Study of blood, the blood-forming organs, and blood diseases
POPULARITY
Categories
Jason Gilley walked into adulthood with a fastball, a college roster spot, and a head of curls that deserved its own agent. Cancer crashed that party and took him on a tour of chemo chairs, pediatric wards, metal taste, numb legs, PTSD, and the kind of late night panic that rewires a kid before he even knows who he is.I sat with him in the studio and heard a story I know in my bones. He grew up fast. He learned how to stare down mortality at nineteen. He found anchors in baseball, therapy, and the strange friendships cancer hands you when it tears your plans apart. He owns the fear and the humor without slogans or shortcuts. Listeners will meet a young man who refuses to let cancer shrink his world. He fights for the life he wants. He names the truth without apology. He reminds us that survivorship stays messy and sacred at the same time. This conversation will stay with you.RELATED LINKS• Jason Gilley on IG• Athletek Baseball Podcast• EMDR information• Children's Healthcare of AtlantaFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Klinisch Relevant ist Dein Wissenspartner für das Gesundheitswesen. Drei mal pro Woche, nämlich dienstags, donnerstags und samstags, versorgen wir Dich mit unserem Podcast und liefern Dir Fachwissen für Deine klinische Praxis. Weitere Infos findest Du unter https://klinisch-relevant.de
Welcome to our final episode for 2025. We're taking a little break for the holidays but we'll be back again on Friday 9th of January to kick off our year with the Managing Director of Merck KGaA's M Ventures, Hakan Goker.Today, though, I'm joined by Ester in t'Groen of Johnson & Johnson.Fresh off the American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting in Orlando, where J&J presented over 60 abstracts, Ester shares insights into the company's portfolio and the advances that the company has made over recent years in the hematology space.She walks us through the real-world evidence for some pretty significant results from the thousands of patients in their clinical trials, and explain what's next for J&J in hematology in 2026—including some exciting readouts.01:14 - Meet Ester in t'Groen 02:37 - Winning the Kilmer Medal06:32 - J&J's key focus areas07:32 - The hematology portfolio19:07 - All about ASH 202523:49 - The MajesTEC-3 data27:43 - The value of real-world datasets32:06 - Looking forward into 2026Interested in being a sponsor of an episode of our podcast? Discover how you can get involved here! Stay updated by subscribing to our newsletterTo dive deeper into the topic: Blood Cancer Awareness Month: What biotech holds in store 10 oncology deals in 2025 spotlight where industry leaders are betting bigT cell engagers: A promising, fast-growing field for cancer and autoimmune disease treatments
Dr. Marissa Russo trained to become a cancer biologist. She spent four years studying one of the deadliest brain tumors in adults and built her entire research career around a simple, urgent goal: open her own lab and improve the odds for patients with almost no shot at survival. In 2024 she applied for an F31 diversity grant through the NIH. The reviewers liked her work. Her resubmission was strong. Then the grant system started glitching. Dates vanished. Study sections disappeared. Emails went silent. When she finally reached a program officer, the message was clear: scrub the DEI language, withdraw, and resubmit. She rewrote the application in ten days. It failed. She had to start over. Again. This time with her identity erased.Marissa left the lab. She found new purpose as a science communicator, working at STAT News through the AAAS Mass Media Fellowship. Her story captures what happens when talent collides with institutional sabotage. Not every scientist gets to choose a Plan B. She made hers count.RELATED LINKSMarissa Russo at STAT NewsNIH F31 grant story in STATAAAS Mass Media FellowshipContact Marissa RussoFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this week's episode, Blood editor Dr. Laurie Sehn interviews three of the latest Blood authors: Drs. Vijay Sankaran, Ruud Delwel, Françoise Kraeber-Bodere. Two studies on the MECOM gene have been paired in this episode, analyzing new groundwork for potential novel myeloid differentiation therapies via repression of MECOM restoring enhancer mediated CEBPA expression. We'll also hear about the results of CASSIOPET, imaging companion study of the CASSIOPEIA trial, and how achieving negativity in PET before starting maintenance therapy is significant even in patients who still show residual disease in the bone marrow.Featured ArticlesCEBPA repression by MECOM blocks differentiation to drive aggressive leukemiasMECOM is a master repressor of myeloid differentiation through dose control of CEBPA in acute myeloid leukemia Prognostic value of premaintenance FDG PET/CT response in patients with newly diagnosed from the CASSIOPEIA trial
This episode is part of the special series Empowered Intimacy: Getting Your Sexy Back After Breast Cancer, where getting your sexy back is about reclaiming confidence, connection, and desire after a breast cancer diagnosis. Melissa Berry sits down with Chelsey Pickthorn, a patient advocate living with stage four triple-negative breast cancer, and Dr. Don Dizon, Chief of Hematology and Oncology at Tufts Medicine and a national leader in sexual health and inclusive cancer care. They explore the challenges LGBTQ+ individuals face with intimacy, dating, body image, and relationships after a cancer diagnosis. Chelsey shares her experiences navigating disclosure, reconstruction, caregiving, and connection, while Dr. Dizon highlights gaps in healthcare for LGBTQ+ patients. This honest and hopeful conversation offers guidance, empowerment, and advocacy for inclusive care. Thank you to Lilly, Merck, and Novartis for making this episode possible.
Scott Capozza and I could have been cloned in a bad lab experiment. Both diagnosed with cancer in our early twenties. Both raised on dial-up and mixtapes. Both now boy-girl twin dads with speech-therapist wives and a lifelong grudge against insurance companies. Scott is the first and only full-time oncology physical therapist at Yale New Haven Health, which means if he catches a cold, cancer rehab in Connecticut flatlines. He's part of a small, stubborn tribe of providers who believe movement belongs in cancer care, not just after it. We talked about sperm banking in the nineties, marathon training during chemo, and what it means to be told you're “otherwise healthy” when your lungs, ears, and fertility disagree. Scott's proof that survivorship is not a finish line. It's an endurance event with no medals, just perspective.RELATED LINKSScott Capozza on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-capozza-a68873257Yale New Haven Health: https://www.ynhh.orgExercising Through Cancer: https://www.exercisingthroughcancer.com/team/scott-capozza-pt-msptProfiles in Survivorship – Yale Medicine: https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/profiles-in-survivorship-scott-capozzaFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Send us a textMeghan Gutierrez is the Chief Executive Officer of the Lymphoma Research Foundation ( https://lymphoma.org/ ), the nation's largest nonprofit organization devoted to funding lymphoma research and education, advancing both the study of new cancer therapies and improved patient care.An expert in government relations and health care policy, Meghan has pursued an array of public policy issues during her career, ranging from mental health parity and rare disease awareness to medical technology and the treatment of chronic disease. Following her work as a Congressional staff member for Dr. Greg Ganske, one of the U.S. House of Representatives' foremost leaders on health care policy, she served as a health policy and communications advisor for several national nonprofit and educational institutions, including Columbia University and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America.Meghan joined the Lymphoma Research Foundation in 2008 as its chief program, policy and communications officer. She was a driving force behind programs such as the country's only Adolescent and Young Adult Lymphoma Initiative and development of the first mobile app for people with lymphoma. She became Chief Executive Officer in 2014. In this role Meghan represents the Foundation before several audiences, including the U.S. Congress, Department of Defense, Food and Drug Administration and National Institutes of Health. She has written and lectured extensively about the needs of lymphoma patients and served on committees and panels of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, Institute of Medicine, and National Cancer Institute, among others.Jennifer Branstetter is Executive Director, North America Corporate Affairs & Patient Advocacy Lead at BeOne Medicines USA ( https://beonemedicines.com/ ), a global oncology company that is discovering and developing innovative treatments that are more affordable and accessible to cancer patients worldwide. With a portfolio spanning hematology and solid tumors, BeOne is expediting development of its diverse pipeline of novel therapeutics through its internal capabilities and collaborations.Jennifer has a demonstrated 25+ year history of working with Fortune 500 pharmaceutical companies, in government, and with nonprofits and the media, and has been a strategist for multi-faceted state and federal public affairs and patient advocacy campaigns.Previously, Jennifer was a Senior Director, Corporate Affairs (North America) at BeOne and also held positions at Cullari Communications Global, Branstetter Consulting, as Director of Policy and Planning in the Commonwealth of PA, Governor's Office, for Governor Tom Corbett, as Director of Education and Outreach for Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, as Communications Manager for the Pennsylvania Bar Association, and as Deputy Press Secretary in the Pennsylvania Office of the Lieutenant Governor during the administration of Governor Tom Ridge.#MeghanGutierrez #JenniferBranstetter #BeOneMedicines #LymphomaResearchFoundation #PatientAdvocacy #PatientCentricAI #PatientNavigation #ClinicalTrialEligibility #FinancialToxicityDetection #PatientDistress #AutomatedInsuranceNavigation #EquityRadar #RegulatoryAdvocacy #STEM #Innovation #Science #Technology #Research #ProgressPotentialAndPossibilities #IraPastor #Podcast #Podcaster #Podcasting #ViralPodcastSupport the show
In this Review Series episode, Blood Associate Editor, Dr. Elisabeth Battinelli discusses the Platelet Heterogeneity with authors Drs. Craig Morrell, Larry Frelinger, and Leo Nicolai. Find the full review series in volume 146 issue 24 of Blood.
