Podcasts about Hematology

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.

Vidcast:  https://www.instagram.com/p/DQdod3Mj3HW/A new, supercharged form of immunotherapy for breast cancer has just been announced by UCLA oncologists in the Journal of Hematology & Oncology. The new approach involves the production of CAR-NKT cells, standing for chimeric antigen receptor-natural killer T cells, that have the superpower to attack not one but dozens of tumor cell surface antigens simultaneously.  The cells target a protein mesothelin, which cancers need to rapidly grow and spread.Many current immunotherapies only target a single receptor. Triple negative breast cancers lack many of these common receptors making them difficult to treat successfully. This CAR-NKT therapy attacks so many receptors it could prove effective for those with these triple negative cancers.Even better, the CAR-NKT cells can be mass-produced from donated stem cells and stored for immediate use on demand. Very promising is the fact that the CAR-NKT cells target, mesothelin, is not only found on breast cancers but also on the surfaces of ovarian, pancreatic, and lung cancer cells.So far, these CAR-NKT cells have only been tested in the laboratory on tissue cultured breast cancer cells harvested from patient swith advanced disease.  Clinical trials are in the planning stages, and hopefully, this super-immunotherapy will be available to save patients with a variety of difficult-to-treat cancers…..someday soon.https://www.news-medical.net/news/20251022/New-type-of-immunotherapy-could-change-the-treatment-plan-for-triple-negative-breast-cancer.aspxhttps://jhoonline.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13045-025-01736-9#immunotherapy #CAR-NKT #cancer #breast #triplenegative #ovarian #pancreatic #lung

In this Review Series episode, Associate Editor Dr. Philippe Armand speaks with multiple authors about what it might look like to improve treatments follicular lymphoma, a disease that has been put on the backburner of innovation due to its generally treatable nature. Dr. Armand discusses "Treatment of relapsed and refractory follicular lymphoma: which treatment for which patient for which line of therapy?" with author Dr. Carla Casulo,  "The future of follicular lymphoma management: strategies on the horizon” with author Dr. Sarah C. Rutherford, and "An updated understanding of follicular lymphoma transformation” with Dr. Erin M. Parry.Find the whole review series on follicular lymphoma in volume 146 issue 15 of Blood Journal.  

