Podcasts about dana farber cancer institute

Dr Jennifer Crombie from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, reviews available and investigational CD20 x CD3 targeted bispecific antibodies for the treatment of follicular and diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. CME information and select publications here.

Dr Rinath M Jeselsohn from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, discusses recent developments with oral SERDs in the management of ER-positive metastatic breast cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Dr. Kimberly Perez and Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero discuss the new guideline from ASCO on symptom management for well-differentiated GEP-NETs. They share the latest recommendations on managing symptoms related to hormone excess, including carcinoid syndrome and carcinoid heart disease, managing symptoms of functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and also palliative interventions. Dr. Perez and Del Rivero share how to use this guideline in concert with the systemic therapy for tumor control in metastatic well-differentiated GEP-NETs guideline, and hope for the future for the treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Read the full guideline, “Symptom Management for Well-Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: ASCO Guideline.” Transcript This guideline, clinical tools, and resources are available on ASCO.org. Read the full text of the guideline and review authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest in JCO Oncology Practice.        Brittany Harvey: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines Podcast, one of ASCO's podcasts delivering timely information to keep you up to date on the latest changes, challenges, and advances in oncology. You can find all the shows, including this one, at asco.org/podcasts. My name is Brittany Harvey and today I'm interviewing Dr. Kim Perez from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero from the Center for Cancer Research at the National Cancer Institute, co-chairs on “Symptom Management for Well-Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: ASCO Guideline.” Thank you for being here today, Dr. Del Rivero and Dr. Perez. Dr. Kim Perez: Thank you. Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: Thank you so much for the invitation. Brittany Harvey: And then before we discuss this guideline, I'd like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its guidelines and ensuring that the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy is followed for each guideline. The disclosures of potential conflicts of interest for the guideline panel, including Dr. Perez and Dr. Del Rivero, who have joined us here today, are available online with the publication of the guideline in JCO Oncology Practice, which is linked in the show notes. So then to jump into the content here, first Dr. Del Rivero, could you provide an overview of the scope and purpose of this guideline? Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: Yeah. Thank you so much. Well, first, we really wanted to thank ASCO for allowing us to develop these guidelines for the management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. I do want to mention that there is also another set of guidelines that I was very fortunate also to co-chair with Dr. Perez on the systemic management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. But when discussing these guidelines as well as with the different panelists, experts in this type of disease, we also realized that the management of these tumors are quite complex, not only from the management of the disease progression, but at the same time, management of the symptoms related to the hormone excess. And because of that, we like to thank ASCO for allowing us to then not only have a discussion on the systemic management of these tumors, but at the same time develop recommendations for the symptoms related to the different hormones that these neuroendocrine tumors may produce. These guidelines are for the management of grade 1 to grade 3 metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. These guidelines include the management of the different aspects and the symptoms related to hormone excess, such as carcinoid syndrome, carcinoid heart disease, how to manage carcinoid crisis, as well as the different symptoms and how to manage the functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and as well as provide recommendations in the different treatments for these tumor types, not only from the systemic management but also from the surgical management as well as for liver-directed therapy options and the different aspects in terms of the palliative care of these patients to improve not only the symptoms related to the hormone excess caused by these tumors, but as well as to improve the quality of life. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. And I appreciate that overview. And yes, we'll link the guideline on the Systemic Therapy for Tumor Control for Well-Differentiated Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors in the show notes for our listeners so that they can refer to that companion guideline as well. So then you just described the several different categories of recommendations that this guideline covers on symptom management. So, Dr. Perez, I'd like to start reviewing some of those key recommendations of that guideline. So, starting with what are the key recommendations for carcinoid syndrome and carcinoid heart disease? Dr. Kim Perez: Thank you Brittany. Yeah, I also want to thank ASCO for inviting us to do this podcast today. Just to start, I think these guidelines will really add to what's available in the literature to provide a kind of a quick look for the community provider to manage carcinoid-related symptoms. I think the highlights that I would point out are we've all been using somatostatin analogs for the last few decades to manage symptoms, but with the newer treatments that are now available, we tried to highlight what does the literature support in regards to PRRT, what does the literature support in regards to using systemic therapy for disease management, but also the benefits that you will get from a symptom management perspective using other modalities. I think the highlight really is it's a multidisciplinary approach. We are now considering surgery and embolization or interventional radiology as a critical piece. And I think the third that I'd highlight is the fact that sometimes we get too focused on carcinoid syndrome and the symptoms will actually, may result from other things. And the highlight in the algorithms that we've provided is what other things cause carcinoid-related diarrhea. And let's not forget about that because we will find ourselves treating and patients getting very frustrated with persistence of symptoms when in actuality, we should be treating something else that is causing a very similar symptom. For carcinoid heart disease, I think there are more and more guidelines that are now available to provide guidance there, but I think the major advances are that we should be utilizing heart assessment with echocardiogram with lab values such as BMP. But also critical to this is consulting with our cardiology colleagues and making sure that we're identifying heart related issues that are resulting from hormone excess sooner than later because interventions on the earlier side can really make a significant impact on quality of life and associated comorbidities and mortality. Brittany Harvey: Thank you for reviewing those key points for both carcinoid syndrome and carcinoid heart disease symptom management. So then the next set of recommendations. Dr. Del Rivero, what are the key highlights for symptom management of functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors? Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: Yes, it's very important to recognize the symptoms related to hormone excess due to pancreas neuroendocrine tumors. Up to 10% of pancreas neuroendocrine tumors may produce different hormones. Among those hormones can be insulin, gastrin, glucagon, somatostatin. So it's important to know and understand that based on what a neuroendocrine tumor is, they may produce different types of hormones. The importance of these guidelines is to also recognize some of these symptoms and how to address that, because it's not necessarily in these tumor types besides the management of metastatic disease, and know the different options that we recommend for metastatic disease from the systemic therapy, such as chemotherapy or targeted therapies or PRRT. It's important to recognize the symptoms because based on the symptoms we may recommend a different approach. That's something that is important to acknowledge and recognize. Moreover, in certain functional pancreas neuroendocrine tumors, as Dr. Perez mentioned, is a multidisciplinary approach. And it's important to also discuss these different cases with your endocrinologist. You may need to have an experienced endocrinologist to manage, for example, the excess of insulin. And also discuss your cases with a surgeon and interventional radiologist because some of these approaches can certainly improve the symptoms related to hormone excess. I understand that sometimes medical oncologists in the communities may not have access to the multidisciplinary approach or have the different teams that can manage these tumors, and that's the reason why with these guidelines we wanted to establish the understanding of different symptoms associated with the hormone excess to these neuroendocrine tumors as well as how to manage this. For example, in the case of insulinoma, I think for the medical oncologist it is important to know that the everolimus is an option to be used for these tumors, not only to manage tumor progressions related to this tumor type at the same time, because everolimus as a side effect causes hyperglycemia, that can also improve some of the symptoms related to the excess of insulin besides the somatostatin agonist. I think these recommendations will allow the medical oncologist to recognize the symptoms and based on what the symptoms cause, then you can have a different approach that could be added to the systemic therapies options as well. Brittany Harvey: Yes, beyond systemic therapy, it's important to be recognizing symptoms to provide an individualized approach for every single patient. So then, following that overview of symptom management for functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, Dr. Perez, what is recommended regarding palliative interventions for patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors? Dr. Kim Perez: Yeah, great question. So I think what's unique to neuroendocrine tumors is that the palliative approach really mirrors what we would be doing for symptom management. Some of these patients are living a very long time with carcinoid related symptoms. And so the approach that we take for the carcinoid symptom control is going to mirror the palliative piece of it. I think for those who develop a burden of disease related symptoms, I think it mirrors what we do across the board for all cancer-related complications. And so I think what we attempted to highlight here and included one of our colleagues who focuses specifically on the field of palliative care and neuroendocrine tumors, was to never really lose sight of what we've been doing to care for symptom management throughout the patient's journey and to always rereview the etiology of the symptoms, ensure that we don't focus solely on carcinoid-related issues, but also the symptom management that we would apply to all patients with cancer-related burden symptoms. Brittany Harvey: Definitely. I think that's a helpful approach to consider when thinking about how to manage these palliative interventions as well. So then Dr. Del Rivero, what should clinicians know as they implement these symptom management recommendations? Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: Yes, thank you so much for that question. As we have discussed in the last 10 or 15 minutes, we have discussed the different approaches on the management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Clinicians, I think it's important to know that neuroendocrine tumors is a quite complex disease because we're not only addressing the management of tumor growth, but we're also addressing the management of the symptoms related to hormone excess and the complexity associated with that. When medical oncologists or clinicians implement these recommendations it's to understand what symptoms these tumors may cause related to the hormone excess but at the same time, how do we approach those symptoms? As Dr. Perez said that I think is very important is to recognize the different types of diarrhea. It doesn't mean that if the patient has worsening diarrhea, it doesn't mean that this is related to disease progression. So it's important to recognize so that way you can address that, because the type of diarrheas can be related because of the lanreotide or somatostatin agonist, it could be because of the prior surgery. I think it's important to recognize those in order to address the symptom. And the same with the gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. It's important to know what hormones they produce because there are different measurements that may be added to the systemic management of these tumors. I think that there are two aspects here, and that's the reason why these guidelines were implemented in the sense that not only we're going to manage disease progression of these tumors, or how do we manage the metastatic disease of these tumors, but at the same time, how do we manage the symptoms related to the hormone excess and the different complications. Moreover, I think, as we discussed earlier, we need to manage these tumors in a multidisciplinary approach. And something very important is not like one size fits all, because the treatment recommendations, it will depend on different characteristics in terms of the tumor presentations. And hormone excess is one of the important aspects to recognize so that way we can implement these recommendations that will definitely help the quality of life of these patients. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. And using these guidelines in concert with the systemic therapy guidelines is key. And then beyond this impact for clinicians that Dr. Del Rivero has just outlined, Dr. Perez, what does this new guideline mean for patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors? Dr. Kim Perez: Yeah, I think that's an important highlight of this guideline. It really gives patients a voice. I think it recognizes the fact that these symptoms can go unmanaged or mismanaged or just missed, and patients commonly will come in feeling very frustrated and feeling very ill. And I think it will provide them a means to open up a conversation with their providers and say, “Hey, this is what I'm experiencing. Let's talk about what's available. How does this apply to me?” And I think that can be very empowering. I think it's really hard nowadays with so many sources and resources online and patients are really left wondering what are the bullet points that they should be bringing to their clinician appointments? And I think that these guidelines provide them a good framework for those discussions. Brittany Harvey: Yes, bringing these discussion points for patients is very important to be able to have those resources. And we have some patient resources and information available on the website for this guideline and we can link that in the show notes for listeners. So then you've both touched on the importance of this guideline for improving quality of life and we continue to see advancements in this field. So Dr. Del Rivera, what are the outstanding questions regarding symptom management and tumor control for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors? Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: I have to say whenever somebody asks me that question, the word that I will say is I feel hopeful, because more than 10 years ago we didn't have that many options for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. And it has been in the last decade or so that there has been more developments in the management of these tumors as well as the understanding of the symptoms related to these tumors. But that said, yes, we do need more therapies for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Of the treatment options that we have, we all know in the field that even though we have disease control by using the different options for the systemic management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, we need options where we can achieve an objective response, especially for these tumor types. But there is a significant volume of disease and we see a lot of these patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. And now where the field is going is to make some of these therapies more effective, to develop more therapies as well. For example, immunotherapies, a different type of immunotherapy understand the tumor immune microenvironment of these tumors in order to develop therapies as well. From the antibody drug conjugates, I think that's a new way to also address or treat these tumor types, understanding about the different markers found on these tumors that way they can be addressed in different ways. Now with the development of new therapies, I think that's something that can help us as well not only have disease control and as well as having an objective response, but having a better objective response can certainly also help with the symptoms related to hormone excess too. In terms of other therapies, I think some of the issues that we encounter are like the refractory carcinoid diarrhea and how do we manage this. We do have therapies that can help us control the diarrhea in the refractory settings, such as telotristat. Telotristat is one of the newer medications that can help us control the refractory diarrhea. But that said, despite this, that we still encounter situations where it's sometimes difficult to control. I think in those situations it will be good to understand more about the biology of these tumors as well and how we manage. If there is a different time or how do we implement these options. I think there is so much to learn. But that said, I feel we're in hopeful times. We're understanding more about these tumors so that way we can help us develop better therapies not only to have control of the tumor growth as well having control of the symptoms. And it's the same with the pancreas neuroendocrine tumors in the metastatic setting. Sometimes it may be difficult to control this hormone excess. But understanding these and having therapies that can achieve more of an objective response, I think that will definitely help us more and manage these patients. But one aspect I want to mention, and Dr. Perez also mentioned as well, the fact that we have these guidelines that help us understand about the different symptoms related to hormone excess and how to address it, I think is very important because having symptoms related to hormone excess can be detrimental to the quality of life on patients with neuroendocrine tumors that may necessarily be related to disease progression and having this information is so important. And I'm hopeful for the different therapies. There's different clinical trials ongoing for neuroendocrine tumors and especially in the field of PRRT. And a lot of more information will come with the different alpha-PRRT and combination therapy. So more information to come in the next couple of years. So this is, in my opinion, hopeful times for this field. Brittany Harvey: It's great to hear that you're hopeful for all the developments in this field and we'll look forward to the development and discovery of new therapies and further research and then, hopefully incorporate those updates into guidelines in the future. So I want to thank you both so much for your work to develop these guidelines and thank you for your time today. Dr. Del Rivero and Dr. Perez. Dr. Jaydira Del Rivero: Thank you so much for having us. Dr. Kim Perez: Thank you. Brittany Harvey: And thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast. To read the full guideline, go to www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines. You can also find many of our guidelines and interactive resources in the free ASCO Guidelines app, which is available in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you've heard today, please rate and review the podcast and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode.   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.

