Podcasts about Harvard Medical School

Nessa live, eu conversei com o biomédico e pesquisador Dr. Andrew Koutnik (@andrewkoutnikphd)Dr. Andrew Koutnik é um cientista cuja carreira integra ciência de ponta, performance de elite e experiência pessoal vivendo com diabetes tipo 1 há mais de 17 anos. Doutor em Ciências Médicas (Farmacologia e Fisiologia Molecular) pela University of South Florida, ele desenvolveu pesquisas financiadas por instituições como NASA, Departamento de Defesa dos EUA e NIH, acumulando mais de 100 publicações e apresentações científicas internacionais. Seu trabalho investiga como nutrição, metabolismo e estilo de vida podem otimizar saúde, desempenho e resiliência — tanto em doenças crônicas quanto em contextos de alta exigência física.Atualmente professor no Institute for Sports Science and Medicine da Florida State University, Dr. Koutnik lidera estudos sobre fisiologia do exercício, saúde cardiometabólica e nutrição terapêutica, incluindo estratégias dietéticas para diabetes tipo 1 e 2, obesidade, sono e performance sob estresse metabólico. Colabora com instituições como Harvard Medical School e Boston Children's Hospital. Sua missão central é promover saúde metabólica baseada em evidência, ajudando indivíduos — inclusive atletas de elite — a alcançarem alto desempenho mesmo diante de desafios crônicos. Fora do laboratório, dedica-se à família e à prática de Brazilian Jiu Jitsu e treinamento físico.No Clube de Leitura, exploramos juntos obras que desafiam o senso comum — livros que unem ciência, filosofia e ancestralidade — sempre com uma visão crítica e prática para transformar o conhecimento em ação.

I want to start off by asking a question I continually interest myself with. Do we really want to be happy? If I survey the culture, it looks like we very much want happy moments. The little jolts of dopamine from entertainment, food, drugs and such. But do we really want deep and abiding happiness in our souls? Because if we do, then our primary interest would be in relationships. But not just any relationships. I'm revisiting a conversation I had with Robert Waldinger. Robert is a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and director of the Harvard Study of Adult Development at Massachusetts General Hospital which has been going on for 87 years. His devotion is on what most equates to human happiness, and the answer is, relationships. But let me point out that Robert himself is a Zen master and teaches meditation around the world. Which is a focus on what I feel is our first and most important relationship. The relationship with ourselves. I have continued to grow in appreciation, not just for the message, but for Robert himself. If you have my book, What Drives You, you'll see his endorsement. Roberts book, which is how I came to know of him, is, The Good Life: Lessons From the World's Longest Scientific Study on Happiness. And you type in, “Robert Waldinger TED” you will find his TED talk, titled, What Makes A Good Life, that between postings on both YouTube and TED has over 80 million views. Sign up for your $1/month trial period at shopify.com/kevin Go to shipstation.com and use code KEVIN to start your free trial. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most of us have been trained to think of treating people as a technical problem. If something hurts, we look for the right drug. If something fails, we look for the right procedure. That picture is incomplete.We've built a system obsessed with fixing bodies, while quietly ignoring the inner worlds of the people living inside them. Their fears, their beliefs, their unanswered prayers, and the meaning they're trying to make of suffering.Illness doesn't just attack organs. It raises questions about God, identity, guilt, fear, and loss of control. And when those questions go unanswered, suffering multiplies, no matter how advanced the treatment plan is.Modern medicine has no real language for this kind of pain. It knows how to measure blood pressure, inflammation, and tumor size, but it doesn't know how to sit with grief, spiritual doubt, uncertainty, and loss.Yet when clinicians slow down enough to listen, something shifts. Patients begin to speak about meaning, about God, about unresolved relationships and fears they've never voiced before.And often, that is where real healing starts — the kind of whole-person healing that restores connection, dignity, and a sense of being spiritually held in the middle of suffering.What if some of the deepest healing doesn't come from doing more, but from being more present? How can clinicians learn to care for the soul as intentionally as they care for the body?In this episode, I speak with Dr. Marvin Delgado Guay, a palliative care specialist at MD Anderson Cancer Center. We talk about what it looks like when medicine includes spiritual care in its everyday practice. We explore why “total pain” includes the soul as much as the body, and how healthcare can become not just a place of treatment, but a space for healing, meaning, and connection with God.Things You'll Learn In This Episode Pain isn't always physicalMany symptoms labeled as “medical” are actually expressions of emotional or spiritual distress. What happens when we treat suffering instead of just symptoms?Fixing vs. healingMedicine is trained to solve problems, but some forms of suffering can't be solved, only witnessed. How does presence become a form of treatment?How spirituality shapes medical decisionsBeliefs about meaning, God, and purpose influence everything from treatment choices to end-of-life care, but are clinicians equipped to address this?The power of the “collective soul” in healthcareWhen doctors, nurses, chaplains, and therapists work as one, care becomes something deeper than specialization. What changes when healing becomes a shared human act?Guest BioDr. Marvin Delgado Guay is an internist and Assistant Professor in the Department of Palliative Care and Rehabilitation Medicine at MD Anderson Cancer Center, where he provides symptom control and supportive care for patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. He completed his internal medicine training at Michael Reese Hospital in Chicago, followed by a fellowship in Geriatric Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and a clinical and research fellowship in Symptom Control and Palliative Care at MD Anderson. Earlier in his career, he coordinated palliative care services and worked within geriatrics at Lyndon B. Johnson General Hospital through the University of Texas Medical School. Dr. Delgado Guay's work focuses on what medicine often overlooks: the full experience of illness. His research explores physical, psychological, and spiritual distress in patients with serious disease, as well as aging-related issues such as frailty and cognition. He has authored and co-authored multiple peer-reviewed publications on symptom burden and spiritual care in advanced cancer, and is deeply committed to improving quality of...