Listen to JCO's Art of Oncology article, "Reflection" by Dr. Jamie Riches, who is an Assistant Professor at Columbia University and Director of the Hematology Oncology Hospitalist Service. The article is followed by an interview with Riches and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Dr Riches shares a deeply personal narrative, reflecting on the profound personal and professional impact of losing her young family member to cancer, illuminating the intimate intersection of grief, loss, and healing. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Reflection, by Jaime C. Riches, DO If I stand this way, with my shoulders back, my chin lifted, if I hold my breath for a moment, my skin fits my bones just right. Each subtle motion is an effort to make my clavicle more prominent, to manifest my ribs. I feel so ignorant about beauty. I was at the side of her hospital bed as she uncovered herself and asked me to look away. Her eyes, glassy and hollow, met mine. "I'm so ugly right now." It's an interesting piece of practicing medicine, to be an observer of bodies, their look, their feel, and their function. Which lines are strength and which are fatigue…which ones are scars and how they have healed. My words were soft and aching, "You are beautiful" I said, knowing that her skin fits her bones too tight. They are almost all that's left. My 38-year-old cousin's oncologist is my colleague, my friend. When she was diagnosed, he reminded me that there were excellent treatments available. I reminded him that none of them would allow her to see her children start kindergarten. Redefining excellence, I thought, sounded like a cancer center's marketing strategy that just missed the mark. As I looked away, a piece of me splintered. It isn't the same when it's someone you know, when it's someone you love. Maybe I feel shame for underappreciating my own fertile marrow, my fat and muscle, and my own existence. Maybe it's guilt for dedicating my whole life to work that can't save her, for being the one to look her mother in the eye and say she can't be saved. Maybe, just sadness. This lonely world, that only exists right at the bedside, is like a magically devastating song and I am humming the rhythmic asynchrony of being a doctor, and just being. "From where do we yearn?," I wonder. It's from within these little spaces we look to fill the absence of something beautiful. The moments that we're longing to be a part of. We are all mothers—the seven of us now in her room, aunts and cousins united by a last name—by the successes and losses we previously thought unimaginable. We've known the brittle anticipation of a new life, the longing, the joy of spending time, and the sense of simply existing in these spaces. We are the daughters and sisters of firefighters. We are women who know the low bellow of the bagpipes, women who own "funeral clothes." We've tried to disinherit the same shades of blue, and all of our distance has brought us right here, where they're making her comfortable. She knows that her time has been spent. Her eyes are the color of her favorite flower, a yellow rose, and her once sterile room appears almost sunlight by the garden of bouquets. Her mother is sitting by her side, gently moving her fingers across what would be a hairline, the way you would touch a newborn in those moments when you're just realizing you didn't know you could love someone so much. There's a song running through my head, "Golden Slumbers" (The Beatles, Abbey Road, 1969). Even playing in my memory, it gives me chills, starting right beneath my jaw and circulating through my limbs. Once, there was a way To get back homeward Once, there was a way To get back home Sleep, pretty darling, do not cry And I will sing a lullaby Nothing illustrates the frailty of existence like a mother preparing for her inevitable goodbye. Once you see it, you can be certain that biology is imperfect. We're convinced that we're grieving throughout the whole of motherhood, as our babies become grown people of their own, as they live their lives. But it isn't grief. We're simply living a life that is singular, in a series of moments that are final. "Golden Slumbers" doesn't actually seem to end. It just subtly transforms into the next track as if they were one, and before the chills are fully absorbed, you're struck by something totally new…triumphant trumpets. When her breath stopped, it wasn't held. I don't think she realized the bravery it took to leave this world with such grace, to be unlonely. I've been witness to so many punctuated pulseless yawns, but not this one. I wish I knew by which of these wounds am I softened and by which I am hardened, but I don't. They heal, with secondary intention, naturally and slowly, from the inside out. 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. Today, I am so thrilled to be joined by Jamie Riches, who is Assistant Professor at Columbia University and Director of the Hematology Oncology Hospitalist Service. We'll be discussing her absolutely gorgeous article, "Reflection." At the time of this recording, our guest has no disclosures. Jamie, I want to thank you so much for contributing your essay to the Journal of Clinical Oncology, and welcome you to discuss your article. Jamie Riches: Thank you so much for having me. Mikkael Sekeres: I have to say, I was so moved by this and just loved the writing. I don't drop the 'G word', gorgeous, very often when describing pieces, but this was truly moving and truly lovely. Jamie Riches: Thank you. Thank you so much. It was a really deeply personal story to me. Mikkael Sekeres: So I wonder if you can tell us a little bit about yourself. Where are you from, and walk us through your career? For example, where did you do your training? Jamie Riches: Well, I am from Brooklyn, New York, and I did my training at an osteopathic medical school in Harlem called Touro, and my residency training at what used to be called St. Luke's-Roosevelt, and now is Mount Sinai West after many of the New York City mergers. I did a chief resident year at Memorial Sloan Kettering and started my oncology hospitalist career there for many years and have been at Columbia now for three years. Mikkael Sekeres: Wonderful. Isn't it interesting how the institutions of our youth are no longer, and that seems to happen at a faster and faster pace? Jamie Riches: I know. I feel the need to reference the old name sometimes when I'm discussing it. Mikkael Sekeres: Can you tell us a little bit about your own story as a writer? How long have you been writing reflective or narrative pieces? Jamie Riches: I have probably always been a jotter. I think that's for as long as I can remember, and I've enjoyed that process. And I think once I was an undergrad, I studied chemistry, I majored in chemistry, but I really filled up a bunch of elective time with writing classes and learning what I could about the processes of writing. And I guess almost 10 years ago now, I enrolled in the graduate certificate program in Narrative Medicine at Columbia. And that program helped me explore a little bit in terms of form and function and in terms of really relating my writing to my own personal experience as a physician. Mikkael Sekeres: And if I'm not mistaken, the field of narrative medicine was really in part born at Columbia, wasn't it? Jamie Riches: It was. Yeah. Rita Charon was the founder of the practice as a field, yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: And what was it that that experience- what did the formal training teach you that you couldn't have figured out on your own by the iterative process of reading and writing? Jamie Riches: I think there's something to having a group of people critiquing you that really allows you to become better in any field, in any practice. And I think there's something to having a, you know, a relatively safe space to explore different ways of doing something. For example, writing poetry, which I really hadn't done much of before and have done a bit of since. I think having a space where there are both educated critics and experts being able to look at your work and say, "This is working and this isn't," was really helpful for me. Mikkael Sekeres: You know, I've heard with writing, the notion that your first critics should be people you trust and feel as if you're in a safe space with because you're so vulnerable with writing. Even exposing it to relative strangers in a formal course can be, I don't want to use the word damaging, but I guess damaging, or at least get you out of a safe space that you need for writing. Do you have an inner circle that you trust for your writing? Jamie Riches: I do. I do. Mikkael Sekeres: If you feel comfortable doing so, can you tell us what prompted you to write this piece? Jamie Riches: This piece just sort of came out. This piece is real, and it's a real experience, and the processing of this