wave plan FDA filings. There are job opportunities available in data management and program leadership within the biopharma industry.Moving on to other news, several big pharmaceutical companies such as Novartis, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Eli Lilly are competing in the radiopharmaceuticals market, which is projected to be worth over $13 billion by 2033. The FDA is expected to announce decisions on therapies for dry eye disease soon. Michelle Werner, CEO of AllTrna, is focused on developing trna-based treatments for various diseases.Safety concerns are emerging in the Duchenne muscular dystrophy space as companies like Dyne and Wave plan FDA filings. The EU rejected Lilly's Alzheimer's drug Kisunla, Biontech's bispecific showed promise in treating SCLC patients, and Wave's duchenne exon-skipper reversed muscle damage in a mid-stage trial. Job opportunities within the biopharma industry were also highlighted for those interested.Thank you for tuning in to Pharma and Biotech daily - keeping you updated on all the latest news in the world of pharmaceuticals and biotechnology.

The US stock was mixed overnight.  The Dow closed mostly flat, down -0.03% to 41,989 points.  Nike was the top performer, up 2.02%. While pharma companies were all sold off, with the three worst performing stocks including Johnson & Johnson down -7.59%, Merck down -2.94%, and Amgen down -1.49%. Johnson & Johnson has just had a federal judge reject a $10b class action settlement over cancer claims relating to its baby powder.

In this on-site episode of Don't Miss a Beat from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) 2025 Annual Scientific Sessions, hosts Muthiah Vaduganathan, MD, MPH, and Steve Greene, MD, break down a pair of trials from the meeting: STRIDE and SOUL. STRIDE Trial The STRIDE trial, funded by Novo Nordisk, was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study initiated in 2020 to evaluate the effects of semaglutide 1.0 mg (Ozempic) on walking distance in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). Conducted across 112 sites in 20 countries, the trial enrolled 792 patients, who were randomized 1:1 to receive semaglutide or placebo for 52 weeks. Participants assigned to semaglutide received an escalating dose regimen (0.25 mg to 1.0 mg). The primary endpoint, the ratio from baseline in maximum walking distance at 52 weeks, favored semaglutide (1.21 [interquartile range, 0.95–1.55] vs 1.08 [0.86–1.36]), with an estimated treatment ratio (ETR) of 1.13 (95% CI, 1.06–1.21; P = .0004). Secondary outcomes further supported semaglutide's benefit. At week 57, the improvement in walking distance was greater with semaglutide (ETR, 1.08; P = .038). Quality-of-life scores (VascuQoL-6) at week 52 were significantly higher in the semaglutide group (median difference, 1.00; P = .011). Pain-free walking distance also improved more with semaglutide than with placebo (ETR, 1.11; P = .0046). SOUL Trial The SOUL trial was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven study designed to assess the cardiovascular effects of oral semaglutide (Rybelsus) in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and/or chronic kidney disease (CKD). The trial enrolled 9650 patients aged ≥50 years and was conducted across 450 centers in 44 countries. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive semaglutide or placebo, with a mean follow-up of 47.5 months. Primary outcome events occurred in 12.0% of participants receiving semaglutide (3.1 events per 100 person-years) compared with 13.8% in the placebo group (3.7 events per 100 person-years), resulting in a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77–0.96; P = .006). The primary driver of benefit was a 26% reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction, with additional reductions in nonfatal stroke (12%) and cardiovascular death (7%). No significant improvements in kidney function were observed. Serious adverse events occurred slightly less frequently in the semaglutide group compared with placebo (47.9% vs 50.3%; P = .02). However, gastrointestinal adverse events, including nausea, diarrhea, constipation, and flatulence, were more common in the semaglutide group (5.0% vs 4.4%). Benefits were consistent across subgroups, including participants receiving sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Relevant disclosures for Vaduganathan include Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Cytokinetics, Lexicon, and others. Relevant disclosures for Greene include Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Cytokinetics, and others. Chapters 00:00 - Intro 00:50 - STRIDE Background 02:50 - STRIDE Results 08:19 - SOUL Background 10:40 - SOUL Results

Disclosure: Rory Pace discloses she is employed by Patient Care America, serves as a consult with Ardelyx and Akebia, is a speaker with Vitaflow, and a stockholder with Amgen.Our latest podcast dives into the critical connection between nutrition support and nephrocardiology, exploring how beside clinicans can enhance outcomes for patients with cardiorenal conditions. Listen in as we chat with Rory Pace, MPH, RD, CSR, FAND, FNKF, as she breaks down evidence-based nutrition interventions, discuss real-world clinical applications, and share insights that can transform patient care. This episode was hosted by Christina Rollins, MBA, MS, RDN, LDN, CNSC, FAND and was recorded on 3/10/25.

*This month in partnership with ⁠Choroideremia Research Foundation⁠*Our Carrier Connections program features a different X-linked condition each month to increase awareness of X-linked conditions and how they impact the lives of women and girls.This month, we are featuring choroideremia (CHM). CHM is an X-linked disorder caused by mutations in the gene CHM, which produces a protein that plays a critical role in the cell's ability to transport proteins and organelles within and outside of the cell. When this gene is dysfunctional, the cell can no longer support this protein escort ability, resulting in premature cell death, primarily in the eyes. Typically, this condition is characterized by progressive vision loss. These symptoms may begin at any age, but tend to onset between childhood and adulthood. Females carriers of CHM have been proven to experience a spectrum of symptoms, ranging from mild to severe retinal degeneration. Our guest today is Michelle. She is a mom of two incredible boys with CHM, doing whatever she can to find a treatment. Carrier Connections is sponsored by Kyowa Kirin and Amgen. For more information about our organization, check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠rememberthegirls.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