Dr. MaryAnn Wilbur trained her whole life to care for patients, then left medicine behind when it became a machine that punished empathy and rewarded throughput. She didn't burn out. She got out. A gynecologic oncologist, public health researcher, and no-bullshit single mom, MaryAnn walked straight off the cliff her career breadcrumbed her to—and lived to write the book.In this episode, we talk about what happens when doctors are forced to choose between their ethics and their employment, why medicine now operates like a low-resource war zone, and how the system breaks the very people it claims to elevate. We cover moral injury, medical gaslighting, and why she refused to lie on surgical charts just to boost hospital revenue.Her escape plan? Tell the truth, organize the exodus, and build something that actually works. If you've ever wondered why your doctor disappeared, this is your answer. If you're a clinician hiding your own suffering, this is your permission slip.RELATED LINKSMaryAnn Wilbur on LinkedInMedicine ForwardClinician Burnout FoundationThe Doctor Is No Longer In (Book)Suck It Up, Buttercup (Documentary)FEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Fueled by cancer, obesity and cardiovascular deals, $1 billion-plus takeouts in biotech are at their highest level in a decade with three weeks to go in the year. On the latest BioCentury This Week, BioCentury's analysts discuss the rise in large M&A deals and what the trends among the 37 acquisitions say about biopharma dealmaking.The analysts assess first-in-human in vivo CAR T data at the American Society of Hematology meeting from Kelonia Therapeutics, which showcase the promise of the modality and justify the growing pipeline. They also break down readouts from Praxis in developmental and epileptic encephalopathy from the American Epilepsy Society Annual Meeting and from Novo Nordisk, which presented full data at the Clinical Trials on Alzheimer's Disease meeting on semaglutide's failure to treat Alzheimer's disease.Washington Editor Steve Usdin analyzes a roller-coaster week at FDA in which Richard Pazdur resigned as director of FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and Tracy Beth Høeg became acting CDER director, a move that Usdin says will prompt staff departures, ease restraints on FDA leadersView full story: https://www.biocentury.com/article/657781#BiotechMA #CARTTherapy #EpilepsyResearch #AlzheimersDisease #FDA02:37 - Biotech M&A06:39 - In vivo CAR T10:08 - Semaglutide for Alzheimer's16:17 - Praxis22:11 - FDATo submit a question to BioCentury's editors, email the BioCentury This Week team at podcasts@biocentury.com.Reach us by sending a text
Listen to JCO's Art of Oncology article, "Smell," by Dr. Alice Cusick, who is a Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan Division of Hematology and Oncology. The article is followed by an interview with Cusick and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Dr Cusick shares a connection to a cancer patient manifested as a scent. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Smell, by Alice Cusick, MD Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Welcome back to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. This ASCO podcast features intimate narratives and perspectives from authors exploring their experiences in oncology. I'm your host, Mikkael Sekeres. I'm Professor of Medicine and Chief of the Division of Hematology at the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami. Joining us today is Alice Cusick, Hematology Section Chief at the Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan, Division of Hematology and Oncology, to discuss her Journal of Clinical Oncology article, "Smell." Alice, thank you for contributing to Journal of Clinical Oncology and for joining us to discuss your article. Dr. Alice Cusick: Thank you so much for having me, Mikkael. I appreciate it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's really a pleasure, and as usual, Alice and I discussed this beforehand and agreed to call each other by first names. I always love to hear your story first. Can you tell us about yourself? Where are you from, and walk us through your career, if you could. Dr. Alice Cusick: I'm a Midwesterner. I grew up in Iowa and Illinois and went to a small college in Illinois, played basketball, Division lll, and was an English Literature major. I took one science class and was going to be an English professor. And then my father's a physician. My senior year, I realized I don't think I could spend all my time in a library. I didn't feel like I was helping anyone. And so I talked to my dad, and he said, "Yeah, I think you could be a doctor." So I thought I would help people by being a physician. So I moved to Iowa City and spent two years working in a lab and doing science classes and took the MCAT, which was the first year they had the essay on there, and I rocked that. That was my highest score. I got into the University of Iowa and then went on to residency and fellowship at the University of Wisconsin, just in hematology. I didn't do solid tumors. And then went on, spent a couple years there, worked in Pennsylvania in more of a group practice, and then came back to academics at the University of Michigan about 10 years ago. And then five years ago, I became the Hematology Section Chief at the VA in Ann Arbor. So I work there full time now. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I love that story. I served on the admissions committee at Cleveland Clinic and Case Western when I was also a Midwesterner for 18 years. And I always wondered if instead of searching for science majors, we should be searching for English majors because I think there's a core element of medicine that is actually storytelling. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. My father was a country doctor for many, many years in rural Iowa in the fifties and sixties. So he did house calls, and he talked about how you really got to know people by going to their house. And I'll never forget the first time that I did a full history and physical, I think I was maybe a second-year medical student, and I was telling him, "Oh, I'm so excited. I'm going to do my first history and physical." And he said, "Alice, don't talk to them about medicine right away or about their problems right away. Talk to them about something else. Get to know them because you know about sports, talk about sports." I said, "Dad, that's called establishing rapport." You know, that's what they had taught us. But it was intuitive to him. I'll never forget that he just said their story is important and how they live and where they live and who they live with is so important. It really helps you figure out their medical issues as well. And I've always tried to carry that through. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's funny what we glean from our parents. My dad was a journalist for the Providence Journal-Bulletin. He was a reporter for a couple of decades, and I almost feel like some of what I'm doing is acting as a reporter. It's my job to get the story and get the story right and solicit enough details from a patient that I really have a sense that I'm with them on the journey of their illness, so I can understand it completely. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. And that's one of the things I really harp about with the fellows because sometimes I remember more of the social history than I do sometimes the medical history when I'm seeing a patient. I remind them, you need to know who they live with and how they live. It helps you take care of them. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Well, and that must be particularly germane with your patient population. When I was a medical student, my first rotation on internal medicine was at the Philadelphia VA, and it's actually what convinced me to specialize within internal medicine. What is it like caring for veterans? Dr. Alice Cusick: This is the best job I've ever had in my life. And I think because it speaks to my sense of duty that I got from my parents, particularly from my father, and I really feel I got back to my original focus, which is helping people. So that sense of duty and serving those who served, which is our core mission, this job is the most rewarding I've ever had because you really feel like you're helping people. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: How much do you learn about your patients' military history when you first interact with them? Dr. Alice Cusick: It can come up in conversation. It sort of depends on what the context is and how much you ask and how much of that is incorporated into what's going on with their medical history. It comes up a lot in terms of, particularly cancer, because a lot of cancers that veterans develop can be related to their military exposures. So it can come up certainly in that context. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: You write about how your patient and his wife brought in photographs of his younger self. Can you describe some of those photos? Dr. Alice Cusick: So a lot of it was about the sports he was doing at the time. He was kind of almost like a bodybuilder and doing like martial arts. So there were some pictures of him in his shirt and shorts, showing how healthy he was. He was much younger, but it was such a contrast to how he was at that time as he was nearing death. But it really rounded out my understanding of him because, as we all know, when we meet people, we see them when they're at that particular age, and we may not have that context of what they were 20, 30 years ago. But that still informs how they think about themselves. I mean, I still think of myself as an athlete even though I'm much older. So that's important to understand how the patient thinks about himself or herself. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: You know, it's funny you mentioned those two photographs. I- immediately flashed into my mind, I had a patient who also was a martial arts expert, and I remember he was in his early seventies and hospitalized, but he made sure to put up that photo of him when he was in his prime, in his martial arts outfit in a pose. And I've had another patient who was a boxer, and all he wanted to talk about whenever he saw me was his first experience boxing in Madison Square Garden and what that moment felt like of climbing into the ring, squeezing in between the ropes, and facing off in front of what must have been some massive crowd. Dr. Alice Cusick: Yeah. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Why do you think it was important to them to bring in those photos to show you? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think it was to help me understand what he had been. I think it was important for him, and because we had a relationship, it wasn't just transactional in terms of his medical problems. It was really conversations every day about what he was doing and how his life was going. And I think he really wanted me to understand what he had been. And so I felt really honored because I think that was important. It told me that his relationship with me was very important to him. I found that very, very humbling. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah, I find it fascinating the details that patients offer to us about themselves as opposed to the ones that we solicit. I think it speaks to also the closeness of the relationship we have with patients when they want to share that aspect of them. They want to show you who they were before they were ill. And it's not a point of bragging. It's not flexing for them. I think it's really to remind themselves and us of the vitality of the person who's sitting in front of us or lying in front of us in the hospital johnny or sitting on an exam table. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. And I've experienced that even with my own parents as they got older and were in the medical system. I remember vividly, my father had had a stroke, and the people taking care of him didn't understand what he had been. They didn't understand that his voice was very different. We kept asking, you know, "His voice is different." They had no concept of him beforehand. So that also really hit home to me how important it is to understand patients in the whole context of their lives. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: And as a family member, do you think it's equally important to share that story of who somebody was before they were ill as a reminder to yourself and to the people taking care of a relative? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. I think it's very helpful because it also makes you feel like you're supporting the loved one as well by, if they can't speak for themselves, particularly when they're very ill, to help people understand, it may help the physicians or any provider understand their illness better, especially if there's a diagnostic dilemma, thinking about going home, what are they going to need at home, those sorts of things. I think it's always important to try to provide that context. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Patients will often talk about their deaths or transitions to hospice as an abstract future. Do you think they rely on us to make the decision about a concrete transition to hospice, or do you think they know it's time and are looking for us to verbalize it for their family and friends? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think it depends on how much groundwork you've done beforehand. So when you talk about end of life with people well before that transition it's almost mandatory, I think it's very important. It makes the transition much smoother because then they understand what hospice is, and they can prepare themselves. When they're not prepared, I think it's much more of a very clear transition. So it's almost like you're shutting one door, disease treatment, and moving on to, "I'm just going home to die," versus when you're laying the groundwork and you make sure that it's about how you live. I always try to emphasize, it's how you want to spend your time. It's how you want to live. Hospice is helping people live the best they can for as long as they can. And if you haven't prepared people, I think then they think much more you're closing the door and you're just sending me home to die. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's tricky though, isn't it? Because as an oncologist or hematologist-oncologist, in our case, people look to us for that hope that there's still something to do and there's still life ahead of them. But at a certain point, we all realize that we need to transition our focus. But once we say that out loud, do you ever feel like it almost shuts a door for our patients? Dr. Alice Cusick: Again, it depends on the situation, and it depends on the support they have. It's different when you're dealing with somebody who's out in an outpatient world who has good family support and you've developed a relationship versus the patient who's taken a very sudden turn for the worse, and maybe is in the hospital, and things are more chaotic, and maybe they've been on very active treatment beforehand, but suddenly things have changed. So in my mind, it depends on the context that you're dealing with and what the relationship you have prior to. Maybe you're covering for your colleague, and you don't have a relationship with that particular family or that particular patient, but yet you have to talk to them. Somebody gets transferred from another hospital and you have a very brief relationship. And so I think the relationship kind of dictates sometimes how patients feel. But as long as you can help people understand the process of end of life as best as you can, I think that sometimes helps the transition. Some people are going to be angry no matter what. And that's totally understandable, angry about their family member dying, angry about what's happening to them if they're the patient. I think that's always part of the process, but it's hard to make things smooth all of the time. We do the best we can. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I was going to ask, has anyone ever been shocked when you start to talk about palliative care or hospice and never really did see it coming? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, of course. I think, especially if you've been doing this for a while, you sometimes see the future. You know what's, well, I mean, not exactly, but you have a good sense of what's going to happen. And there can be times when you start talking about end of life and palliative care or hospice and people are shocked, particularly family members, family members who may not be there all the time, who may not have seen their loved one frequently and haven't just understood what the disease course has been. And that certainly can be shocking. And again, totally understandable, but it's my responsibility to try to smooth that over and help people understand what's going on and make it a conversation. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's a nice description of what we do. We make it a conversation. When talking about what you smelled that day when you saw your patient, you write, "Did I suddenly have a gift? Could I float through the hospital wards and smell the future? Or maybe I could only smell inevitability." It's a beautiful sentence. "Could I only smell inevitability?" What do you think it was that led you to know that his time had come? And I wonder, was it a distinct odor or what I refer to as a Malcolm Gladwell "blink" moment, you know, in which your 25 years of experience allowed you to synthesize a hundred different sensory and cognitive inputs in a split second to realize this was the time? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think I knew it was time because I had been seeing him so frequently and I knew him very well. The smell was very real to me. My husband and I disagree because I've talked to my husband about this. He thinks it was a real smell and that I did smell something. I think it was more that amalgamation of my experience and, as I said in the piece, a scent took the place of a thought. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Huh. Dr. Alice Cusick: But it bothered me so much, and that's when I talk about, "Did I have a gift?" You know, there are people who can smell diseases. There's a report of a woman who could smell Parkinson's disease. I thought, "Have I suddenly developed some sort of gift?" But in my mind, I thought, "You know, it was inevitability." I mean, it was inevitable that this gentleman was going to die of this disease. So that was my thought. I don't think I had a gift. I think it was smelling the inevitability that I understood through experience and knowing this patient so well. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Why do you think that smell haunted you so much afterwards? I mean, you really think about it and really dwell on it. I think in a way that any one of us would. Dr. Alice Cusick: I think because I thought there was something wrong with me. As I said in the piece, I thought it made my experience of that patient, my memory of that visit in particular and the whole relationship with him, I was thinking more about myself instead of thinking about him and his experience and his family's experience. And you know, you always grieve for patients, and it was interfering with my normal process. And so it really bothered me. In the end, it was more, "What was wrong with me?" This was weird, and it just sort of played with my usual understanding of how these things were supposed to go. And that's what really bothered me. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It is true. We really feel acutely our patients' loss, and it's so much more, I don't know if "acute" is the right word, or so much more meaningful when it's someone we've gotten to know over years, isn't it? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. You grieve for them, you miss them. At the same time, you also, you know, especially with this patient, his death was how he wanted it. So helping someone with the, quote unquote, "good death", the death surrounded by family, the death where there is no suffering or as minimal suffering as possible, you do find that helps with the grief, I think, instead of thinking, "Oh, what did I do wrong? What did I miss?" You can make it somewhat helpful in processing the grief. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's perhaps one of the more exquisite aspects of the art of medicine is helping people with that transition in their final days and sharing in the emotions of that. It has been such a pleasure to have Alice Cusick, who is Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan, Division of Hematology and Oncology to discuss "Smell." Alice, thank you so much for submitting your article and for joining us today. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: If you've enjoyed this episode, consider sharing it with a friend or colleague or leave us a review. Your feedback and support helps us continue to have these important conversations. If you're looking for more episodes and context, follow our show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen and explore more from ASCO at asco.org/podcasts. Until next time, this has been Mikkael Sekeres for Cancer Stories. 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. Show Notes: Like, share and subscribe so you never miss an episode and leave a rating or review. Guest Bio: Dr Alice Cusick is Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan Division of Hematology and Oncology.
JCO Editor-in-Chief Dr. Jonathan Friedberg is joined by colleagues Dr. Jennifer Woyach, Dr. Wojciech Jurczak, and Dr. Matthew Davids to discuss simultaneous publications presented at ASH 2025 on pertibrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. TRANSCRIPT The disclosures for guests on this podcast can be found in the show notes. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I'm Jonathan Friedberg, editor of Journal of Clinical Oncology, and welcome to JCO After Hours, where we are covering two manuscripts that were presented at the American Society of Hematology meeting 2025 in Orlando, Florida. I am delighted to be joined by colleagues on this call to discuss these pivotal manuscripts which cover the topic of pirtobrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. I will first just introduce our guests, Dr. Woyach. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Hi, my name is Jennifer Woyach. I am from the Ohio State University. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Hello, I am Wojciech Jurczak, working at the National Research Institute of Oncology in Krakow, Poland. Dr. Matthew Davids: Hi, I am Matthew Davids from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: We are going to start by just learning a little bit about these two trials that were both large, randomized phase 3 studies that I think answered some definitive questions. We will start with your study, Jennifer. If you could just describe the design of your study and the patient population. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Absolutely. So this is the BRUIN CLL-314 study, and this is a phase 3 randomized trial of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib in patients with CLL or SLL who had not previously been treated with a covalent BTK inhibitor. The patients were both treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory, about one-third of the patients treatment-naive, the rest relapsed/refractory, and they were stratified based upon 17p deletion and the number of prior lines of therapy. The primary objective was looking at non-inferiority of overall response rate over the entire treated population as well as the relapsed/refractory patient population. Key secondary objectives included progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat and the smaller relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And just comment a little bit on the risk of the patients. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: This study was fairly typical of this cohort of patients. Within the relapsed/refractory patient population, there was a median of one prior line of therapy in each of the groups, up to nine prior lines of therapy in the patients included on the study. For the overall cohort, about two-thirds of the patients were IGHV unmutated, about 15% had 17p deletion, 30% had TP53 mutations, and about 35% to 40% had a complex karyotype, which is three or more abnormalities. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And what were your findings? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Regarding the primary outcome, which is the focus of the publication, we did find that pirtobrutinib was indeed non-inferior and actually superior to ibrutinib for overall response rate throughout the entire patient population and in both the relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive cohorts. PFS is a little bit immature at this time but is trending towards also being significantly better in pirtobrutinib-treated patients compared with ibrutinib-treated patients. Probably most significantly, we found this to be the case in the treatment-naive cohort where there was a striking trend to an advantage of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And the follow-up that you have on that progression-free survival? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: So we have about 18 months follow-up on progression-free survival. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: The second study, Wojciech, can you just go through the design and patient population that you treated? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Thank you, Dr. Friedberg, for this question. So the BRUIN CLL-313 study was, in fact, the first phase 3 study with pirtobrutinib in exclusively untreated CLL patients. It was a randomized study where we challenged pirtobrutinib versus bendamustine-rituximab. At the time we designed the protocol, bendamustine-rituximab was an option as a standard of care, and Bruton tyrosine kinase monotherapy was used far more commonly than nowadays. The primary target of the study was progression-free survival. We took all untreated patients except for those with 17p deletions. Therefore, it is a good representation for intermediate risk. We had about 60% of the population, 56 to be precise, which was unmutated, evenly distributed into two treatment arms. 17p deleted cases were excluded, but we had about 7% and 8% of TP53 mutated patients as well as about 11% and 7%, respectively, in the pirtobrutinib and bendamustine-rituximab arm of patients with complex karyotype. The progression-free survival was in favor of pirtobrutinib and was assessed by an independent review committee. What is important is that the progression-free survival of the bendamustine-rituximab arm was actually similar to the other studies addressing the same questions, like the comparison with ibrutinib in the ALLIANCE study or zanubrutinib in the SEQUOIA study. What was different was the hazard ratio. In our study, it was 0.20. It was one of the longest effect sizes noted in the frontline BTK study. It represented an 80% reduction in progression-free survival or death. If we compare it to ibrutinib or zanubrutinib, it was 0.39 and 0.42 respectively. Presumably, this great effect contributed towards a trend of overall survival difference. Although survival data are not mature enough, there is a clear trend represented by three patients we lost in the pirtobrutinib arm versus 10 patients lost in the bendamustine-rituximab arm. This trend in overall survival is becoming statistically significant despite the fact that there was a possibility of crossover, and effectively 52.9 patients, which means 18 out of 34 patients relapsing in the bendamustine-rituximab arm, were treated by pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I am going to turn it over to Matt. The question is: why study pirtobrutinib in this patient population? And then with these two studies, how do you find the patients that were treated, are they representative of people who you see? And do you see this maybe being approved and more widely available? Dr. Matthew Davids: I think in terms of the first question, why study this in a frontline population, we have seen very impressive data with pirtobrutinib in a very difficult-to-treat population of CLL patients. This was from the original BRUIN phase 1/2 study where most of the patients had at least two or three lines of therapy, often both a covalent BTK inhibitor and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax, and yet they were still responding to pirtobrutinib. The drug was also very well tolerated in that early phase experience. And actually, we have seen phase 3 data from the BRUIN 321 study comparing pirtobrutinib to bendamustine and rituximab in a relapse population as well. So I think that really motivated these studies to look at pirtobrutinib as a first therapy. You know, often in other cancers of course, we want to use our best therapy first, and I think these studies are an initial step at looking at that. In terms of the second question around the patient population, these are pretty representative patient populations, I would say, for most frontline CLL studies. We see patients who are a bit younger and fitter than sort of the general population of CLL patients who are treated in clinical practice, and I think that is true here as well. Median age in the sort of mid-60s here is a bit younger than the typical patients we are treating in practice. But that is not different from other CLL frontline studies that we have seen recently, so I think it makes it a little bit easier as we kind of think across studies to feel comfortable that these are relatively similar populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: How do you see this either getting regulatory approval or potentially being used compared to current standard of care options? Dr. Matthew Davids: So my understanding is that both of these trials were designed with registrational intent in the frontline setting, and they are both positive studies. That is certainly very encouraging in terms of the potential for an approval here. We have seen in terms of the FDA recently some concerns around the proportion of patients who are coming from North America, and my understanding is that is relatively low on these two studies. But nonetheless, the datasets are very impressive, and so I think it is certainly supportive of regulatory approval for frontline pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I will ask Jennifer a question. The control arm in your study was ibrutinib, and I think many in the audience may recognize that newer, second-generation BTK inhibitors like acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib are more frequently used now if monotherapy is decided. How do you respond to that, and how would you put your results in your pirtobrutinib arm in context with what has been observed with those agents? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Yeah, that is a great question. Even though in the United States we are predominantly using acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib when choosing a monotherapy BTK inhibitor, this is actually not the case throughout the entire world where ibrutinib is still used very frequently. The head-to-head studies of both acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib compared to ibrutinib have shown us pretty well what the safety profile and efficacy profile of the second-generation BTK inhibitors is. So even though we do not have a head-to-head study of acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib versus pirtobrutinib, I think, given the entirety of data that we have with all of the covalent BTK inhibitors, I think we can safely look at the pirtobrutinib arm here, how the ibrutinib arm compares or performs in context with those other clinical trials. And though we really can not say anything about pirtobrutinib versus acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib, I think we can still get a good idea of what might be the clinical scenarios in which you might want to choose pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And Wojciech, do you agree with that? Obviously, I think you have acknowledged that chemoimmunotherapy is rarely used anymore as part of upfront treatment for CLL. So, I guess a similar question. If you were to put the pirtobrutinib result in your study in context with, I guess, more contemporary type controls, would you agree that it is competitive? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Well, I think that that was the last study ever where bendamustine-rituximab was used as a comparator arm. So we should notice that smashing difference. Because if we look at the progression-free survival at two years, we have 93.4% in pirtobrutinib arm versus 70.7% in bendamustine-rituximab arm. Bendamustine-rituximab arm did the same as in the other trials, like ALLIANCE or SEQUOIA. Pirtobrutinib did exceptionally well, as pirto is not just the very best BTK inhibitor overcoming the resistance, but perhaps even more important for the first line, it is very well tolerated and is a very selective drug. Now, if we look at treatment-related adverse events, the discontinuation rate, they were hardly ever seen. If we compared the adverse events in exposure-adjusted incidence, literally all adverse events were two or three times higher in bendamustine-rituximab arm except for the bleeding tendency, which however was predominantly in CTCAE grade 1 and 2 with just 0.7% of grade 3 hemorrhage. Therefore, I think that we should actually put the best and the safest drugs upfront if we may, and pirtobrutinib is, or should be, the first choice if we choose monotherapy. Now, I understand that we are not presenting you the data of pirtobrutinib in combination with anti-CD20 or with BCL2 inhibitors, but that is to come. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Matt, how would you envision, were regulatory approval granted and this were an option, using this in the upfront patient population? Is there anybody who you would preferentially use this or start on this treatment? Or would this be something that you would tend to reserve for second line? Dr. Matthew Davids: So I would say that in general for most of my patients who would want to start with a continuous BTK inhibitor, I would still use a covalent BTK inhibitor, and I say that for a couple of reasons despite the very promising data from these studies. The first is that the follow-up for both of these phase 3 trials is still quite short, in the range of a median 18 to 24 months. And we know that CLL is a marathon, not a sprint, and these patients are going to probably be living for a very long time. And we do have much longer follow-up from the covalent BTK inhibitors, median of 10-year follow-up with ibrutinib and five to six years with zanubrutinib and acalabrutinib respectively. And you know, I do not think that the pirtobrutinib is going to fall off a cliff after two years, but on the other hand, I think there is a lot of value to long-term data in this disease, and that is why I think for most of my patients I would stick with covalent BTK inhibitors. But the other important factor that we need to consider is patients who are younger and may have many different CLL treatments over the years. We have to be very careful, I think, about how we sequence these drugs. We know right now that we can start with covalent BTK inhibitors and then subsequently patients will respond well to the non-covalent inhibitor pirtobrutinib in later lines of therapy. But right now we do not have prospective data the other way around. So how will the patients on these studies who progress on pirtobrutinib respond to covalent BTK inhibitors? We do not know yet. There have not been a lot of progression events, which is great, but we would like to see some data in that respect to feel more comfortable with that sequence. Now, I do think that particularly for older patients and those who have significant cardiovascular comorbidities, if they wanted to go on a continuous BTK inhibitor, I do think these data really strongly support using pirtobrutinib as the BTK inhibitor of choice in that population. In particular, the cardiovascular risks with pirtobrutinib seem to be quite low. I was very struck in the comparison with BR that the rate of AFib was equivalent between the two arms of the study. And that is really the first time we have seen that with any of these BTK inhibitors, no elevated risk of AFib in a randomized study. I think that is the population where it will get the most traction first, is the upfront, sort of older patient with significant cardiovascular comorbidities. And as the data from these studies mature, I think that we will start to see more widespread use of pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Jennifer, I am just curious if you have any personal experience or heard anecdotally about after progression on pirtobrutinib the use of other BTK inhibitors and whether there is a growing experience there. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: I do not think that there is much clinical experience, you know, as Matt alluded to, it certainly has not been tested yet. There has been some data in relapsed CLL suggesting that in people who have resistance mutations to covalent BTK inhibitors after treatment with pirtobrutinib, sometimes those mutations go away. I think most of us are concerned that they are probably not actually gone but maybe in compartments that we just have not sampled, suggesting that sort of approach where you might sequence a covalent inhibitor after a non-covalent in somebody who had already been resistant probably would not work that well. But, you know, in this setting where people had never been exposed to a covalent BTK inhibitor before, we really have no idea what the resistance patterns are going to be like. We assume they will be the same as what we have seen in relapsed CLL, but I think we just need some longer follow-up to know for sure. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: If I may confront Dr. Davids about the use of covalent BTK inhibitors upfront, well, I think that we should abandon the idea of using the first and the second and the third generation, at least if we don't have medical lines. If we endlessly block the same pathway, it is not going to be effective. So if pirtobrutinib gets approval in first, second line, we do not necessarily have to use it in the first line. I am not here in a position to defend that we should treat patients with pirtobrutinib upfront and not BCL2 time-limited regimen. However, the way I look at CLL patients when choosing therapy is not just how should I treat them now, but what would be the best regimen in 5, 10 years if I have to re-treat them. And in some instances, the idea may be that in this setting we would like to have a BTK inhibitor upfront to have a BCL2 inhibitor later to make it time-limited. Although I understand and I agree with Matthew that if we have an elderly, fragile population, then the charm of having a drug taken once a day in a tablet with literally few cardiovascular adverse events might be an option. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And I will give Matt the last word whether he wants to respond to that, and also just as a forward-looking issue, I know both investigators have implied that there will be future studies looking at combinations with pirtobrutinib, and if you have any sense as to what you would be looking for there. Dr. Matthew Davids: The field really is heading toward time-limited therapy for most patients, I would say. There is a bit of a discrepancy right now in the field between sort of what we are doing in academic practice and what is done sort of more widely in community practice. And so right now we are going to see evolving datasets comparing these approaches. We are already seeing data now from the CLL17 study with ibrutinib comparing continuous to time-limited venetoclax-based therapy, and we are seeing similar efficacy benefits from these time-limited therapies without the need for continuous treatment. And so that is where I think some of the future studies with pirtobrutinib combining it with venetoclax and other partners are so important. Fortunately, several of these studies are already ongoing, including a phase 3 trial called CLL18, which is looking at pirtobrutinib with venetoclax, comparing that to venetoclax and obinutuzumab. So I am optimistic that we are going to be developing these very robust datasets where we can actually use pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting as a time-limited therapy as a component of a multi-drug regimen. So far, those early data are very promising. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Perhaps last but not least, in a single center we have treated over 300 patients with pirtobrutinib. So eventually some of them relapsed. And I must say that our experience on BCL2 inhibitors, not just venetoclax but including sonrotoclax, are appealingly good. Therefore, by using pirtobrutinib even earlier, we do not block the efficacy of other compounds. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: All right. Well, I want to thank all of our speakers. I also want to congratulate our two guests who presented these very influential papers at the ASH Annual Meeting, and chose to publish them in JCO, so we thank you for that, and Dr. Davids for your commentary - really appreciated. That is this episode of JCO After Hours. Thank you for your attention. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Disclosures Dr. Wojciech Jurczak Consulting or Advisory Role: BeiGene, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech, Takeda, Roche, AstraZeneca Research Funding: Roche, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech Dr. Jennifer Woyach Consulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Loxo, Newave Pharmaceutical, Genentech, Abbvie, Merck Research Funding: Company name: Janssen, Schrodinger, beone, Abbvie, Merck, Loxo/Lilly Dr. Matthew Davids Honoraria: Curio Science, Aptitude Health, Bio Ascend, PlatformQ Health, Plexus Consulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Janssen, Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Ascentage Pharma, BeiGene, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Merck, MEI Pharma, Nuvalent, Inc., Galapagos NV, Schroedinger Research Funding: Ascentage Pharma, Novartis, MEI Pharma, AstraZeneca