Host Dr. Davide Soldato and guests Dr. David Einstein and Dr. Ravi Madan discuss JCO article, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations," underscoring the need for a consensus on clinical trial designs implementing novel endpoints in this population, the importance of PSA doubling time as a prognostic factor and with an emphasis on treatment de-escalation to limit toxicity and improve patient outcomes. TRANSCRIPT The disclosures for guests on this podcast can be found in the show notes. Davide Soldato: Hello and welcome to JCO After Hours, the podcast where we sit down with authors from some of the latest articles published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. I am your host, Dr. Davide Soldato, medical oncologist at Ospedale San Martino in Genoa, Italy. Today, we are joined by JCO authors Dr. David Einstein and Dr. Ravi Madan. Dr. Einstein is a medical oncologist specializing in genitourinary malignancy working at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, part of the DFCI Cancer Center, and an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Madan is a senior clinician at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), where he focuses on conducting clinical research in prostate cancer, particularly in the field of immunotherapy. Today, we will be discussing the article titled, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations." So, thank you for speaking with us, Dr. Einstein and Dr. Madan. David Einstein: Thanks for having us. This is a great pleasure. Ravi Madan: Appreciate being here. Davide Soldato: So, I just want to start from a very wide angle. And the main question is why did you feel that there was the need to convey a consensus and a working group to talk about this specific topic: biochemically recurrent prostate cancer? What has been the change in current clinical practice and in the trial design that we are seeing nowadays? And so, why was it necessary to convey such a consensus and provide considerations on novel clinical trials? David Einstein: Yeah, so I think it's very interesting, this disease state of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. It's very different from other disease states in prostate cancer, and we felt that there was a real need to define those differences in clinical trials. Years ago, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was the primary disease state that was explored, and over time, a lot of things shifted earlier to metastatic disease defined on a CAT scan and bone scan to an earlier disease state of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. And the clinical trial principles from late-stage could be applied to MCSPC as well. However, BCR is very different because the patients are very different. And for those reasons, there are unique considerations, especially in terms of toxicity and treatment intensity, that should be applied to biochemically recurrent prostate cancer as opposed to just using the principles that are used in other disease states. And for that reason, we thought it was very important to delineate some of these considerations in this paper with a group of experts. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. So, one of the main changes that have been applied in recent years in clinical practice when looking at biochemically recurrent prostate cancer is the use of molecular imaging and particularly of PSMA PET. So, first of all, just a quick question: was the topic of the consensus related on which threshold of PSA to use to order a PET scan to evaluate this kind of patient? David Einstein: Yeah, thanks for that question. It's a super important one. The brief answer is that no, we did not address questions about exactly when clinicians would decide to order scans. We were more concerned with the results of those scans in how you define different disease states. But I think as a broader question, I think a lot of folks feel that finding things on a scan equates that with what we used to find on conventional scans. And fundamentally, we actually sought to redefine that disease space as something that's not equivalent to metastatic disease, and rather coined the term "PSMA-positive BCR" to indicate that traditional BCR prognostic criteria and factors still apply, and that these patients have a distinct natural history from those with more advanced metastatic disease. Ravi Madan: And if I may just add that the National Cancer Institute is running a trial where we're prospectively monitoring PSMA-positive BCR patients. And that data is clearly showing that, much like what we knew about BCR a decade ago, PSMA findings in BCR patients do not change the fact that overall, BCR is an indolent disease state. And the findings, which are usually comprised of five- to seven-millimeter lymph nodes, do not endanger patients or require immediate therapy. And so, while PSMA is a tool that we can be using in this disease state, it doesn't really change the principal approach to how we should manage these patients. And as Dr. Einstein alluded to, there is a drive to create a false equivalency between PSMA-positive BCR and metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, but that is not supported by the data we're accumulating or any of the clinical data as it exists. Davide Soldato: One thing that it's very important and you mentioned in your answer to my question was actually the role of PET scan and conventional imaging, so CAT scan and bone scan that we have used for years to stage patients with metastatic prostate cancer. And you mentioned that there is a distinction among patients who have a positive PET scan and a BCR, and patients who have a positive conventional imaging. And yet, we know that sometimes the findings of the PET scan are not always so clear to interpret. So, I just wanted to understand if the consensus reached an agreement as to when to use conventional imaging to potentially resolve some findings that we have on PET scan among thess patients with BCR? David Einstein: Yeah, I think there's a number of questions actually buried within that question. One of which is: does PSMA PET result in false positives? And the answer has definitely been yes. There's a known issue with false-positive rib lesions. And so, first and foremost, we need to be very careful in calling what truly is suspicious disease and what might actually not be cancer or might be something that is totally separate. So I think that's the first part of the answer to that question. The second is to what extent do we need to use paired PET and conventional imaging to define this disease state? In other words, do you have to have positive findings on one and negative findings on the other in order to enter this definition? The challenge there, as we discussed, is that logistically, oftentimes it's hard to get patients to do multiple sets of scans to actually create that definition. Sometimes it's difficult to get insurers to pay for such scans. And finally, it's hard to sometimes blind radiologists to the results of one scan in reading the other. So, we did have some deliberations about to what extent you could use some of the CAT scan portion of a PSMA PET in order to at least partially define that. We also talked about using bone scans to confirm any bone findings seen on PET. But I think another important part of this is not just the baseline imaging, but also what's going to be done serially on a study in order to define responses and progression. And that's sort of a whole separate conversation about to what extent you can interpret changes in serial PET. Ravi Madan: And just to pick up on the key factor here, I think that the PSMA PET in BCR is pretty good at defining lymph node disease, and that's actually predominantly 80 to 90 percent of the disease seen on these findings. It might be pretty good at also defining other soft tissue findings. The real issues come to bone findings. And one thing the group did not feel was appropriate was to just define only PSMA-positive bone findings confirmed on a CT bone window. There's not really great data on that, but the working group felt that, when in the rare situation, because it is relatively rare, a PSMA-positive finding is in a bone, a bone scan should be done. And it's worth noting that Phu Tran, who is a co-author and a co-leader of this working group, his group has already defined that underlying genomics of conventionally based lesions, such as bone scan, are more aggressive than findings on next-gen imaging, such as PSMA. So, there is also a genomic underlying rationale for defining the difference between what is seen on a PET scan in a bone and what is seen on a bone scan. Davide Soldato: Coming back to this issue of PET PSMA sometimes identifying very small lesions where we don't see any kind of correlates on conventional imaging or where we see only very little alteration on the bone scan or in the CT scan, was there any role that was imagined, for example, for MRI to distinguish this type of findings on the PET scan? Ravi Madan: So, I think that, again, what can be identified on a PSMA frequently cannot be seen on conventional imaging. We didn't feel that it was a requirement to get an MRI or a CT to necessarily confirm the PSMA findings. I think that generally, we have to realize that in this disease state, that questionable lesions are going to be seen on any imaging, including PSMA. We've actually probably put way too much faith in PSMA findings thus far, as Dr. Einstein alluded to with some of the false positives we're seeing. So, I think that these false positives are going to have to be baked into trials. And in terms of clinical practice, it highlights the need to again, not overreact to everything we see and not necessarily need to biopsy everything and put patients' health in jeopardy to delineate a disease that's indolent anyway. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. That was very clear. So, basically, the main driver was really also the data showing that if we have a BCR, so a patient with a biochemically recurrent disease that is positive on the conventional imaging, this is usually associated with a different aggressiveness of the disease. But coming back to a comment that you made before, Dr. Madan, you said that even if we talk about PSMA-positive BCR, we are still talking about BCR and the same criteria should apply. So, what we have used for years in this space to actually try to stratify the prognosis of patients is the PSA doubling time, so how quickly the PSA rises over time. So, coming back to that comment, was the consensus on the PSA doubling time basically retained as what we were using before, so defining patients with a doubling time less than 12 months, 10 months, 9 months, as patients with a higher risk of progressing in terms of developing metastatic disease? Ravi Madan: Yes, so that's a very important point. And the working group defined high-risk BCR as a PSA doubling time less than six months. And this really comes from Johns Hopkins historical data, which shows that if your doubling time is three months or less, there's about a 67 percent chance of metastasis at five years. If it's between three and six months, it's 50 percent. And if it's over six months, if it's between six and nine months, it's roughly only 27 percent. There are trials that are accruing with eligibility criteria that they may describe as high-risk that are beyond six months, but the data as really it's been defined in the literature highlights that truly high-risk BCR is less than six months. And the working group had a consensus on that opinion, and that was our recommendation. David Einstein: And I think an important follow-on to that is that's regardless of PET findings, right? And so, we present a couple of case studies of patients with positive PET findings who have a long doubling time, in whom the disease is in fact indolent, as you would have expected from a traditional BCR prognostic standpoint. Obviously, there are patients in whom they have fast doubling times, and even if they do not have PET findings, that doesn't make them not high-risk. Ravi Madan: And just to follow up that point, I will let you know a little bit of a free preview that my colleague Melissa Abel from the NCI will be presenting PSMA findings in the context of PSA doubling time at ASCO GU if that data is accepted. Davide Soldato: Looking forward for those data because I think that they're going to clarify a lot of the findings that we have in this specific population. And coming back to one of the points that we made before, so PET PSMA has a very high ability to discriminate also a very low burden of disease, which we currently refer to as oligometastatic biochemically recurrent prostate cancer, which is not entirely defined as an entity. But what we are seeing both in some clinical trials, which use mainly conventional imaging, but also what we're starting to see in clinical practice, is that frequently we use the metastasis-directed therapy to treat these patients. So, just a little bit of a comment on the use of this type of strategy in clinical practice and if the panel thought of including this as, for example, a stratification criteria or mandated in the design of novel clinical trials in the field of BCR? David Einstein: Yeah, I think that's an incredibly important point. You know, fundamentally, there's a lot of heterogeneity in practice where some folks are using local salvage approaches, some are using systemic therapies, in some cases surveillance may be reasonable, or some combination of these different strategies. We certainly have phase two data from multiple trials suggesting that met-directed therapy may help buy patients time off of treatment until subsequent treatments are started. And that in and of itself may be an important goal that we can come back to in discussing novel endpoints. I think what our panel acknowledged was that, in some sense, the clinical practice has gotten even farther ahead than where the data are, and this is being offered pretty routinely to patients in practice. And so, what became clear was that we, in developing clinical trials, cannot forbid investigators from doing something that would be within their usual standard of care, even if it might not be supported by the most robust data. But at minimum, it definitely should be used as a stratification factor, or in some trial designs, you can do met-directed therapy after a primary endpoint is assessed. And that offers a compromise between testing, say, the effect of a systemic therapy but also not excluding patients and investigators from doing what they would have done had they not been on a study. Ravi Madan: And I would just like to follow up your phrasing in the question of "oligometastatic prostate cancer." We have a figure in the paper and it highlights the fact that, unfortunately, that term in prostate cancer is imaging agnostic. And we've already discussed in this podcast, as well as in the paper, that imaging used to define a metastatic lesion, whether it's PSMA or conventional imaging, carries with it a different clinical weight and a different prognosis. So, we feel in the working group, that the correct term for this disease state of PSMA-positive BCR is just that: PSMA-positive BCR. We also have to realize that when we talk about oligometastatic disease, while it's imaging agnostic, it seems to be numerically based, whether it's five or three or 10 depending on the trial. But PSMA-positive BCR does not have a limit in terms of the number of lesions. And so again, we just feel that there is an important need to delineate what we're seeing in this disease state, which again is PSMA-positive BCR, and that should be differentiated frankly from oligometastatic disease defined on other imaging platforms. David Einstein: Right, and that also makes clear that patients can have polyfocal disease on PET that still is not what we would consider metastatic, but goes beyond the traditional definition of oligometastatic. So, in other words, just because someone has PET-detected disease only, that does not automatically equate with oligometastatic. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. So, you were speaking a little bit, Dr. Einstein, about the different types of treatment that we can propose or not propose to this patient because you mentioned, for example, that in clinical practice MDT, so metastasis-directed therapy, is becoming more and more used. For these patients, we can potentially use systemic treatments, which include androgen deprivation therapy, which can be given continuously or in an intermittent fashion. And recently, we can also use novel systemic therapies, for example, enzalutamide, to treat this type of patient. So, given that the point of the consensus was really to provide consideration for novel clinical trials in this space, what was the opinion on the panel regarding the control arm? So, if we're looking at a novel therapy in the BCR space, does the control arm need to include a therapy or not? And if so, which therapy? David Einstein: Yeah, this is a super important question and one that's subject to a lot of discussion, especially in light of recent data from EMBARK. What we came to a consensus around was the fact that neither MDT nor systemic therapy should be required as a control arm on BCR trials. And we can talk about a number of reasons for that. There's also the pragmatics of what investigators might actually accrue patients to and what they would consider their standard of care, and that's important to factor in, too. I think that one of the major goals of our working group was outlining what kinds of trials we would like to see in the future and where the limitations of the current data stand. For example, EMBARK proposes a strategy of a single treatment discontinuation and resumption at a predefined threshold indefinitely. That's probably not how most people are practicing. Most folks are probably using some version of intermittent therapy as they would have before this trial, but we actually don't have any data supporting that. Moreover, we don't have data comparing different intermittent strategies to one another. We don't know what the right thresholds are, we don't know how much time we buy patients off treatment, and we don't know to what extent MDT modifies that. And so, those are all really important questions to be asking in future versions of these trials. I'd say my second point would be that a lot of drug development is happening with novel therapies that are not hormonal, trying to bring them into this space. And when you think about trying to compare one of those types of therapies to a hormonal therapy on short-term endpoints, the hormonal therapy is always going to win. Hormonal therapy is almost universally effective, it will bring down PSAs, and it will prolong, quote-unquote, "progression." The downside of that is that hormonal therapy doesn't actually modify the disease, it suppresses it, and it tends to have fairly transient effects once you remove it. And so, part of our goal was in trying to figure out some novel endpoints that would allow these novel types of therapies to be examined head-to-head against a more traditional type of hormonal therapy and have some measurement of some of the more long-term impacts. Davide Soldato: So, jumping right into the endpoints, because this is a very relevant and I think very well-constructed part of the paper that you published. Because in the past we have used some of these endpoints, for example, metastasis-free survival, as potentially a proxy for long-term outcomes. But is this the right endpoint to be using right now, especially considering that frequently this outcome is measured using conventional imaging, but we are including in these trials patients who are actually negative on conventional imaging but have a positive PSMA when they enter this type of trial? David Einstein: Yeah, there's a number of challenges with those types of endpoints. One of which is, as you say, we're changing the goalposts a little bit on how we're calling progression. We still don't exactly understand what progression on PET means, and so that's something that is challenging. That said, we're also cognizant of the fact that many times investigators are likely to get PET scans in the setting of rising PSA, and that's going to affect any endpoint that relies purely on conventional imaging. So, there's some tension there between these two different sets of goalposts. One thing that we emphasize is that not only are there some challenges in defining those, but also there're challenges in what matters to a patient. So, if a progression event occurs in the form of a single lesion on a PET scan or even a conventional image, that might be relevant for a clinical trial but might be less relevant for a patient. In other words, that's something that, in the real world, an investigator might use serial rounds of metastasis-directed therapy or intermittent therapy to treat in a way that doesn't have any clinical consequences for the patient necessarily. In other words, they're asymptomatic, it's not the equivalent of a metastatic castration-resistant disease progressing. And so, we also need to be cognizant of the fact that if we choose a single endpoint like PFS, that there's going to be many different versions of progression, some of which probably matter clinically more than others, and some of which are more salvageable by local therapies than others. Ravi Madan: So I think the working group really thoughtfully looked at the different options and underscored perhaps strengths and weaknesses, and I think that's presented as you mentioned in the paper. But I think it's also going to depend on the modality, the approach of the therapeutic intervention. In some cases if it's hormone-based, then maybe PSA is providing some early metrics, maybe metastasis-free survival is more relevant in a continuous therapy, but intermittent therapies might have a different approach. There's emerging immunotherapy strategies, radiopharmaceutical strategies, they might have some more novel strategies as well. I think we have to be open-minded here, but we also have to be very clear: we do not know what progression is on a PSMA scan. Just new lesions may not carry the clinical significance that we think, and we may not know what threshold that ultimately becomes clinically relevant is. So, I do think that there was some caution issued by the working group about using PSMA as an endpoint because we still do not have the data to understand what that modality is telling us. Again, I'm optimistic that the National Cancer Institute's prospective data set that we've been collecting, which has over 130 patients now, will provide some insights in the months and years ahead. Davide Soldato: So, just to ask the question very abruptly, what would you feel like the best endpoint for this type of trials is? I understand that is a little bit related to the type of treatments that we're going to use, whether it's intermittent, whether it's continuous, but do we have something that can encapsulate all of the discussion that we have up until this point? David Einstein: Yeah, so that's a perfect segue to the idea of novel endpoints, which we feel are very important to develop in these novel disease spaces. So, one thing that we discussed was an endpoint called treatment-free survival, which conceptually you can think of as exactly what it sounds like, but statistically you actually have to do some work to get there. And so essentially, you imagine a series of Kaplan-Meier curves overlaid: one about overall survival, one time to next therapy, one time on initial therapy. You can actually then take the area under those curves or between those curves and essentially sum it up using restricted mean survival time analysis. And that can give you a guide about the longitudinal experience of a patient: time spent on treatment versus off treatment; time spent with toxicity versus without toxicity. And importantly, each one of those time-to-event metrics can be adjusted depending on exactly what the protocol is and what is allowed or not allowed and what's prespecified as far as initiation of subsequent therapies. So, we felt that this was a really important endpoint to develop in this disease space because it can really capture that longitudinal aspect. It can really reward treatments that are effective in getting durable responses and getting patients off of therapy, because unfortunately, PFS-based endpoints generally reward more or longer systemic therapy versus shorter or no systemic therapy, and that's sort of an artificial bias in the way those endpoints are constructed. So, I think that there are challenges of course in implementing any new endpoint, and some of the things that are really critical are collecting data about toxicity and about subsequent therapies beyond what a typical trial might collect. But I think in this kind of disease space, that longitudinal aspect is critical because these are really patients who are going to be going through multiple rounds of therapy, going to be going on and off treatments, they're going to be using combinations of local and systemic therapies. And so, any one single endpoint is going to be limited, but I think that really highlights the limitations of using PFS-based endpoints in this space. Ravi Madan: I also think that in the concept of treatment-free survival lies one of the more powerful and, honestly, I was surprised by this, that it was so universally accepted, recommendations from the committee. And that was that the general approach to trials in this space should be a de-escalation of the EMBARK strategy as it's laid out with relatively continuous therapy with one pause. And so, I think again, buried in all of this highlights the need for novel endpoints like treatment-free survival. We get to the fact that these are patients who are not at near-term clinical risk from symptoms of their disease, so de-escalating therapies does not put them at risk. And if you look at, for example, lower-volume metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer, it's become realized that we need to de-escalate, and there are now trials being done to look at that. Historically, we know that BCR is an indolent disease process for the vast majority of patients who are not at near-term risk from clinical deterioration. So, therefore, we shouldn't wait a decade into abundant BCR trials to de-escalate. The de-escalation strategy should be from the outset. And that was something the committee really actually universally agreed on. David Einstein: And that de-escalation can really take multiple forms. That could be different strategies for intermittent therapy, different start-stop strategies. It could also mean actually intensifying in the short-term with the goal long-term de-intensification, kind of analogous to kidney cancer where we might use dual checkpoint inhibitors up front with some higher upfront toxicity but with the hope of actually long-term benefit and actually being able to come off treatment and stay in remission. Those kinds of trade-offs are the types of things that are challenging to talk about. There's not a one-size-fits-all answer for every patient. And so, that's why some of these endpoints like treatment-free survival would be really helpful in actually quantifying those trade-offs and allowing each patient to make decisions that are concordant with their own wishes. Davide Soldato: Thanks so much. That was very clear, especially on the part of de-escalation, because, as you were mentioning, I think that we are globally talking about a situation, a clinical situation, where the prognosis can be very good and patients can stay off treatment for a very long period of time without compromising long-term outcomes. And I think that well-constructed de-escalation trials, as you were mentioning and as the consensus endorsed, are really needed in this space also to limit toxicity. This brings us to the end of this episode. So, I would like to thank again Dr. Einstein and Dr. Madan for joining us today. David Einstein: We really appreciate the time and the thought, and I think that even starting these types of discussions is critical. Even just recognizing that this is a unique space is the beginning of the conversation. Ravi Madan: Yeah, and I want to thank JCO for giving us this forum and the opportunity to publish these results and all the expert prostate cancer investigators who were part of this committee. We produced some good thoughts for the future. Davide Soldato: We appreciate you sharing more on your JCO article titled, "National Cancer Institute's Working Group on Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer: Clinical Trial Design Considerations." If you enjoy our show, please leave us a rating and review and be sure to come back for another episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinion of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  

Medicare for all. Not socialized medicine, just a single, government-run system that provides healthcare.  Is it possible? Or even viable? Our guest this week on the Creating a New Healthcare podcast believes so. In fact, he sees it as the only way to ultimately address the affordability problem with healthcare, particularly for high cost conditions like cancer. In today's episode, we talk with Dr. Troy Brennan about his book, The Transformation of American Health Insurance: On the Path to Medicare for All, and why a single payer, government system is needed, and how the changes the current administration has made to our public health systems is taking us backwards, not forward. Troyen Brennan is an Adjunct Professor at Harvard Chan School of Public Health.  He was formerly the Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer for CVS Health and Aetna. Before that, he was the President of the Brigham and Women's Physician Organization and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School.  He was also Professor of Law and Public Health at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health.  Brennan was formerly the Chair of the American Board of Internal Medicine and is a member of the National Academy of Medicine. He has published six books and over 600 articles. 

In this episode, Dr. Andy Cutler talks with Dr. Tim Wilens about enduring myths surrounding ADHD diagnosis and treatment, beginning with why misconceptions about overdiagnosis and misuse continue to shape clinical hesitation. They explore common misunderstandings about ADHD medications—including stimulants versus non-stimulants, concerns about diversion, personality changes, and long-term safety—and contrast stigma-driven narratives with the clinical evidence. The conversation equips clinicians with practical, evidence-based strategies to address patient fears, counter misinformation, and make thoughtful, individualized treatment decisions.  Timothy Wilens, MD, is chief of the Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and is co-director of the Center for Addiction Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. He is the MGH Trustees Chair in Addiction Medicine and a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Wilens' research interests include the relationship among attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, and substance use disorders, embedded health care models, and the pharmacotherapy of ADHD across the lifespan.   Andrew J. Cutler, MD, is a distinguished psychiatrist and researcher with extensive experience in clinical trials and psychopharmacology. He currently serves as the Chief Medical Officer of Neuroscience Education Institute and EMA Wellness. He is a Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at SUNY Upstate Medical University in Syracuse, New York.  Save $100 on registration for 2026 NEI Spring Congress with code NEIPOD26  Register today at nei.global/spring  Never miss an episode!