This episode covers: Cardiology This Week: A concise summary of recent studies Relevance and management of ventricular ectopic beats  Lp(a) in cardiovascular risk management Mythbusters: A vegetarian diet lowers cardiovascular risk Host: Susanna Price Guests: Carlos Aguiar, Thomas Deneke, Kausik Ray Want to watch that episode? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1802 Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Thomas Deneke, Nicolle Kraenkel and Susanna Price have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Kausik Ray declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: research grants from Amarin, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi, consultant for Abbott, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biologix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cargene Therapeutics, CRISPR, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly and Company, Esperion, Kowa Pharmaceuticals, NewAmsterdam Pharma, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Regeneron, Resverlogix, Sanofi, Scribe Therapeutics, Silence Therapeutics, Vaxxinity, and Viatris, honoraria for lectures from Novartis, BI, AZ, Novo Nordisk, Viatris, Amarin, Biologix Pharma, Sanofi, Amgen, Esperion, Daiichi Sankyo, Macleod and stock options New Amsterdam Pharma, Pemi 31, SCRIBE Therapeutics. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Host: Susanna Price  Guest: Thomas Deneke  Want to watch that extended interview? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1802?resource=interview Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Thomas Deneke, Nicolle Kraenkel and Susanna Price have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma and Biotech world.President Trump has nominated Susan Monarez as the new head of the CDC, facing challenges such as a measles outbreak that has already resulted in two deaths. Merck commits nearly $2 billion for an oral lipid-lowering drug, joining other companies targeting lipoprotein(a). GSK is studying the impact of their shingles vaccine, Shingrix, on reducing dementia risk. Cassava has ended their Alzheimer's program for Simufilam after years of controversy. The average life sciences salaries have increased by 9% in 2024, but bonuses and equity values have dropped. Trump has doubled down on the threat of tariffs on pharmaceuticals. In other news, Opthea and Unity have failed to unseat Regeneron's Eylea in vision disorders, while Alector will be laying off 13% of its workforce. AstraZeneca is making a potential $10 billion commitment to China despite political pressure. Opportunities in the life sciences industry are available at companies like Oncothera, Dyne Therapeutics, Amgen, and Novo Nordisk.

Joining Shahin and Vinnie is marketing legend, Mark Ritson, Founder of the Mini MBA. From almost buying Kylie Minogue's house, to consulting, and building a global brand, Mark shares with us the journey of his Mini MBA.

Johnson & Johnson’s Stelara, Regeneron’s Eylea and Amgen’s Prolia are just some of the drugs facing off against new biosimilars or generics in 2025, as featured in the latest edition of Fierce Pharma’s annual special report documenting the 10 biggest losses of U.S. exclusivity expected throughout the year. In this week’s episode of The Top Line, we dig into the report, which details the stories behind 10 key medicines that are set to face off against new generic or biosimilar competitors this year as their patents expire. Fierce’s Eric Sagonowsky and Angus Liu recap the report, sharing their perspectives on several of the drugs and discussing the industry effects of 2025’s sizable patent cliff. To learn more about the topics in this episode: The top 10 drugs losing US exclusivity in 2025 After patent settlement, Amgen scores FDA nod for its biosimilar version of J&J's Stelara Amgen grabs FDA thumbs-up for Soliris biosim, eyes 2025 launch Novartis wins 11th-hour bid to block generic version of blockbuster heart med Entresto Amgen settles Prolia patent suit with Celltrion, teeing up potential biosimilar launch in June See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In today's episode, Sandy chats with Yan Chow, an expert in AI, automation, and healthcare tech, and the global healthcare leader for Automation Anywhere. Healthcare is a target-rich environment that offers opportunities everywhere to make healthcare more sustainable and more valuable for the future. They chat about how AI is being applied to healthcare and how it can benefit both healthcare workers and patients alike. He also talks about how AI doesn't have to be so scary, but it is important to take AI adoption one step at a time. If you want to hear more about Automation Anywhere, check out their recordings at the ViVe Event website.In this episode, they talk about:An overview of Automation Anywhere and what they are doingThe main application of AI todayThere is a labor shortage in healthcare even though the demand is increasingWhat is agentic automation and how will it help people with healthcare?Automations are doing the job more effectively than we would be able to doCross borders and the difference in regulations and rulesIs AI making patient biases better or worse?Limiting data to avoid hallucinations and mistakesIt takes time to learn when and where to utilize AI A Little About Yan:Yan Chow, MD, MBA, is a leader in the AI, automation, and healthcare technology sectors. He joined Automation Anywhere in 2019 to launch its healthcare vertical, leveraging AI to automate routine tasks and enabling healthcare professionals to focus on patient care. Previously, Dr. Chow was Medical Director for Digital Medicine at Amgen, where he integrated digital technologies like wearable sensors and advanced analytics into clinical trials.Before Amgen, Dr. Chow served as Chief Innovation Officer at Longview Technology Solutions, providing healthcare consulting services to major U.S. government clients. He also led the Innovation & Advanced Technology Group at Kaiser Permanente, overseeing emerging clinical information technologies and managing a significant innovation grant program.In addition to his corporate roles, Dr. Chow has founded and advised several startups, including a venture-funded NLP analytics company with a successful exit. He holds three U.S. patents and was recognized as one of the top three healthcare innovators in the nation by Healthcare IT News in 2014. Dr. Chow earned his A.B. from Harvard, M.D. from UC San Diego and MBA from UC Berkeley.

In this episode of Molecule to Market, you'll go inside the outsourcing space of the global drug development sector with Matthew Bio, CSO, Cambrex & President, Snapdragon Chemistry Your host, Raman Sehgal, discusses the pharmaceutical and biotechnology supply chain with Matt, covering: The frustrating experience of not having ownership or being hands-on at big pharma middle management Recounting the early days of Snapdragon Chemistry and being in the right place at the right time to harness continuous process manufacturing Getting out of the way of your talented people to let them explore and shine The story behind how a proposed acquisition by Asymchem was blocked by the Treasury's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)... Deciding to choose and stay at Cambrex post-acquisition, and having the freedom to use Snapdragon as a catalyst for growth Matt began his career in chemistry more than 30 years ago developing continuous processes for the manufacture and purification of acrylates at the former Rohm & Haas company. Matthew then moved to Columbia University and earned a PhD in Chemistry. Upon graduating, Matthew returned to industry as a process development chemist at Merck Research Laboratories.  In 2006, Matthew moved to Amgen where he worked on the development of both batch and continuous manufacturing solutions for synthetic drug substances. He also worked on the development of new manufacturing technologies for synthetic – biologic hybrid molecules. In 2015, Matthew was a founding member Snapdragon Chemistry, Inc., a contract development firm specialized in continuous manufacturing technology. He is author or inventor on more than 30 peer-reviewed publications and patents, and numerous regulatory filings. Matthew is driven by a passion for the development of new chemical technologies. Please subscribe, tell your industry colleagues and join us in celebrating and promoting the value and importance of the global life science outsourcing space. We'd also appreciate a positive rating! Molecule to Market is also sponsored and funded by ramarketing, an international marketing, design, digital and content agency helping companies differentiate, get noticed and grow in life sciences.  