experience has happened on so many different planes for me, and writing is really one of them. And once I sat down and said, "Let me write some of this down," it just kind of poured out. Mikkael Sekeres: Sometimes we write to process. I once heard somebody say that writing is the only time in life when you get a free redo, right, or a do over. We say something or we post something on social, and it's out there in the universe. But with writing, it's very personal, and we can look at a paragraph or a sentence and say, "Gee, that just doesn't feel right," and rework it if it's not communicating exactly what I was hoping it would. The other aspect of writing, of course, is that it allows us to ruminate on something that's just occurred and to try to make sense of it. Do you think that was some basis for writing this? Jamie Riches: I think so. And I think maybe just relating one really specific experience into the greater realm of the work that we do every day, and how that experience both stood on its own, but also is woven into so many other patient encounters and encounters with families. And that's a form of processing, I think, for sure. Mikkael Sekeres: Can you tell us in your own words about the main character in this piece and what was going on? Because you write it in a lovely way that allows the reader to discover what's transpiring gradually, but if you could tell us in your own words, who is this person? Jamie Riches: Yeah. So the person that I'm talking to in some parts of the story and talking about in much of the story is my cousin, Patrice, who was diagnosed with bladder cancer at 38 years old and who has had interactions with the medical field as a patient but is not a physician, is not a medical professional, and so had a lot of questions and a lot of trust and reliance on those of us in the family who had some medical knowledge and experience. And so I wound up being pretty intimately involved in her care as a family member, and that was really a fine line in a lot of ways because my friends and colleagues were the care team, and I was the family member. And many of us have been in that position in many different ways, but it's always a fine line. And she was young, and she was very positive throughout really the course of her illness. She had twins who were two years old at the time of her diagnosis. And I think, I'm a little bit speechless now, as you can see, I think she just was so incredibly graceful, and I think I used this word in the story, throughout the entirety of her illness, which included multiple lengthy hospitalizations where she had spent time away from her children. And I still don't know how she did it with the patience and the thoughtfulness and the love for everyone else that she did. Mikkael Sekeres: You really honor her in this piece and paint such a beautiful portrait of her. In the essay, you write, "It's an interesting piece of practicing medicine to be an observer of bodies, their look, their feel, their function. Which lines are strength and which are fatigue, which ones are scars and how they've healed." It's a beautiful couple of sentences. In this case, you aren't really playing the role of doctor, are you? Can you talk a little bit more about when that line's blurred between being a family member and and the practice of medicine when people are relying on you to help out with their medical care? Jamie Riches: Yeah, I think most of us know this gray area fairly well, and the gravity of the situation really dictates how blurry the line is. And it's true, I wasn't the doctor in this situation, and I had as much information about the scans and the clinical picture and the day to day trajectory and the lab results and the toxicity profiles and the data from the studies that the regimens were approved based on. And that made it impossible to step out of the doctor role or mentality, and I also wasn't making the formal recommendations by any means, but I think it's hard to sort of exempt yourself from that space once you're in it. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah. I think we also sometimes don't realize how even the smallest contribution we have in advising somebody about their medical care becomes very, very meaningful and how much those words can have an effect on somebody. I recall my uncle was diagnosed with acute leukemia, so that's right in my bailiwick, of course. And I remember talking with him about transplant and being as neutral as humanly possible about whether he should proceed with the transplant given the characteristics of his leukemia. And months later, after he had gone through the transplant, he said, "You know, I went through this even though you really advised me not to." So as neutral and trying not to sway someone and giving advice as we are, people hear us differently. Did you find that also with your cousin? Jamie Riches: I did. I phoned into one of her oncologist appointments, and her oncologist, who I have to say is wonderful and who I have the utmost respect and really love for, who took great care in taking care of her, went through in detail everything they could about her disease and about treatment options and really explained everything, and took a minute and said, "Okay, do you have any questions?" And my cousin said, "No, whatever Jamie thinks." So I said, "Okay, well, we'll chat a little bit later." But that made me realize, which I think I just hadn't before, how much having an opinion matters. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah, and that it's a gift to people when they can cede some of that decision making or some of that knowledge to somebody else and feel as if they don't have to take it on themselves. Jamie Riches: Yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: I want to read one other quote from your piece. I could just reread the whole piece, I enjoyed it so much and keep quoting it. You write, "We've known the brittle anticipation of a new life, the longing, the joy of spending time, the sense of simply existing in these spaces. We are the daughters and sisters of firefighters. We are women who know the low bellow of the bagpipes. Women who own funeral clothes." There's a lot that swims beneath the surface, I think, in that quote, that family members get together at births and deaths, that these become the occasions for the family to get together, that we put on uniforms for them, and that they happen frequently enough that we actually own the uniform to be part of them. Is that what defines us as families? Is that what we've come to? Or how about us as physicians? We own uniforms as physicians also. Are the gatherings, the only gatherings we have with our colleagues at tumor boards when we discuss successes and failures of our patients? Jamie Riches: That's a great question and a great reading, and thank you for these questions. I think every family is different, obviously, and I won't speak for the masses here, but there is a bit of a structure to the events that you're expected to attend and that you're expected to not be absent for, to sort of show up for. And those events are sort- you're right, you know, births and funerals and weddings, and they have a bit of a code to them. And as physicians, it's interesting to think about things like tumor board as the gathering spaces, because although as colleagues we're not families, we are the closest thing to going through some of these moments together. And I think these moments at the bedside, and I use that term so often because I work in the hospital, and I am literally often sitting in a hospital bed holding someone's hand, talking to them. Those are the moments that we feel. We feel them in our bodies. I can feel it right here, and I'm touching my chest when I say that. I don't get that same visceral feeling from looking at most scans, looking at most lab reports, or even having academic conversations with people. And I think that you're right, things like tumor board or even other academic conferences really are the gathering spaces for physicians, but that makes me question if those are the spaces that matter most. Mikkael Sekeres: I think that's a great point also to end our time together. It has been such a true, true pleasure to have Jamie Riches on our JCO Cancer Stories podcast to talk about her gorgeous piece, "Reflection." Dr. Riches is Assistant Professor at Columbia University and Director of the Hematology Oncology Hospitalist Service. Thank you so much again for submitting your piece to us. Jamie Riches: Thank you so much. Mikkael Sekeres: And thank you to our listeners for choosing JCO Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. 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. 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 Jamie Riches is an Assistant Professor at Columbia University and Director of the Hematology Oncology Hospitalist Service.