In this episode, we discussed the management of systemic mastocytosis with Dr. Daniel DeAngelo from the Dana Farber Cancer Institute. Here are the key studies we discussed:Midostaurin https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1513098?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200www.ncbi.nlm.nih.govAvapritinibEXLPORER study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01538-9PATHFINDER study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01539-8Bezuclastinib: APEX trial: https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/144/Supplement%201/659/530240/Apex-Part-1-Updated-Assessment-of-BezuclastinibHSCT for Advanced SM: https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2014.55.2018

Jeffrey Ekoma, ASTHO Senior Director for Government Affairs, explains how he came to ASTHO and how his team provides value for members; Vish Viswanath, Professor of Health Communication and Population Sciences at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, explains how an upcoming ASTHO webinar will prepare you to be a better crisis communicator; the Association of Immunization Managers, is celebrating its 25-year anniversary; and Jeff Brown, Acting Commissioner of Health for the State of New Jersey, is ASTHO's newest member. ASTHO Webinar: Don't Panic! A Panel on How to be an Effective Crisis Communicator Association of Immunization Managers Web Page: AIM 2024 Annual Report ASTHO Web Page: New Jersey | Jeff Brown  

Dr Rebecca Dent from National Cancer Centre Singapore and Dr Nancy Lin from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, discuss important efficacy and safety data from 2024 related to the management of localized and advanced breast cancers. CME information and select publications here.

Dr Jennifer R Brown from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston and Prof Paolo Ghia from IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele in Milano, Italy, summarize clinically relevant research findings and datasets over the past year regarding the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. CME information and select publications here.

When it comes to breakthroughs in medical research, the future is closer than you think. Willy was joined by one of the most influential voices in oncology, Dr. Ben Ebert, President and CEO of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. They explored Dana-Farber's strategy for navigating threats to medical funding and research, competition and collaboration in the medical field, how Dana-Farber attracts world-class talent, cutting-edge new technologies (including blood biopsies), the transformative potential of AI in early detection and accelerating breakthroughs, Dr. Ebert's hope for the next five years, and so much more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Feed Your Brain, Fuel Your Mood!with guest expert Dr. Uma NaidooLife gets busy, and grabbing something quick feels like a win. But what if those convenient bites are actually messing with more than just your waistline?They're messing with your mind, too.When we think about it, any shift away from the standard American diet (you know, the one packed with fast food, processed snacks, and sugar bombs) is a move in the right direction. Most people talk about these foods being bad for your body, but what about your brain?Turns out, the way you eat could be one of the most powerful ways to take care of your mental health — starting today.In this episode, you will learn:How Food Affects Mental Health (Not Just Physical Health!) Why Whole Foods Are Better Than Processed Ones Eating the Rainbow: How Colorful Fruits and Veggies Boost Health The Gut-Mood Connection: A Happy Gut Equals a Happier Mind Are You Eating Enough to Fuel Your Brain? Where to Find Fiber in Your Diet Who Should Be Careful with Fiber for Gut Health America's Fiber Deficiency: What You Should Know How Antioxidants Fight Stress in Your Cells Boosting Mental Health with Spices Essential Foods for a Healthy Mind and Body How Food Can Help Prevent Inflammation What Your Gut Needs for a Happier Brain How Antioxidants Protect Your Brain The Dangers of Processed Foods on Mental Health How Gut Health Affects Emotional Regulation and Stress The Power of Phytonutrients: How Colorful Foods Support a Healthier Mind… And much more.About our guest expert:Dr. Uma Naidoo is a nutritional psychiatrist and serves as the director of nutritional & lifestyle psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital. She is on the faculty at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Naidoo trained at the Harvard Longwood Psychiatry Residency Training Program, and completed a consultation liaison fellowship at Brigham & Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.Dr. Naidoo studied nutrition, and she also graduated from the Cambridge School of Culinary Arts as a professional chef. She was awarded her culinary school's most coveted award, the MFK Fisher Award for Innovation. Dr. Naidoo is regarded nationally and internationally as a pioneer in the field of nutritional psychiatry, having founded the first US hospital-based clinical service in this area.She is the author of This is Your Brain on Food: An Indispensable Guide to the Surprising Foods that Fight Depression, Anxiety, PTSD, OCD, ADHD, and More. With her passion for food and nutritional psychiatry, she will share her expertise on the integration of food, mental health, and medicine.Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drumanaidoo/Website: https://www.dailydoselife.com/meal-plans****************************************Get Jumping!! Rebounder Workouts = Cardio without ImpactI loooove my rebounder mini-trampoline workouts. Why? Efficient cardio without high-impact hurting my joints + the bonus of improving lymphatic flow.It's a great 1-2 punch to get a high energy, low-impact sweat on with the added benefit of using the trampoline as a step, bench and other uses to allow for building muscle (especially when you add-on...

In this episode of The Patient From Hell, host Samira Daswani speaks with Dr. Sara Char about her journey into oncology, the evolution of cancer biology, and the significant role of the microbiome in colon cancer. They discuss the complexities of cancer survivorship, the effectiveness of different methods of delivering survivorship care plans, and the importance of colonoscopy in monitoring colorectal cancer. The conversation also delves into the impact of diet on cancer risk, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive understanding of dietary patterns rather than focusing solely on individual foods. In this conversation, Dr. Sara Char discusses various aspects of survivorship care for colorectal cancer patients, focusing on dietary recommendations, exercise, and the emotional challenges faced during the transition from active treatment to survivorship. The dialogue emphasizes the importance of balancing nutrition, understanding the role of GLP-1 agonists, and the need for a supportive care team. Additionally, the conversation highlights the unique mental health needs of survivors and the significance of providing patients with a roadmap for their cancer journey.About Our Guest:Dr. Sara Char is a hematology and oncology fellow at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. She specializes in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancers with a specific interest in young-onset colorectal cancer. Her research explores the molecular underpinnings of diet and lifestyle factors implicated in colorectal cancer development and progression. Dr. Char received her M.D. from Tufts University School of Medicine and completed her residency training in internal medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital, where she also served as chief resident. Outside of work, she is a self-identified foodie and devoted dog-mom. Resources & Links:This episode was supported by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) and features the PCORI research study here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34302474/ - ‘Simplifying Survivorship Care Planning: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing 3 Care Plan Delivery Approaches'Chapter Codes00:00 Exploring the Microbiome and Colon Cancer05:59 The Transition to Survivorship Care11:57 Understanding Adherence in Survivorship Plans17:49 The Role of Colonoscopy in Survivorship24:06 Dietary Patterns and Cancer Risk25:04 Inflammatory Diet and Health Outcomes28:11 Dietary Recommendations for Cancer Survivors30:34 Exercise and Body Composition in Cancer Care31:59 Managing GI Issues with GLP-1 Agonists34:43 Navigating Multidisciplinary Care35:50 The Transition from Active Treatment to Survivorship38:08 Mental Health Challenges Post-Treatment41:41 The Need for Psycho-Oncology Support46:47 The Importance of Patient Education and ResourcesConnect with Us:Enjoyed this episode? Make sure to subscribe, rate, and review! Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, or Linkedin @mantacares and visit our website at mantacares.com for more episodes and updates.Disclaimer:All content and information provided in connection with Manta Cares is solely intended for informational and educational purposes only. This content and information is not intended to be a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.This episode was supported by an award from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

In this episode, Dr. Tejas Jayakrishnan discusses the rising incidence of young onset colorectal cancer (CRC) and the potential environmental factors contributing to this trend. The conversation delves into the importance of screening protocols, the challenges faced in early detection, and the role of education in increasing awareness and understanding of cancer risks. Dr. Jayakrishnan emphasizes the need for tailored approaches in patient care, particularly for younger patients, and highlights ongoing research efforts aimed at improving outcomes in this demographic.About Our Guest:Dr. Thejus Jayakrishnan is a gastrointestinal medical oncologist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, and an Instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Originally from India, he completed his medical training in New Delhi and continued his journey through residency in Pittsburgh and oncology fellowship at Cleveland Clinic.Dr. Jayakrishnan's research explores why some people develop cancers like colorectal cancers at a younger age. He studies how metabolism, gut bacteria, and genetics contribute to these patterns, with the goal of developing better tools for screening and treatment.In the clinic, he treats patients with all types of gastrointestinal cancers and works closely with Dana-Farber's Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer Center. His focus is on translating scientific discoveries into meaningful improvements in care through clinical trials. Outside of work, he's an avid cyclist, outdoor enthusiast, and lover of books and movies.Resources & Links:This episode was supported by the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) and features the PCORI research study here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30578103/ - ‘Impact of including quantitative information in a decision aid for colorectal cancer screening: A randomized controlled trial'Chapter Codes:00:00 - Understanding Young Onset Colorectal Cancer10:03 - Screening Protocols and Challenges19:50 - The Role of Education in Cancer Awareness30:04 - Future Directions in Colorectal Cancer ResearchConnect with Us:Enjoyed this episode? Make sure to subscribe, rate, and review! Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, or Linkedin @MantaCares and visit our website at MantaCares.com for more episodes and updates.Disclaimer:All content and information provided in connection with Manta Cares is solely intended for informational and educational purposes only. This content and information is not intended to be a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.This episode was supported by an award from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. 