In this special episode, Blood editor Dr. Laura Michaelis interviews Dr. Arielle Langer and Blood Associate editor Dr. Marc Blondon for this special Maternal Health episode. In honor of the second Maternal Health compendium, both discuss their papers featured in this special collection. Featured Articles: β-Thalassemia minor is associated with high rates of worsening anemia in pregnancyLongitudinal profile of estrogen-related thrombotic biomarkers after cessation of combined hormonal contraceptivesSee the entire Maternal Health Compendium Second Edition
Episode 5 of Standard Deviation with Oliver Bogler on the Out of Patients podcast feed pulls you straight into the story of Dr Ethan Moitra, a psychologist who fights for LGBTQ mental health while the system throws every obstacle it can find at him.Ethan built a study that tracked how COVID 19 tore through an already vulnerable community. He secured an NIH grant. He built a team. He reached 180 participants. Then he opened an email on a Saturday and learned that Washington had erased his work with one sentence about taxpayer priorities. The funding vanished. The timeline collapsed. His team scattered. Participants who trusted him sat in limbo.A federal court eventually forced the government to reinstate the grant, but the damage stayed baked into the process. Ethan had to push through months of paperwork while his university kept the original deadline as if the shutdown had not happened. The system handed him a win that felt like a warning.I brought Ethan on because his story shows how politics reaches into science and punishes the people who serve communities already carrying too much trauma. His honesty lands hard because he names the fear now spreading across academia and how young scientists question whether they can afford to care about the wrong population.You will hear what this ordeal did to him, what it cost his team, and why he refuses to walk away.RELATED LINKSFaculty PageNIH Grant DetailsScientific PresentationBoston Globe CoverageFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this week's episode, Blood editor Dr. James Griffin speaks with Drs. Emanuele Zucca and Sandra Pinho about their latest articles published in Blood. Dr. Zucca discusses his second analysis of the IELSG37 trial, where findings suggested that R-CHOP21 rituximab, cyclophosphamide,doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone, administered every 21 days) may be a suboptimal frontline regimen for PMBCL. Dr. Pinho discusses the aging megakaryocytic niche and its influence on the age-associated decline in HSC and progenitor cell function. The authors demonstrate that remodeling of the megakaryocytic niche and associated platelet factor 4 (PF4) downregulation are central mechanisms driving HSC aging.Featured Articles: Impact of immunochemotherapy regimens on outcomes of patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma in the IELSG37 trial Platelet Factor 4 (PF4) Regulates Hematopoietic Stem Cell Aging
Mehlman Qbanks: https://qbanks.mehlmanmedical.com/IG: https://www.instagram.com/mehlman_medical/Telegram: https://mehlmanmedical.com/subscribe/
Chelsea J. Smith walks into a studio and suddenly I feel like a smurf. She's six-foot-three of sharp humor, dancer's poise, and radioactive charm. A working actor and thyroid cancer survivor, Chelsea is the kind of guest who laughs while dropping truth bombs about what it means to be told you're “lucky” to have the “good cancer.” We talk about turning trauma into art, how Shakespeare saved her sanity during the pandemic, and why bartending might be the best acting class money can't buy. She drops the polite bullshit, dismantles survivor guilt with punchline precision, and reminds every listener that grace and rage can live in the same body. If you've ever been told to “walk it off” while your body betrayed you, this one hits close.RELATED LINKS• Chelsea J. Smith Website• Chelsea on Instagram• Chelsea on Backstage• Chelsea on YouTube• Cancer Hope Network• Artichokes and Grace – Book by Chelsea's motherFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this week's episode, Blood editor Dr. Laurie Sehn interviews authors Drs. Lorenzo Falchi and Robert Levy on their latest papers published in Blood Journal. Dr. Falchi discusses his work on an open-label, multicenter phase 1b/2 study evaluating fixed-duration epcoritamab with rituximab and lenalidomide in 108 patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma. Dr. Levy shares his work on demonstrating that in vivo expansion of Tregs in recipients prior to transplant is possible by activating TNFRSF25 (also known as death receptor 3) in combination with low-dose interleukin-2 in preclinical models. Both papers showed impressive and promising results for the treatment of lymphoma and GVHD.Featured ArticlesFixed-Duration Epcoritamab Plus R2 Drives Favorable Outcomes in Relapsed or Refractory Follicular LymphomaPre-transplant targeting of TNFRSF25 and CD25 stimulates recipient Tregs in target tissues ameliorating GVHD post-HSCT
We all know how hard it is to feel out of place. To not know where we belong. Being part of a community, a tribe, is not only important for our physical well being but it's vitally important for our brain health and mental wellness! Why am I talking about tribes and communities here on Game On Glio? Because-my friend, you are part of our tribe! You are never alone. You are part of this community. Seth Godin talks about tribes as being essential for growth and leadership. He also explains that in order to pursue something passionately one must have "Faith that leads to HOPE, and it overcomes FEAR. Faith is critical to ALL innovation.” This is important because it's this type of thinking and leadership that has led to some of the most innovative clinical trials out right now. One of those trials is the ReSPECT-gbm trial. Today we sit down with Andrew Brenner, MD, PhD; a professor of medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology at The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. A tumor biologist and oncologist, his focus is in drug development for the management of primary brain tumors and breast neoplasms. Dr. Brenner's academic work focuses on both clinical cancer management and the development of novel therapies to treat breast and central nervous system tumors. And, Dr. Toral Patel who is an Associate Professor and neurosurgeon at the UT Southwestern Medical Center, specializing in brain tumor surgery, including malignant and benign tumors. Her expertise includes advanced surgical techniques like laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) and she also holds a patent for nano-carrier research for central nervous system diseases. Together, they discuss the importance of clincial trials and the why and how of ReSPECT-GBM and ReSPECT-LM trials. If you like our show, please help us continue to grow and reach new listeners. Share our podcast with others and consider giving us a review on Apple and Spotify! Season Premier Sponsors: Imvax Inc. (imvax.com) GammaTile (gammatile.com) Episode Sponsors: Cypris Therapeutics Curtana Pharmaceuticals Brockport Custom Carpets
We talk with physiologist Elliot Jenkins about how passive heat acclimation boosts VO2 max, hemoglobin mass, and cardiac function in trained runners without adding mechanical training load. Practical protocols, safety tips, and open research questions round out a clear, actionable guide to using heat wisely.• Elliot's path from Otago to a PhD in the UK• Why passive heat instead of exercising in heat• Hematology: plasma volume expansion • Cardiac changes: larger end-diastolic volume and stroke volume• VO2 max and speed gains in trained runners• Practical protocol: time, temperature, frequency, hydration• Safety: dizziness, slow exits, supervision, low blood pressure• Dose-response unknowns and hot-climate athletes• Heat vs cold and contrast for recovery and adaptation• Where to find Elliot's paper and social links (see below).Follow Elliott Jenkins on X @E_J_Jenkins His paper is published here: https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/JP289874
Mehlman Qbanks: https://qbanks.mehlmanmedical.com/IG: https://www.instagram.com/mehlman_medical/Telegram: https://mehlmanmedical.com/subscribe/
When Julia Stalder heard the words ductal carcinoma in situ, she was told she had the “best kind of breast cancer.” Which is like saying you got hit by the nicest bus. Julia's a lawyer turned mediator who now runs DCIS Understood, a new nonprofit born out of her own diagnosis. Instead of panicking and letting the system chew her up, she asked questions the industry would rather avoid. Why do women lose breasts for conditions that may never become invasive? Why is prostate cancer allowed patience while breast cancer gets the knife? We talked about doctors' fear of uncertainty, the epidemic of overtreatment, and what happens when you build a movement while still in the waiting room. Funny, fierce, unfiltered—this one sticks.RELATED LINKS• DCIS Understood• Stalder Mediation• Julia's story in CURE Today• PreludeDx DCISionRT feature• Julia on LinkedInFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Listen to JCO's Art of Oncology article, "Are You Bereaved?" by Dr. Trisha Paul, who is an Assistant Professor in Pediatric Hematology/ Oncology and Palliative Care at University of Rochester Medical Center. The article is followed by an interview with Paul and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Dr Paul reflects on a grieving father's question about her own bereavement. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Are You Bereaved?, by Trisha Paul, MD, MFA Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Welcome back to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. This ASCO podcast features intimate narratives and perspectives from authors exploring their experience in oncology. I'm your host, Mikkael Sekeres. I'm Professor of Medicine and Chief of the Division of Hematology at the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami. Joining us today is Trisha Paul, an Assistant Professor in Pediatric Hematology Oncology and Palliative Care at University of Rochester Medical Center to discuss her Journal of Clinical Oncology article, "Are You Bereaved?" At the time of this recording, our guest has no disclosures. Trisha, thank you so much for contributing this terrific essay to the Journal of Clinical Oncology and for joining us to discuss your article. Dr. Trisha Paul: Thank you so much for having me today, Dr. Sekeres. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: So we agreed for everyone listening to call each other by first names, and then Dr. Paul just called me Dr. Sekeres. Dr. Trisha Paul: Still adjusting to being an attending. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: That is fantastic. Dr. Trisha Paul: Thank you so much for having me, Mikkael. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: That was great. Well, you already gave us a little bit of a hint. Can we start off by my asking you if you can tell us about yourself - where are you from - and walk us through your career thus far? Dr. Trisha Paul: Sure. I'm originally from Ann Arbor, Michigan, born and raised there, and I completed my undergraduate medical school education at the University of Michigan. I proceeded to do a general pediatrics residency at the University of Minnesota and then went to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital for a combined fellowship in pediatric hematology oncology and hospice and palliative medicine. What brought me into this area of medicine was early experiences as a high school student volunteering at a children's hospital in my hometown. And that's where I found myself in a playroom, spending time with children with cancer and their families. And these experiences of being with patients and families and getting to know them outside of their illnesses was really what brought me to wanting to be not only a pediatric oncologist, but also a palliative care physician who could care for patients holistically. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Wow. So you were introduced to this field at a preternaturally young age. Dr. Trisha Paul: Yes, it's been more than a decade that I've been aspiring to be a pediatric oncologist and a palliative care physician, and I feel fortunate to be there now. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: That's fantastic. And I should say, given your University of Michigan pedigree, 'Go Blue'. Dr. Trisha Paul: Thank you. Go Blue! Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Although, at the time of this recording, Miami is undefeated in football, so, you know, go us. In your essay, I really love how you draw us as readers into your story. You signed up to volunteer at a writing workshop for bereaved parents of children who died from cancer. Can you set the scene for us? Where did this take place? How many people attended? And why did you sign up for the workshop in the first place? I can imagine this would be an incredibly moving experience. Dr. Trisha Paul: Yes. Day of Remembrance is an annual event hosted at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. Many hospitals have similar events where we honor patients who have passed away and we invite their families back to campus to honor these patients. And I started my fellowship in 2021, and so we were still coming out of the pandemic. This workshop that I attended was the first time that I was having an opportunity to attend the annual Day of Remembrance. And at the time, I had completed my palliative care training, and I was wrapping up my pediatric oncology fellowship. The annual Day of Remembrance this year was hosted at a convention center on the banks of the Mississippi River, nearby and next to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. And it was a large convention center that kind of spans the horizon. And it's one of those spaces where you go for medical conferences typically, and it was interesting to walk into this convention center space and all these conference rooms and instead see poster boards that are sharing the stories and the lives of all these children and adolescents who had died over the past several years. One reason I think the timing of this event occurred for me was that I realized that I also knew several patients and families who might be in attendance at this event. I was several years into my fellowship at the time. And so I think the other reason I chose to volunteer at this event was I had spent a lot of time with patients and families whose child was approaching the end of their life, and I had kind of gotten to be with parents and siblings in that period of time. But what often happens for me as a palliative care physician and as an oncologist is the relationship is different after the child dies. And so for many of the patients I cared for as a palliative care physician, or as an oncologist, I wouldn't necessarily see these parents after the death of a child. There are some times where I've been able to see them at a memorial service, but otherwise we spend all this time with families leading up to a child's death. And often there's kind of this black box around them and their lives afterwards. And so I found myself really wanting to better understand the experiences of families after a child's death, which is what led me to participate and volunteer in the annual Day of Remembrance event. I did not want to just attend, I wanted to be able to do something concrete and actionable with these families to learn more about their grief. And for me, as a writer, volunteering at the writing workshop with bereaved parents seemed like a perfect way for me to be able to spend time with them. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Many of us as oncologists place boundaries between our interactions with patients, confining them to the workplace, but many do not. That you attended this workshop tells me that you may fall into the latter category. Was this a deliberate decision or something that evolved over time? And do you ever worry that erosion of such boundaries could contribute to burnout, or is it actually the opposite, that it reminds us of why we do what we do? Dr. Trisha Paul: Yeah, I think this is a great question that I have been asking myself for years and that I anticipate spending the rest of my career wondering about and rediscovering for myself each time I have a patient and a family before me that I am exploring what I want those boundaries to look like or what I want those relationships to look like. I think that for me, my thinking about this has evolved even throughout the course of my training. And I think I've better understood that these are decisions that are made on a very personal level as well as decisions that have to be reassessed with each patient and with each family that we get to care for during this time. And so I think I'm always asking myself about, beyond being an oncologist and beyond being a person's palliative care physician, how do I want to care for them as another person? Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Really nicely said. Did you recognize any of the parents at the writing workshop you attended or at the larger conference when you were there? Dr. Trisha Paul: I did. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: And what was that like, seeing them out of context? Dr. Trisha Paul: In this specific situation, I think it was a little bit jarring in the sense that it was kind of this surprise, that especially these are patients I had cared for in the past several years, and so there was a little bit of a moment to recognize and place them in where we had seen each other before. And then there was this fleeting wonder about whether they also recognized me. Some of these are patients that I might have met while on service as a palliative care physician for a brief visit or an initial consultation. And so for some of those families that I knew, there was less longevity to the ways in which I had known them. And it was curious to wonder if they remembered me and then to wonder about that memory. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Did any of them? Did any of them come up to you and say, "Oh, Dr. Paul, it's good to see you again," or, "Do you remember me?" Dr. Trisha Paul: No, I did not have that happen. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I think jarring is a really interesting word to use. A lot of our interactions are so contextual, and I find it difficult when I run into a patient or a family member and I'm outside of work and have to remind myself of, not so much who they are, but where they are in their treatment course. And sometimes you forget because it's out of the context of our clinic rooms. Dr. Trisha Paul: Mm hmm. I think that's exactly right. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: The author and grieving father who led the workshop in your essay writes in your copy of his book that he thanks you for your work. The way you describe that and isolate that phrase in your essay is to the reader, I will use your word again, jarring. Why was that so jarring to you? Dr. Trisha Paul: It definitely felt jarring when I read those words in my book. There is something about the word work and kind of the connotations of work that separate it from a humanity of caring. It feels a little bit like an obligation or a task or a livelihood. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: You think of what we do as a calling? Dr. Trisha Paul: I don't think the phrase of it being a calling resonates with me personally that much. But it is more than just a thing I do. I think that's the problem with work. I think it's undermining why a lot of us choose to do this. Which I think for many people, kind of this idea of a calling is how they think of it. I think the calling implies there's a lot more choice than I actually feel. Ever since some of the first patients and families that I met within this space, I understood that these are the people I wanted to spend the rest of my life caring for. And I guess that kind of sounds like a calling. But... Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I was not going to say it, but it sounds like a calling. You know that word, and I love how you reflect on semantics in this essay. The notion of a calling sounds so highfalutin and almost religious and as if we're being spoken to. But I don't know. I think you could define it as something that just feels right to you and something that you should be doing and that you fall into and you do not have as much deliberate choice in going into this field, but everything just feels right about it. Dr. Trisha Paul: I think that's exactly it. So I think it's just that you do not really question- for people who choose to do this work and to be with these patients and families, a lot of us from the time we arrive at the realization that this is what we want to do, we don't find ourselves really questioning it in a concrete sense because we understand it. It makes sense to us. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I think that's a great summary of that. It just makes sense to us. Dr. Trisha Paul: I think it's a mysterious idea to so many other people who don't do this work. And that's part of why it's interesting to a lot of people who just respond and say, "Oh, I can't imagine how you do this." Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Well, it just feels as if we're contributing something so substantive to humanity by focusing on hematology, oncology, and particularly palliative care. I don't know about you, I do not know if you have children. I have certainly tried to impart to my children to do something meaningful, to do something that makes other people's lives better with whatever career they choose, because it's so meaningful not just to ourselves, but to other people. Dr. Trisha Paul: Mm hmm. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: We are talking about semantics. In your essay, you reflect on the notion of bereavement. Should we, as medical caregivers, cop to being bereaved, or are we misappropriating a word that really wholly belongs to close family members and friends of a person with cancer? Dr. Trisha Paul: Yes. And I think that this essay was me kind of struggling to wrap my mind around what this question means and kind of what my own reactions to this idea of what it would look like and feel like to call ourselves bereaved. And I don't have an answer to this question. I think it's a question that everyone in this work should consider and think about and what it means for them as an individual. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Are there patients you have lost whom you think about even one, two, three years later on a regular basis? Dr. Trisha Paul: Yes, I would definitely say so. I am early in my career, but I anticipate that that is kind of an essential way in which I do this work. It's part of my own practice, and it's dependent on each patient, but I find ways that I keep their legacy alive in my life. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah. I thought a lot about your essay since I first read it, and I think it's okay to say that we grieve the loss of our patients. I think that is a form of bereavement. Dr. Trisha Paul: I think so too. I think that it was interesting to realize my own hesitation about specifically calling ourselves bereaved when we do, as clinicians, talk about grief and secondary grief and something about using the language of grief and grieving feels more appropriate and within our purview as clinicians. But something about specifically identifying as bereaved felt like a different step. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's closer, isn't it? I don't know, it feels like more of a personal relationship rather than a professional relationship to be bereaved. Dr. Trisha Paul: And I think that that's simultaneously terrifying and empowering as a way of acknowledging what the loss of a patient can do to us and also honoring the affection we have for people we care for. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I hope it's okay that we end on that phrase that you just said: It's both terrifying and empowering to admit to being bereaved and to feel that closeness to one of our patients. It has been such a pleasure to have Trisha Paul, who is an Assistant Professor in Pediatric Hematology, Oncology, and Palliative Care at the University of Rochester Medical Center to discuss her essay, "Are You Bereaved?" Trisha, thank you so much for submitting your article and for joining us today for this enlightening conversation. Dr. Trisha Paul: Thank you so much. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: If you have enjoyed this episode, consider sharing it with a friend or colleague or leave us a review. Your feedback and support helps us continue to have these important conversations. If you are looking for more episodes and context, follow our show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen, and explore more from ASCO at asco.org/podcasts. Until next time, this has been Mikkael Sekeres for Cancer Stories. 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. Show notes: Like, share and subscribe so you never miss an episode and leave a rating or review. Guest Bio: Dr Trisha Paul is an Assistant Professor in Pediatric Hematology/ Oncology and Palliative Care at University of Rochester Medical Center.