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.

In this episode, Anthony and Bernie discuss the important role of community hematology. We discuss innovative research models, partnerships between community and academic practices, and ways to improve care for hematology patients who live near and far!

This week we are so excited to have two incredible guests on the podcast to help us learn more about their areas of expertise, individual stories and help our community educate themselves on Breast Cancer + Women's Health. Dr. Deepa Halaharvi, DO, FACOS, is a fellowship-trained, board-certified breast surgeon and breast cancer survivor. She graduated from Kansas City University in 2008 and went on to complete her general surgery residency in 2013 at Doctor's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.Dedicated to lifelong learning, Halaharvi continued to master her skills by focusing on breast surgical oncology through a fellowship program in 2014. Only eight months after completing her fellowship, she learned firsthand what it feels like to hear the words, “You have breast cancer.” Despite the different forms of crises, setback and illness, Halaharvi realized she had the courage and resiliency to keep going using her voice and experience to help her patients. Having seen both sides—as a breast cancer surgeon and a breast cancer patient—she has gained unique insight and perspective into what it is like to face breast cancer. She started The Breast Cancer Podcast, a YouTube channel and social media outlets to help educate others about body awareness and managing a breast cancer diagnosis. Halaharvi continues to challenge herself and others in learning new skills to achieve better outcomes and improve the patient experience.Dr. Shabana Dewani is board certified in Medical Oncology, Hematology, and Internal Medicine. She completed her residency in Internal Medicine at Wright State University and was appointed as Chief Resident. Dr. Dewani completed her combined fellowship in Oncology and Hematology at Wright State University. During her training, she received Special Award in Academic Excellence and was inducted into the medical honor society Alpha Omega Alpha.Dr. Dewani was a faculty member at the Ohio State University where she was rated among the top 10 percent of physicians in the nation for patient satisfaction. She participated in multiple clinical trials investigating different therapies to treat breast, gastrointestinal and hematologic cancers.Dr. Dewani is married, has two children and lives in Dublin, Ohio.