Welcome to the fourth episode of ASTCT Talks' exclusive 8-part series, supported by an educational grant from Sanofi US. In this episode, former ASTCT President Dr. Corey Cutler sits down with Dr. Connie R. Shi from the Cutaneous Oncology Program at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. They discuss Dr. Shi's recent article, Cutaneous Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease: Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis, Management, and Supportive Care.Tune in as they explore the complexities of cutaneous GVHD, including acute and chronic presentations, diagnostic challenges and skin-directed treatment strategies such as topical steroids and phototherapy. They also cover key considerations for recognizing and diagnosing cutaneous GVHD in patients of all skin tones and managing long-term complications like skin cancer risk.

In this episode, Bryce joins us at the end of the podcast to talk about our trip to Boston, an airshow visit, and his gold medal at Special Olympics Basketball Regionals. We also update the listeners with good news from Sandy's visit at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute along with other highlights since the last podcast episode.  It's important to share how life continues in this new season of our autism journey. We know we are not the only parents who have had a health crisis or other unexpected personal change that has impacted their parenting. We continue to trust the Lord and His plan for us as we take one day at a time. You can reach out directly to us if you want to purchase a signed edition of our book, "PARENTING AUTISM: The Early Years." We have several Author copies available.  Bryce is a funny, mechanical, HAPPY little guy who was diagnosed with autism at age two and is now eleven years old. His pure joy makes this world a much better place!We are humbled and honored to follow our calling and be Autism Ambassadors while helping others understand our world a little more than they did before listening to the podcast. We also feel called to bring light to a community that has experienced dark days after the "diagnosis". (Luke 1:79) You can follow us on our Parenting Autism Youtube Channel (Parenting Autism Show) and our Facebook & Instagram pages to see stories, pictures, and videos of our autism journey. You can also contact us through Facebook, Instagram, or by email: parentingautism@att.net.NOTE: Most of our Social Media content is on our YouTube channel @parentingautismpodcastSupport the show

Dr. Ko Un “Clara” Park and Dr. Mylin Torres present the latest evidence-based changes to the SLNB in early-stage breast cancer guideline. They discuss the practice-changing trials that led to the updated recommendations and topics such as when SLNB can be omitted, when ALND is indicated, radiation and systemic treatment decisions after SLNB omission, and the role of SLNB in special circumstances. We discuss the importance of shared decision-making and other ongoing and future de-escalation trials that will expand knowledge in this space. Read the full guideline update, “Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update” at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. TRANSCRIPT This guideline, clinical tools, and resources are available at http://www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. Read the full text of the guideline and review authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO-25-00099       Brittany Harvey: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines podcast, one of ASCO's podcasts delivering timely information to keep you up to date on the latest changes, challenges and advances in oncology. You can find all the shows, including this one at asco.org/podcasts. My name is Brittany Harvey and today I'm interviewing Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park from Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Dr. Mylin Torres from Glenn Family Breast Center at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, co-chairs on “Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.” Thank you for being here today, Dr. Park and Dr. Torres. Dr. Mylin Torres: Thank you, it's a pleasure to be here. Brittany Harvey: And before we discuss this guideline, I'd like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its guidelines and ensuring that the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy is followed for each guideline. The disclosures of potential conflicts of interest for the guideline panel, including Dr. Torres and Dr. Park, who have joined us here today, are available online with the publication of the guideline in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, which is linked in the show notes. To start us off, Dr. Torres, what is the scope and purpose of this guideline update on the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer? Dr. Mylin Torres: The update includes recommendations incorporating findings from trials released since our last published guideline in 2017. It includes data from nine randomized trials comparing sentinel lymph node biopsy alone versus sentinel lymph node biopsy with a completion axillary lymph node dissection. And notably, and probably the primary reason for motivating this update, are two trials comparing sentinel lymph node biopsy with no axillary surgery, all of which were published from 2016 to 2024. We believe these latter two trials are practice changing and are important for our community to know about so that it can be implemented and essentially represent a change in treatment paradigms. Brittany Harvey: It's great to hear about these practice changing trials and how that will impact these recommendation updates. So Dr. Park, I'd like to start by reviewing the key recommendations across all of these six overarching clinical questions that the guideline addressed. So first, are there patients where sentinel lymph node biopsy can be omitted? Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: Yes. The key change in the current management of early-stage breast cancer is the inclusion of omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with small, less than 2 cm breast cancer and a negative finding on preoperative axillary ultrasound. The patients who are eligible for omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy according to the SOUND and INSEMA trial are patients with invasive ductal carcinoma that is size smaller than 2 cm, Nottingham grades 1 and 2, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative in patients intending to receive adjuvant endocrine therapy, and no suspicious lymph nodes on axillary ultrasound or if they have only one suspicious lymph node, then the biopsy of that lymph node is benign and concordant according to the axillary ultrasound findings. The patients who are eligible for sentinel lymph node biopsy omission according to the SOUND and INSEMA trials were patients who are undergoing lumpectomy followed by whole breast radiation, especially in patients who are younger than 65 years of age. For patients who are 65 years or older, they also qualify for omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy in addition to consideration for radiation therapy omission according to the PRIME II and CALGB 9343 clinical trials. And so in those patients, a more shared decision-making approach with the radiation oncologist is encouraged. Brittany Harvey: Understood. I appreciate you outlining that criteria for when sentinel lymph node biopsy can be omitted and when shared decision making is appropriate as well. So then, Dr. Torres, in those patients where sentinel lymph node biopsy is omitted, how are radiation and systemic treatment decisions impacted? Dr. Mylin Torres: Thank you for that question. I think there will be a lot of consternation brought up as far as sentinel lymph node biopsy and the value it could provide in terms of knowing whether that lymph node is involved or not. But as stated, sentinel lymph node biopsy actually can be safely omitted in patients with low risk disease and therefore the reason we state this is that in both SOUND and INSEMA trial, 85% of patients who had a preoperative axillary ultrasound that did not show any signs of a suspicious lymph node also had no lymph nodes involved at the time of sentinel node biopsy. So 85% of the time the preoperative ultrasound is correct. So given the number of patients where preoperative ultrasound predicts for no sentinel node involvement, we have stated within the guideline that radiation and systemic treatment decisions should not be altered in the select patients with low risk disease where sentinel lymph node biopsy can be omitted. Those are the patients who are postmenopausal and age 50 or older who have negative findings on preoperative ultrasound with grade 1 or 2 disease, small tumors less than or equal to 2 cm, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer who undergo breast conserving therapy. Now, it's important to note in both the INSEMA and SOUND trials, the vast majority of patients received whole breast radiation. In fact, within the INSEMA trial, partial breast irradiation was not allowed. The SOUND trial did allow partial breast irradiation, but in that study, 80% of patients still received whole breast treatment. Therefore, the preponderance of data does support whole breast irradiation when you go strictly by the way the SOUND and INSEMA trials were conducted. Notably, however, most of the patients in these studies had node-negative disease and had low risk features to their primary tumors and would have been eligible for partial breast irradiation by the ASTRO Guidelines for partial breast treatment. So, given the fact that 85% of patients will have node-negative disease after a preoperative ultrasound, essentially what we're saying is that partial breast irradiation may be offered in these patients where omission of sentinel node biopsy is felt to be safe, which is in these low risk patients. Additionally, regional nodal irradiation is something that is not indicated in the vast majority of patients where omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy is prescribed and recommended, and that is because very few of these patients will actually end up having pathologic N2 disease, which is four or more positive lymph nodes. If you look at the numbers from both the INSEMA and the SOUND trial, the number of patients with pathologic N2 disease who did have their axilla surgically staged, it was less than 1% in both trials. So, in these patients, regional nodal irradiation, there would be no clear indication for that more aggressive and more extensive radiation treatment. The same principles apply to systemic therapy. As the vast majority of these patients are going to have node-negative disease with a low risk primary tumor, we know that postmenopausal women, even if they're found to have one to three positive lymph nodes, a lot of the systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy decisions are driven by genomic assay score which is taken from the primary tumor. And therefore nodal information in patients who have N1 disease may not be gained in patients where omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy is indicated in these low risk patients. 14% of patients have 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes in the SOUND trial and that number is about 15% in the INSEMA trial. Really only the clinically actionable information to be gained is if a patient has four or more lymph nodes or N2 disease in this low risk patient population. So, essentially when that occurs it's less than 1% of the time in these patients with very favorable primary tumors. And therefore we thought it was acceptable to stand by a recommendation of not altering systemic therapy or radiation recommendations based on omission of sentinel nodes because the likelihood of having four more lymph nodes is so low. Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: I think one thing to add is the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors to that and when we look at the NATALEE criteria for ribociclib in particular, where node-negative patients were included, the bulk majority of the patients who were actually represented in the NATALEE study were stage III disease. And for stage I disease to upstage into anatomic stage III, that patient would need to have pathologic N2 disease. And as Dr. Torres stated, the rate of having pathologic N2 disease in both SOUND and INSEMA studies were less than 1%. And therefore it would be highly unlikely that these patients would be eligible just based on tumor size and characteristics for ribociclib. So we think that it is still safe to omit sentinel lymph node biopsy and they would not miss out, if you will, on the opportunity for CDK4/6 inhibitors. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. I appreciate you describing those recommendations and then also the nuances of the evidence that's underpinning those recommendations, I think that's important for listeners. So Dr. Park, the next clinical question addresses patients with clinically node negative early stage breast cancer who have 1 or 2 sentinel lymph node metastases and who will receive breast conserving surgery with whole breast radiation therapy. For these patients, is axillary lymph node dissection needed? Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: No. And this is confirmed based on the ACOSOG Z0011 study that demonstrated in patients with 1 to 3 positive sentinel lymph node biopsy when the study compared completion axillary lymph node dissection to no completion axillary lymph node dissection, there was no difference. And actually, the 10-year overall survival as reported out in 2017 and at a median follow up of 9.3 years, the overall survival again for patients treated with sentinel lymph node biopsy alone versus those who were treated with axillary lymph node dissection was no different. It was 86.3% in sentinel lymph node biopsy versus 83.6% and the p-value was non-inferior at 0.02. And so we believe that it is safe for the select patients who are early stage with 1 to 2 positive lymph nodes on sentinel lymph node biopsy, undergoing whole breast radiation therapy to omit completion of axillary lymph node dissection. Brittany Harvey: Great, I appreciate you detailing what's recommended there as well. So then, to continue our discussion of axillary lymph node dissection, Dr. Torres, for patients with nodal metastases who will undergo mastectomy, is axillary lymph node dissection indicated? Dr. Mylin Torres: It's actually not and this is confirmed by two trials, the AMAROS study as well as the SENOMAC trial. And in both studies, they compared a full lymph node dissection versus sentinel lymph node biopsy alone in patients who are found to have 1 to 2 positive lymph nodes and confirmed that there was no difference in axillary recurrence rates, overall survival or disease-free survival. What was shown is that with more aggressive surgery completion axillary lymph node dissection, there were higher rates of morbidity including lymphedema, shoulder pain and paresthesias and arm numbness, decreased functioning of the arm and so there was only downside to doing a full lymph node dissection. Importantly, in both trials, if a full lymph node dissection was not done in the arm that where sentinel lymph node biopsy was done alone, all patients were prescribed post mastectomy radiation and regional nodal treatment and therefore both studies currently support the use of post mastectomy radiation and regional nodal treatment when a full lymph node dissection is not performed in these patients who are found to have N1 disease after a sentinel node biopsy. Brittany Harvey: Thank you. And then Dr. Park, for patients with early-stage breast cancer who do not have nodal metastases, can completion axillary lymph node dissection be omitted? Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: Yes, and this is an unchanged recommendation from the earlier ASCO Guidelines from 2017 as well as the 2021 joint guideline with Ontario Health, wherein patients with clinically node-negative early stage breast cancer, the staging of the axilla can be performed through sentinel lymph nodal biopsy and not completion axillary lymph node dissection. Brittany Harvey: Understood. So then, to wrap us up on the clinical questions here, Dr. Park, what is recommended regarding sentinel lymph node biopsy in special circumstances in populations? Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: One key highlight of the special populations is the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy for evaluation of the axilla in clinically node negative multicentric tumors. While there are no randomized clinical trials evaluating specifically the role of sentinel lymph nodal biopsy in multicentric tumors, in the guideline, we highlight this as one of the safe options for staging of the axilla and also for pregnant patients, these special circumstances, it is safe to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy in pregnant patients with the use of technetium - blue dye should be avoided in this population. In particular, I want to highlight where sentinel lymph node biopsy should not be used for staging of the axilla and that is in the population with inflammatory breast cancer. There are currently no studies demonstrating that sentinel lymph node biopsy is oncologically safe or accurate in patients with inflammatory breast cancer. And so, unfortunately, in this population, even after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, if they have a great response, the current guideline recommends mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. I appreciate your viewing both where sentinel lymph node can be offered in these special circumstances in populations and where it really should not be used. So then, Dr. Torres, you talked at the beginning about how there's been these new practice changing trials that really impacted these recommendations. So in your view, what is the importance of this guideline update and how does it impact both clinicians and patients? Dr. Mylin Torres: Thank you for that question. This update and these trials that inform the update represent a significant shift in the treatment paradigm and standard of care for breast cancer patients with early-stage breast cancer. When you think about it, it seems almost counterintuitive that physicians and patients would not want to know if a lymph node is involved with cancer or not through sentinel lymph node biopsy procedure. But what these studies show is that preoperative axillary ultrasound, 85% of the time when it's negative, will correctly predict whether a sentinel lymph node is involved with cancer or not and will also be negative. So if you have imaging that's negative, your surgery is likely going to be negative. Some people might ask, what's the harm in doing a sentinel lymph node biopsy? It's important to recognize that upwards of 10% of patients, even after sentinel lymph node biopsy will develop lymphedema, chronic arm pain, shoulder immobility and arm immobility. And these can have a profound impact on quality of life. And if there is not a significant benefit to assessing lymph nodes, particularly in someone who has a preoperative axillary ultrasound that's negative, then why put a patient at risk for these morbidities that can impact them lifelong? Ideally, the adoption of omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy will lead to more multidisciplinary discussion and collaboration in the preoperative setting especially with our diagnostic physicians, radiology to assure that these patients are getting an axillary ultrasound and determine how omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy may impact the downstream treatments after surgery, particularly radiation and systemic therapy decisions, and will be adopted in real world patients, and how clinically we can develop a workflow where together we can make the best decisions for our patients in collaboration with them through shared decision making. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's great to have these evidence-based updates for clinicians and patients to review and refer back to. So then finally, Dr. Park, looking to the future, what are the outstanding questions and ongoing trials regarding sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer? Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: I think to toggle on Dr. Torres's comment about shared decision making, the emphasis on that I think will become even more evident in the future as we incorporate different types of de-escalation clinical studies. In particular, because as you saw in the SOUND and INSEMA studies, when we de-escalate one modality of the multimodality therapy, i.e., surgery, the other modalities such as radiation therapy and systemic therapy were “controlled” where we were not de-escalating multiple different modalities. However, as the audience may be familiar with, there are other types of de-escalation studies in particular radiation therapy, partial breast irradiation or omission of radiation therapy, and in those studies, the surgery is now controlled where oftentimes the patients are undergoing surgical axillary staging. And conversely when we're looking at endocrine therapy versus radiation therapy clinical trials, in those studies also the majority of the patients are undergoing surgical axillary staging. And so now as those studies demonstrate the oncologic safety of omission of a particular therapy, we will be in a position of more balancing of the data of trying to select which patients are the safe patients for omission of certain types of modality, and how do we balance whether it's surgery, radiation therapy, systemic therapy, endocrine therapy. And that's where as Dr. Torres stated, the shared decision making will become critically important. I'm a surgeon and so as a surgeon, I get to see the patients oftentimes first, especially when they have early-stage breast cancer. And so I could I guess be “selfish” and just do whatever I think is correct. But whatever the surgeon does, the decision does have consequences in the downstream decision making. And so the field really needs to, as Dr. Torres stated earlier, rethink the workflow of how early-stage breast cancer patients are brought forth and managed as a multidisciplinary team. I also think in future studies the expansion of the data to larger tumors, T3, in particular,reater than 5 cm and also how do we incorporate omission in that population will become more evident as we learn more about the oncologic safety of omitting sentinel lymph node biopsy. Dr. Mylin Torres: In addition, there are other outstanding ongoing clinical trials that are accruing patients right now. They include the BOOG 2013-08 study, SOAPET, NAUTILUS and the VENUS trials, all looking at patients with clinical T1, T2N0 disease and whether omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy is safe with various endpoints including regional recurrence, invasive disease-free survival and distant disease-free survival. I expect in addition to these studies there will be more studies ongoing even looking at the omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy setting. And as our imaging improves in the future, there will be more studies improving other imaging modalities, probably in addition to axillary ultrasound in an attempt to accurately characterize whether lymph nodes within axilla contain cancer or not, and in that context whether omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy even in patients with larger tumors post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be done safely and could eventually become another shift in our treatment paradigm. Brittany Harvey: Yes. The shared decision making is key as we think about these updates to improve quality of life and we'll await data from these ongoing trials to inform future updates to this guideline. So I want to thank you both so much for your extensive work to update this guideline and thank you for your time today. Dr. Park and Dr. Torres. Dr. Mylin Torres: Thank you. Dr. Ko Un "Clara" Park: Thank you. Brittany Harvey: And thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast. To read the full guideline, go to www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines. You can also find many of our guidelines and interactive resources in the free ASCO Guidelines app available in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you've heard today, please rate and review the podcast and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode.   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.  