Read "ME/CFS and Long COVID share similar symptoms and biological abnormalities: road map to the literature" – co-authored by Dr. Anthony L. Komaroff & W. Ian Lipkin. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2023.1187163/full    Fatigue is the body's hard-wired response to a viral infection. In today's episode, Haylie Pomroy shares insights with Dr. Anthony L. Komaroff to examine the history of ME/CFS research, the causes and triggers of ME/CFS and other post-infectious chronic illnesses, and the abnormalities observed in the brain and autonomic nervous system among patients with ME/CFS and long COVID. Dr. Komaroff also addresses how patients have often been dismissed within the healthcare system, explains the physical and psychological processes involved in these conditions, and discusses how he and other clinicians are now moving to the forefront of diagnosis and treatment.   Register for the Integrative Medicine Luncheon featuring Dr. Payam Hakimi on  February 14, 2026. https://nova.zoom.us/meeting/register/RQnykYIKRZO-yVykmDp-YQ#/registration   Dr. Anthony L. Komaroff is a distinguished Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and a Senior Physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital. He has held significant leadership roles, including Director of the Division of General Medicine and Primary Care at Brigham and Women's Hospital. Dr. Komaroff is known for his research on myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and human herpesvirus infections. He has published over 270 research articles and book chapters and served on numerous advisory committees for major health organizations.   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/anthony-l-komaroff-64133346/  Facebook: https://web.facebook.com/anthonyl.komaroff    Solve ME: https://solvecfs.org  Open Medicine Foundation: https://www.omf.ngo  National Institutes of Health (NIH): https://www.nih.gov/mecfs/about-mecfs  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): https://www.cdc.gov/me-cfs/about/index.html   Haylie Pomroy, Founder and CEO of The Haylie Pomroy Group, is a leading health strategist specializing in metabolism, weight loss, and integrative wellness. With over 25 years of experience, she has worked with top medical institutions and high-profile clients, developing targeted programs and supplements rooted in the "Food is Medicine" philosophy. Inspired by her own autoimmune journey, she combines expertise in nutrition, biochemistry, and patient advocacy to help others reclaim their health. She is a New York Times bestselling author of The Fast Metabolism Diet.   Learn more about Haylie Pomroy's approach to wellness through her website: https://hayliepomroy.com   Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hayliepomroy  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hayliepomroy  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@hayliepomroy/videos  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hayliepomroy/  X: https://x.com/hayliepomroy    Enjoy our show? Please leave us a 5-star review so we can bring hope and help to others. You can also watch the show on our YouTube.https://www.youtube.com/@NSU_INIM   Sign up today for our newsletter. https://nova.us4.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=419072c88a85f355f15ab1257&id=5e03a4de7d    This podcast is brought to you by the Institute for Neuro-Immune Medicine. Learn more about us here.   Website: https://www.nova.edu/nim/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/InstituteForNeuroImmuneMedicine Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/NSU_INIM/ Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/NSU_INIM

Synopsis: At JPM 2026 in San Francisco, Alok Tayi welcomes Michelle Werner, CEO of Alltrna, to Biotech 2050 for a powerful conversation at the intersection of personal mission, platform biology, and rare-disease drug development. Michelle traces her two-decade career across Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Novartis—and the moment everything changed when her child was diagnosed with a rare disease. That experience led her to Alltrna and its pioneering engineered tRNA platform, designed to correct nonsense mutations across hundreds—potentially thousands—of genetic disorders with a single therapeutic approach. Together, Alok and Michelle explore how tRNAs work, why “stop-codon disease” could redefine rare-disease classification, and how basket trials borrowed from oncology may accelerate development. They dive into delivery strategy, portfolio expansion into CNS and muscle disorders, regulatory innovation, and how AI is reshaping molecular design—offering a rare look at what it takes to build a first-in-class modality from the ground up. Biography: Michelle is a seasoned pharmaceutical executive with more than 20 years in the industry spanning commercial and research & development (R&D) responsibilities. Prior to Alltrna, Michelle served as Worldwide Franchise Head, Solid Tumors at Novartis Oncology, where she was responsible for delivering the disease area strategies across multiple tumors and led business development efforts resulting in a doubling of long-term portfolio value for the franchise. Previous to Novartis, Michelle was a senior leader at AstraZeneca and as Global Franchise Head in Hematology, she was critical in launching multiple indications worldwide for CALQUENCE®. Prior to this, Michelle was Head of US Oncology, where she led the business through dramatic growth in both team and revenue through eight-plus product launches. Previous to AstraZeneca, Michelle was with Bristol-Myers Squibb for 10 years in various positions of increasing responsibility including roles in sales, marketing, and market access in the US and UK, and above market in Europe (based in France) and global almost exclusively in oncology. Michelle started her professional career in R&D, working hands-on with patients at the Oncology Clinical Trials Unit at Harvard Medical School before moving into industry in clinical operations. Outside of her corporate responsibilities, Michelle is a wife and mother to three children and is a member of the rare disease community. She is currently serving a Board appointment for the non-profit organization Rare Disease Renegades, a purpose that fuels her passions both personally and professionally.

In episode 67 of Going anti-Viral, Dr Martin Hirsch joins host Dr Michael Saag to discuss his career in HIV medicine, mentorship, and his scientific legacy. Dr Hirsch is a Professor Emeritus at Harvard Medical School and was Director of the Harvard Collaborative AIDS Treatment Evaluation Unit from 1986 to 2003 and Director of the Harvard Multidisciplinary AIDS Research Training Grant. Dr Hirsch's research focused on finding drug combinations that delay the development of multidrug resistance and reduce viral replication in HIV-1 infection. Dr Hirsch served as an Editorial Board member for numerous prestigious medical journals over the past 3 decades, including AIDS, the New England Journal of Medicine, Clinical Infectious Diseases, and the Journal of Infectious Diseases, where he was Editor-in-Chief. Dr Hirsch discusses his extensive career, the evolution of antiviral therapies, and the importance of mentorship in science. He reflects on his early experiences, the emergence of HIV, and the collaborative efforts that led to advancements in treatment. Dr Hirsch emphasizes the need for individualized mentorship and shares insights on the future of HIV research and his optimism for the potential of HIV prophylactic treatments.0:00 – Introduction1:50 – Early career and mentorship5:07 – Transitioning to HIV research7:55 – The emergence of antiretroviral therapies11:06 – The AIDS epidemic and initial cases14:30 – Collaboration in HIV research17:42 – The AZT trial and its impact20:16 – Navigating the shift from CMV to HIV22:39 – Antiretroviral resistance and combination therapy26:39 – The role of mentorship in science30:56 – Future directions in HIV researchResources:Going-anti-Viral: Episode 6 - A Conversation With Dr Anthony Fauci __________________________________________________Produced by IAS-USA, Going anti–Viral is a podcast for clinicians involved in research and care in HIV, its complications, and other viral infections. This podcast is intended as a technical source of information for specialists in this field, but anyone listening will enjoy learning more about the state of modern medicine around viral infections. Going anti-Viral's host is Dr Michael Saag, a physician, prominent HIV researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and volunteer IAS–USA board member. In most episodes, Dr Saag interviews an expert in infectious diseases or emerging pandemics about their area of specialty and current developments in the field. Other episodes are drawn from the IAS–USA vast catalogue of panel discussions, Dialogues, and other audio from various meetings and conferences. Email podcast@iasusa.org to send feedback, show suggestions, or questions to be answered on a later episode.Follow Going anti-Viral on: Apple Podcasts YouTubeXFacebookInstagram...

In this episode, Dr. Greg Jones sits down with Dr. Sharon Hausman-Cohen, Chief Medical Officer of IntelliXX DNA, to explore how medical genomics is transforming the way we understand heart disease, brain health, inflammation, and metabolism. Most people think genetics stops at traits like eye color or ancestry. Genomics goes much deeper—analyzing how thousands of genes interact to influence cardiovascular risk, cognitive function, clotting tendencies, nutrient metabolism, and chronic inflammation.Dr. Hausman-Cohen explains why many direct-to-consumer DNA tests fall short, how incomplete interpretation can mislead patients, and why clinician-guided genomic analysis allows for truly personalized care. The conversation also dives into inflammation, methylation, homocysteine, cholesterol myths, caffeine metabolism, mitochondrial health, and women's unique clotting risks.Whether you're trying to reduce your risk of heart disease, improve mental clarity, or understand how your biology responds to diet, supplements, and medications—this episode offers a science-based roadmap for precision health.

Send us a textNavigating Childhood Tics and Tourette Syndrome: Expert Insights with Dr. GreenbergIn this  episode, we sit down with Dr. Greenberg, director of the pediatric psychiatry OCD and Tic disorders program in Boston, to discuss the complexities of childhood tics and Tourette Syndrome. Dr. Greenberg shares his extensive expertise and personal experiences to help parents understand what tics are, how they manifest, and their natural progression. He provides insights on effective treatments such as CBIT therapy and when medication might be necessary. Additionally, Dr. Greenberg emphasizes the importance of differentiating between normal tics and those that may indicate other co-occurring conditions like ADHD and OCD. This episode is a must-watch for parents seeking reassurance and practical advice on managing their child's tics.Erica Greenberg, M.D. is an assistant Professor in Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a child/adolescent psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) where she is the Director of the Pediatric Psychiatry OCD and Tic Disorders Program. Dr. Greenberg is also a co-Director of the MGH Tourette Association of America (TAA) Center of Excellence and the co-president of the Medical Advisory Board of the TAA. Her interests include Tourette syndrome (TS), OCD, “Tourettic OCD,” ADHD, body-focused repetitive behavior disorders, and other Tourette syndrome spectrum conditions. She has authored several peer-reviewed manuscripts on TS, OCD, and related disorders, and has presented on these conditions nationally and internationally. Dr. Greenberg graduated from Weill Cornell Medical College with Alpha Omega Alpha honors, and completed her general psychiatry residency at Harvard Longwood and her child/adolescent fellowship training at MGH.Contact Dr Greenberg: MassGeneral Brigham; Massachusetts General Hospital for ChildrenPediatric Psychiatry OCD and Tic Disorders ProgramEmail: MGHPediOCDTics@partners.org617-643-2780Your Child is Normal is the trusted podcast for parents, pediatricians, and child health experts who want smart, nuanced conversations about raising healthy, resilient kids. Hosted by Dr. Jessica Hochman — a board-certified practicing pediatrician — the show combines evidence-based medicine, expert interviews, and real-world parenting advice to help listeners navigate everything from sleep struggles to mental health, nutrition, screen time, and more. Follow Dr Jessica Hochman:Instagram: @AskDrJessica and Tiktok @askdrjessicaYouTube channel: Ask Dr Jessica If you are interested in placing an ad on Your Child Is Normal click here or fill out our interest form.-For a plant-based, USDA Organic certified vitamin supplement, check out : Llama Naturals Vitamin and use discount code: DRJESSICA20-To test your child's microbiome and get recommendations, check out: Tiny Health using code: DRJESSICA The information presented in Ask Dr Jessica is for general educational purposes only. She does not diagnose medical conditi...

Sergio Alfaro, Army Medic and GWOT veteran, in Episode 234 of the Transition Drill Podcast, his experience highlights the importance of preparing for the mental and emotional side of transition, not just the next job or degree, and building support systems early instead of relying on a single post-service plan. Ultimately, his path reinforces that successful transition preparation requires adaptability, self-awareness, and permission to redefine success when the original mission no longer fits.Sergio talks about Iraq, PTSD, and the long road from wanting to become a doctor to rebuilding a life that actually works. If you're a veteran or first responder trying to figure out who you are after the job, this one's for you.Sergio was born in Los Angeles and grew up in Maywood and Burbank, seeing two very different worlds early on. He joined the Army with a long-term plans of becoming a doctor. In the Army, he became a medic, trained and deployed to Iraq in 2003–2004, based in Hamadi, west of Fallujah. He describes the reality of frequent mortar attacks, watching for IED threats, and the kind of moments that never really leave you. He also shares the loss of his commanding officer overseas, and how survivor's guilt and “why him, not me” thinking followed him home.After one enlistment, that turned into four and a half years because of stop-loss, Sergio struggled with trauma, but was hopeful of getting the option for the Army to send him to college to be a doctor. He wanted to keep serving and also go to school, but he ran into the “ask command” reality of the system, and it changed his outlook on staying in. He got out, determined to chase the goal on his own terms.That drive carries him all the way to acceptance at Harvard Medical School, with the GI Bill and Yellow Ribbon support helping make it possible. But also dealing with PTSD, a medical culture not built for that, and a training path that puts him in a VA inpatient psych ward rotation at the worst possible time. Things spiral, and he shares what it's like when your identity is tied to one mission and you feel it slipping away.The second half of this conversation is about what actually helped: support systems, weekly check-ins, and eventually getting connected with Wounded Warrior Project's Warriors to Work, job fairs, resume feedback, and a shift toward a new career path built around what he always loved most, training and teaching others.CONNECT WITH THE PODCAST:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/paulpantani/WEBSITE: https://www.transitiondrillpodcast.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulpantani/SIGN-UP FOR THE NEWSLETTER:https://transitiondrillpodcast.com/home#aboutQUESTIONS OR COMMENTS:paul@transitiondrillpodcast.comSPONSORS:GRND CollectiveGet 15% off your purchaseLink: https://thegrndcollective.com/Promo Code: TRANSITION15Blue Line RoastingGet 10% off your purchaseLink: https://bluelineroasting.comPromocode: Transition10Frontline OpticsGet 10% off your purchaseLink: https://frontlineoptics.comPromocode: Transition10

Love the episode? Send us a text!What happens when a breast surgeon becomes a breast cancer patient—and then faces a second diagnosis years later?In this deeply personal and illuminating episode of Breast Cancer Conversations, host Laura Carfang is joined by Dr. Anne Peled, a board-certified breast, reconstructive, and plastic surgeon who has treated thousands of patients—and also navigated her own early-stage breast cancer diagnosis, followed years later by a new primary DCIS diagnosis.Together, Laura and Dr. Peled unpack what patients are rarely told about DCIS (stage zero breast cancer), the difference between recurrence and a second primary cancer, and how advances in surgery are transforming survivorship—including sensation-preserving mastectomy.This conversation bridges clinical expertise and lived experience, offering clarity, compassion, and permission to choose the path that aligns with your body and values.In this episode: What DCIS really is—and why “stage zero” can be misleadingRecurrence vs. second primary breast cancer: why biology mattersLumpectomy vs. mastectomy and why survival outcomes are often the sameHow guilt and self-blame show up after a second diagnosisBeing diagnosed with breast cancer as a physicianNavigating treatment when your colleagues are your caregiversThe evolution of oncoplastic surgery and patient-centered careWhy loss of breast sensation is under-discussed—but life-changingHow sensation-preserving mastectomy worksWhat questions to ask your surgeon about sensation, nerves, and recoveryMaking decisions based on your priorities—not fear or pressureAbout today's guestDr. Anne Peled is a board-certified plastic, reconstructive, and breast surgeon in private practice in San Francisco and Co-Director of the Sutter Health California Pacific Medical Center Breast Cancer Center of Excellence. Trained at Amherst College, Harvard Medical School, and UCSF, Dr. Peled completed a unique fellowship combining breast oncologic surgery and reconstruction.Her clinical and research work focuses on oncoplastic surgery, preserving and restoring sensation after mastectomy, improving patient outcomes, and breast cancer risk reduction. She is also a breast cancer survivor herself, bringing rare dual insight to patient care. Support the showLatest News: Become a Breast Cancer Conversations+ Member! Sign Up Now. Join our Mailing List - New content drops every Monday! Discover FREE programs, support groups, and resources! Enjoying our content? Please consider supporting our work.