When cancer treatment ends, the world expects celebration. The bell is rung, and everyone around breathes a sigh of relief. But for many survivors, that moment marks not an ending, but a new, confusing beginning. The medical team steps back, the appointments stop, and a quiet question creeps in: now what? Survivorship is more than the absence of disease. It's the long, often lonely process of learning how to live again, in a body, mind, and identity forever changed. Fatigue lingers. Treatment dulls memory and focus. Sleep becomes elusive. And beneath it all is the fear: what if it comes back? But what if recovery after cancer isn't just about waiting for the next scan; it's about reclaiming control? Through lifestyle medicine, survivors can begin to rebuild their strength, calm their nervous system, and lower their risk of recurrence. What measures are important for the survivor phase of cancer care? Why is connection and community so important? In this episode, the Medical Director of the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham, Dr. Amy Comander, returns. The pioneer in lifestyle medicine for survivorship joins us to share what true recovery looks like. She shares insights from her groundbreaking Paving the Path to Wellness program, and we talk about how to have a healthy life after the end of cancer treatment. Things You'll Learn In This Episode -Survivorship isn't just surviving Finishing treatment is only the beginning of recovery. How do survivors move from merely existing to truly thriving? -Movement as medicine Exercise doesn't just build strength; it improves outcomes and lowers recurrence risk. What type of movement makes the biggest impact after cancer? -Food over fear The right diet can reduce inflammation, support immunity, and ease anxiety about recurrence. What does the research actually say about the best foods for survivors, and which supplements to avoid? -The overlooked healing power of connection Support groups and social bonds can dramatically improve the quality of life and survival. Why is community one of the most potent yet underused forms of medicine? Guest Bio Dr. Amy Comander specializes in the care of women with breast cancer. Dr. Comander is Medical Director of the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham, where she also serves as Director of Breast Oncology and Cancer Survivorship at the Mass General Cancer Center in Waltham and at Newton Wellesley Hospital. She is the director of Lifestyle Medicine at the Mass General Cancer Center and an Instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School. She received her undergraduate degree and a master's degree in Neuroscience at Harvard University. She received her medical degree from Yale University School of Medicine. She completed her Internal Medicine residency training and Hematology-Oncology fellowship training at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School. She is board-certified in Hematology and Medical Oncology, and she is a Diplomat of the American Board of Lifestyle Medicine. Dr. Comander has a strong interest in improving the quality of life and outcome of cancer survivors through important lifestyle interventions, including physical activity, diet, and mind/body interventions. She promotes healthy lifestyles for both her active treatment patients as well as those in the survivorship phase of care. She has launched PAVING the Path to Wellness, a 12-week lifestyle medicine-based survivorship program for women with breast cancer. Connect with Dr. Comander on LinkedIn. Resources The MGH Cancer Center is recruiting cancer survivors with insomnia for two behavioral treatment trials testing the Survivorship Sleep Program, a cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) skills program developed at MGH (PI: Daniel Hall, PhD; NCBI - WWW Error Blocked Diagnostic ; NCBI - WWW Error Blocked Diagnostic ). Eligible patients may be in treatment, post-treatment, or living with advanced cancer. All procedures are remote. Compensation is provided. Patients may see our study flyer and MGB Rally website (Rally | Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Cancer Survivors with Insomnia ). Structured Exercise after Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer | NEJM Healthy Eating Plate • The Nutrition Source 10 Cancer Prevention Recommendations About Your Host Hosted by Dr. Deepa Grandon, MD, MBA, a triple board-certified physician with over 23 years of experience working as a Physician Consultant for influential organizations worldwide. Dr. Grandon is the founder of Transformational Life Consulting (TLC) and an outspoken faith-based leader in evidence-based lifestyle medicine. Resources Feeling stuck and want guidance on how to transform your spiritual, mental and physical well being? Get access to Dr Deepa's 6 Pillars of Health video! Visit drdeepa-tlc.org to subscribe and watch the video for free. ‌ Work with Me Ready to explore a personalized wellness journey with Dr. Deepa? Visit drdeepa-tlc.org and click on "Work with Me" to schedule a free intake call. Together, we'll see if this exclusive program aligns with your needs! Want to receive a devotional every week From Dr. Deepa? Devotionals are dedicated to providing you with a moment of reflection, inspiration, and spiritual growth each week, delivered right to your inbox. Visit https://www.drdeepa-tlc.org/devotional-opt-in to subscribe for free. Ready to deepen your understanding of trauma and kick start your healing journey? Explore a range of online and onsite courses designed to equip you with practical and affordable tools. From counselors, ministry leaders, and educators to couples, parents and individuals seeking help for themselves, there's a powerful course for everyone. Browse all the courses now to start your journey. ​​TLC is presenting this podcast as a form of information sharing only. It is not medical advice or intended to replace the judgment of a licensed physician. TLC is not responsible for any claims related to procedures, professionals, products, or methods discussed in the podcast, and it does not approve or endorse any products, professionals, services, or methods that might be referenced. Check out this episode on our website, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify, and don't forget to leave a review if you like what you heard. Your review feeds the algorithm so our show reaches more people. Thank you!