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma and Biotech world.The Trump administration has withdrawn CDC nominee Dave Weldon at the last minute, while NIH and FDA picks advance. Acelyrin has implemented a poison pill strategy to prevent Tang Capital from acquiring the company. Johnson & Johnson and Legend Biotech are investing $150 million to increase Carvykti production. Mallinckrodt and Endo have announced a $6.7 billion merger. Wacker Biotech offers services for advanced therapies. Other news includes updates on Amgen's Uplizna, J&J's talc lawsuit, and Roche's obesity play.

This episode covers: Cardiology This Week: A concise summary of recent studies AI and the future of the Electrocardiogram The heart in rheumatic disorders and autoimmune diseases Statistics Made Easy: Bayesian analysis Host: Susanna Price Guests: Carlos Aguiar, Paul Friedman, Maya Buch  Want to watch that episode? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1801 Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Antonio Greco, Nicolle Kraenkel and Susanna Price have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Maya Buch has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: grant/research support paid to University of Manchester from Gilead and Galapagos; consultant and/or speaker with funds paid to University of Manchester for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, CESAS Medical, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Medistream and Pfizer Inc; member of the Speakers' Bureau for AbbVie with funds paid to University of Manchester. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Paul Friedman has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: co-inventor of AI ECG algorithms. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Host: Susanna Price Guest: Maya Buch Want to watch that extended interview? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1801?resource=interview Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Nicolle Kraenkel and Susanna Price have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Maya Buch has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: grant/research support paid to University of Manchester from Gilead and Galapagos; consultant and/or speaker with funds paid to University of Manchester for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, CESAS Medical, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Medistream and Pfizer Inc; member of the Speakers' Bureau for AbbVie with funds paid to University of Manchester. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

*This month in partnership with Choroideremia Research Foundation**Our Carrier Connections program features a different X-linked condition each month with the goal to increase awareness of X-linked conditions and how they impact the lives of women and girls.This month, we are featuring choroideremia (CHM). CHM is an X-linked disorder caused by mutations in the gene, CHM, which produces a protein that plays a critical role in the cell's ability to transport proteins and organelles within and outside of the cell. When this gene is dysfunctional, the cell can no longer support this protein escort ability, resulting in premature cell death primarily in the eyes. Typically, this condition is characterized by progressive vision loss. These symptoms may begin at any age, but tend to onset between childhood and adulthood. Females carriers of CHM have been proven to experience a spectrum of symptoms, ranging from mild to severe retinal degeneration. Today, we are featuring Dr. Sena Gocuk. Dr. Gocuk is an optometrist and postdoctoral research fellow specialising in inherited retinal diseases (IRD), with a particular focus on female carriers of X-linked IRDs. Her research explores the unique challenges female carriers face, from variability in disease expression to their underrepresentation in clinical trials. Dr. Gocuk has led innovative studies investigating retinal changes in female carriers, providing insights into emerging treatments such as gene therapy. She is an advocate for the inclusion of female carriers in research and treatment interventions, regularly sharing her findings to promote better care and access for this often-overlooked population.RESOURCES:Choroideremia Research FoundationRetinal Characteristics of Female Choroideremia Carriers: Multimodal Imaging, Microperimetry, and GeneticsLongitudinal assessment of female carriers of choroideremia using multimodal retinal imagingFemale carriers of X-linked inherited retinal diseases - Genetics, diagnosis, and potential therapiesCarrier Connections is sponsored by Kyowa Kirin and Amgen. For more information about our organization, check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠rememberthegirls.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Our guest this week is Tim Kane of Ridgewood, NJ a former Senior Director of Broadcasting for the NBA, board member at the Epic School Foundation and father of three children including an autistic son. Tim and his wife, Laurie, have been married for 28 years and are the proud parents of three children: Katie (27), Caroline (21) and Jack (24) who is Autistic. Tim reflects on his storied career that began at ESPN in the early days and with the NBA for more than 30 years as well as a long list of NBA A-listers who have showed an extraordinary level of compassion for the Kane family and especially their son.  Tim also talks about his faith and shares with gratitude some of the organizations that have had an influential role in their lives, including:       EPIC School Foundation      Autism NJ, and      Kennedy KriegerAll on this episode of he SFN Dad to Dad Podcast.Show Links - Phone – (201) 673-2750Email – tkane41@verizon.netLinkedIn –  https://www.linkedin.com/in/tim-kane-09aa304/Kennedy Krieger Institute https://www.kennedykrieger.orgEpic School https://www.epicschool.orgAutism New Jersey https://www.epicschool.orgRegister for the 6th Annual SFN Dads Virthual Conference on May 10, 2025: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/TLkN_ViJTTqnaK-M8pHPNA After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.Special Fathers Network -SFN is a dad to dad mentoring program for fathers raising children with special needs. Many of the 800+ SFN Mentor Fathers, who are raising kids with special needs, have said: "I wish there was something like this when we first received our child's diagnosis. I felt so isolated.  There was no one within my family, at work, at church or within my friend group who understood or could relate to what I was going through."SFN Mentor Fathers share their experiences with younger dads closer to the beginning of their journey raising a child with the same or similar special needs. The SFN Mentor Fathers do NOT offer legal or medical advice, that is what lawyers and doctors do. They simply share their experiences and how they have made the most of challenging situations.Check out the 21CD YouTube Channel with dozens of videos on topics relevant to dads raising children with special needs - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzDFCvQimWNEb158ll6Q4cA/videosPlease support the SFN. Click here to donate: https://21stcenturydads.org/donate/Special Fathers Network: https://21stcenturydads.org/  Special thanks to Amgen for there ongoing an generous support.  https://www.amgen.com/  

Alissa Coram and Ken Shreve analyze Thursday's market action and discuss key stocks to watch on Stock Market Today.