Imagine being afraid of a pickle. Or a banana. Or a nub of bread. That’s daily life for people with ARFID (Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder). It's an eating disorder not driven by weight or body image, but by fear, sensory overwhelm, or low appetite. People with this condition experience real terror and powerful aversions to certain foods - far beyond picky eating. Clinical psychologist Dr. Evelyna Kambanis explains ARFID, who it affects, and how treatment helps people reclaim their lives. Andrew Luber (aka “ARFID Andrew”) shares his funny, blunt, and vulnerable attempts at food exposures online. And Danielle Meinert tells the story of carrying ARFID since toddlerhood, and the startling change she says came after a high-dose psilocybin experience. Resources: National Eating Disorders Association - ARFIDAssociation of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated DisordersFamilies Empowered and Supporting Treatment of Eating Disorders Suggested episodes: The hidden hunger of Pica: Stories from people who eat objects Anorexia is complex. Two people talk frankly about their decades-long journeys GUESTS: Dr. Evelyna Kambanis: Licensed clinical psychologist in the Eating Disorders Clinical & Research Program at Massachusetts General Hospital and a faculty member at Harvard Medical School. She is involved in clinical care and research on ARFID Andrew Luber, aka ARFID Andrew: Los Angeles filmmaker and social media creator who documents food exposures with humor under the tagline, “Conquering my fear of food one laugh at a time” Danielle Meinert: Lived with ARFID for 27 years after a major shift in her relationship with food following ear surgery as a toddler. After years of trying traditional approaches, she described experiencing a dramatic change after a session using psilocybin Support the show: https://www.wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

“Time of Useful Consciousness “ (The aviation term for the time between when the oxygen cuts out, and the pilot is still conscious…) Caroline welcomes astro mytho colleague Judith Tsafrir, as we weave powerful testimony from Aliya Rahman, and Renee Good's brothers, Luke & Brent Ganger, rousing music – with the increasing rapidly arising dangers – with the descriptive & guiding astrological narrative of effective strategy. The Good Medicine of Bad Bunny Super Bowl, the Monks and Aloka. In Trickster We Trust …   Judy Tsafrir, MD is a physician, shamanic practitioner, and guide in the work of healing and human development. Trained in adult and child psychiatry and psychoanalysis, and a longtime Harvard Medical School faculty member, she brings an integrative approach that bridges depth psychology, holistic medicine, and spiritual wisdom. Judy draws on shamanism, astrology, the Tarot, Reiki, and intuitive practices, alongside her medical and psychoanalytic training, to support healing at emotional, physical, and spiritual levels. She is the author of Sacred Psychiatry: Bridging the Personal and Transpersonal to Transform Health and Consciousness., and her work is grounded in the belief that healing arises through the integration of heart, mind, body, and spirit—and that personal healing is inseparable from the healing of our communities and planet. https://www.JudyTsafrirMD.com The post Time of Useful Consciousness appeared first on KPFA.

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Atul Batra discuss the PLANeT study from India, which evaluated low-dose pembrolizumab in addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple-negative breast cancer, and its place among a growing body of international research on improving efficacy while reducing costs and toxicity with lower doses of immunotherapy. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Monty Pal. I'm a medical oncologist, professor, and vice chair of academic affairs at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles. My guest today, I think, is going to be a really riveting one. It's Dr. Atul Batra, who is an additional professor of medical oncology at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, or AIIMS, in New Delhi. And he's also the senior author of the PLANeT study. It's a very compelling study that evaluated low-dose pembrolizumab in addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for triple-negative breast cancer. And it's really a big part of a growing body of research that's showing balanced efficacy when we use lower doses of immunotherapy instead of standard doses to reduce cost, as well as potentially toxicity. I think this has huge implications for our global audience, and I'm so thrilled to have you on the podcast today, Dr. Atul Batra, welcome. Dr. Atul Batra: Thank you, Dr. Pal. Dr. Monty Pal: And we'll just take it with first names from here since we're both friends. I have to give the audience some context. Atul, I had the great honor of visiting AIIMS New Delhi. For those that don't know, this is really, you know, the Harvard Medical School of India. It's the most competitive institution for medical training. And on the back end of that, there's also incredible resources when it comes to clinical trials and infrastructure. I just wanted to have you give the audience sort of a scope of the types of trials that you've been able to do at AIIMS New Delhi. Dr. Atul Batra: Thank you, Monty. So, I work at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, and we had the honor and pleasure of having Monty here this month. And people are still in awe of his lectures that he delivered there. Coming back to our institute, so it's kind of a medical college. It's one of the oldest ones, it was built in 1956. We are lucky enough that we get the best of the residents and fellows because they have to go through an exam, a competitive exam, and mostly it's them who come to us and we're able to do some good work out here. Regarding the trials that we have conducted, we do conduct some investigator-initiated studies, and we try to answer the questions where we can help our own patients. Like, for example, this PLANeT study. Every other patient in the clinic was almost not able to afford Keytruda at the full dose, pembrolizumab, and we had a lot of evidence creeping in that a lower dose might be helpful. And that's how we planned this study. Before that, there are certain cancers that are peculiar to India, like gallbladder cancer, head and neck cancers. These are much more common in India as compared to the U.S., and there are some good studies that have been conducted from our own institute by our senior colleagues which have been presented at ASCO and published in the JCO. We also did the capecitabine hand-foot syndrome study that was known as the D-ToRCH study: 1% diclofenac gel that became the standard of care to prevent hand-foot syndrome.  So, that's kind of a brief overview of investigator-initiated studies. India is slowly and steadily becoming a partner of the global registration trials. And it's more recently, the last five years or so, we have seen that the number of phase 2 and phase 3 trials are increasing and we are able to offer now these trials as well to our patients. Dr. Monty Pal: That was a terrific overview. I just want to highlight for the audience, as we go through some of your discussions today around specific trials, the speed at which this can be done. Just for context, for me to accrue a clinical trial of 30 patients – I think many people have probably come across some of the work that I've done in the microbiome space – at a single institution, 30 patients, right, takes me about a year and a half, two years. We're going to go through some trials today where Dr. Batra and his team have actually, in fact, accrued close to 200 patients over a span of just a year, which is just remarkable by, I would say, any American standard. So, I see a real need for partnership and Atul, I'll kind of get back to that at the end. But without further ado, the focus of this podcast today, I think, is really this terrific presentation you gave in an oral session at ESMO and subsequently published in Annals of Oncology related to the PLANeT study. Would you give the listeners some context around what the study entailed and population and so forth? Dr. Atul Batra: So, we know the KEYNOTE-522 became the standard of care for triple-negative breast cancer, where Keytruda, when added at 200 mg, the standard dose every three weeks with neoadjuvant, increases the pCR from around 51% to 64% by a magnitude of around 13%. However, in India and other low-middle income countries, less than 5% of the patients actually have access to this dose of pembrolizumab. So, our standard of care was actually just chemotherapy till now. And this kind of led us to design this trial. There are data that come from previous trials conducted in India, from the Tata Memorial, done in head and neck space, some other studies done in Hodgkin's lymphoma, that a much lower dose, probably around one-tenth of the dose, works well in these cancers. So, that's where we designed the PLANeT study, where we gave the standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the control arm, and in the experimental arm we added 50 mg of pembrolizumab. This was given every six weeks for three doses. So, that's a total of 150 mg over the neoadjuvant period as compared to 1,600 mg that was given in the KEYNOTE-522 study. So, this was almost one-tenth of the study. Dr. Monty Pal: So, a tenth of the dose, which is just remarkable. I mean, that's just such an interesting concept. Dr. Atul Batra: And the results, when we – the primary outcome, this was a phase 2 study. We just wanted to see, is there a signal of activity? And to even our surprise, when we looked at the pathological complete response rates, in the control arm this was 40.5%, and in the experimental arm this was 53.8%. So, a difference came to around 13.3%; it was numerically, I mean, so much similar to what KEYNOTE-522 had with just these many doses. So, this was around 160 patients randomized over one year. We could randomize them in one year because of the load that we see. And the primary endpoint was met, and we could see that the path complete response did show a remarkable increase. We are still following these patients to see whether there is a difference in event-free survival at a longer follow-up. Until now, it's a small follow-up, so the number of events absolute, are different: four events in the experimental arm and 11 events in the control arm. So, we are seeing some signal even in this much short follow-up period as well. But we need to see more of what happens in the longer term. Dr. Monty Pal: That's so impressive. I wonder, with this lower dose, do you attenuate toxicity at all as far as you can gather? Dr. Atul Batra: So, although we shouldn't be doing kind of cross-trial comparisons, but if you look at thyroid dysfunction, we saw that around 10% of our patients had this thyroid dysfunction. This was compared to 15% in the KEYNOTE-522, that was a larger sample size though. But we're seeing that all the toxicities are somewhat less as compared to those in the standard dose. So, the exposure is less, but I mean, I can't really commit definitely on this. For this we would need much more data to say this with more confidence. Dr. Monty Pal: Yeah. I'm going to ask you a really tough question to follow up, and this is probably something that's on everyone's mind after reading a study like this. Is this something that is disease-specific that needs to be replicated across other histologies? The reason I ask this is, you know, you think about paradigms like, for instance, in the States we're toying between intravenous versus subcutaneous delivery of checkpoint inhibitors, and we have studies focused in specific histologies that might justify use across all histologies. With this particular phenomenon, do you think we need to do dedicated studies in renal cell or in colon cancer and other places where, you know, in selected settings we might use checkpoint inhibitors and then decide whether or not there's this dose equivalence, if you will? Dr. Atul Batra: That's a real tough one, though. But I'm happy to share that there are several ongoing studies within India currently. At our institute, my colleagues are leading studies in lung cancer space, cervical cancer. There was already a publication from Tata Memorial Hospital in head and neck cancers and we see that the signal has been consistent throughout. Regarding renal cancer, there was one study that was presented for sure at ASCO from CMC Vellore, that's again a center in South India. That was in RCC at a much lower dose. And for patients who cannot take the full dose, we actually are offering lower dose nivolumab in such patients and we are seeing responses. I mean, we haven't done those randomized trials again because the numbers are much lower in kidney cancers, we know. We could do this trial in triple-negative ones because we had support and we had numbers to conduct this trial. But I'm sure this should be a class effect. I mean, when we can get tumor-agnostic approvals, then some real-world data has come up in almost all tumors, we have seen that consistent effect across tumors. And as we speak of today, I'm also delighted to share that in India, yesterday, we had the first biosimilar of nivolumab and that's now available at a much, much lower price than the original patent product. There was a long ongoing lawsuit that was there, that's over now, and from yesterday onwards, I'm so happy to share here that we would have the first biosimilar of nivolumab that's available. That's going to bring the cost to almost like one-tenth already. Dr. Monty Pal: Wow. That's huge.  I'm going to be very selfish here for a second and focus on a study that is in the renal cell space that your group has done. You know, when it came out, I was really sort of intrigued by this study as well and it reflects sort of a different capability, I think, of AIIMS New Delhi, and that's in the, what I'm going to call, biomarker space. This, for the audience, was a prospective effort to characterize germline variants in patients with advanced kidney cancer. And it's something that we talk about a lot in the kidney cancer literature, whether or not we're missing a lot of these so-called hereditary patterns of RCC. Can you tell us a little bit about that study too? Dr. Atul Batra: Yeah, so that was led by one of our fellows, Chitrakshi Nagpal, and she's just completed her fellowship. And two years back we published that. So, that was done in almost 160 consecutive patients that we recruited over the span of just one year and we saw, apart from the common known mutations in RCC, that was around 5% or so, but a lot of other mutations were also seen that we don't generally see in kidney cancers and we see in other cancers like BRCA1, BRCA2 and others. We are still, I mean, doing those analyses to see whether we get more things out of there in the somatic: is there a loss of heterozygosity or was it just present and in there? Dr. Monty Pal: I thought it was a terrific study and again, I was just so blown away at the pace. I mean, as I look at 140 patients accrued over a span of one year, this is something that would take us perhaps three times as long at City of Hope, and that's with a very sort of, what I consider to be large and dedicated kidney cancer program. So, it really underscores, I think, the need for collaboration. And ever since I came back from my visit to you at AIIMS Delhi, I think I've just been sort of transformed in the sense of trying to think of better ways for us to collaborate. One tangible thing that I'm going to get cracking on is seeing whether or not perhaps we can form some partnerships through SWOG or what we call the NCTN, the National Clinical Trials Network here within the U.S. Talk to me about collaboration. I mean, you've been really terrific at this. How do you sort of envision collaboration enhancing the global landscape of oncology? Dr. Atul Batra: That's really amazing, Monty. That's what we need. We have the infrastructure, we have the manpower, we have patients. I mean, these are all high-volume centers. Unfortunately, we are a little less in numbers, so we are more clinically occupied as well. So, sometimes it's kind of tougher, but again, when it comes to helping out the patients, global collaboration, we need to kind of take you guys along with us and have our patients finish trials earlier. This is a win-win situation for patients, one, because they also get exposure or an option to participate in the clinical trials, and second, we can answer all these scientific questions that we have at a much faster pace. All those things can be done within a much shorter span of time for sure. We are so happy to hear that, and with open hands we are ready to collaborate for all these efforts. Dr. Monty Pal: That's awesome. You know, I came back thinking, gosh, this would be so ideal for some of these rare subtypes of kidney cancer. Prospective clinical trials that I'm running in that space where really we're threatened with closure all the time. And if we just sort of extended a hand to, you know, our partners in India and other countries, you know, I'm sure we could get this research done in a meaningful way and that's got to be a win for patients. Atul, I had such a terrific time chatting with you today. I'm looking forward to seeing lots more productivity from your group there. By the way, for our viewership here, take a look and see what AIIMS New Delhi is doing under the leadership of Dr. Batra and others. It is just a real powerhouse and I think that after doing so, you'll be enticed to collaborate as well.  I'm hoping this is the first of many times that we have you on the podcast. Thank you so much for joining. Dr. Atul Batra: Thank you so much for having me here, Monty. It was a pleasure as always speaking to you. And thank you again. Dr. Monty Pal: You got it.  Well, and thanks to our listeners. I encourage you to check out Dr. Batra's paper. We'll actually have a link to the study in the transcript of this episode.  Finally, if you value the insights that you heard today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. More on today's speakers:     Dr. Monty Pal   @montypal Dr. Atul Batra @batraatulonc Follow ASCO on social media:          ASCO on X    ASCO on Bluesky         ASCO on Facebook          ASCO on LinkedIn          Disclosures:       Dr. Monty Pal:      Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview     Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical     Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis     Dr. Atul Batra: Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Zydus Pharmaceuticals, Glenmark, Caplin Point Laboratories, Laurus Research Funding: AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Alkem Laboratories