Dr Adrienne G Waks from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, reviews recent trial updates and their significance for the management of breast cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Host: Charles Turck, PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP Guest: Aaron Logan, MD, PhD Although acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a relatively rare disease with fewer than 7,000 people diagnosed each year in the US,1,2 there's been a lot of progress in the management of B-cell ALL over the years. One key development comes from the E1910 Phase III trial, which explored the addition of blinatumomab to frontline consolidation chemotherapy for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative B-lineage ALL (B-ALL).3 Joining Dr. Charles Turck to discuss the impacts of this data on B-ALL clinical guidelines and practice is Dr. Aaron Logan. Dr. Logan is a Professor of Clinical Medicine in the Division of Hematology/Oncology and Director of the Hematologic Malignancies Tissue Bank at UCSF. References: National Cancer Institute. SEER Cancer Stat Facts: Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL). Accessed at https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/alyl.html on March 31, 2025 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL). Accessed September 17, 2024. https://www.dana-farber.org/cancer-care/types/acute-lymphoblastic-leukemia Litzow MR, et al. Blood. 2022;140(suppl 2):LBA-1

Everyone is at risk of breast cancer. Some are more at risk than others due to hereditary factors – such as a family history of cancers – and lifestyle choices that affect our overall health. Knowing your risk of breast cancer can help you decide what steps to take to lower your risk. Joining me today is Dr. Jennifer Ligibel, a Susan G. Komen Scholar and Komen grantee, Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, Senior Physician at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and an expert on the impact of lifestyle factors, cancer risk and outcomes. Through more than a dozen lifestyle intervention trials, Dr. Ligibel has evaluated the impact of exercise, weight loss, fitness, body composition and quality of life in cancer patients and survivors.

Dennis connects via Zoom with Roshan Sethi, director of the new film A Nice Indian Boy, which is about and Indian-American doctor named Naveen (Roshan's real-life boyfriend Karan Soni) who falls who falls for a photographer named Jay (Jonathan Groff), who is white but who was adopted and raised by Indian-American parents. Complications ensue when Naveen brings Jay home to meet his family. Roshan talks about the film's origins as a stage play, directing his real life boyfriend Karan Soni in love scenes with Jonathan Groff and the movie's theme of negotiating life after coming out and how big or small do you want to play in terms of being your true self. Roshan also talks about his second career as a doctor and how he works several months a year at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts. Other topics include: what gay life is like in India, being mentored by indie mainstay Mark Duplass, how Jonathan Groff leads from love all the time, not being allowed to watch Hollywood movies growing up and the moment from making A Nice Indian Boy that he knows he'll never forget.

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about!Ryan Leak – Author & Keynote Speaker explained to Dan How To Work With Complicated People… The Dana Farber Marathon Challenge - goal of raising $8.5 million for the Claudia Adams Barr Program in Innovative Basic Cancer Research at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Jack Fultz - 1976 Boston Marathon® Men's Open Division Champion, has served as the team's training advisor since the DFMC's inception checked in with Dan.World's best two-wheel racers converging on Gillette Stadium in Foxborough for one action-packed race on Saturday, April 5, 2025. With Tristan Lane - 450SX Class racer.Your Pet Can Meet the Easter Bunny This Weekend in Massachusetts! Lauren Dalis – Simon Mall Team Member- Director of Marketing and Business Development at Burlington Mall shared the details. Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio app and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!