Join hosts Eddie, Ashwin, and Raj as they welcome Dr. Michelle Yong and Dr. Gemma Reynolds, academic infectious diseases physicians from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and the National Centre for Infections in Cancer, for an in-depth discussion on cytomegalovirus (CMV) management in immunocompromised hematology patients.Key Topics CoveredFundamentals of CMV ManagementDistinguishing CMV reactivation from CMV diseaseTreatment thresholds and target viral loadsProphylaxis strategies in non-allograft settingsValaciclovir dosing in general hematology populationsHigh-risk patient populationsFirst-Line TherapiesValganciclovir: advantages, disadvantages, and myelosuppressionFoscarnet: indications and monitoring strategiesTreatment-resistant CMVAllogeneic Transplant PatientsHigh-risk populations and timing of reactivationMonitoring protocols post-transplantRandomized Controlled TrialsAURORA Trial: Maribavir vs. ValganciclovirDesign: RCT comparing maribavir to valganciclovir for pre-emptive CMV therapy post-allogeneic transplant [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38036487/]NEJM Letermovir Prophylaxis TrialDesign: Double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT of letermovir prophylaxis post-allogeneic transplant [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29211658/]Emerging Patient PopulationsCMV in lymphoma and myeloma patients receiving CAR T-cell therapy and T-cell engaging bispecific antibodiesMonitoring and prophylaxis strategies for novel immunotherapiesImpact of CMV on post-CAR T mortality-https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40203190/
Dr. Rachel Gatlin entered neuroscience with curiosity and optimism. Then came chaos. She started her PhD at the University of Utah in March 2020—right as the world shut down. Her lab barely existed. Her advisor was on leave. Her project focused on isolation stress in mice, and then every human on earth became her control group. Rachel fought through supply shortages, grant freezes, and the brutal postdoc job market that treats scientists like disposable parts. When her first offer vanished under a hiring freeze, she doubled down, rewrote her plan, and won her own NIH training grant. Her story is about survival in the most literal sense—how to keep your brain intact when the system built to train you keeps collapsing.RELATED LINKS• Dr. Rachel Gatlin on LinkedIn• Dr. Gatlin's Paper Preprint• Dr. Eric Nestler on Wikipedia• News Coverage: Class of 2025 – PhD Students Redefine PrioritiesFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this week's episode, Blood editor Dr. Laura Michaelis interviews authors Drs. Terri Parker and Peter Lenting on their latest papers published in Blood Journal. Dr. Lenting discusses his work on introducing a new therapeutic approach to von Willebrand disease with the development of a novel bispecific antibody (KB-V13A12) that links endogenous mouse VWF to albumin, extending VWF half-life twofold with cessation of provoked bleeding. Dr Parker shares the results of a 43-patient phase 2 study that evaluates the single agent isatuximab, a CD38 monoclonal antibody, in patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis. With a hematological response rate of 77%, organ response rates between 50 and 57%, and an excellent safety profile, the current study lays the foundation for future use of isatuximab across treatment settings and combination strategies.Featured ArticlesIsatuximab for Relapsed and/or Refractory AL Amyloidosis: Results of a Prospective Phase 2 Trial (SWOG S1702)A bispecific nanobody for the treatment of von Willebrand disease type 1
Paul J. Hampel, MD, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN Recorded on November 4, 2025 Paul J. Hampel, MD Assistant Professor of Medicine Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN In this episode, Dr. Paul Hampel from Mayo Clinic Rochester takes a comprehensive look at hairy cell leukemia (HCL). He reviews the current diagnostic work-up, including immunophenotypic and molecular testing, and highlights key clinical features that distinguish HCL from related disorders. Dr. Hampel also discusses approved frontline therapies and evidence-based approaches for relapsed or refractory disease, with attention to infection risk and supportive care. The conversation explores emerging agents, novel combinations, and clinical trials shaping the next wave of HCL management. Join us for this expert discussion, offering practical insights to enhance care and outcomes for patients with HCL.
In today's episode, we had the pleasure of speaking with Justin Taylor, MD, an associate professor in the Division of Hematology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, about the growing role of artificial intelligence in cancer information–seeking and what this means for clinicians caring for patients with hematologic malignancies. Dr Taylor's recent work explores how patients are increasingly turning to AI tools to better understand their diagnoses and treatments, and why oncologists must be aware of the accuracy, limitations, and clinical implications of these technologies.
Courtney Cordaro, Director and Therapeutic Strategy & Innovation Lead at CTI, discusses the rapidly changing landscape of hematology clinical research. She shares insights on operational excellence and innovation, demonstrating why adaptability and precision are key to success in hematology clinical trials. 01:00 Courtney shares her background and passions. 02:29 The growing need for rapid innovation in hematology trials. 03:57 Unique challenges in hematology trials. 05:17 The evolving role of project management. 08:28 Strategies for maintaining compliance and data integrity. 10:46 Differentiators in CTI's hematology research. 13:54 Future trends within the field. 15:19 The five pillars of success. 18:01 Advice for sponsors entering this space.
EPISODE DESCRIPTIONBefore she was raising millions to preserve fertility for cancer patients, Tracy Weiss was filming reenactments in her apartment for the Maury Povich Show using her grandmother's china. Her origin story includes Jerry Springer, cervical cancer, and a full-body allergic reaction to bullshit. Now, she's Executive Director of The Chick Mission, where she weaponizes sarcasm, spreadsheets, and the rage of every woman who's ever been told “you're fine” while actively bleeding out in a one-stall office bathroom.We get into all of it. The diagnosis. The misdiagnosis. The second opinion that saved her life. Why fertility preservation is still a luxury item. Why half of oncologists still don't mention it. And what it takes to turn permission to be pissed into a platform that actually pays for women's futures.This episode is blunt, hilarious, and very Jewish. There's chopped liver, Carrie Bradshaw slander, and more than one “fuck you” to the status quo. You've been warned.RELATED LINKSThe Chick MissionTracy Weiss on LinkedInFertility Preservation Interview (Dr. Aimee Podcast)Tracy's Story in Authority MagazineNBC DFW FeatureStork'd Podcast EpisodeNuDetroit ProfileChick Mission 2024 Gala RecapFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship, email podcast@matthewzachary.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Mehlman Qbanks: https://qbanks.mehlmanmedical.com/IG: https://www.instagram.com/mehlman_medical/Telegram: https://mehlmanmedical.com/subscribe/
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Antiphospholipid Syndrome from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Pure Red Cell Aplasia from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Coagulation Cascade from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
In this week's episode, associate editor Dr. James Griffin interviews researchers Dr. John Semple and Dr. Othman Al-Sawaf on their groundbreaking studies on transfusion-related acute lung injury and chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatment. Dr. Semple explored how mitochondrial DNA could act as a first hit in lung injury, while Dr. Al-Sawaf revealed that patient fitness may not significantly impact the efficacy of targeted CLL treatments. Both studies challenge existing medical assumptions and suggest new approaches to understanding disease mechanisms and treatment responses.Featured ArticlesThe impact of fitness and dose intensity on clinical outcomes with venetoclax-obinutuzumab in CLLMitochondrial DNA via recipient TLR9 acts as a potent first-hit in murine transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI)
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria (PNH) from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
Mehlman Qbanks: https://qbanks.mehlmanmedical.com/IG: https://www.instagram.com/mehlman_medical/Telegram: https://mehlmanmedical.com/subscribe/
EPISODE DESCRIPTION:Libby Amber Shayo didn't just survive the pandemic—she branded it. Armed with a bun, a New York accent, and enough generational trauma to sell out a two-drink-minimum crowd, she turned her Jewish mom impressions into the viral sensation known as Sheryl Cohen. What started as one-off TikToks became a career in full technicolor: stand-up, sketch, podcasting, and Jewish community building.We covered everything. Jew camp lore. COVID courtship. Hannah Montana. Holocaust comedy. Dating app postmortems. And the raw, relentless grief that comes with being Jewish online in 2025. Libby's alter ego lets her say the quiet parts out loud, but the real Libby? She's got receipts, range, and a righteous sense of purpose.If you're burnt out on algorithm-friendly “influencers,” meet a creator who actually stands for something. She doesn't flinch. She doesn't filter. And she damn well earned her platform.This is the most Jewish episode I've ever recorded. And yes, there will be guilt.RELATED LINKSLibby's Website: https://libbyambershayo.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/libbyambershayoTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@libbyambershayoLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/libby-walkerSchmuckboys Podcast: https://jewishjournal.com/podcasts/schmuckboysForbes Feature: Modern Mrs. Maisel Vibes https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshweissMedium Profile: https://medium.com/@libbyambershayoFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform.For guest suggestions or sponsorship, email podcast@matthewzachary.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Sideroblastic Anemia from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Iron Deficiency Anemia from the Hematology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