Send us a textThere are moments in life when you realize — very clearly — who and what is holding you up. This week, I found myself thinking deeply about the people who show up quietly, consistently, and without needing anything in return. And it made me reflect on how much of what weighs us down isn't physical at all — it's emotional, and relational.This episode is an invitation to look at relationships differently. Not through the lens of fixing, forcing, or holding on tighter — but through honesty, acceptance, and relief. If you've ever felt exhausted by relationships, confused by love, or curious about what truly helps us feel lighter — this one is for you.References1.    Waldinger, R. J., & Schulz, M. S. (2010). What makes a good life? Lessons from the longest study on happiness. Harvard Study of Adult Development, Harvard Medical School.2.    Waldinger, R. J. (2015). What makes a good life? Lessons from the longest study on happiness. TED Talk. Harvard University.3.    Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., Baker, M., Harris, T., & Stephenson, D. (2015). Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: A meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 227–237.4.    Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2000). The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 737–745.5.    Beck, J. S. (2011). Cognitive behavior therapy: Basics and beyond (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.6.    Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26.Let's go, let's get it done. Get more information at: http://projectweightloss.org

Success in HR often comes with a hidden job: absorbing everyone else's anxiety. You're expected to soothe, steady, and “make it okay”, even when what people are feeling is a normal response to real pressure and uncertainty.In this episode, clinical psychologist Dr. David Rosmarin offers a practical reframe: not all anxiety is the same. Some anxiety does require professional support, but much of what shows up at work is an emotional signal, not a diagnosis. When leaders learn to recognize what anxiety is communicating, they can stop playing whack-a-mole with stress, build healthier trust on teams, and create a culture that performs without pretending certainty exists.You'll also hear David's simple four-step process to work with anxiety constructively, identifying what's underneath it, sharing it in a way that builds connection, embracing it as resilience-building, and letting go of what can't be controlled.About our guestDr. David Rosmarin is a clinical psychologist, author, and Associate at Harvard Medical School, and the founder of the Center for Anxiety. His work focuses on helping people rethink anxiety not only as something to treat clinically when needed, but as a normal human experience that can be used to thrive — a perspective especially relevant in today's high-pressure workplaces.Resources MentionedDr. Rosmarin's four-step framework (public resource) Dr. David RosmarinDr. Rosmarin's site + newsletter - Dr. David RosmarinBook: Thriving with Anxiety - Amazon TED Talk: How to make anxiety your friend TEDStay connected with foHRsightTo sign up for our monthly newsletter, foHRsight, visit http://www.futurefohrward.com/subscribeFollow us on LinkedIn:Mark Edgar – www.linkedin.com/in/markedgarhr/Naomi Titleman Colla – www.linkedin.com/in/naomititlemancolla/future foHRward – www.linkedin.com/company/future-fohrward/Follow us on Instagram: www.instagram.com/futurefohrward/For more information on our private community for forward-thinking HR leaders, including how to join our next Manager-Director HR Leader cohort launching this spring, visit our website at futurefohrward.com/community. We are also currently welcoming new members in our CHRO and VP+ HRBP & Talent cohorts. Don't miss your chance to join the community you've been missing!Support the show

In this episode, I sit down with one of my former mentors and professors, Dr. Alan Penzias, Medical Director at Boston IVF and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School, to discuss his recent editorial in the Annals of Internal Medicine titled "The Weighty Issue of Obesity and Reproductive Success."  Read the full show notes on Dr. Aimee's website.  We dive deep into how age and weight factor into the fertility equation and why these conversations are so critical for anyone trying to conceive. Dr. Penzias shares his decades of experience helping patients navigate the complex intersection of body mass index, maternal age, and reproductive success, offering practical guidance on when to seek treatment and how to optimize your health before trying to get pregnant. In this episode, we cover: How age remains the strongest predictor of fertility success and why both partners should consider timing The U-shaped curve of BMI and fertility: why both low and high body mass index can impact conception Practical strategies for doctors for discussing weight and fertility with patients in a shame-free, empowering way When to prioritize immediate fertility treatment versus taking time for weight optimization based on age The role of GLP-1 medications (like Tirzepatide) in fertility treatment and safe protocols for use Why unexplained infertility may have hidden explanations related to weight and metabolic health The "do the as if" philosophy: building sustainable health habits one step at a time Resources: Dr. Alan Penzias and Boston IVF: BostonIVF.com Dr. Penzias's editorial: "The Weighty Issue of Obesity and Reproductive Success" - Annals of Internal Medicine https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/ANNALS-25-02742  Dr. Penzias's YouTube video: "Evidence-Based Approach to Unexplained Infertility" https://youtu.be/9j4lNvmaXts?si=zmMFZFOno0sWnhcn  American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) Practice Committee resources on overweight and fertility https://www.asrm.org/ Dr. Stephanie Fein  - Fertility Weight Loss Specialist: https://www.stephaniefeinmd.com/  Hillary Wright, Nutritionist at Boston IVF: https://www.bostonivf.com/physicians/hillary-wright Do you have questions about IVF?Click here to join Dr. Aimee for The IVF Class. The next live class call is on Monday, February 9, 2026 at 4pm PST, where Dr. Aimee will explain IVF and there will be time to ask her your questions live on Zoom.   Dr. Aimee Eyvazzadeh is one of America's most well known fertility doctors. Her success rate at baby-making is what gives future parents hope when all hope is lost. She pioneered the TUSHY Method and BALLS Method to decrease your time to pregnancy. Learn more about the TUSHY Method and find a wealth of fertility resources at www.draimee.org. Other ways to connect with Dr. Aimee and The Egg Whisperer Show: Subscribe to my YouTube channel for more fertility tips!Subscribe to the newsletter to get updates  

In this episode of The MSing Link Podcast, I'm thrilled to welcome Dr. Kelly Rich, neuroscientist at Harvard Medical School, for a deep dive into how multiple sclerosis (MS) might accelerate brain aging—and what the latest research reveals. We explore the connection between MS, cellular aging, and innovative new therapies like cellular reprogramming that could help protect and rejuvenate your nervous system. Dr. Rich shares practical insights on supporting brain health, resilience, and ways to slow neurological decline. Whether you're looking to reduce MS fatigue, improve mobility, or boost your cognition, this episode is packed with expert advice, empowering exercises, and actionable tools for living better with MS. Tune in for an inspiring discussion on MS treatments, neuroscience, anti-inflammatory strategies, and hope for future breakthroughs in MS care! About Dr. Kelly Rich:  Dr. Kelly Rich, a neuroscientist and clinical genetic counselor at Harvard Medical School, who works in Dr. David Sinclair's lab studying how aging affects our nervous system at the cellular level. Connect with Dr. Kelly Rich:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kellyrichphd Connect with the Sinclair Lab:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sinclair_labWebsite: https://sinclair.hms.harvard.edu/?utm_source=ig&utm_medium=social&utm_content=link_in_bio&fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMjU2MjgxMDQwNTU4AAGnPtOlP1oSYiX1wyDKp-8TxE5-kbY81__aH1AWVU_qn2JJGn-dihYq4uHn6Wg_aem_7n-6t_jlL2A68qgb0q7bVALifespan with Dr. David Sinclair Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lifespan-with-dr-david-sinclair/id1601709306 Additional Resources: https://www.doctorgretchenhawley.com/insider Reach out to Me: hello@doctorgretchenhawley.com Website: www.MSingLink.com Social: ★ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/mswellness ★ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/doctor.gretchen ★ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/doctorgretchenhawley?sub_confirmation=1 → Game Changers Course: https://www.doctorgretchenhawley.com/GameChangersCourse → Total Core Program: https://www.doctorgretchenhawley.com/TotalCoreProgram → The MSing Link: https://www.doctorgretchenhawley.com/TheMSingLink

Send us a textFebruary is National Heart Month, and in the month of hearts, we're revisiting one of the most important conversations from the Ageless Glamour Girls™ Podcast archives.Broken Heart Syndrome can mimic the symptoms of a heart attack - and it can occur after sudden, intense emotional or physical stress. Research shows cases are increasing, particularly among middle-aged and older women. This episode originally aired during our debut season in March 2022, but its message feels even more urgent today. We're joined by Dr. Susan Cheng, senior author of a major study on the condition and a leading cardiologist at the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai. Dr. Cheng breaks down:What Broken Heart Syndrome is - and what it isn'tWhy women are disproportionately affectedThe powerful role stress plays in heart healthAnd, most importantly, why this condition is treatableIf you've ever felt the physical weight of emotional stress, this conversation matters. And here's to Healthy Aging and Joyful Living, Luvvies!**********************GUEST BIO: Susan Cheng, MD, MMSc, MPH is the Erika J. Glazer Chair in Cardiovascular Health and Population Science, Director of the Institute for Research on Healthy Aging, and Director of Population Health Sciences at the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai. She also serves as Professor and Vice Chair of Research Affairs in the Department of Cardiology. Dr. Cheng is a cardiologist, echocardiographer, and clinician-scientist who leads nationally recognized research programs focused on the drivers of cardiovascular aging in women and men. She received her bachelor's degree from Harvard College, her medical degree from McMaster University, a Master of Medical Science from MIT, and a Master of Public Health from Harvard.She completed internal medicine training at The Johns Hopkins Hospital and cardiology training at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, where she later served as cardiology faculty and Associate Director of the Cardiovascular Imaging Core Laboratory. Dr. Cheng is also Co-Director of the Framingham Heart Study Echocardiography Laboratory and Co-Director of the international Bioactive LipidsNet Consortium. She has served on editorial boards of major cardiovascular and imaging journals and on leadership committees for the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology. Dr. Cheng has chaired and contributed to multiple American Heart Association scientific statements on research methods, heart disease statistics, and cardiovascular care of older adults. She has authored more than 4Support the show https://buymeacoffee.com/agelessglamourgirls www.linkedin.com/in/marqueetacurtishaynes www.agelessglamourgirls.com https://www.shopltk.com/explore/AgelessGlamourGirls https://www.youtube.com/@agelessglamourgirls Instagram @agelessglamourgirls Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/agelessglamourgirls Private (AGG) FB Group: The Ageless Café: https://www.facebook.com/groups/theagelesscafe TikTok: @agelessglamourgirls Podcast Producers: Ageless Glamour Girls and Purple Tulip Media, LLC

Send us a textHow deep into AI do clinicians really need to go? In this clip from our episode "Making Healthcare Massively Better", CareTalk host John Driscoll speaks with Halle Tecco about why becoming AI-literate is the only way to build real guardrails as patients use tools like ChatGPT at scale.Listen to the full episode here

“My times were dropping and it was so exciting. Every week, they were dropping, dropping, dropping. It was pretty early in the season, too. At that point, I hadn't even made NCAAs. At the time when I ran 2:00, I had the number one time in the country. There was a lot that happened super fast… I think that was my favorite race of my life. I never even thought in my mind that I could run 2:00 even earlier on in the season. It broadened the horizons of what I think I'm capable of in the future and to never limit myself.”My guest for today's episode is Victoria Bossong. This week on the podcast, CITIUS MAG is bringing you interviews with some of Team New Balance's latest signees as we celebrate five years of partnering with them on all things from the high school to the professional front. Yesterday, we brought you an interview with Roisin Willis and now we've got another strong rising 800m runner.Victoria was a star high school sprinter in Maine who almost on a whim tried the 800m late into her prep career and found success. Fast forward a few years and she's fully committed to the event. In 2025 while at Harvard, she was the NCAA Indoor Championships runner-up and ran an outdoor personal best of 1:59.48. She just opened up her indoor season as a pro with an indoor 1000m PB of 2:36. Off the track, she's just as impressive. She has her degree in neuroscience and has worked in a Harvard Medical School lab. In our chat, she discusses how she managed to balance all of that as a student-athlete, how she comes at the 800m from more of a sprinter background, and her goals for her first professional season.____________Host: Chris Chavez | ⁠⁠@chris_j_chavez on Instagram⁠Guest: Victoria Bossong | @victoriabossong on InstagramProduced by: Jasmine Fehr | ⁠⁠⁠@jasminefehr on Instagram⁠⁠⁠____________SUPPORT OUR SPONSORSUSATF: The USATF Indoor Track and Field Championships presented by Prevagen are back in New York City from February 28th to March 1st at the Ocean Breeze Athletic Complex in Staten Island. This is where legends don't just race; they punch their ticket to the world stage. The pressure is real, the margins are razor thin, and every athlete is fighting for one thing: a spot on Team USATF at the World Indoor Championships. Grab your tickets now at USATF.org/tickets and experience track and field at its absolute loudest.OLIPOP: A blast from the past, Olipop's Shirley Temple combines smooth vanilla flavor with bright lemon and lime, finished with cherry juice for that nostalgic grenadine-like flavor. One sip of this timeless soda proves some flavors never grow old. Try Shirley Temple and more of Olipop's flavors at DrinkOlipop.com and use code CITIUS25 at checkout to get 25% off your orders.

Ewa Grassin jest naukowczynią na Harvard Medical School. W swojej pracy tworzy modele ludzkiego mózgu z komórek macierzystych, by lepiej zrozumieć choroby neurologiczne. W odcinku nauka jest jednak tylko punktem wyjścia. To rozmowa o tym, jak naprawdę wygląda kariera naukowa w Stanach Zjednoczonych: o drodze do pracy w jednym z najbardziej konkurencyjnych środowisk na świecie, presji grantów, zawodowej niepewności, statusie imigracyjnym i codzienności, która ma niewiele wspólnego z filmowym wyobrażeniem Harvardu.