There is something uniquely haunting about many neurological diseases. These conditions often don't only affect the body — they reshape the very foundation of who we are, our memories, our personalities, our language. When the brain begins to fail, the boundary between illness and identity start to blur; the person we know begins to fade even before their life has ended. In this episode, we are joined by John Rhee, MD, MPH, a neuro-oncologist and palliative care physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, whose work sits at the intersection of science, suffering, and the soul. He cares for patients with brain tumors and neurodegenerative diseases, conditions that challenge our deepest assumptions about selfhood, dignity, and what it means to live a meaningful life. Dr. Rhee is also the co-founder and executive director of The Hippocratic Society, a community of clinicians that aims to cultivate virtues that characterize good medical practitioners and ideals that make medicine a sacred profession. Over the course of our conversation, we talk about suffering — not just physical pain, but the existential kind. We explore how the brain anchors our identity, how its decline confronts us with profound questions, how medical education can improve by training doctors to be more reflective in their work, why an element of spirituality remains critical to medicine, what it means to accompany someone through decline, and more.In this episode, you'll hear about: 3:00 - Dr. Rhee‘s path to medicine6:30 - The general scope of focus for a neuro-oncologist 16:07 - Understanding the brain from both medical and existential perspectives 26:36 - The mission of The Hippocratic Society40:45 - Why “virtue” is central to the focus of The Hippocratic Society 49:34 - How to get involved with The Hippocratic SocietyVisit our website www.TheDoctorsArt.com where you can find transcripts of all episodes.If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe, rate, and review our show, available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. If you know of a doctor, patient, or anyone working in health care who would love to explore meaning in medicine with us on the show, feel free to leave a suggestion in the comments or send an email to info@thedoctorsart.com.Copyright The Doctor's Art Podcast 2025

In this week's episode of MedNews Week's Oncology Unplugged, host Chandler Park, MD, a medical oncologist at Norton Cancer Institute in Louisville, Kentucky, spoke with Ann S. LaCasce, MD, MMSc, an associate professor of medicine and a lymphoma specialist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts and Director of the Dana-Farber/Mass General Brigham Fellowship in Hematology/Oncology. LaCasce shares her journey into hematologic oncology, shaped by early mentors—including her father—and how a passion for art history sparked her interest in pattern recognition and morphology, which are skills central to lymphoma diagnosis. Their discussion explores key advancements in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma management, including efforts to reduce long-term toxicity by minimizing radiation in early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. LaCasce also highlights the incorporation of novel agents, such as brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) and checkpoint inhibitors, into frontline regimens aimed at improving outcomes without increasing treatment burden. Park and LaCasce also discuss the importance of education and mentorship. She describes her work directing one of the country's largest hematology/oncology fellowship programs and her leadership in founding the international Women in Lymphoma network to foster collaboration and gender equity in the field. From clinical innovation to workforce development, LaCasce provides a comprehensive look into the role of multidisciplinary research, mentorship, and global engagement in advancing the future of lymphoma management.

Dr Scott Kopetz from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and Dr Jeffrey Meyerhardt from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston summarize the most clinically relevant research findings and data presented over the past year for patients with colorectal cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Dr Scott Kopetz from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and Dr Jeffrey Meyerhardt from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston summarize the most clinically relevant research findings and data presented over the past year for patients with colorectal cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Dr Scott Kopetz from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and Dr Jeffrey Meyerhardt from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston summarize the most clinically relevant research findings and data presented over the past year for patients with colorectal cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Dr Scott Kopetz from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and Dr Jeffrey Meyerhardt from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston summarize the most clinically relevant research findings and data presented over the past year for patients with colorectal cancer. CME information and select publications here.