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma and Biotech world. AbbVie has recently entered the obesity market through a deal with Gubra for Amylin, worth up to $2.2 billion. This move positions AbbVie among industry leaders like Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. The focus on redefining obesity as a chronic disease is gaining momentum, with recent FDA documents and The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology commission highlighting the importance of maintenance treatment. In immuno-oncology, experts are searching for the next breakthrough beyond Keytruda and Yervoy. Novel targets, combinations, and pre-emptive immunization are being explored as potential areas of growth. The upcoming World Orphan Drug Congress in 2025 will gather industry leaders to discuss the future of orphan drug development and rare disease care. Positive developments have been reported for Biogen and Eisai's Leqvio in Europe, AstraZeneca and Amgen's Phase III win for Tezspire, and advancements in non-opioid painkillers by Lexicon. The text also discusses the maturation of immuno-oncology, the potential of mRNA technology in rare diseases, recent FDA approvals for rare disease treatments, the evolving mindset towards treating obesity as a chronic disease, and updates on FDA-related news. Lastly, job opportunities in the biotech industry are available at AbbVie, Moderna, Arvinas Inc., and Sonothera. Share your input on topics to cover in the biopharma industry.

Dr. Neeraj Agarwal and Dr. Peter Hoskin discuss key abstracts in GU cancers from the 2025 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium, including novel therapies in prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer and the impact of combination therapies on patient outcomes. TRANSCSRIPT Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm Dr. Neeraj Agarwal, the director of the Genitourinary Oncology Program and professor of medicine at the Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah, and editor-in-chief of ASCO Daily News. Today, we'll be discussing practice-informing abstracts and other key advances in GU oncology featured at the 2025 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium. Joining me for this discussion is Dr. Peter Hoskin, the chair of this year's ASCO GU Symposium. Dr. Hoskin is a professor in clinical oncology in the University of Manchester and honorary consultant in clinical oncology at the Christie Hospital, Manchester, and University College Hospital London, in the United Kingdom. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode. Peter, thank you for joining us today. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Thank you so much, Neeraj. I am very pleased to be here. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: The GU meeting highlighted remarkable advancements across the spectrum of GU malignancies. What stood out to you as the most exciting developments at the ASCO GU Symposium?  Dr. Peter Hoskin: The theme of this year's meeting was "Driving Innovation, Improving Patient Care," and this reflected ASCO GU's incredible milestone in GU cancer research over the years. We were thrilled to welcome almost 6,000 attendees on this occasion from over 70 countries, and most of them were attending in person and not online, although this was a hybrid meeting. Furthermore, we had more than 1,000 abstract submissions. You can imagine then that it fostered fantastic networking opportunities and facilitated valuable knowledge and idea exchanges among experts, trainees, and mentees. So, to start I'd like to come back to you for a second because the first day started with a focus on prostate cancer and some of the key clinical trials. And congratulations to you, Neeraj, on sharing the data from the TALAPRO-2 trial, which we were eagerly awaiting. I'd love to get your thoughts on the data that you presented. Could you tell us more about that trial, Abstract LBA18?  Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Yes, Peter, I agree with you. It was such an exciting conference overall and thank you for your leadership of this conference. So, let's talk about the TALAPRO-2 trial. First of all, I would like to remind our audience that the combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide was approved by the U.S. FDA in June 2023 in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer harboring HRR gene alterations, after this combination improved the primary endpoint of radiographic progression-free survival compared to enzalutamide alone in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-cohort phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial. In the abstract I presented at ASCO GU 2025, we reported the final overall survival data, which was a key alpha-protected secondary endpoint in cohort 1, which enrolled an all-comer population of patients with mCRPC. So, at a median follow-up of around 53 months, in the intention-to-treat population, the combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide significantly reduced the risk of death by 20% compared to enzalutamide alone, with a median OS of 45.8 months in the experimental arm versus 37 months in the control arm, which was an active control arm of enzalutamide. This improvement was consistent in patients with HRR alterations with a hazard ratio of 0.54 and in those with non-deficient or unknown HRR status, with a hazard ratio of 0.87. In a post hoc analysis, the hazard ratio for OS was 0.78 favoring the combination in those patients who did not have any HRR gene alteration in their tumors by both tissue and ctDNA testing. Consistent with the primary analysis, the updated rPFS data also favored the experimental arm with a median rPFS of 33.1 compared to 19.5 months in the control arm, and a hazard ratio of 0.667. No new safety signals were identified with extended follow-up. Thus, TALAPRO-2 is the first PARP inhibitor plus ARPI study to show a statistically significant and a clinically meaningful improvement in OS compared to standard-of-care enzalutamide as first-line treatment in patients with mCRPC unselected for HRR gene alterations. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Thank you, Neeraj. That's a great summary of the data presented and very important data indeed. There was another abstract also featured in the same session, Abstract 20, titled “Which patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer benefit more from androgen receptor pathway inhibitors? STOPCAP meta-analyses of individual participant data.” Neeraj, could you tell us more about this abstract? Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Absolutely, I would be delighted to. So, in this meta-analysis, Dr. David Fischer and colleagues pooled individual participant data from different randomized phase 3 trials in the mHSPC setting to assess the potential ARPI effect modifiers and determine who benefits more from an ARPI plus ADT doublet. The primary outcome was OS for main effects and PFS for subgroup analyses. Prostate cancer specific survival was a sensitivity outcome. The investigators pooled data from 11 ARPI trials and more than 11,000 patients. Overall, there was a clear benefit of adding an ARPI on both OS and PFS, with hazard ratios of 0.66 and 0.51, respectively, representing a 13% and 21% absolute improvement at 5 years, respectively, with no clear difference by the class of agent. When stratifying the patients by age group, the effects of adding an ARPI on OS and PFS were slightly smaller in patients older than 75, than in those younger than 65, or aged between 65 and 75 years. Notably, in the trials assessing the use of abiraterone, we saw very little OS effects in the group of patients older than 75, however there was some benefit maintained in prostate-cancer specific survival, suggesting that other causes of death may be having an impact. The effects of the other ARPIs, or ‘lutamides' as I would call them, were similar across all three age subgroups on both OS and PFS. Therefore, the majority of patients with mHSPC benefit from the addition of ARPIs, and the benefits/risks of abiraterone and other ‘amides' must be considered in older patients.  Dr. Peter Hoskin: Thanks, Neeraj. Another great summary relevant to our day-to-day practice. Of course, there's ongoing collection of individual patient data from other key trials, which will allow robust comparison of ARPI doublet with triplet therapy (including docetaxel), guiding more personalized treatment.   Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: I agree with you, Peter, we need more data to help guide personalized treatment for patients with mHSPC and potentially guide de-escalation versus escalation strategies. Now, moving on to a different setting in prostate cancer, would you like to mention Abstract 17 titled, “Overall survival and quality of life with Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide versus enzalutamide alone in poor-risk, metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer in ENZA-p (ANZUP 1901),” presented by Dr. Louise Emmett? Dr. Peter Hoskin: Of course I will. So, ENZA-p was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2 trial conducted in Australia. It randomized 163 patients into adaptive doses (2 or 4 cycles) of Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide versus enzalutamide alone as first-line treatment in PSMA-PET-CT-positive, poor-risk, mCRPC. The interim analysis of ENZA-p with median follow-up 20 months showed improved PSA-progression-free survival with the addition of Lu-PSMA-617 to enzalutamide. Here, the investigators reported the secondary outcomes, overall survival, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). After a median follow up of 34 months, overall survival was longer in the combination arm compared to the enzalutamide arm, with a median OS of 34 months compared to 26 months; with an HR of 0.55. Moreover, the combination improved both deterioration-free survival and health-related quality of life indicators for pain, fatigue, physical function, and overall health and quality of life compared to the control arm. Consistent with the primary analysis, the rPFS also favored the experimental arm with a median rPFS of 17 months compared to 14 months with a HR of 0.61. So, the addition of LuPSMA improved overall survival, and HRQOL in patients with high-risk mCRPC. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Peter. Great summary, and promising results with Lu-177 and ARPI combination in first line treatment for mCRPC among patients who had two or more high risk features associated with early enzalutamide failure. Before we move on to bladder cancer, would you like to tell us about Abstract 15 titled, “World-wide oligometastatic prostate cancer (omPC) meta-analysis leveraging individual patient data (IPD) from randomized trials (WOLVERINE): An analysis from the X-MET collaboration,” presented by Dr. Chad Tang?  Dr. Peter Hoskin: Sure. So, with metastatic-directed therapy (MDT), we have a number of phase 2 studies making up the database, and the X-MET collaboration aimed to consolidate all randomized data on oligometastatic solid tumors. This abstract presented pooled individual patient data from all the published trials involving patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer who received MDT alongside standard of care (SOC) against SOC alone. The analysis included data from five trials, encompassing 472 patients with oligometastatic prostate cancer, and followed for a median of 41 months. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either MDT plus SOC or SOC alone. The addition of MDT significantly improved PFS. The median PFS was 32 months with MDT compared to 14.9 months with SOC alone, with an HR of 0.45. Subgroup analyses further confirmed the consistent benefits of MDT across different patient groups. Regardless of factors like castration status, receipt of prior primary treatment, stage, or number of metastases, MDT consistently improved PFS. In patients with mHSPC, MDT significantly delayed the time to castration resistance by nine months, extending it to a median of 72 months compared to 63 months in the SOC group with an HR of 0.58. In terms of OS, the addition of MDT improved the 48-month survival rate by 12%, with OS rates of 87% in the MDT+SOC group compared to 75% in the SOC alone group. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Peter. These data demonstrate that adding MDT to systemic therapy significantly improves PFS, rPFS, and castration resistance-free survival, reinforcing its potential role in the treatment of oligometastatic prostate cancer. So, let's switch gears to bladder cancer and start with Abstract 658 reporting the OS analysis of the CheckMate-274 trial. Would you like to tell us about this abstract?  Dr. Peter Hoskin: Yes, sure, Neeraj. This was presented by Dr. Matt Milowsky, and it was additional efficacy outcomes, including overall survival, from the CheckMate-274 trial which evaluated adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer after radical surgery. The phase 3 trial previously demonstrated a significant improvement in disease-free survival with nivolumab. With a median follow-up of 36.1 months, disease-free survival was longer with nivolumab compared to placebo across all patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer, reducing the risk of disease recurrence or death by 37%. Among patients who had received prior neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, nivolumab reduced this risk by 42%, whilst in those who had not received chemotherapy, the risk was reduced by 31%. Overall survival also favored nivolumab over placebo, reducing the risk of death by 30% in all patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and by 52% in those with tumors expressing PD-L1 at 1% or higher. Among patients who had received prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy, nivolumab reduced the risk of death by 26%, whilst in those who had not received chemotherapy, the risk was reduced by 33%. Alongside this, the safety profile remained consistent with previous findings. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Peter, for such a nice overview of this abstract. These results reinforce adjuvant nivolumab as a standard of care for high-risk muscle-invasive bladder cancer, offering the potential for a curative outcome for our patients. Dr. Peter Hoskin: I agree with you Neeraj. Perhaps you would like to mention Abstract 659 titled, “Additional efficacy and safety outcomes and an exploratory analysis of the impact of pathological complete response (pCR) on long-term outcomes from NIAGARA.” Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Of course. Dr. Galsky presented additional outcomes from the phase 3 NIAGARA study, which evaluated perioperative durvalumab combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The study previously demonstrated a significant improvement in event-free survival and overall survival with durvalumab compared to chemotherapy alone, with a manageable safety profile and no negative impact on the ability to undergo radical cystectomy. Among the 1,063 randomized patients, those who received durvalumab had a 33% reduction in the risk of developing distant metastases or death and a 31% reduction in the risk of dying from bladder cancer compared to those who received chemotherapy alone. More patients who received durvalumab achieved a pathological complete response at the time of surgery with 37% compared to 28% in the chemotherapy-alone group. Patients who achieved a pathological complete response had better event-free survival and overall survival compared to those who did not. In both groups, durvalumab provided additional survival benefits, reducing the risk of disease progression or death by 42% and the risk of death by 28% in patients with a pathological complete response, while in those patients without a pathological complete response, the risk of disease progression or death was reduced by 23% and the risk of death by 16% when durvalumab was added to the chemotherapy. Immune-mediated adverse events occurred in 21% of patients in the durvalumab group compared to 3% in the chemotherapy-alone group, with grade 3 or higher events occurring in 3% compared to 0.2%. The most common immune-related adverse events included hypothyroidism in 10% of patients treated with durvalumab compared to 1% in the chemotherapy-alone group, and hyperthyroidism in 3% versus 0.8%. At the time of the data cutoff, these adverse events had resolved in 41% of affected patients in the durvalumab group and 44% in the chemotherapy-alone group. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Thank you, Neeraj, for the great summary. These findings further support the role of perioperative durvalumab as a potential standard of care for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: I concur with your thoughts, Peter. Before wrapping up the bladder cancer section, would you like to mention Abstract 664 reporting updated results from the EV-302 trial, which evaluated enfortumab vedotin in combination with pembrolizumab compared to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma? Dr. Peter Hoskin: Yes, of course. Dr. Tom Powles presented updated findings from the EV-302 study, and in this abstract presented 12 months of additional follow-up for EV-302 (>2 y of median follow-up) and an exploratory analysis of patients with confirmed complete response (cCR). The study had a median follow-up of 29.1 months and previously demonstrated significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab. This is now the standard of care in global treatment guidelines. Among the 886 randomized patients, enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 52% and the risk of death by 49% compared to chemotherapy. The survival benefit was consistent regardless of cisplatin eligibility or the presence of liver metastases. The confirmed objective response rate was higher with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab at 67.5% compared to 44.2% with chemotherapy. The median duration of response was 23.3 months with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab compared to 7.0 months with chemotherapy. A complete response was achieved in 30.4% of patients in the enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab group compared to 14.5% in the chemotherapy group, with the median duration of complete response not yet reached in the enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab group compared to 15.2 months in the chemotherapy group. Severe treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57.3% of patients treated with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab compared to 69.5% in the chemotherapy group, while in patients who achieved a complete response, severe adverse events occurred in 61.7% of those treated with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab compared to 71.9% with chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 1.1% of patients treated with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab compared to 0.9% with chemotherapy, with no treatment-related deaths occurring in those who achieved a complete response. These findings clearly confirm the durable efficacy of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab, reinforcing its role as the standard of care for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, and no new safety concerns have been identified. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you for this great summary. Moving on to kidney cancer, let's talk about Abstract 439 titled, “Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (N+C) vs sunitinib (S) for previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Final follow-up results from the CheckMate-9ER trial.” Dr. Peter Hoskin: Sure. Dr. Motzer presented the final results from the phase 3 CheckMate-9ER trial, which compared the combination of cabozantinib and nivolumab against sunitinib in previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma. The data after more than five years follow-up show that the combination therapy provided sustained superior efficacy compared to sunitinib. In terms of overall survival, we see an 11-month improvement in median OS, 46.5 months for the cabo-nivo versus 35.5 months for sunitinib and a 42% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death, with median progression-free survival nearly doubling – that's 16.4 months in the combination group and 8.3 months with sunitinib. Importantly, the safety profile was consistent with the known safety profiles of the individual medicines, with no new safety concerns identified. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Great summary, Peter. These data further support the efficacy of cabo-nivo combination therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma, which is showing a 11-month difference in overall survival. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Neeraj, before wrapping up this podcast, would you like to tell us about Abstract 618? This is titled “Prospective COTRIMS (Cologne trial of retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in metastatic seminoma) trial: Final results.” Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Sure, Peter. I would be delighted to. Dr Heidenrich from the University of Cologne in Germany presented the COTRIMS data evaluating retroperitoneal LN dissection in patients with clinical stage 2A/B seminomas. Seminomas are classified as 2A or B when the disease spreads to the retroperitoneal lymph nodes of up to 2 cm (CS IIA) or of more than 2 cm to up to 5 cm (CS 2B) in maximum diameter, respectively. They account for 10-15% of seminomas and they are usually treated with radiation and chemotherapy. However, radiation and chemo can be associated with long-term toxicities such as cardiovascular toxicities, diabetes, solid cancers, leukemia, particularly for younger patients. From this standpoint, Dr Heidenrich and colleagues evaluated unilateral, modified template, nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection as a less toxic alternative compared to chemo and radiation. They included 34 patients with negative AFP, beta-HCG, and clinical stage 2A/B seminomas. At a median follow-up of 43.2 months, the trial demonstrated great outcomes: a 99.3% treatment-free survival rate and 100% overall survival, with only four relapses. Antegrade ejaculation was preserved in 88% of patients, and severe complications such as grade 3 and 4 were observed in 12% of patients. Pathological analysis revealed metastatic seminoma in 85% of cases, with miR371 being true positive in 23 out of 24 cases and true negative in 100% of cases. It appears to be a valid biomarker for predicting the presence of lymph node metastases. These findings highlight retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is feasible; it has low morbidity, and excellent oncologic outcomes, avoiding overtreatment in 80% of patients and sparing unnecessary chemotherapy or radiotherapy in 10-15% of cases. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Great summary and important data on retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in metastatic seminoma. These findings will help shape clinical practice. Any final remarks before we conclude today's podcast? Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Before wrapping up this podcast, I would like to say that we have reviewed several abstracts addressing prostate, bladder, kidney cancers, and seminoma, which are impacting our medical practices now and in the near future. Peter, thank you for sharing your insights with us today. These updates are undoubtedly exciting for the entire GU oncology community, and we greatly appreciate your valuable contribution to the discussion and your leadership of the conference. Many thanks. Dr. Peter Hoskin: Thank you, Neeraj. Thank you for the opportunity to share this information more widely. I'm aware that whilst we have nearly 6,000 delegates, there are many other tens of thousands of colleagues around the world who need to have access to this information. And it was a great privilege to chair this ASCO GU25. So, thank you once again, Neeraj, for this opportunity to share more of this information that we discussed over those few days. Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Thank you, Peter. And thank you to our listeners for joining us today. You will find links to the abstracts discussed today on the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News podcast, please take a moment to 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. Neeraj Agarwal    @neerajaiims    Dr. Peter Hoskin Follow ASCO on social media:      @ASCO on Twitter      ASCO on Bluesky  ASCO on Facebook      ASCO on LinkedIn      Disclosures: Dr. Neeraj Agarwal: Consulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Nektar, Lilly, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Foundation Medicine, Astellas Pharma, Lilly, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Eisai, Seattle Genetics, EMD Serono, Janssen Oncology, AVEO, Calithera Biosciences, MEI Pharma, Genentech, Astellas Pharma, Foundation Medicine, and Gilead Sciences Research Funding (Institution): Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Exelixis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Calithera Biosciences, Celldex, Eisai, Genentech, Immunomedics, Janssen, Merck, Lilly, Nektar, ORIC Pharmaceuticals, Crispr Therapeutics, Arvinas Dr. Peter Hoskin: Research Funding (Institution): Varian Medical Systems, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Roche, Pfizer, Elekta, Bristol Myers  