I had the absolute pleasure of sitting down with Dr. Amy Comander on The Breast Cancer Podcast 

I am so happy to welcome Dr. Ellen Braaten back for her third time on the show! In case you missed those episodes and/or need a refresher, Dr. Ellen Braaten is the founding director of the Learning and Emotional Assessment Program at Massachusetts General Hospital and an associate professor at Harvard Medical School. She is a prolific researcher and author whose work focuses on ADHD, learning disorders, child psychopathology, processing speed, intelligence, and children's motivation, including bestselling books for parents and professionals. Deeply committed to public education, she frequently speaks on child mental health topics and contributes to both local and national media. In our conversation, we talk about why unmotivated kids rarely fit neatly into a single category, with Dr. Braaten explaining that children may struggle with motivation for a variety of reasons, such as cognitive overload, emotional fatigue, repeated failure, or even a lack of clear identity. She also explains why framing these challenges as brain-based skills, rather than personal failings, can help change the way parents and clinicians respond. We also discuss the narrowing of opportunities in schools today, why kids need space to discover their own strengths beyond academics and athletics, and how uncomfortable emotions such as shame, anxiety, or regret can silently block motivation. Dr. Braaten's workbook is designed not just for children but for the adults supporting them, and she shares how parents, teachers, and therapists can use its activities to spark meaningful conversations, assess where a child gets stuck, and offer guidance without shame. It's about collaboration, not enforcement, and about helping kids take ownership of their growth while navigating setbacks safely. This episode of the show will surely resonate with anyone supporting tweens and teens, whether you're a parent, educator, or clinician, and offers strategies to help young people (and even adults) rediscover what matters to them, reclaim their motivation, and move forward with confidence! Show Notes: [2:09] - Hear how Dr. Ellen Braaten realized poor motivation affects everyone, especially during stressful, sleep-deprived times. [5:40] - Motivation consists of initiation, persistence, and desire, and can be treated as a learnable skill. [7:56] - Dr. Braaten discusses how kids today struggle to find identity due to overwhelming choices and early specialization pressures. [9:52] - Dr. Braaten argues that strengths extend beyond academics and sports, yet schools rarely provide opportunities to explore diverse talents. [11:51] - Hear how setbacks, injuries, or missed guidance can lead to regret. [13:44] - Breaking motivation into initiation, intensity, and persistence can help kids, parents, and clinicians clarify obstacles. [16:28] - Dr. Braaten points out how even small changes, like better sleep, improve motivation. [18:04] - Parents should balance support and independence, empowering children while preventing guilt or overwhelming hovering. [21:18] - Anxiety and post-pandemic habits have reduced face-to-face engagement, creating cycles that undermine motivation. [23:04] - Dr. Braaten's workbook is best used with adults as guides, sparking conversations about identity and priorities. [26:05] - Hear how to contact Dr. Braaten. Links and Related Resources: Episode 61: Slow Processing Speed with Dr. Ellen Braaten Episode 107: How to Motivate Kids Who Couldn't Care Less with Dr. Ellen Braaten Dr. Ellen Braaten & Hillary Bush - The Motivation Mindset Workbook: Helping Teens and Tweens Discover What They Love to Do   Connect with Dr. Ellen Braaten: Dr. Ellen Braaten's Website  

Most people never escape the circumstances they're born into — Dr. Ming Wang escaped Communist China with $50 and went on to restore sight to millions. In this episode of The Root of All Success, Jason Duncan sits down with Dr. Ming Wang, a Harvard- and MIT-trained physician, laser eye surgeon, and the inventor who donated a multi-million dollar patent to help blind children worldwide. Dr. Wang breaks down how he redefined success from outcomes to effort, why he chose purpose over profit, and how perseverance rooted in faith carried him from darkness to light — both literally and spiritually. This conversation dives into: Why he completed three years of high school in weeks to escape labor camps How earning both an MD and a PhD made him a one-of-a-kind surgeon The moment he chose to donate his invention instead of cashing in Why success should be measured by effort, not results How his conversion from atheism to Christianity transformed his purpose The business lesson medical school never taught him about serving your audience first If you're facing impossible odds, searching for deeper purpose in your work, or need to redefine what success means to you — this episode will challenge everything you thought you knew about achievement.

Send us a textIn this episode, Dr. Amy Gelfand, a child neurologist specializing in pediatric headaches, discusses the complexities and treatment of migraines in children. Gelfand explains the genetic nature of migraines and their commonality among kids, noting triggers like menstrual cycles and changes in sleep patterns. She elaborates on distinguishing features of migraines and provides insight into preventive and acute treatments, including NSAIDs, triptans, neuromodulation devices, and supplements. The discussion also covers the importance of a regular schedule, the benefits of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and recent advancements in migraine-specific medications. Dr. Gelfand emphasizes the significant progress in migraine treatment and encourages families to consult specialists for personalized care.About Dr Gelfand:Dr. Amy Gelfand is a pediatric neurologist who specializes in diagnosing and treating children with a variety of headache disorders, as well as those with childhood periodic syndromes (such as abdominal migraine), which may be precursors to migraine headache later in life. Her research focuses on the epidemiology of pediatric migraine and childhood periodic syndromes.Gelfand received her medical degree from Harvard Medical School. She completed residencies in pediatrics and child neurology at UCSF.Gelfand has received a teaching award from the UCSF pediatric residency program and writing awards from the medical journal Neurology. She is a member of the American Academy of Neurology, Child Neurology Society and American Headache Society.Your Child is Normal is the trusted podcast for parents, pediatricians, and child health experts who want smart, nuanced conversations about raising healthy, resilient kids. Hosted by Dr. Jessica Hochman — a board-certified practicing pediatrician — the show combines evidence-based medicine, expert interviews, and real-world parenting advice to help listeners navigate everything from sleep struggles to mental health, nutrition, screen time, and more. Follow Dr Jessica Hochman:Instagram: @AskDrJessica and Tiktok @askdrjessicaYouTube channel: Ask Dr Jessica If you are interested in placing an ad on Your Child Is Normal click here or fill out our interest form.-For a plant-based, USDA Organic certified vitamin supplement, check out : Llama Naturals Vitamin and use discount code: DRJESSICA20-To test your child's microbiome and get recommendations, check out: Tiny Health using code: DRJESSICA The information presented in Ask Dr Jessica is for general educational purposes only. She does not diagnose medical conditi...

Andrew Beck, MD, PhD is the Co-founder and CEO of PathAI, where he and his team are developing AI tools to improve the precision of pathology and the efficacy of drug development for diagnosis of cancer and also many other complex diseases.Before founding PathAI, Andrew was an Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School, where his research focused on the application of machine learning to cancer pathology. He earned his MD from Brown University and his PhD in Biomedical Informatics from Stanford University, where he pioneered some of the first computational models used to predict patient outcomes in oncology.Time stamps of the conversation:00:00:00 Highlights00:01:28 Introduction00:02:18 Entrypoint in AI00:07:02 Background in Medicine and Bioinformatics 00:10:00 Leap from academia to entrepreneurship00:16:20 Translating AI developments to Pathology00:21:15 Specialist vs Generalist AI models in medicine00:24:15 What sets PathAI apart?00:26:32 AI adoption medicine00:34:25 Usage of AI tools in clinical workflows, example MASH00:40:10 AI in Dermatopathology00:42:15 AI for biomarker discovery00:47:05 Will AI models replace pathologists?00:52:28 Avoiding over-reliance on AI00:57:40 Is AI living unto the hype?01:01:00 Challenges in clinical trials 01:05:12 AI reaching patients directly01:09:50 Working at intersection of AI & Healthcare01:15:30 Pitfalls to learn fromMore about PathAI: https://www.pathai.com/and Andy: https://www.pathai.com/about-us/andy-beckAbout the Host:Jay is a Machine Learning Engineer III at PathAI working on improving AI for medical diagnosis and prognosis. Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shahjay22/Twitter: https://twitter.com/jaygshah22Homepage: https://jaygshah.github.io/ for any queries.Stay tuned for upcoming webinars!***Disclaimer: The information in this video represents the views and opinions of the speaker and does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of any institution. It does not constitute an endorsement by any Institution or its affiliates of such video content.***

In this episode of The ICHE Podcast, host Dr. David Calfee explores non–ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP)—what it is, how common it is, and why it matters for patient outcomes. He is joined by Dr. Barbara Jones (University of Utah) and Dr. Sheryl Kluberg (Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Harvard Medical School) to discuss key risk factors for NV-HAP and how preventable it may be. The conversation highlights practical prevention strategies, including the role of routine oral care and patient mobility. Dr. Jones shares insights from her ICHE study evaluating the impact of an oral care initiative using electronic clinical data and diagnostic coding, while Dr. Kluberg discusses her research on the associations between oral care, in-hospital mobility, and NV-HAP. Together, they break down the study questions, methods, key findings, and real-world implications for infection prevention efforts. This episode offers a concise, evidence-based look at how everyday care practices can help reduce the burden of NV-HAP in hospitalized patients. Links: Jones, Barbara E., Alec B. Chapman, Jian Ying, McKenna R. Nevers, Shannon Munro, Michael Klompas, Amy L. Valderrama, and Daniel O. Scharfstein. “Evaluating the Impact of an Oral Care Initiative on the Risk of Non-Ventilator-Associated Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Using Electronic Clinical Data and Diagnostic Coding Surveillance Criteria.” Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 46, no. 12 (2025): 1190–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.54. Kluberg, Sheryl A., Tom Chen, Rui Wang, Robert Jin, Laura DelloStritto, Dian Baker, Karen Giuliano, et al. “Associations between Routine Oral Care and In-Hospital Mobility with Non-Ventilator Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia.” Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 46, no. 12 (2025): 1181–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.10245.

Send us a textHealthcare innovation has never had more hype or more pressure to deliver real results. With AI accelerating and digital health entering a more mature phase, what does “better” actually look like in practice? Halle Tecco, Author of Massively Better Healthcare joins CareTalk host John Driscoll, Chairman of UConn Health, to discuss what Silicon Valley gets right and wrong about healthcare, why innovators need to align incentives with outcomes, and how leaders should think about AI with clear guardrails instead of buzzwords.

From Discovery to Delivery: Charting Progress in Gynecologic Oncology, hosted by Ursula A. Matulonis, MD, brings expert insights into the most recent breakthroughs, evolving standards, and emerging therapies across gynecologic cancers. Dr Matulonis is chief of the Division of Gynecologic Oncology and the Brock-Wilcon Family Chair at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, as well as a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston, Massachusetts.In this episode, Dr Matulonis sat down with guest Rebecca Porter, MD, PhD. Dr Porter is a physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.Drs Matulonis and Porter discussed the evolving role of immunotherapy in gynecologic cancer management, focusing on recent clinical breakthroughs and future directions. They noted that although high-grade serous ovarian cancer has historically been refractory to immunotherapy, the phase 3 KEYNOTE-B96 trial (NCT05116189) demonstrated an efficacy benefit with the addition of pembrolizumab to weekly paclitaxel for patients with platinum-resistant disease. In particular, improvements in overall survival were noted in the PD-L1–positive patient population. Dr Porter attributed this success to the metronomic weekly dosing of paclitaxel, which may increase neoantigen levels and favorably alter the tumor microenvironment (TME).Moreover, the experts highlighted how immunotherapy has already become the standard of care for patients with mismatch repair–deficient advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. However, they explained that for the mismatch repair–proficient population, this benefit is less clear and appears most significant in patients with measurable disease or specific molecular subtypes. They added that although circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assay results correlate with treatment outcomes, ctDNA is currently not an actionable biomarker for determining treatment duration or selection.Lastly, Drs Matulonis and Porter reported that the field of gynecologic oncology is shifting toward combination therapies and novel platforms beyond standard checkpoint inhibitors. Treatment advances include bispecific and trispecific antibodies that engage multiple cell types or signals; as well as adoptive cellular therapies, such as CAR T-cell and CAR natural killer–cell therapies. Ultimately, the experts concluded that the goal of managing challenging-to-treat diseases like ovarian cancer is to use combinatorial approaches—incorporating vaccines, anti-angiogenic therapies, and chemotherapy—to overcome the immunosuppressive nature of the TME.

FOR en gjest i ukas episode av Nerdelandslaget!

Dr Haley Ellis from Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, Prof Eric Van Cutsem from University Hospitals Leuven in Belgium, Dr Zev Wainberg from UCLA School of Medicine in Los Angeles, California, and moderator Dr Lionel KankeuFonkoua from Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, discuss recent data surrounding the management of HER2-positive GI cancers, alongside their perspectives on its clinical application and management.CME information and select publications here.

Dr Haley Ellis from Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, Prof Eric Van Cutsem from University Hospitals Leuven in Belgium, Dr Zev Wainberg from UCLA School of Medicine in Los Angeles, California, and moderator Dr Lionel KankeuFonkoua from Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, discuss recent data surrounding the management of HER2-positive GI cancers, alongside their perspectives on its clinical application and management.CME information and select publications here.

Most medical encounters are structured as transactions. The patient comes in with a specific complaint, the medical expert identifies a discrete problem, and a specific intervention is prescribed.But at the heart of a medical encounter is a story. When a patient comes in with a medical problem, the problem cannot be disentangled from their life's narrative — doing so risks hollowing out the essence of what it means to care for another person. Our guest on this episode is award-winning author, and primary care physician Suzanne Koven, MD. Following the completion of her residency at Johns Hopkins Hospital, Dr. Koven joined the faculty at Harvard Medical School and practiced primary care medicine at Massachusetts General for 32 years. In 2019, she became the inaugural Writer in Residence at Mass General. Her writings have been published broadly—including in The Boston Globe, The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, and The New Yorker. As a teacher and public speaker, she highlights the relationship between literature and medicine, and is a powerful advocate for female medical trainees. In this episode, Dr. Koven shares her journey to medicine at a time when few women were represented in the field and why she finds her undergraduate English classes to be more relevant to her clinical work than her science classes. We discuss narrative medicine, its value to patients and physicians alike, and how the modern healthcare system struggles to value the patient story. Finally, Dr. Koven leaves us with her advice for up-and-coming trainees: find a place in medicine where you can be yourself – for your own good and for your patients'.In this episode, you'll hear about: 3:00 - Dr. Koven's motivations for going into primary care medicine 15:49 - The impact that Dr. Koven's English degree has had on her approach to medicine 19:36 - What narrative medicine is 24:34 - What is lost when human connection and human story are deprioritized within the practice of medicine 31:15 - The benefits doctors experience when cultivating an appreciation for the arts37:21 - How gender representation in medicine has shaped Dr. Koven's experience as a physician42:54 - The need for the culture of medicine to adapt to changing demographics in the medical workforceIf 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 2026