Listen to ASCO's Journal of Clinical Oncology Art of Oncology article, "I Hope So Too” by Dr. Richard Leiter from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. The article is followed by an interview with Leiter and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Leiter shares that even in the most difficult moments, clinicians can find space to hope with patients and their families. TRANSCRIPT  Narrator: I Hope So Too, by Richard E. Leiter, MD, MA  “You're always the negative one,” Carlos' mother said through our hospital's Spanish interpreter. “You want him to die.” Carlos was 21 years old. A few years earlier he had been diagnosed with AML and had undergone an allogeneic bone marrow transplant. He was cured. But now, he lay in our hospital's bone marrow transplant (BMT) unit, his body attacked by the very treatment that had given him a new life. He had disseminated graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in his liver, his lungs, his gut, and, most markedly, his skin. The BMT team had consulted us to help with Carlos' pain. GVHD skin lesions covered his body. They were raw and weeping. Although the consult was ostensibly for pain, the subtext could not have been clearer. Carlos was dying, and the primary team needed help navigating the situation. As his liver and kidney function declined, the need to address goals of care with Carlos' mother felt like it was growing more urgent by the hour. Difficult cases, like a young person dying, transform an inpatient unit. Rather than the usual hum of nurses, patient care associates, pharmacy technicians, and unit managers going about their daily work, the floor becomes enveloped in tension. Daily rhythms jump a half step ahead of the beat; conversations among close colleagues fall out of tune. “Thank goodness you're here,” nurse after nurse told my attending and me, the weight of Carlos' case hanging from their shoulders and tugging at the already puffy skin below their eyes. I was a newly minted palliative care fellow, just over a month into my training. I was developing quickly, but as can happen with too many of us, my confidence sat a few steps beyond my skills. I thought I had a firm grasp of palliative care communication skills and was eager to use them. I asked for feedback from my attendings and genuinely worked to incorporate it into my practice. At the same time, I silently bristled when they took charge of a conversation in a patient's room. Over the ensuing week, my attending and I leaned in. We spent hours at Carlos' bedside. If I squinted, I could have convinced myself that Carlos' pain was better. Every day, however, felt worse. We were not making any progress with Carlos' mother, who mostly sat silently in a corner of his room. Aside from occasionally moaning, Carlos did not speak. We learned little, if anything, about him as a person, what he enjoyed, what he feared. We treated him, and we barely knew him. Each morning, I would dutifully update my attending about the overnight events. “Creatinine is up. Bili is up.” She would shake her head in sadness. “Doesn't she get that he's dying?” one of the nurses asked us. “I feel like I'm torturing him. He's jaundiced and going into renal failure. I'm worried we're going to need to send him to the ICU. But even that won't help him. Doesn't she understand?”  We convened a family meeting. It was a gorgeous August afternoon, but the old BMT unit had no windows. We sat in a cramped, dark gray family meeting room. Huddled beside Carlos' mother was everyone on the care team including the BMT attending, nurse, social worker, chaplain, and Spanish interpreter. We explained that his kidneys and liver were failing and that we worried time was short. Carlos' mother had heard it all before, from his clinicians on rounds every day, from the nursing staff tenderly caring for him at his bedside, and from us. “He's going to get better,” she told us. “I don't understand why this is happening to him. He's going to recover. He was cured of his leukemia. I have hope that his kidneys and liver are going to get better.” “I hope they get better,” I told her. I should have stopped there. Instead, in my eagerness to show my attending, and myself, I could navigate the conversation on my own, I mistakenly kept going. “But none of us think they will.” It was after this comment that she looked me right in the eyes and told me I wanted Carlos to die. I knew, even then, that she was right. In that moment, I did want Carlos to die. I could not sit with all the suffering—his, his mother's, and his care team's. I needed her to adopt our narrative—that we had done all we could to help Carlos live, and now, we would do all we could to help him die comfortably. I needed his mother to tell me she understood, to accept what was going on. I failed to recognize what now seems so clear. Of course, his mother understood what was happening. She saw it. But how could we have asked her to accept what is fundamentally unacceptable? To comprehend the incomprehensible?  At its best, serious illness communication not only empathetically shares news, be it good or bad, but also allows patients and families adequate time to adjust to it. For some, this adjustment happens quickly, and in a single conversation, they can digest difficult news and move to planning the next steps in care for themselves or their loved ones. For most, they need more time to process, and we are able to advance the discussion over the course of multiple visits. My attending led the conversations from then on. She worked with the BMT attending, and they compassionately kept Carlos out of the intensive care unit. He died a few days later, late in the evening. I never saw his mother again. I could not have prevented Carlos' death. None of us could have. None of us could have spared his mother from the grief that will stay with her for the rest of her life. Over those days, though, I could have made things just a little bit less difficult for her. I could have protected her from the overcommunication that plagues our inpatient units when patients and families make decisions different from those we would make for ourselves and our loved ones. I could have acted as her guide rather than as her cross-examiner. I could have hoped that Carlos stopped suffering and, genuinely, hoped he got better although I knew it was next to impossible. Because hope is a generous collaborator, it can coexist with rising creatinines, failing livers, and fears about intubation. Even in our most difficult moments as clinicians, we can find space to hope with our patients, if we look for it. Now—years later, when I talk to a terrified, grieving family member, I recall Carlos' mother's eyes piercing mine. When they tell me they hope their loved one gets better, I know how to respond. “I hope so too.” And I do. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Hello and welcome to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology, which features essays and personal reflections from authors exploring their experience in the oncology field. I'm your host, Mikkael Sekeres. I'm professor of Medicine and Chief of the Division of Hematology at the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at University of Miami. Today I am thrilled to be joined by Dr. Ricky Leiter from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. In this episode, we will be discussing his Art of Oncology article, “I Hope So, Too.” Our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Ricky, welcome to our podcast and thank you so much for joining us. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Thanks so much for having me. I'm really excited to be here. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Ricky, I absolutely adored your essay. It really explored, I think, a combination of the vulnerability we have when we're trying to take care of a patient who's dying and the interesting badlands we're placed in when we're also a trainee and aren't quite sure of our own skills and how to approach difficult situations. But before we dive into the meat of this, can you tell us a little bit about yourself? Where are you from and where did you do your training? Dr. Ricky Leiter: Sure, yeah. Thanks so much. So I grew up in Toronto, Canada, and then moved down to the States for college. I was actually a history major, so I never thought I was going to go into medicine. And long story short, here I am. I did a Post-Bac, did a year of research, and ended up at Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine for med school, where I did a joint degree in medical humanities and bioethics. And that really shaped my path towards palliative care because I found this field where I said, “You know, wow, I can use these skills I'm learning in my Master's at the bedside with patients thinking about life and death and serious illness and what does that all mean in the broader context of society.” So, moved from Chicago to New York for residency, where I did residency and chief residency in internal medicine at New York Presbyterian Cornell, and then came up to the Harvard Interprofessional Palliative Care Program, where I did a clinical fellowship, then a research fellowship with Dana-Farber, and have been on faculty here since. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Fantastic. Any thoughts about moving back to Canada? Dr. Ricky Leiter: We talk about it every now and then. I'm really happy here. My family's really happy here. We love life in Boston, so we're certainly here for the time being. Definitely. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: And the weather's so similar. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Yeah, I'm used to the cold. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I apparently did not move to Miami. I'm curious, this may be an unfair question, as you have a really broad background in humanities and ethics. Are there one or two books that you read where you think, “Gee, I'm still applying these principles,” or, “This really still resonates with me in my day to day care of patients who have cancer diagnosis”? Dr. Ricky Leiter: Oh, wow, that is a great question. There are probably too many to list. I think one is When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi, which I didn't read in my training, I read afterwards. And I think he's such a beautiful writer. The story is so poignant, and I just think Paul Kalanithi's insights into what it means to be living with a serious illness and then ultimately dying from cancer as a young man, as someone in medicine, has really left an imprint on me. Also, Arthur Kleinman. The Illness Narratives, I think, is such a big one, too. And similarly, Arthur Frank's work. I mean, just thinking about narrative and patient stories and how that impacts our clinical care, and also us as clinicians. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: And I suspect us as writers also. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Absolutely. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: We imprint on the books that were influential to us. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Certainly. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: So how about your story as a writer? How long have you been writing narrative pieces? Is this something you came to later in your career, or did you catch the bug early as an undergrad or even younger? Dr. Ricky Leiter: So I caught it early, and then it went dormant for a little while and came back. As a history major, as someone who is humanities minded, I loved writing my papers in college. Like, I was one of those nerds who got, like, really, really excited about the history term paper I was writing. You know, it was difficult, but I was doing it, particularly at the last minute. But I really loved the writing process. Going through my medical training, I didn't have as much time as I wanted, and so writing was sort of on the back burner. And then actually in my research fellowship, we had a writing seminar, our department, and one of the sessions was on writing Op-eds and perspective pieces. And we had a free write session and I wrote something sort of related to my research at the time I was thinking about, and Joanne Wolfe, who was helping to lead the session, pediatric palliative care physician, she said, “You know, this is really great. Like, where are you going to publish this?” And I said, “Joanne, what do you mean? I just wrote this in this session as an exercise.” She said, “No, you should publish this.” And I did. And then the bug came right back and I thought, “Wow, this is something that I really enjoy and I can actually make a difference with it. You know, getting a message out, allowing people to think a little bit differently or more deeply about clinical cases, both in the lay press and in medical publications.: So I've essentially been doing it since and it's become a larger and larger part of my career. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: That's absolutely wonderful, Ricky. Where is it that you publish then, outside of Art of Oncology? Dr. Ricky Leiter: So I've had a couple of pieces in the New York Times, which was really exciting. Some in STAT News on their opinion section called First Opinion, and had a few pieces in the New England Journal as well, and in the Palliative Care Literature, the Journal of Palliative Medicine. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Outstanding. And about palliative care issues and end of life issues, I assume? Dr. Ricky Leiter: Sort of all of the above. Palliative care, serious illness, being in medical training, I wrote a fair bit about what it was like to be on the front lines of the pandemic. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah, that was a traumatic period of time, I think, for a lot of us. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Absolutely. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I'm curious about your writing process. What triggers a story and how do you face the dreaded blank page? Dr. Ricky Leiter: So it's hard to pin down exactly what triggers a story for me. I think sometimes I'm in a room and for whatever reason, there's a moment in the room and I say, “You know what? There's a story here. There's something about what's going on right now that I want to write.” And oftentimes I don't know what it is until I start writing. Maybe it's a moment or a scene and I start writing like, “What am I trying to say here? What's the message? And sometimes there isn't a deeper message. The story itself is so poignant or beautiful that I want to tell that story. Other times it's using that story. And the way I think about my writing is using small moments to ask bigger questions in medicine. So, like, what does it mean to have a good death? You know, one piece I wrote was I was thinking about that as I struggled to give someone what I hoped would be a good death, that I was thinking more broadly, what does this mean as we're thinking about the concept of a good death? Another piece I wrote was about a patient I cared for doing kidney palliative care. And she was such a character. We adored her so much and she was challenging and she would admit that. This was someone I wanted to write about. And I talked to her about it and she was honored to have her story told. Unfortunately, it came out shortly after her death. But she was such a vibrant personality. I said, “There's something here that I want to write about.” In terms of the blank page, I think it's overcoming that fear of writing and procrastination and all of that. I think I have a specific writing playlist that I put on that helps me, that I've listened to so many times. You know, no words, but I know the music and it really helps me get in the zone. And then I start writing. And I think it's one of those things where sometimes I'm like, “Oh, I really don't like how this is sounding, but I'm going to push through anyways.” as Anne Lamott's blank first draft, just to get something out there and then I can play with it and work with it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Great. I love the association you have with music and getting those creative juices flowing and picking ‘le mot juste' in getting things down on a page. It's also fascinating how we sometimes forget the true privilege that we have as healthcare providers in the people we meet, the cross section of humanity and the personalities who can trigger these wonderful stories. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Absolutely. Absolutely. It's such a privilege and I think it often will go in unexpected directions and can really impact, for me certainly, my practice of medicine and how I approach the next patients or even patients years down the road. You remember those patients and those stories. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Right. You write with such obvious love and respect for your patients. You also write about that tenuous phase of our careers when we're not yet attendings but have finished residency and have demonstrated a modicum of competence. You know, I used to say that fellowship is really the worst of all worlds, right? As an attending, you have responsibility, but you don't have to do as much of the grunt work. As a resident, you do the grunt work, but you don't really have the responsibility. And in fellowship, you've got it all. You've got to do the grunt work, and you have the responsibility. Can you tie those two concepts together, though? How does our relationship to our patients change over the course of our careers? Dr. Ricky Leiter: Early on, if you think about the imprinting of patients as you go down the road, so many of the patients who have imprinted on me were the ones earlier in my career, before I was more formed as a clinician because of experiences like the one I wrote about in “I Hope so Too,” where the skills are forming, and sometimes where it's smooth sailing, and sometimes we're muddling through. And those cases where we feel like we're muddling through or things don't go as we hope, those are the ones that really leave an impact. And I think it's those little moments that sort of nudge your career and your skill set in different ways. I think the patients now, they still leave a mark on me, but I think it's in different ways. And I think oftentimes it's less about my skills. Although my skills are still very much developing, even, you know, almost a decade out, they impact me differently than they once did. I feel more confident in what I'm doing, and it's more about my relationship to this situation rather than the situation's impact on my skills. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Got it. Got it. It's interesting. I once wrote a piece with Tim Gilligan, who also spent some time at Dana Farber and is a communications expert, about how there's this kind of dualism in how we're trained. We're trained with communications courses and how to talk to patients, and it almost does the opposite. It kind of raises the flag that, “Wait a second, maybe I've been talking to people the wrong way.” And as you get more mature in your career, I almost feel as if you revert back to the way you were before medical school, when you just talked to people like they were people and didn't have a special voice for patients. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Yeah, I think that's right. And I think in palliative care, we spend so much time thinking about the communication. And this was the most challenging piece about fellowship because then- and our fellowship directors told this to us, and now we teach it to our fellows. You know that you come in, the people who choose to go into palliative care, have a love of communication, have some degree of skill coming in, and then what happens is we break those skills down and teach them a new skill set. So it gets clunkier before it gets better. And the time I was writing about in this piece was August of my fellowship year, exactly when that process was happening, where I'm trying to incorporate the new skills, I had my old way of doing things, and it's just not always aligning. And I think you're right that as the skills become embedded, as you go on throughout your career, where it feels much more natural, and then you do really connect with people as people still using the skills and the techniques that we've learned in our communication courses, but they become part of who you are as a clinician. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Nicely put. Your story is particularly poignant because the patient you described was dying from the very treatment that cured his leukemia. It's this, I'm going to use the term badlands again. It's this terrible badlands we sometimes find ourselves where, yes, the treatment has been successful, but at the cost of a human life. Do you think that as healthcare providers, we react differently when a patient is sick, from side effects to our recommendations, as opposed to sick from their disease? Dr. Ricky Leiter: I think we probably do. It's hard because I think every patient in every case pulls at us in different directions. And this case was Carlos, who I called him, it was such a challenging situation for so many reasons. He was young. He really couldn't communicate with us. We were talking to his mom. Like, there were so many layers to this. But I think you're right. that underlying this, there's a sense of “We did everything we could beautifully, to cure him of his disease, and now he's dying of that, and what does that mean for us as clinicians, physicians. That becomes really hard and hard to sit with and hold as we're going back every day. And I say that as the palliative care consultant. So I can only imagine for the oncology team caring for him, who had taken him through this, what that felt like. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Well, you describe, again, beautifully in the piece, how the nursing staff would approach you and were so relieved that you were there. And it was, you know, you got the sense- I mean, obviously, it's tragic because it's a young person who died, but you almost got the sense there was this guilt among the providers, right? Not only is it a young person dying, but dying from graft versus host disease, not from leukemia. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Absolutely. There was guilt because of what he was dying of, because of how he was dying that he was so uncomfortable and it took us so long to get his pain under control and we really couldn't get him that balance of pain control and alertness that we always strive for was pretty much impossible from the beginning. And so it was layer upon layer of distress and guilt and sadness and grief that we could just feel every day as we stepped onto the floor. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah. I don't know if you've ever read- there's a biography of Henry Kaplan, who was considered the father of radiation therapy, where there was this incredible moment during his career when he presented at the AACR Annual Meeting the first cures for cancers, right? No one believed it. It was amazing, actually curing cancer. And then a couple years later, people started dribbling into his clinic with cancers because of the radiation therapy he gave, and he actually went into a clinical depression as a result of it. So it can affect providers at such a deep level. And I think there's this undiscussed guilt that permeates the staff when that happens. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Absolutely, absolutely. It's right there under the surface. And we rarely give ourselves the space to talk about it, right? To really sit down and say, how are we approaching this situation? How do we feel about it? And to sit with each other and acknowledge that this is horrible. It's a horrible situation. And we feel guilty and we feel sad and we feel grief about this. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's been just terrific getting to know you and to read your piece, Ricky Leiternd, a we really appreciate your writing. Keep doing what you do. Dr. Ricky Leiter: Oh, thank you so much. It's a privilege to get the piece out there and particularly in JCO and to be here with you. So I really appreciate it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Until next time, thank you for listening to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all of ASCO's shows at asco.org/podcasts.   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.   Like, share and subscribe so you never miss an episode and leave a rating or review.  Guest Bio: Dr. Ricky Leiter is from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

Join Drs. Rahul & Rohit Gosain in this insightful episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast as they continue their treatment algorithm series, focusing on the rapidly evolving landscape of bladder cancer. They are joined by Dr. Joaquim Bellmunt, a medical oncologist and director of bladder cancer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, who shares his expertise on the latest treatment paradigms for both muscle invasive and non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. In this episode, you'll learn about: •⁠  ⁠The distinction between muscle invasive and non-muscle invasive bladder cancer and their respective treatment approaches. •⁠  ⁠The role of BCG treatment and emerging options for BCG-refractory disease. •⁠  ⁠The significance of the NIAGARA trial and its implications for neoadjuvant chemotherapy and perioperative immunotherapy. •⁠  ⁠Current strategies for managing muscle invasive bladder cancer, including the use of cisplatin-based therapies and the introduction of immunotherapy. •⁠  ⁠Insights into the metastatic space, including the use of enfortumab vedotin (EV) and pembrolizumab, and the importance of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in treatment decisions. •⁠  ⁠Key side effects to monitor with various treatments and the importance of maintaining quality of life for patients. Whether you're a healthcare professional or simply interested in the latest advancements in oncology, this episode is packed with valuable information. YouTube: https://youtu.be/apUp2-BkgWQ Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/   Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe for more discussions on cancer treatment algorithms!  