In this episode, I continue the "Your Voice. Your Health" series with a powerful conversation about step therapy, healthcare disparities, and patient advocacy. I had the privilege of speaking with Jamil Rivers, a metastatic breast cancer thriver, nationally recognized advocate, and founder of The Chrysalis Initiative. We discuss Jamil's experience from her breast cancer diagnosis to her groundbreaking work in educating healthcare providers through her Cancer Curriculum, which is transforming cancer care and addressing inequities in treatment access. We explore the flaws in the healthcare system that step therapy exposes, and discuss trustworthy resources and tactics that can empower patients to advocate for themselves and seek the care they deserve. Listen now to be inspired by Jamil's story and gain important insights into improving cancer care for all. Special thanks to Amgen for making this episode possible.

This episode covers: Cardiology This Week: A concise summary of recent studies Non-bacterial thrombotic endocarditis Managing cardiovascular risk in transgender people Milestones: RAVEL Host: Perry Elliott Guests: Kyle Klarich, Christian Delles Want to watch that episode? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1800 Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor.  This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes.  The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Christian Delles, Kyle Klarich and Nicolle Kraenkel have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Perry Elliott has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancies for Pfizer, BMS, Cytokinetics, AstraZeneca, Forbion. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Host: Perry Elliott Guest: Christian Delles Want to watch that extended interview? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1800?resource=interview Disclaimer: ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC. Declarations of interests: Stephan Achenbach, Christian Delles and Nicolle Kraenkel have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Perry Elliott has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancies for Pfizer, BMS, Cytokinetics, AstraZeneca, Forbion. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Rebecca Henderson is a professor at Harvard Business School and is 1 of only 25 professors at Harvard given the distinction of University Professor, which is the highest honor a professor can receive at Harvard. She is the author of the book Reimagining Capitalism which explores how the private sector can help build a more sustainable economy. Rebecca is also a research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of both the British Academy and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She also sits on the boards of several companies, including AMGEN. Rebecca earned a degree in mechanical engineering from MIT and a PhD in business economics from Harvard. In this episode we discuss the following: I love the story Rebecca shared about the book contract she had lined up. She was going to write a book about how we are prone to take on too much stuff, and then she had to cancel the contract because she had taken on too much stuff. Finding the right balance between staying focused and embracing change is a never-ending struggle. Rebecca worked with Nokia, Kodak, and Motorola. All of them were at the cutting edge of technology and poised to dominate the cell phone and camera market. But none could adapt quickly enough to the changing technology. I thought it was fascinating to hear how some firms got superior results to other firms, even though they had the same inputs. The economists hated the finding because the research showed that leadership and management practices could make such a difference. The best firms took care of their people. Here are two of Rebecca's papers: Innovation in the 21st Century: Architectural Change, Purpose, and the Challenges of Our Time Moral Firms? And here is a link to her book website for Reimagining Capitalism.  Connect on Social Media: X: https://twitter.com/nate_meikle LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/natemeikle/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nate_meikle/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@nate.meikle

About Marisa Cruz:Dr. Marisa Cruz is the Vice President of Global Digital Medicine at AMGEN, a renowned global biotechnology company. An endocrinologist and internist, she continues to practice medicine at UCSF, bringing a clinical perspective to her work in digital health. Dr. Cruz oversees AMGEN's digital health strategy, focusing on harnessing data and technology to improve patient outcomes and bridge healthcare accessibility gaps.Things You'll Learn:AMGEN is driving innovation in digital health with initiatives like the LATTICE Consortium, aiming to reduce cardiovascular incidents by 50%.AI and machine learning are playing a crucial role in improving clinical trial diversity and accessibility.Emerging digital health trends, including implementation science and patient-centered care, are reshaping the future of healthcare.AMGEN's patient engagement platform, PARC, empowers patients to actively participate in their own healthcare journey.Resources:Connect with and follow Marisa Cruz on LinkedIn.Follow Amgen on LinkedIn and visit their website.Explore Amgen PARC websiteDiscover the LATTICE Consortium website. 

In this episode, podcast host Mel Brooke, BIRDs Patient and Public Engagement Programme talks with Dr. Victoria Flower  about Gastrointestinal (GI) issues in Systemic SclerosisThis episode is part one of a two part series, with this first episode focussing on Upper GI issues and part two the Lower GI tract. We begin with a brief introduction around the whole  topic and run through issues such as reflux, difficulty swallowing, and similar symptoms that someone with Systemic Sclerosis might experience. Vicky then talks about treatment options and self-management approaches.Useful Links:⁠Dysphagia (swallowing problems) - NHSHeartburn and acid reflux - NHSConnect further with us:Have questions or thoughts about our information Podcast library?  Interested in joining BIRDs patient research panel? Email Mel at  ppe@birdbath.org.ukBe sure to subscribe, rate, and review the podcast to help us continue sharing information that matters!The Patient and Public Engagement Programme is supported by hands-off sponsorships from Eli Lilly and Company Limited, UCB and Amgen -all of whom have provided grant funding but who have were not involved in the development, content or editorial control of this podcast, nor the subsequent review and approval of these materials or general running of the patient and public engagement programme.We would also like to thank The Arnold Clark Community Fund, The Cumber Family Charitable Trust, Medlock Charitable Trust, The Ray Harris Charitable Trust and The Hospital Saturday Fund.Thank you to all our sponsors for helping us to bring you information that supports you and helps to increase your knowledge of rheumatic diseases.Please visit the⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BIRD website ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to sign up for news.