Cassandra Bodzak is a spiritual teacher, holistic wellness coach, and actress known for helping soul-led women design lives that support their energy, purpose, and expansion. Through her signature Sacred Structure method, an intuitive blend of astrology, human design, and ritualized scheduling, she guides others to craft daily rhythms that nourish the body, regulate the nervous system, and amplify creative power. Cassandra studied Lifestyle Medicine and Nutrition and Wellness Coaching through Harvard Medical School and is certified as a HHC through the Institute of Integrative Nutrition. Her approach bridges science and spirit, grounding metaphysical tools in sustainable, embodied practices. You may have seen her on ABC's The Taste with Anthony Bourdain as the “happy, healthy living guru,” or featured in collaborations with SHAPE, Teen Vogue, Eating Well, Huffington Post, Thrive, Fabletics, Lululemon, and SoulCycle. In This Episode, We Explore:Cassandra's full-circle journey of revamping her first book and evolving authenticallyHow her brother's illness inspired her passion for nutrition, cooking, and healingLearning to trust body wisdom through intuitive eating and becoming a “food detective”Navigating postpartum nutrition, cravings, and conflicting health advice with clarityWhy quality ingredients, education, and gratitude matter more than rigid food rulesFollow Cassandra on Instagram: http://instagram.com/cassandrabodzak Follow Cassandra on Substack: https://substack.com/@cassandrabodzak Listen to Cassandra on her podcast, YOU with Intention by Cassandra Bodzak: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/you-with-intention-by-cassandra-bodzak/id1042765691 Pre-Order Cassandra's Book, The Mindful Table: Recipes & Affirmations for Intuitive, Seasonal Eating: https://a.co/d/gC64CQ0 Read all of Cassandra books here: https://amzn.to/46KjTUV Stay Connected:Instagram @whitneyaronoffInstagram @starseedkitchenTikTok @whitneyaronoffTikTok @starseedkitchenLearn more about Starseed Kitchenwww.starseedkitchen.comShop organic spiceshttps://starseedkitchen.com/shop/code STARSEED for 10% offWork with a personal chefhttps://form.typeform.com/to/CGDu08tEBook a 1-on-1 callhttps://bit.ly/4smXWUfFind more of Chef Whitney's offerings herehttps://linktr.ee/whitney.aronoff

Some families are living on an emotional rollercoaster. One minute everyone seems fine. The next, it feels like the wheels are coming off. In this episode of Complicated Kids, I sit down with Dr. Kate Lund, a licensed clinical psychologist, resilience expert, and twin mom, to talk about resilience as a way of living rather than a trait you either have or do not have. Instead of seeing resilience as "you hit a challenge and bounce back," we explore what it looks like to build a steadier baseline so you can ride the waves of real life with a little more ease. Dr. Kate shares how she helps parents understand their own context first. That includes their nervous system, history, strengths, and the particular stressors they are carrying. From there, we talk about practical tools for modulating your stress response, including a simple daily relaxation practice that helps you learn what "regulated" actually feels like in your body so you can return to it more often. We also talk about timing. Kids of all ages need space to feel their feelings before they can look for possibilities or "what's next." We walk through real-life examples, including college rejections, tough games, and everyday disappointments, and how to sit with your child's emotions without rushing to fix them. A big part of this conversation focuses on perfectionism and comparison. Dr. Kate and I discuss why there is no resilience formula, why siblings in the same family can need completely different things, and how to move away from "perfect outcome" thinking and toward doing what is optimized within your own context. If you've ever wondered how to be a grounded leader in your family while still being a real human with your own feelings and limits, this episode will give you language, tools, and a more compassionate way to think about resilience for both you and your kids. Key Takeaways Resilience is a lifestyle, not a moment. Regulation becomes more accessible when tools are woven into daily life instead of saved for crises. Your nervous system sets the tone. When you are already stressed, even small challenges can overwhelm the whole family. A simple daily practice matters. A five-minute breathing practice paired with a calming word can teach your body what calm feels like. Self-awareness comes before strategy. Resilient parenting starts with being honest about your own strengths, limits, and stress patterns. Every child has their own context. Siblings can need completely different support based on their nervous systems. Validation comes before possibility. Kids need their feelings acknowledged before they can move forward. Sharing struggles builds connection. Age-appropriate honesty shows kids that resilience includes falling down and getting back up. Perfectionism blocks resilience. Growth happens when you work within your real life, not an imaginary ideal. There is no one-size-fits-all formula. Resilient families stay curious and adjust over time. Possibility lives on the other side of hard things. Holding a long view allows hope without minimizing today's challenges. About Dr. Kate Lund Dr. Kate Lund is a licensed clinical psychologist, resilience expert, author, and host of The Optimized Mind podcast. With specialized training from three Harvard Medical School–affiliated hospitals and more than two decades of clinical practice, she helps parents, athletes, students, and entrepreneurs thrive within their unique contexts. She is the author of Bounce: Help Your Child Build Resilience and Thrive in School, Sports, and Life and Step Away: The Keys to Resilient Parenting. Dr. Kate also volunteers at Seattle Children's Hospital with her dog, Wally, supporting young patients facing medical challenges. About Your Host, Gabriele Nicolet I'm Gabriele Nicolet—toddler whisperer, speech therapist, parenting life coach, and host of Complicated Kids. Each week, I share practical, relationship-based strategies for raising kids with big feelings, big needs, and beautifully different brains. My goal is to help families move from surviving to thriving by building connection, confidence, and clarity at home. Complicated Kids Resources and Links

Janina Fisher, Ph.D. is a licensed clinical psychologist and a former instructor at Harvard Medical School.She is an international expert on the treatment of trauma and an Advisory Board member of the Trauma Research Foundation as well as the author of three books, including her most recent, Embracing Our Fragmented Selves: A Workbook for Trauma Survivors and TherapistsHealing the Fragmented Selves of Trauma Survivors: Overcoming Self-Alienation (2017), Transforming the Living Legacy of Trauma: a Workbook for Survivors and Therapists (2021), and The Living Legacy Instructional Flip Chart (2022). Janina is best known as the creator and trainer of Trauma-Informed Stabilization Treatment (TIST), a parts approach to resolution and healing.In This EpisodeJanina's websiteJanina's books:Healing the Fragmented Selves of Trauma Survivors: Overcoming Self-Alienation (2017)Transforming the Living Legacy of Trauma: a Workbook for Survivors and Therapists (2021)The Living Legacy Instructional Flip Chart (2022). Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-trauma-therapist--5739761/support.You can learn more about what I do here:The Trauma Therapist Newsletter: celebrates the people and voices in the mental health profession. And it's free! Check it out here: https://bit.ly/4jGBeSa———If you'd like to support The Trauma Therapist Podcast and the work I do you can do that here with a monthly donation of $5, $7, or $10: Donate to The Trauma Therapist Podcast.Click here to join my email list and receive podcast updates and other news.Thank you to our Sponsors:Jane App - use code GUY1MO at https://jane.appArizona Trauma Institute at https://aztrauma.org/

Jordan Amadio, M.D., is a board-certified neurosurgeon, and his clinical practice focuses on minimally invasive spine surgery, surgical neuro-oncology and neurotrauma. Amadio received his medical education at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology before completing a neurosurgery residency at Emory University. At Emory, he pursued research fellowships as a Council of State Neurosurgical Societies socioeconomic fellow and a Congress of Neurological Surgeons innovation fellow. He also earned an MBA from Harvard Business School, with emphasis on medical technology innovation. As affiliated faculty and a National Institutes of Health-funded investigator within Texas Robotics, he works with robotics experts to build next-generation tools and implants for spine surgery. Previously, he co-founded the NeuroLaunch incubator for neurotechnology startups and has since advised dozens of medical technology ventures. Outside his academic work, Amadio is closely involved with the development of brain-computer interface technology as a director of neurosurgery at Neuralink. Amadio is deeply committed to mentoring the next generation of physicians and enjoys teaching students and residents. As a way of giving back, he has also been active in providing neurosurgical care to socioeconomically challenged populations, from Texas to Mirebalais, Haiti.Support the show

Get the book, The Digital Delusion: How Classroom Technology Harms Our Kids' Learning—And How To Help Them Thrive Again Visit the LME Global website, www.LMEGlobal.net Follow Jared on Youtube @JaredCooney About The Author Jared Cooney Horvath, PhD is a neuroscientist educator who has conducted research and lectured at Harvard University, Harvard Medical School, and The University of Melbourne, and over 750 schools on 6 continents. Jared has published 7 books, over 60 research articles, and his work has been featured in popular publications, including The New Yorker, The Atlantic, The Economist, and on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's science show Catalyst. Jared currently serves as Director of LME Global: a team dedicated to bringing the latest brain and behavioral research to teachers, students, and parents.   This episode of Principal Center Radio is sponsored by IXL, the most widely used online learning and teaching platform for K-12. Discover the power of data-driven instruction in your school with IXL—it gives you everything you need to maximize learning, from a comprehensive curriculum to meaningful school-wide data. Visit IXL.com/center to lead your school towards data-driven excellence today.   

Margaret talks with clinical psychologist Dr. Meredith Elkins, author of the new book PARENTING ANXIETY, about how anxiety really works—and how parents can stop unintentionally reinforcing it in themselves and their kids. Dr. Elkins, a faculty member at Harvard Medical School and director of the McLean Anxiety Mastery Program, shares insights from her new book Parenting Anxiety: Breaking the Cycle of Worry and Raising Resilient Kids. Together, they unpack why anxiety isn't something to eliminate, how avoidance makes fear stronger, and why modern “intensive parenting” may be increasing anxiety for both parents and children. You'll learn the three key markers that distinguish normal anxiety from an anxiety disorder (interference, distress, and duration), why psychological flexibility is one of the most important skills we can teach kids, and how cognitive behavioral therapy—especially exposure—helps people face fear instead of shrinking from it. This conversation offers practical, compassionate tools for parents who want to support anxious kids without over-accommodating, and for anyone who wants to change their relationship with anxiety itself. Here's where you can find Dr. Elkins: https://www.meredithelkinsphd.com/ @drmeredithelkins on IG and FB LinkedIn Buy PARENTING ANXIETY: https://bookshop.org/a/12099/9780593798812 What Fresh Hell is co-hosted by Amy Wilson and Margaret Ables. We love the sponsors that make this show possible! You can always find all the special deals and codes for all our current sponsors on our website: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.whatfreshhellpodcast.com/p/promo-codes/ What Fresh Hell podcast, mom friends, funny moms, parenting advice, parenting experts, parenting tips, mothers, families, parenting skills, parenting strategies, parenting styles, busy moms, self-help for moms, manage kid's behavior, teenager, tween, child development, family activities, family fun, parent child relationship, decluttering, kid-friendly, invisible workload, default parent, parenting anxiety, child anxiety, anxiety in children, anxiety disorders, psychological flexibility, cognitive behavioral therapy, CBT for anxiety, exposure therapy, intensive parenting, mental health for parents, anxiety coping skills, raising resilient kids, parenting mental health, postpartum anxiety, intrusive thoughts, anxiety management, Harvard psychologist, Meredith Elkins, anxiety treatment, family mental health Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today Razib talks to Aneil Mallavarapu, a scientist and technology leader based in Austin, Texas, whose career bridges the fields of biochemistry, systems biology, and software engineering. He earned his doctorate in Biochemistry and Cell Biology from the University of California, and has held academic positions at Harvard Medical School, where he contributed to the Department of Systems Biology and developed the "Little b" programming language. Mallavarapu has transitioned from academic research into the tech and venture capital sectors, co-founding ventures such as Precise.ly and DeepDialog, and currently serving as a Managing Partner at Humain Ventures. He remains active in the scientific community through local initiatives like the Austin Science Network. Most of the conversation centers around Mallavarapu's arguments outlined in his Substack The Case Against Conscious AI - Why AI consciousness is inconsistent with physics. The core of his argument rests on the "Simultaneity Problem" and the "Hard Problem of Physics," which involve non-locality and the memorylessness of artificial intelligence phenomena. Though Mallavarapu believes that artificial intelligence holds great promise, and perhaps even "artificial general intelligence" (AGI) is feasible, he argues that this is a distinct issue from consciousness, which is a property of human minds. Razib also brings up the inverse case: could it be that many organisms that are not particular intelligence, also have consciousness? What does that imply for ethics of practices like eating meat?

At the end of 2024 I sat down with Dr. Meng Chiang, the Executive Director of the 2024 Taiwanese American Conference- East Coast. We had a really wonderful heart-centered conversation about the conference theme Collective Memory and that led to collective trauma as it relates to the Taiwanese and Taiwanese American communities. We talked about the 4 types of trauma responses, the 4 Fs- flight, fight, freeze and fawn and post-traumatic growth. Related Links: https://talkingtaiwan.com/collective-memory-collective-trauma-a-conversation-with-meng-chiang-ep-339/ This episode is dedicated to the memory of Sharon Huang, who passed away in December of 2025. She was a dear friend, mother, wife, sister, auntie, a community organizer and a cornerstone of the Taiwanese American community, especially in New York where she resided. Most notably she and her husband Patrick Huang ran the Brooklyn Artists Studio (BAS) and have supported the Taiwanese American Arts Council (TAAC) and Talking Taiwan. Together they have advocated for Taiwan democracy, human rights, and culture. The loss of Sharon is felt by so many who knew and loved her, she leaves behind family in the U.S. and Taiwan.   Mengchun "Meng" Chiang, PhD (she/her/hers), is a member of the Taiwanese American community. She has served in various community leadership roles, most recently as Executive Director of the Taiwanese American Conference East Coast (TACEC) in 2024.   Professionally, Meng is the founder of CHI Executive Consulting, LLC, where she provides leadership coaching and consulting services, specializing in workplace inclusion and organizational wellness. She is passionate about empowering leaders from diverse backgrounds, helping them enhance their communication, negotiation, and inclusive leadership skills. Meng regularly facilitates workshops to help leaders integrate their identities into effective leadership practices that drive business success and personal growth.   Meng is a licensed clinical psychologist with affiliations to Harvard Medical School, Carnegie Mellon University, the Tepper School of Business, and National Taiwan University. Her experience spans education, training, and leadership roles. She pioneered the Leadership and Connection for Asian Women+ Leaders program and served as Assistant Director of Training at Carnegie Mellon University. In her free time, Meng enjoys traveling, practicing loving-kindness meditation, listening to music, taking walks, and grocery shopping.   Related Links: https://talkingtaiwan.com/collective-memory-collective-trauma-a-conversation-with-meng-chiang-ep-339/