Sunday, tune into NESN for the Jimmy Fund Dana-Farber Spring Training Takeover, featuring the Braves vs. Red Sox game, a special broadcast that highlights the incredible work being done to support cancer patients and research. In this powerful episode, we dive into a conversation about the intersection of baseball, cancer research, and patient experiences. Joining the show are Dr. Ben Schlechter, a medical oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, who discusses the challenges of treating colorectal cancer and the importance of early screenings, especially for younger individuals. We also hear from Eric Donovan, a courageous survivor of Ewing sarcoma, who shares his memories of receiving treatment at the Jimmy Fund Clinic and how the Red Sox Spring Training trip provided hope and joy during his battle. Finally, Lisa Scherber, Director of Patient and Family Programs at Dana-Farber's Jimmy Fund Clinic, and Brock Holt, former Red Sox player and Co-Chair of the Jimmy Fund, talk about the emotional impact of these trips on both the patients and staff, as well as the lasting bond between the Red Sox and the Dana-Farber community. Tune in for an inspiring episode filled with incredible stories of resilience and hope, all on 310 To Left, presented by your New England Ford Dealers and hosted by Tom Caron. GET NESN 360: https://nesn.com/download-the-nesn-app/   Subscribe on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/NESN Twitter: https://twitter.com/NESN Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NESN/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nesn TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nesn Twitch: https://twitch.tv/nesn/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to another episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain are joined by Dr. Toni Choueiri, a leading GU medical oncologist from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Together, they dive into the highlights from the GU ASCO 2025 conference, covering key studies and updates in the world of genitourinary oncology. Episode Highlights: •⁠  ⁠TALAPRO-2: An in-depth discussion on the role of PARP inhibitors in prostate cancer, focusing on the study's design, findings, and the importance of germline and NGS testing. •⁠  ⁠NIAGARA Update: Insights into the new standard of care for resectable muscle-invasive bladder cancer and the promising results from the perioperative approach with Durvalumab. •⁠  ⁠CheckMate-9ER Update: A look at the combination of Cabozantinib and Nivolumab in first-line metastatic RCC, including the latest findings and implications for treatment beyond the first line. •⁠  TiNivo2: Exploring the role of Tivozanib in the treatment landscape of RCC and potential sequencing strategies. Join us for this informative discussion that aims to keep community oncologists up to date with the latest advancements in cancer care. If you find this episode helpful, please share it with your colleagues and leave us a review! YouTube: https://youtu.be/OzeHhyAdF9Q Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠ Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Don't forget to subscribe for more insights and updates from the Oncology Brothers!

February 25: In this episode of TownHall, Albert Villarin, MD, VP and CMIO at Nuvance Health, Christine Silvers, MD, Healthcare Executive Advisor at Amazon Web Services, Praveen Meka, MD, Senior Physician/Hospitalist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Qing Liu, Senior Solutions Architect (Healthcare) at Amazon Web Services explore the transformative impact of AI in healthcare. They discuss real-world applications such as AI for patient referrals, document processing, diagnostic tools, and personalized medicine. Examples include the development of ConsultBot for interpreting complex blood tests and the use of AI for remote patient monitoring in underserved areas. How can AI improve patient outcomes and reduce errors in clinical settings? They also address challenges like data security, ethical considerations, and bridging the technology adoption gap among clinicians. What are the biggest hurdles in implementing AI in everyday medical practice? The episode underscores the potential of AI to enhance clinical outcomes, reduce errors, and improve patient satisfaction. Subscribe: This Week HealthTwitter: This Week HealthLinkedIn: This Week HealthDonate: Alex's Lemonade Stand: Foundation for Childhood Cancer

Genetic testing can be both illuminating and intimidating. What exactly is genetic testing, and who might benefit most? We spoke with Huma Q. Rana MD, MPH, Clinical Director of the Division of Cancer Genetics and Prevention at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, about the impacts of genetic insights, breaking down the process, addressing logistical hurdles, like gathering your family history, and the range of possible test outcomes positive and what each might mean for your health and the health of your loved ones.

Emily Brennan's journey into the world of marathon running is nothing short of inspirational. After college, she took up running to get healthier, finding it was more than just a physical endeavor; it became a balm for stress and a mental clarity booster. Her story is a testament to the transformative power of running, highlighting how it has become an integral part of her life and well-being. From her initial races with Team Alzheimer's to securing a coveted spot in the Boston Marathon, Emily's dedication shines through.The push to run the Boston Marathon was fueled by a heartfelt mission—raising funds for Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Emily's determination to support cancer research was sparked by the battles faced by her close friend's father and her cousin, making every mile run deeply personal. She shares the challenges of balancing rigorous training with the demands of fundraising, likening it to juggling multiple part-time jobs. Yet, the joy of being unexpectedly offered a charity spot filled her with gratitude and reinforced her commitment to making a difference in the fight against cancer.If you'd like to support Emily's mission, you can donate directly through her Dana-Farber Fundraising Page and follow her updates on Instagram and Facebook.As Emily prepares to tackle the infamous Heartbreak Hill, she reflects on the camaraderie and support of the running community. Training with a team that shares her passion for fighting cancer has been invigorating, bringing her closer to like-minded individuals whose personal stories inspire her further. Throughout her training journey, Emily has embraced positive self-talk, focusing on enjoying the marathon experience rather than chasing personal records. Her story encourages us all to savor the moment and use our passions to contribute to causes that matter deeply.Have questions or want to chat? Send me a text!Support the showJoin the newsletter list for updates, special offers, and exclusive behind-the-scenes content.Join fellow pod and running enthusiasts at The Stride Collective community on Facebook or follow us on Instagram.

Rev. Wendy Page, Affiliate Minister, preaching Worship service given February 16, 2025 Prayer by Rev. Tricia Brennan, Adjunct Minister https://firstparish.info/ First Parish A liberal religious community, welcoming to all First gathered 1739 Working as a Hospice Chaplain, Rev. Wendy Page has had the privilege of accompanying patients and their families on their journey toward death. They have shared their hopes and comforts, their beliefs and their fears and have opened their lives to her. Wendy asks, "What can we learn from their vulnerability and their life journeys?" The Reverend Wendy Page is an Affiliate Minister of First Parish Arlington. She has been a member of First Parish since 1999 and First Parish supported her on her journey into ministry. She is a graduate of Andover Newton Theological School and was ordained in the First Parish Sanctuary in 2017.  She has served as a Hospice Chaplain and a hospital chaplain. Previous to her ministry, Wendy was a Software Engineer and Manager. She is an avid cyclist and has participated for 25 years in the annual Pan Mass Challenge fundraiser for the Dana Farber Cancer Institute. She also is a quilter, a gardener and loves to sing. *Note: This service was not filmed in the Meetinghouse and was only offered live online via Zoom due to inclement weather. Offering and Giving First For February 2025, the Giving First recipient is the Arlington Youth Counseling Center (AYCC). AYCC is a state-licensed, community-based mental health center serving Arlington youth (ages 3-21) and their families. AYCC is the leading provider of outpatient and school-based child and adolescent mental health services in Arlington, offering individual, group, and family counseling, psychiatric evaluation, and medication management. Central to its mission, AYCC is committed to ensuring that all community youth and families have access to comprehensive, culturally sensitive, and high-quality mental health care, regardless of their ability to pay. In the past fiscal year, 22% of our clients had public insurance or received grant funding to help cover the costs of care. In addition to mental health services, AYCC oversees First Step- a support group for victims and survivors of domestic violence. The remaining half of your offering supports the life and work of this Parish. To donate using your smartphone, you may text “fpuu” to 73256. Then follow the directions in the texts you receive. About our Lead Minister: Rev. Marta Flanagan began her ministry as our twentieth called minister at First Parish in the fall of 2009. She is a genuine and forthright preacher. In conversation she is direct and engaging. She speaks of prayer with as much ease as she laughs at human foibles. We call her “Marta.” Marta is a religious liberal, a theist, a feminist, and a lover of the woods. As a student of American history at Smith College she was captivated by the stories of social reformers who were motivated and sustained by their faith. That led her to consider the ministry and to study at Harvard Divinity School from where she was graduated in 1986. She was the first woman minister in the city of Salem, Massachusetts, serving at the First Universalist Church there (1987-1997). She served in a co-ministry at South Church (Unitarian Universalist) in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, (1997-2005) from where she is minister emerita. Marta served as interim minister in Montpelier, Vermont (2008-2009). She is trained as a spiritual director. For three years she lived in the Vermont woods practicing voluntary simplicity and the spiritual life. Marta enjoys the vitality of First Parish and our strong sense of community. She celebrates the yearning for depth and the desire to make a difference in the world that she finds here.

Breast cancer treatment today is becoming more personalized and more precise. Precision medicine is rapidly expanding the options patients have for treating their cancer while helping them maintain a desired quality of life. A common mutation in breast cancer called PIK3CA affects more than 1 in 3 people with breast cancer, making it harder to treat. This mutation often leads to worse outcomes for these patients compared to others. Scientists are now developing new treatments that target this mutation specifically, aiming to reduce side effects and improve treatment outcomes, such as shrinking tumors or preventing disease progression. Today, we are speaking with Dr. Sarah Sammons of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to explore the exciting new possibilities brought by personalized medicine, including whether it can help slow disease progression and how it can it improve patients' abilities to potentially live more active and productive lives while on treatment.

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, Drs. Rohit and Rahul Gosain welcome Dr. Sarah Sammons from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to discuss the treatment landscape for HER2-positive breast cancer. Building on their previous discussions about triple-negative breast cancer, Drs. Gosain and Sammons dive deep into the treatment algorithms for early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Key topics include: •⁠  ⁠Treatment paradigms for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer, including the APT trial and considerations for neoadjuvant therapy. •⁠  ⁠The standard of care for locally advanced disease with TCHP and managing associated toxicities. •⁠  ⁠Insights into the latest data from the PATINA trial and its implications for metastatic HER2-positive patients. •⁠  ⁠Discussion on the use of T-DXd and other treatment options in the second and third-line settings, especially for patients with brain metastases. Join us for an informative conversation filled with clinical pearls and practical insights that can help guide treatment decisions in HER2-positive breast cancer. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other episodes in the treatment algorithm series! #OncologyBrothers #HER2Positive #BreastCancer #BreastCancerTreatment #CancerPodcast #DanaFarber YouTube: https://youtu.be/_y0xSxJTptw Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers

Hundreds of people at Fenway Park took a ride towards one goal: raising one $1 billion for Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. For more, ask Alexa to play WBZ NewsRadio on #iHeartRadio.

The social and economic inequity in the United States is clearly evident just by looking at the current state of the American healthcare system. It is broken in so many areas and highly ineffective in addressing the actual needs of the people, leaving many citizens to live in constant suffering. Thankfully, today's tech innovations could offer some solutions to this massive problem. Joining Corinna Bellizzi is social change futurist Sheila Phicil, founder of Phicil-itate Change LLC, who is building a blockchain-powered platform that could fix the many issues of the healthcare system. She explains why the main problem lies in the blatant disregard for values, not in the lack of financial support. Sheila also offers some ways of making healthcare equally accessible to everyone, even to people of color, underserved communities, and minority groups who are always exploited when it comes to well-being.About Guest:Sheila Phicil is a social change futurist™, health equity expert, and founder of Phicil-itate Change LLC, empowering social innovators to create measurable impact. With 15+ years of experience driving healthcare transformation at institutions like Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, and Boston Medical Center, Sheila integrates professional and lived experience to advance health equity. She holds dual Master's degrees in Public Health and Financial Economics, is a Certified Project Management Professional (PMP), and a Fellow of the American College of Healthcare Executives (FACHE). Her COMPASS Project, a blockchain- and AI-enabled platform for patient engagement, was selected for the CIC Social Impact Cohort. Sheila is also a recognized speaker on AI-driven healthcare solutions and social innovation.Guest LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sheila-phicil/ Guest Website: https://phicil-itatechange.com/ Guest Social: https://www.youtube.com/@phicil-itate_change Show Notes: Raw audioWorking At The Intersection Of Healthcare And Equity - 02:13The Problem With Privatized Healthcare system - 06:23How Technology Can Change The Healthcare System - 18:15Ending Exploitation And Inequity In Healthcare - 23:36Exploring The Benefits Of The Compass Project - 30:06An Invitation To Collaborate - 41:28Episode Wrap-up And Closing Words - 44:39JOIN OUR CIRCLE. BUILD A GREENER FUTURE: Subscribe to our newsletter, and we'll plant a tree in your honor! https://caremorebebetter.com Subscribe and rate us wherever you listen, and we'll plant another treeFollow us on social media:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@caremorebebetterTikTok: https://tiktok.com/@caremorebebetterInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/CareMoreBeBetter/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CareMoreBeBetter