In this episode, podcast host Mel Brooke, BIRDs Patient and Public Engagement Programme talks with Dr. Victoria Flower  about Gastrointestinal (GI) issues in Systemic SclerosisThis episode is part two of a two part series. This time we focus on the Lower GI talking about the movement of food through the lower GI tract and common issues one might experience such as  a sluggish bowel and bacterial overgrowth and symptoms like bloating and diarrhea. Vicky also talks us through treatment and self-management options, including dietary adjustments.Useful Links:Dysphagia (swallowing problems) - NHSHeartburn and acid reflux - NHSHow to help a weak bladder - NHSGastrointestinal Tract Involvement in Systemic Sclerosis (SSc) | SRUK Connect further with us:Have questions or thoughts about our information Podcast library?  Interested in joining BIRDs patient research panel? Email Mel at  ppe@birdbath.org.ukBe sure to subscribe, rate, and review the podcast to help us continue sharing information that matters!The Patient and Public Engagement Programme is supported by hands-off sponsorships from Eli Lilly and Company Limited, UCB and Amgen -all of whom have provided grant funding but who have were not involved in the development, content or editorial control of this podcast, nor the subsequent review and approval of these materials or general running of the patient and public engagement programme.We would also like to thank The Arnold Clark Community Fund, The Cumber Family Charitable Trust, Medlock Charitable Trust, The Ray Harris Charitable Trust and The Hospital Saturday Fund.Thank you to all our sponsors for helping us to bring you information that supports you and helps to increase your knowledge of rheumatic diseases.Please visit the⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BIRD website ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to sign up for news.

Good morning from Pharma and Biotech daily: the podcast that gives you only what's important to hear in Pharma e Biotech world.Moderna reported higher-than-expected losses in its fourth-quarter earnings report and is anticipating layoffs. The company's revenue was down substantially from the previous year. Meanwhile, controversial figure RFK Jr. was confirmed as the Health and Human Services Secretary, despite his history of anti-vaccine rhetoric. In other news, BMS' phase III Opdivo and Yervoy combination therapy failed in adjuvant melanoma, potentially limiting market opportunities. Amgen and Ideaya have ended their collaboration on a cancer combo therapy, with Amgen continuing to advance one component in a mid-stage trial for lung cancer. Pliant has brought in outside experts to review a study pause in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis research. Stay tuned for more updates on various biopharma companies and their developments.

This episode covers: Cardiology This Week: A concise summary of recent studies Atrial fibrillation in athletes 'Work and life' of a medical journalist Mythbusters: Female doctors with better outcomes Host: Perry Elliott Guests: Carlos Aguiar, Isabelle van Gelder, Shelley Wood Want to watch that episode? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1799   Disclaimer ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC.   Declarations of interests  Stephan Achenbach, Nicolle Kraenkel, Isabelle van Gelder and Shelley Wood have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Perry Elliott has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancies for Pfizer, BMS, Cytokinetics, AstraZeneca, Forbion. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

Host: Perry Elliott Guest: Isabelle van Gelder Want to watch that extended interview? Go to: https://esc365.escardio.org/event/1799?resource=interview   Disclaimer ESC TV Today is supported by Bristol Myers Squibb. This scientific content and opinions expressed in the programme have not been influenced in any way by its sponsor. This programme is intended for health care professionals only and is to be used for educational purposes. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) does not aim to promote medicinal products nor devices. Any views or opinions expressed are the presenters' own and do not reflect the views of the ESC.   Declarations of interests Stephan Achenbach, Nicolle Kraenkel and Isabelle van Gelder have declared to have no potential conflicts of interest to report. Carlos Aguiar has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: personal fees for consultancy and/or speaker fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BiAL, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ferrer, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Tecnimede. Davide Capodanno has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi Aventis, Novo Nordisk, Terumo. Perry Elliott has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancies for Pfizer, BMS, Cytokinetics, AstraZeneca, Forbion. Steffen Petersen has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: consultancy for Circle Cardiovascular Imaging Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Emma Svennberg has declared to have potential conflicts of interest to report: Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers, Squibb-Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson.

New 10% tariffs on China exports to the US have taken effect; China is to levy countermeasures on some US imported products with 15% tariffs on coal and LNG, as well as 10% tariff on oil, agricultural machines and some autos from the US.European bourses trade tentatively, Tech buoyed by strength in Infineon; US futures are modestly lower.DXY is flat, JPY underperforms, unwinding the prior day's strength, and Antipodeans lag.Bonds pullback but remain above Monday's lows as we await tariff updates from US/China.Crude softer amid Canada/Mexico tariff delays and China tariff retaliation.Looking ahead, US JOLTS Job Openings, NZ HLFS Jobs. Speakers including Fed's Bostic & Daly.Earnings from BMPS, Intesa Sanpaolo, Ferrari, AMD, Google, Snapchat, Chipotle, Amgen, Paypal, Spotify, Pfizer, Regeneron, PepsiCo, Merck, Estee Lauder, Marathon Petroleum & Ball.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

APAC stocks traded higher as the region reacted to US President Trump's delay of tariffs against Canada and Mexico for a month.However, the new 10% tariff on all China exports to the US took effect after the deadline passed.Furthermore, China is to levy countermeasures on some US imported products with 15% tariffs on coal and LNG, as well as 10% tariff on oil, agricultural machines and some autos from the US.European equity futures indicate a slightly lower cash market open with Euro Stoxx 50 future down 0.1% after the cash market closed with losses of 1.3% on Monday.DXY was boosted by Chinese retaliatory measures, EUR/USD is back below 1.03 and Cable is sub-1.24.Looking ahead, highlights include US JOLTS Job Openings, NZ HLFS Jobs, Riksbank Minutes, Fed's Bostic & Daly, Supply from UKEarnings from UBS, BNP Paribas, Vodafone, Diageo, Infineon, BMPS, Intesa Sanpaolo, Ferrari, AMD, Google, Snapchat, Chipotle, Amgen, Paypal, Spotify, Pfizer, Regeneron, PepsiCo, Merck, Estee Lauder, Marathon Petroleum.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

RFK Jr Faces Big Pharma-Backed Opposition on Capitol Hill