About this Episode Episode 50 of “The 2 View” – BNPs, D-Dimers, and Sneakily Sick Kids Segment 1A - Needs of older nurses Clendon JA, Walker L. Nurses aged over 50 and their perceptions of flexible working: The experiences and needs of older nurses in relation to flexible working and the barriers and facilitators to implementation within workplaces. J Nurs Manag. 2016;24:336-346. doi:10.1111/jonm.12325 Segment 1B - WHO and Tropical Diseases Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases. World Health Organization. Accessed August 19, 2025. https://tdr.who.int/about-us Segment 2A - BNP Silvers SM, Gemme SR, Hickey S, et al. Clinical Policy: Critical Issues in the Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Acute Heart Failure Syndromes. Ann Emerg Med. 2019;49(2): 232–241. Lamberta M, Chertoff A. BNP Level in the Emergency Department: Does it Change Management? EMDocs. June 20, 2016. Accessed November 4, 2025. https://www.emdocs.net/bnp-level-in-the-emergency-department-does-it-change-management/ Maisel AS, Krishnaswamy P, Nowak RM, et al. Rapid measurement of B-type natriuretic peptide in the emergency diagnosis of heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(3):161-167. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa020233 Segment 2B - D-Dimer Wolf SJ, Hahn SA, Nentwich LM, et al. Clinical policy: Critical issues in the evaluation and management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected acute venous thromboembolic disease. Ann Emerg Med. 2018;71(5):e59–e109. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.03.006 Righini M, Van Es J, Den Exter PL, et al. Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to rule out pulmonary embolism: The ADJUST-PE study. JAMA. 2014;311(11):1117–1124. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.2135 van der Hulle T, Cheung WY, Kooij S, et al. Simplified diagnostic management of suspected pulmonary embolism (the YEARS study): A prospective, multicentre, cohort study. Lancet. 2017;390(10091):289–297. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30885-1 Kearon C, de Wit K, Parpia S, et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with D-dimer adjusted to clinical probability. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(22):2125–2134. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1909159 Lim w, Le Gal G, Bates SM, et al. American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: Diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. Blood Adv. 2018;2(22):3226-3256. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024828 Kabrhel C, Jaff MR, Channick RN. D-dimer. StatPearls. June 22, 2025. Accessed November 4, 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK431064/ Tripodi A, Lippi G. How we manage a high D-dimer. Haematologica. 2020;106(6):1491-1494. doi:10.3324/haematol.2020.248344 Segment 3: Sneakily Sick Kids Kocher MS, Zurakowski D, Kasser JR. Differentiating between septic arthritis and transient synovitis of the hip in children: An evidence-based clinical prediction algorithm. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(12):1662-1670. doi:10.2106/00004623-199912000-00002 Caird MS, Flynn JM, Leung YL, et al. Factors distinguishing septic arthritis from transient synovitis of the hip in children: a prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(6): 1251-1257. doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00216 Recurring Sources Center for Medical Education. http://ccme.org The Proceduralist. http://www.theproceduralist.org The Procedural Pause. https://journals.lww.com/em-news/blog/theproceduralpause/pages/default.aspx The Skeptics Guide to Emergency Medicine. http://www.thesgem.com Be sure to keep tuning in for more great prizes and fun trivia questions! Once you hear the question, please email us your guesses at 2viewcast@gmail.com and tell us who you want to give a shout-out to.
In today's episode, we had the pleasure of speaking with Kevin Kalinsky, MD, MS, FASCO, about the evolving treatment paradigm for hormone receptor (HR)–positive breast cancer post-CDK4/6 inhibition, as well as the need for more advanced therapies to improve patient outcomes in this setting. Dr Kalinsky is a professor and director in the Division of Medical Oncology of the Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Emory University School of Medicine, as well as the director of the Glenn Family Breast Center and the Louisa and Rand Glenn Family Chair in Breast Cancer Research at Winship Cancer Institute in Atlanta, Georgia. In our exclusive interview, Dr Kalinsky discussed combination therapies that have shown promise for the management of HR-positive breast cancer following endocrine therapy, factors influencing treatment selection for patients who have received prior CDK4/6 inhibition, best practices for genomic testing in this population, and breast cancer research highlights from the 2025 ESMO Congress.
When the system kills a $2.4 million study on Black maternal health with one Friday afternoon email, the message is loud and clear: stop asking questions that make power uncomfortable. Dr. Jaime Slaughter-Acey, an epidemiologist at UNC, built a groundbreaking project called LIFE-2 to uncover how racism and stress shape the biology of pregnancy. It was science rooted in community, humanity, and truth. Then NIH pulled the plug, calling her work “DEI.” Jaime didn't quit. She fought back, turning her grief into art and her outrage into action. This episode is about the cost of integrity, the politics of science, and what happens when researchers refuse to stay silent.RELATED LINKS• The Guardian article• NIH Grant• Jaime's LinkedIn Post• Jaime's Website• Faculty PageFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
We love to hear from our listeners. Send us a message.Episode 115 of Cell & Gene: The Podcast features Host Erin Harris' talk with Aliya Omer, Vice President and Global Head of Hematology and Cell Therapy at AstraZeneca. Omer shares valuable insights from her rich experience leading cell therapy development across multiple top companies. She highlights the critical importance of collaboration by breaking down silos across research, manufacturing, regulatory, and commercial teams to deliver innovative therapies efficiently. She also discusses AZ's diverse and ambitious cell therapy portfolio, encompassing autologous CAR-T, TCR-T, in vivo gene therapies, and regulatory T-cell therapies. She candidly addresses current challenges in manufacturing scalability, patient access, and healthcare system readiness and describes how AZ is prioritizing fast manufacturing platforms and ecosystem-wide partnerships to surmount these hurdles. Subscribe to the podcast!Apple | Spotify | YouTube Visit my website: Cell & Gene Connect with me on LinkedIn
EPISODE DESCRIPTIONAllison Applebaum was supposed to become a concert pianist. She chose ballet instead. Then 9/11 hit, and she ran straight into a psych ward—on purpose. What followed was one of the most quietly revolutionary acts in modern medicine: founding the country's first mental health clinic for caregivers. Because the system had decided that if you love someone dying, you don't get care. You get to wait in the hallway.She's a clinical psychologist. A former dancer. A daughter who sat next to her dad—legendary arranger of Stand By Me—through every ER visit, hallway wait, and impossible choice. Now she's training hospitals across the country to finally treat caregivers like patients. With names. With needs. With billing codes.We talked about music, grief, psycho-oncology, the real cost of invisible labor, and why no one gives a shit about the person driving you to chemo. This one's for the ones in the waiting room.RELATED LINKSAllisonApplebaum.comStand By Me – The BookLinkedInInstagramThe Elbaum Family Center for Caregiving at Mount SinaiFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship, email podcast@matthewzachary.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
On this episode, Dr. Keyur B. Thakar, MD, MPH, Medical Director of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Northwell's Phelps Hospital, joins the podcast to discuss his priorities for the year, including expanding access to advanced cancer care in Westchester. He shares insights on the benefits of lifestyle medicine and plant-based diets, and emphasizes the importance of thinking beyond treating disease to focus on prevention and long-term wellness.
Hematology-oncology physician Adeel Khan discusses his article, "Universities must tap endowments to sustain biomedical research." He explains how declining federal support for the National Institutes of Health threatens America's position as a global leader in medical science and why universities must use a fraction of their massive endowments to sustain research innovation. Adeel highlights the moral and economic case for investing in science, the urgency of supporting early-career investigators, and the need for academic institutions to bridge funding gaps left by federal cuts. Viewers will learn why this call to action matters for medicine, patients, and the future of health advancement. Our presenting sponsor is Microsoft Dragon Copilot. Want to streamline your clinical documentation and take advantage of customizations that put you in control? What about the ability to surface information right at the point of care or automate tasks with just a click? Now, you can. Microsoft Dragon Copilot, your AI assistant for clinical workflow, is transforming how clinicians work. Offering an extensible AI workspace and a single, integrated platform, Dragon Copilot can help you unlock new levels of efficiency. Plus, it's backed by a proven track record and decades of clinical expertise, and it's part of Microsoft Cloud for Healthcare, built on a foundation of trust. Ease your administrative burdens and stay focused on what matters most with Dragon Copilot, your AI assistant for clinical workflow. VISIT SPONSOR → https://aka.ms/kevinmd SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST → https://www.kevinmd.com/podcast RECOMMENDED BY KEVINMD → https://www.kevinmd.com/recommended
EPISODE DESCRIPTIONRebecca V. Nellis never meant to run a nonprofit. She just never left. Twenty years later, she's still helming Cancer and Careers after a Craigslist maternity-leave temp job turned into a lifelong mission.In this 60-minute doubleheader, we cover everything from theater nerdom and improv rules for surviving bureaucracy, to hanging up on Jon Bon Jovi, to navigating cancer while working—or working while surviving cancer. Same thing.Rebecca's path is part Second City, part Prague hostel, part Upper East Side grant writer, and somehow all of that makes perfect sense. She breaks down how theater kids become nonprofit lifers, how “sample sale feminism” helped shape a cancer rights org, and how you know when the work is finally worth staying for.Also: Cleavon Little. Tap Dance Kid. 42 countries. And one extremely awkward moment involving a room full of women's handbags and one very confused Matthew.If you've ever had to hide your diagnosis to keep a job—or wanted to burn the whole HR system down—this one's for you.RELATED LINKSCancer and CareersRebecca Nellis on LinkedIn2024 Cancer and Careers Research ReportWorking with Cancer Pledge (Publicis)CEW FoundationI'm Not Rappaport – Broadway InfoFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship opportunities, email podcast@matthewzachary.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.