Dr. Janet Abrahm is a Fellow of the American Academy of Physicians, Fellow of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, and a Fellow of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. She is a Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, a former practicing oncologist, and an internationally recognized expert in supportive and palliative care for patients with cancer. She has over 20 years of experience in the forefront of palliative care at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. She is the author of the newly updated Comprehensive Guide to Supportive and Palliative Care for Patients with Cancer as well as an award-winning clinician and educator in palliative care. This week she joins me to talk about the latest updates in palliative care. We chat about palliative precedes, the treatment of cancer related fatigue, new thinking about cancer cachexia and more.You can learn more about Dr. Abrahm and her work at janetabrahm.com.Here's to healing the heart of the healers,Dr. DeliaDelia Chiaramonte, MDwww.integrativepalliative.com Coping Courageously: A Heart-Centered Guide for Navigating a Loved One's Illness Without Losing Yourself is available here: www.copingcourageously.com A free guide for physicians to help reclaim your joy at work and in life https://trainings.integrativepalliative.com/pl/2148540010Please review this podcast wherever you listen and forward your favorite episode to a friend! And be sure to subscribe!Sign up to stay connected and learn about upcoming programs:https://trainings.integrativepalliative.com/IPI-stay-in-touchI'm thrilled to be listed in Feedspot's top 15 palliative podcasts!https://blog.feedspot.com/palliative_care_podcasts/

In this enlightening episode of the Patient From Hell, host Samira Daswani interviews Dr. Sara Tolaney, a leading oncologist specializing in breast cancer. They delve into the evolving landscape of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), exploring advancements in treatment, from targeted therapies to immunotherapy, and the challenges faced by patients in both early-stage and metastatic settings. With her characteristic warmth and expertise, Dr. Tolaney provides actionable insights for patients and caregivers, offering hope and understanding in navigating this complex diagnosis. Key Highlights: 1. A New Paradigm in Early-Stage TNBC Treatment: Dr. Tolaney explains how neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy has revolutionized outcomes, achieving pathologic complete response rates above 60%. 2. Metastatic TNBC Advances: The discussion highlights the critical role of biomarker testing and the introduction of innovative therapies like antibody-drug conjugates, providing extended survival for many patients. 3. Empowering Patient Symptom Management: The episode underscores the importance of patient-reported outcomes and emerging tools like health apps to enhance self-management and real-time support for side effects. About our guest: Sara Tolaney, MD, MPH is the Chief of the Division of Breast Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and is internationally recognized for her research and education leadership in breast cancer. She also serves as Associate Director of the Susan F. Smith Center for Women's Cancers and is a Senior Physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Tolaney received her undergraduate degree from Princeton University and her medical degree from UC San Francisco. She subsequently completed her residency in Internal Medicine at Johns Hopkins University, and fellowships in hematology and medical oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. She obtained her Masters in Public Health from Harvard School of Public Health. Her research focuses on the development of novel therapies in the treatment of breast cancer and developing more effective and less toxic treatment approaches. Her work has demonstrated that a relatively low risk regimen is beneficial in women with early stage node-negative HER2-positive cancers, and this works has been incorporated into national and international guidelines. She has developed several follow-up studies looking at novel approaches to early stage HER2-positive disease and has also played a significant role in development of cdk 4/6 inhibitors, antibody drug conjugates, and immunotherapy in breast cancer. She is the author of over 150 peer-reviewed publications with manuscripts included in many prestigious journals such as the New England Journal, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, and JAMA Oncology. Key Moments: At 8 minutes: "It used to be that if someone had a triple negative breast cancer, we would often take someone to surgery and then after surgery give them some chemotherapy to kill any stray cells that might've gotten into the bloodstream and integrate radiation as needed. But we've really changed our approach very dramatically over the last few years where we've learned that if someone has an early stage, stage two or three triple negative breast cancer, it is actually very critical that they not go to upfront surgery, but in fact get chemotherapy with immunotherapy prior to surgery." Disclaimer: All content and information provided in connection with Manta Cares is solely intended for informational and educational purposes only. This content and information is not intended to be a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.

Join us for another insightful episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast as we dive into the latest breakthroughs in breast cancer research from the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2024. In this episode, hosts Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain are joined by Dr. Sara Tolaney from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to discuss three pivotal studies: 1.⁠ ⁠DESTINY-Breast06 - An update on the efficacy of T-DXd in HER2 low and ultra-low breast cancer patients, highlighting its potential to change treatment paradigms for endocrine refractory disease. 2.⁠ ⁠DESTINY-Breast12 - Exploring the robust intracranial activity of T-DXd in patients with brain metastases and its impact on quality of life. 3.⁠ ⁠PATINA Trial - A groundbreaking study on the use of CDK4-6 inhibitors in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab for ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer, showcasing impressive progression-free survival rates. Tune in as we unpack the implications of these studies for clinical practice and discuss the future of breast cancer treatment. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for more updates on oncology research and treatment strategies! Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers For more information, visit our website: OncologyBrothers.com #OncologyBrothers #BreastCancer #SABCS2024 #TDXD #PATINA #CancerResearch #Podcast

Dr Jennifer Crombie from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Prof Martin Hutchings from Copenhagen University Hospital, Dr Matthew Lunning from the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Dr Tycel Phillips from City of Hope and moderator Dr Jeremy S Abramson from Massachusetts General Hospital discuss recently updated data on the role of CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies in the management of diffuse large B-cell, mantle cell and follicular lymphoma.

Send us a textDr. Kevin Gendreau is a returning guest on our show! Be sure to check out his first appearance on episode 265 of Boundless Body Radio!Kevin R. Gendreau, MD, is a board-certified obesity medicine physician, author, and advocate for metabolic health based in Fall River, Massachusetts. With a personal journey of losing 125 pounds and reversing type II diabetes through lifestyle modifications, Dr. Gendreau brings a unique and compassionate perspective to his work.Dr. Gendreau earned his bachelor's degree at Boston University before completing his medical degree at Temple University School of Medicine in Philadelphia. He completed residencies in Family Medicine at Cambridge Health Alliance and Carney Hospital through Tufts University. He has also received an Honorarium for Prostate Cancer Research from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.He is passionate about helping others understand the hormonal and biological factors behind obesity, providing science-backed strategies for sustainable health.Dr. Gendreau is the author of Metabolic Health Handbook: A Doctor's Guide to Overcoming the Hormonal and Biological Barriers to Fat Loss, a comprehensive guide to achieving better metabolic health.He is also the author of Fasting While Furious: How I Turned Anger and Sadness into Motivation for Weight Loss, and the author of two children's books, having published A Healthier You with Sophia & Sue and Queen Celine's Vaccine Machine, blending his medical expertise with his creative talents to educate readers of all ages.Find Dr. Kevin Gendreau at-Find Dr. Gendreau at-https://kevingendreau.com/ IG- kevingendreau Find Boundless Body at- myboundlessbody.com Book a session with us here!

Dr Jennifer Crombie from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Prof Martin Hutchings from Copenhagen University Hospital, Dr Matthew Lunning from the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Dr Tycel Phillips from City of Hope and moderator Dr Jeremy S Abramson from Massachusetts General Hospital discuss recently updated data on the role of CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies in the management of diffuse large B-cell, mantle cell and follicular lymphoma. Produced by Research To Practice. CME information and select publications here (https://www.researchtopractice.com/ASHCART24).

Dr Erika Hamilton from the Sarah Cannon Research Institute in Nashville, Tennessee, Dr Kevin Kalinsky from the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, Dr Ian E Krop from the Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut, Dr Joyce O'Shaughnessy from the Sarah Cannon Research Institute in Dallas, Texas, and Dr Sara M Tolaney from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, discuss available and novel treatment strategies for metastatic breast cancer, moderated by Dr Neil Love. Produced by Research To Practice. CME information and select publications here (https://www.researchtopractice.com/SABCS2024/mBC).

Dr Erika Hamilton from the Sarah Cannon Research Institute in Nashville, Tennessee, Dr Kevin Kalinsky from the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, Dr Ian E Krop from the Yale Cancer Center in New Haven, Connecticut, Dr Joyce O'Shaughnessy from the Sarah Cannon Research Institute in Dallas, Texas, and Dr Sara M Tolaney from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, discuss available and novel treatment strategies for metastatic breast cancer.

Chadi sits down with Dr. Matt Davids, Director of Clinical Research in the Division of Lymphoma at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, to unpack the latest breakthroughs in leukemia and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) from the ASH annual meeting. A pioneer in CLL treatment, Dr. Davids recounts the development of venetoclax, a transformative therapy he helped bring to clinical use over a decade ago, setting the stage for discussions on emerging updates. Together, they explore advancements in BTK inhibitors across three distinct classes, the potential of novel targeted therapies, innovative combination regimens, and the shifting paradigms in treating blood cancers, including a nod to the latest clinical trials of high potential. Check out Chadi's website for all Healthcare Unfiltered episodes and other content. www.chadinabhan.com/ Watch all Healthcare Unfiltered episodes on YouTube. www.youtube.com/channel/UCjiJPTpIJdIiukcq0UaMFsA

Dr Alexander Perl from Abramson Cancer Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Dr Richard M Stone from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, Dr Eunice S Wang from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, New York, Prof Andrew H Wei from Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in Melbourne, Australia, and moderator Dr Eytan M Stein from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York, discuss updated data from ASH 2024 influencing the current and future treatment paradigm for treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Dr Alexander Perl from Abramson Cancer Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Dr Richard M Stone from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, Dr Eunice S Wang from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, New York, Prof Andrew H Wei from Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research in Melbourne, Australia, and moderator Dr Eytan M Stein from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York, discuss updated data from ASH 2024 influencing the current and future treatment paradigm for treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Produced by Research To Practice. CME information and select publications here (https://www.researchtopractice.com/ASHAML24).

Dr. James Tulsky is passionate about enhancing communication between clinicians and patients. Why are words so vital in the medical field? What do patients and families need most during critical conversations? And what are the key moments where navigating communication effectively can make all the difference? (Spoiler: delivering difficult diagnoses, discussing changes in care or prognosis, and navigating end-of-life conversations.) Dr. Tulsky, alongside Dr. Anthony Back and Dr. Robert Arnold, founded the nonprofit VitalTalk to provide clinicians with practical tools and training to navigate challenging conversations with empathy and clarity. Reflecting on what inspired him to focus on this area – and to go on to train tens of thousands of others in the medical field – Dr. Tulsky shares, “It hit me like a lightning bolt—the power of words.”

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation is a potentially life-saving therapy for some patients with hematologic and bone marrow cancers and certain nonmalignant conditions such as sickle cell disease. Hermioni L. Amonoo, MD, MPP, MPH, of Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, joins JAMA Deputy Editor Kristin Walter, MD, MS, to discuss the process of allogeneic stem cell donation. Related Content: Allogeneic Stem Cell Donation