Superpowers for Good should not be considered investment advice. Seek counsel before making investment decisions. When you purchase an item, launch a campaign or create an investment account after clicking a link here, we may earn a fee. Engage to support our work.Watch the show on television by downloading the e360tv channel app to your Roku, LG or AmazonFireTV. You can also see it on YouTube.Devin: What is your superpower?Eugene: Staying focused on a North Star.Eugene Chan, CEO and founder of rHEALTH, has taken blood diagnostics to new heights—literally. His innovative technology, capable of analyzing dozens of biomarkers from a single drop of blood, was tested aboard the International Space Station (ISS). In today's episode, Eugene shared the remarkable journey of rHEALTH, from competing with top companies for a NASA partnership to launching its device into space.What sets rHEALTH apart is its proven reliability in extreme conditions, including the zero-gravity environment of space. Eugene explained, “We tested this technology on the International Space Station with astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti, who operated the device and obtained precise values from single drops of sample. They did the analysis using our device and got absolutely the right answers.” This achievement underlines the robustness and accuracy of rHEALTH's technology, qualities that distinguish it from other attempts at single-drop blood diagnostics.Unlike Theranos, which famously failed to deliver on similar promises, rHEALTH's technology has been rigorously vetted. Eugene highlighted the grueling process of earning NASA's trust. “To be the one company selected to demonstrate our novel technology on the ISS was a huge undertaking,” he said. He recounted the intense competition and NASA's exacting standards, which included testing the device's functionality during zero-gravity parabolic flights.Now, Eugene and his team are bringing this groundbreaking technology to the public with a regulated crowdfunding campaign on StartEngine. “You don't have to be a Silicon Valley elite or a Boston venture capitalist to participate,” I noted during the episode. With this campaign, everyday investors have the opportunity to support a proven technology poised to revolutionize healthcare.The implications of rHEALTH's success are profound. If it works in space, it can work in remote clinics, underserved communities, and even in people's homes. This technology has the potential to make diagnostics more accessible, empowering individuals to take control of their health.Eugene's vision, combined with rHEALTH's proven track record, makes this an exciting investment opportunity. Visit StartEngine to learn more and become part of this revolutionary journey.tl;dr:Eugene Chan shared how rHEALTH's diagnostic technology was tested and proven aboard the International Space Station.He explained the rigorous process of competing with other companies to secure NASA's trust.rHEALTH's crowdfunding campaign on StartEngine makes investing in this revolutionary technology accessible to all.Eugene highlighted the importance of his North Star: improving human health with innovative solutions.He shared advice on maintaining focus and using challenges as opportunities to achieve big goals.How to Develop Staying Focused on a North Star As a SuperpowerEugene's superpower is his ability to maintain a relentless focus on his “North Star”—the overarching goal of improving human health. As he explained, “The North Star has always been to improve the human condition and help us improve human health.” For Eugene, this guiding principle has driven his work through challenges, from competing for NASA's attention to developing groundbreaking diagnostic technology.One illustrative story of this superpower came during a pivotal moment in Eugene's career. While competing in the XPRIZE competition, he found himself grappling with a flawed prototype. It was during this time, sitting at his wife's bedside after the birth of their child, that the concept for rHEALTH's current device was born. Combining the pressure of the competition, the inspiration of his newborn daughter, and his unwavering focus on creating a robust solution, Eugene developed the technology that would later achieve success in space.Eugene also shared actionable tips for developing this superpower:Identify your personal North Star—a goal or mission that deeply resonates with you.Let that North Star guide your decisions, especially during challenging times.Stay committed to your mission, even when facing setbacks or obstacles.Use external pressures, like deadlines or competitions, to fuel innovation and progress.By following Eugene's example and advice, you can make staying focused on a North Star a skill. With practice and effort, you could make it a superpower that enables you to do more good in the world.Remember, however, that research into success suggests that building on your own superpowers is more important than creating new ones or overcoming weaknesses. You do you!Guest ProfileEugene Chan (he/him):CEO, Founder, rHEALTHAbout rHEALTH: rHEALTH has worked with NASA to develop a miniaturized diagnostic test system to keep astronauts healthy on the way to Mars. We have successfully tested this onboard the International Space Station and published the results in Nature Communications, demonstrating results from blood in minutes in extreme environments. The technology shrinks a central clinical lab and a team of doctors in a form suitable for everyday use. Comprehensive lab-quality analysis can be performed by anyone, fundamentally shifting diagnostics from centralized facilities to the point-of-care and homes. The focus is to usher in Diagnostics 2.0, allowing high-value multiplexed diagnostics.Website: rhealth.comOther URL: startengine.com/offering/rhealthBiographical Information: Dr. Chan is a physician-inventor. He is currently Founder, CEO of rHEALTH, and President, CSO of DNA Medicine Institute, a medical innovation laboratory. He has been honored as Esquire magazine's Best and Brightest, one of MIT Technology Review's Top 100 Innovators, and an XPRIZE winner. His work has contributed to the birth of next-generation sequencing, health monitoring in remote environments, and therapeutics. Dr. Chan holds over 60 patents and publications, with work funded by the NIH, NASA, and USAF. Dr. Chan received an A.B. in Biochemical Sciences from Harvard College summa cum laude in 1996, received an M.D. from Harvard Medical School with honors in 2007, and trained in medicine at the Brigham and Women's Hospital. He has been in zero gravity and led the team that demonstrated the rHEALTH ONE bioanalyzer onboard the International Space Station.LinkedIn Profile: linkedin.com/in/eugene-chan-4220045Personal Twitter Handle: @Dr_EugeneChanSupport Our SponsorsOur generous sponsors make our work possible, serving impact investors, social entrepreneurs, community builders and diverse founders. Today's advertisers include Crowdfunding Made Simple. Learn more about advertising with us here.Max-Impact Members(We're grateful for every one of these community champions who make this work possible.)Brian Christie, Brainsy | Cameron Neil, Lend For Good | Carol Fineagan, Independent Consultant | Hiten Sonpal, RISE Robotics | John Berlet, CORE Tax Deeds, LLC. | Justin Starbird, The Aebli Group | Lory Moore, Lory Moore Law | Mark Grimes, Networked Enterprise Development | Matthew Mead, Hempitecture | Michael Pratt, Qnetic | Mike Green, Envirosult | Dr. Nicole Paulk, Siren Biotechnology | Paul Lovejoy, Stakeholder Enterprise | Pearl Wright, Global Changemaker | Scott Thorpe, Philanthropist | Sharon Samjitsingh, Health Care Originals | Add Your Name HereUpcoming SuperCrowd Event CalendarIf a location is not noted, the events below are virtual.SuperGreen Live, January 22–24, 2026, livestreaming globally. Organized by Green2Gold and The Super Crowd, Inc., this three-day event will spotlight the intersection of impact crowdfunding, sustainable innovation, and climate solutions. Featuring expert-led panels, interactive workshops, and live pitch sessions, SuperGreen Live brings together entrepreneurs, investors, policymakers, and activists to explore how capital and climate action can work hand in hand. With global livestreaming, VIP networking opportunities, and exclusive content, this event will empower participants to turn bold ideas into real impact. Don't miss your chance to join tens of thousands of changemakers at the largest virtual sustainability event of the year. Learn more about sponsoring the event here. Interested in speaking? Apply here. Support our work with a tax-deductible donation here.SuperCrowd Impact Member Networking Session: Impact (and, of course, Max-Impact) Members of the SuperCrowd are invited to a private networking session on January 27th at 1:30 PM ET/10:30 AM PT. Mark your calendar. We'll send private emails to Impact Members with registration details.Community Event CalendarSuccessful Funding with Karl Dakin, Tuesdays at 10:00 AM ET - Click on Events.Join C-AR Annual Reporting: Requirements, Deadlines, and Lessons Learned from the Field on January 14, 2026, an informative online webinar designed to help crowdfunding issuers and professionals clearly understand C-AR annual reporting requirements, key deadlines, and real-world insights to stay compliant and prepared.Join UGLY TALK: Women Tech Founders in San Francisco on January 29, 2026, an energizing in-person gathering of 100 women founders focused on funding strategies and discovering SuperCrowd as a powerful alternative for raising capital.If you would like to submit an event for us to share with the 10,000+ changemakers, investors and entrepreneurs who are members of the SuperCrowd, click here.Manage the volume of emails you receive from us by clicking here.We use AI to help us write compelling recaps of each episode. Get full access to Superpowers for Good at www.superpowers4good.com/subscribe

Restless legs syndrome is a sleep-related neurologic disorder that causes an overwhelming urge to move the limbs, which can cause substantial sleep disturbance. Author John W. Winkelman, MD, PhD, of Harvard Medical School joins JAMA Deputy Editor Kristin Walter, MD, MS, to discuss the symptoms, risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment of restless legs syndrome. Related Content: Restless Legs Syndrome

Born in Tustin, California, James Nestor spent his teens surfing and playing in a straight-edge punk band called Care Unit. After graduating high school, he moved to the Bay Area, where he studied art and literature and earned an MFA.  Nestor's professional life began as a copywriter. Soon he moved into magazine journalism. His essays and features have appeared in Outside, Scientific American, The New York Times, The Atlantic, Dwell, The Surfer's Journal, and many others. His 2014 book, DEEP: Freediving, Renegade Science, and What the Ocean Tells Us About Ourselves, follows clans of extreme athletes, adventurers, and scientists as they plumb the ocean's depths and uncover surprising new discoveries. But his big book is, of course, 2020's Breath: The New Science of a Lost Art, which explores the million-year-long history of how we humans have lost the ability to breathe properly, and why we're suffering from various maladies because of it. Along with drawing on thousands of years of medical texts and recent cutting-edge studies in pulmonology, psychology, biochemistry, and human physiology, Nestor also found answers in the muddy digs of ancient burial sites, secret Soviet facilities, New Jersey choir schools, and the smoggy streets of Sao Paulo. In sum, Breath turns the conventional wisdom of what we thought we knew about our most basic biological function on its head. Nestor has been a guest speaker at Stanford Medical School, Harvard Medical School, Yale School of Medicine, and the United Nations. He currently lives in Portugal.  In this episode of Soundings, Nestor talks with Jamie Brisick about the fundamentals of breathwork, Ocean Beach, growing up in Orange County, his early days as a reporter, the values of freediving, and writing books. Produced by Jonathan Shifflett. Music by PazKa (Aska Matsumiya & Paz Lenchantin).

In this episode, Christina sits down with Jacob Hooker for a candid conversation at the intersection of coaching, mentorship, and mental health. Together, they unpack the psychology of growth, the science of change, and why curiosity is one of the most overlooked tools in personal development.Jacob shares how his journey from academia to entrepreneurship led him to focus on the mental health crisis, and how innovative therapeutic approaches, including psychedelic-assisted treatments, are reshaping what's possible.About The Guest: Jacob Hooker, PhD, is a neuroscientist, entrepreneur, and CEO of Sensorium Therapeutics, a biotechnology company developing nature-inspired medicines for mental health. Jacob previously served as an endowed professor at Harvard Medical School and a scientific leader at Massachusetts General Hospital, where his research helped advance new approaches for understanding the brain and treating psychiatric disease. His work sits at the intersection of neuroscience, chemistry, and human well-being—with a focus on creating better, faster-acting treatments for anxiety and stress.Connect with Jacob on LinkedInLearn more about Sensorium TherapeuticsFollow Jacob on Substack If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating  and leave us a comment on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser and Castbox about what you'd like us to talk about that will help you realize that at any moment, any day, you too can decide, it's your turn! 

Studies show qigong can strengthen your body and mind, and reduce cortisol levels. We explore this Chinese meditative movement practice that dates back over 4,000 years.Summary: After a period of intense stress, loss, and physical disconnection, one guest turns to qigong—a gentle, meditative movement practice rooted in traditional Chinese medicine—to reconnect with their body and calm their nervous system. This episode of The Science of Happiness explores the growing scientific evidence behind qigong, revealing how mindful movement can support both physical health and psychological well-being.We want to hear from you! Take our 5-minute survey to enter a drawing to win a copy of The Science of Happiness Workbook: 10 Practices for a Meaningful Life. Tell us what you love, what you want more of, and how we can make the show even more inspiring and useful. Click the survey link in the show notes wherever you're listening, or go directly to: https://tinyurl.com/happyhappysurvey. Thank you for helping us make the podcast even better!One Way To Do This Practice: Stand and settle: Stand with your feet hip-width apart, knees soft, arms relaxed by your sides. Take a moment to feel the ground beneath your feet and let your body arrive. Ground through your feet: Gently rock or sway in small circles, slowly shifting your weight to notice different parts of your feet making contact with the floor. Let your balance find its own rhythm. Breathe slowly and naturally: Inhale through your nose and exhale through your mouth, allowing your breath to deepen without forcing it. Imagine your breath moving through your whole body, not just your chest. Begin gentle, flowing movements: Move your arms and torso in smooth, continuous motions—circling, swaying, or softly lifting and lowering your hands. Keep your movements relaxed and fluid rather than stiff or controlled. Soften your body and attention: Release unnecessary tension in your jaw, shoulders, and hands. Place your attention on how the movements feel from head to toe, letting your mind stay with sensation rather than thoughts. Close with stillness: After 10–15 minutes, return to standing quietly. Notice any changes in your energy, mood, or sense of grounding before stepping back into your day. Scroll down for a transcription of this episode.Today's Guests:ACE BORAL is an Oakland-based chef.PETER WAYNE is an Associate Professor of Medicine, and serves as the Director for the Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, jointly based at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital.Learn more about Peter's work: https://tinyurl.com/342xndnaRelated The Science of Happiness episodes:  Breathe Away Anxiety (Cyclic Sighing): https://tinyurl.com/3u7vsrr5The Science of Synchronized Movement: https://tinyurl.com/n4bcrb5jTell us about your experience with this practice. Email us at happinesspod@berkeley.edu or follow on Instagram @HappinessPod.Help us share The Science of Happiness! Leave us a 5-star review on Apple Podcasts and share this link with someone who might like the show: https://tinyurl.com/2p9h5aapTranscription: https://tinyurl.com/yyxnsfy9

We all want to stay sharp, and forestall the cognitive effects of aging. But do brain supplements actually work? Are they safe? And why doesn't the F.D.A. even know what's in them? (Part one of “The Freakonomics Radio Guide to Getting Better.”) SOURCES:Marty Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.Peter Attia, physician, author, and host of The Peter Attia Drive.Pieter Cohen, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, physician at the Cambridge Health Alliance. RESOURCES:"Protein Powders and Shakes Contain High Levels of Lead," by Paris Martineau (Consumer Reports, 2025)."Accuracy of Labeling of Galantamine Generic Drugs and Dietary Supplements," by Pieter Cohen, Bram Jacobs, Koenraad Van Hoorde, and Céline Vanhee (JAMA, 2024).Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets It Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health, by Marty Makary (2024).Outlive: The Science and Art of Longevity, by Petter Attia (2023)."Revealing the hidden dangers of dietary supplements," by Jennifer Couzin-Frankel (Science, 2015). EXTRAS:"China Is Run by Engineers. America Is Run by Lawyers." by Freakonomics Radio (2025)."How to Fix the Hot Mess of U.S. Healthcare," by Freakonomics Radio (2021). Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.