In this week's episode of the Blood Podcast, Associate Editor Dr. James Griffin interviews Drs. Binod Dhakal and Ruben Bierings about their respective papers published in this week's issue of Blood. Dr. Dhakal presents his study on using talquetamab, a bispecific antibody, as a bridging therapy before BCMA-targeted CAR T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma patients, showing promising results with high response rates and manageable toxicities. Next, Dr. Bierings identified patients with genetic variants in the guanine exchange factor MAP kinase–activating death domain (MADD) that impair VWF secretion from endothelial cells and possibly cause VWD type 1. Featured ArticlesA novel cause of type 1 von Willebrand disease: impaired exocytosis of Weibel-Palade bodies due to biallelic MADD variantsSophie Hordijk, Stijn A. Groten, Petra E. Bürgisser, Sebastiaan N. J. Laan, Georg Christoph Korenke, Tomáš Honzík, Diane Beysen, Frank W. G. Leebeek, Paul A. Skehel, Maartje van den Biggelaar, Tom Carter, Ruben BieringsSequential targeting in multiple myeloma: talquetamab, a GPRC5D bispecific antibody, as a bridge to BCMA CAR-T therapyBinod Dhakal, Othman S. Akhtar, David Fandrei, Alexandria Jensen, Rahul Banerjee, Darren Pan, Shambavi Richard, Reed Friend, Matthew Rees, Patrick Costello, Mariola Vazquez Martinez, Oren Pasvolsky, Charlotte Wagner, James A. Davis, Omar Castaneda Puglianini, Ran Reshef, Aimaz Afrough, Danai Dima, Manisha Bhutani, Omar Nadeem, Ricardo Parrondo, Ciara Freeman, Lekha Mikkilineni, Shahzad Raza, Larry D. Anderson Jr, Prashant Kapoor, Hitomi Hosoya, Saurabh Chhabra, Ariel Grajales-Cruz, Mahmoud Gaballa, Shonali Midha, Melissa Alsina, Douglas Sborov, Krina Patel, Yi Lin, Christopher Ferreri, Nico Gagelmann, Anupama Kumar, Doris Hansen, Andrew Cowan, Luciano J. Costa, Maximilian Merz, Surbhi Sidana

Patient and Physician Perspectives on Multiple Myeloma Data Presented at ASCO and EHA 2025: A Podcast In this plain language podcast, highlights from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting 2025 are discussed, supplemented with additional reflections from the European Hematology Association (EHA) 2025 Congress. These insights come from the perspective of an expert patient and physician, both of whom have experience and expertise in the field of multiple myeloma (MM). This podcast is intended to broaden the reach of complex data on MM from these scientific meetings to a broader audience, including nonspecialists, helping enable better informed treatment decisions between patients and healthcare professionals. This podcast is published open access in Oncology and Therapy and is fully citeable. You can access the original published podcast article through the Oncology and Therapy website and by using this link: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40487-025-00389-5. All conflicts of interest can be found online. This podcast is intended for medical professionals. Open Access This podcast is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The material in this podcast is included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Eberechi Nwogu-Onyemkpa is an assistant professor in the Division of Palliative Medicine at Washington University in St. Louis. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Executive Managing Editor of the Journal. E. Nwogu-Onyemkpa and Others. Involving Palliative Care to Improve Outcomes in Sickle Cell Disease. N Engl J Med 2025;393:1553-1556. E. Costa and Others. Thirty Years of Hydroxyurea for Sickle Cell Anemia — Scientific Progress, Global Health Gaps. N Engl J Med 2025;393:1556-1559.

Sally Wolf is back in the studio and this time we left cancer at the door. She turned 50, brought a 1993 Newsday valedictorian article as a prop, and sat down with me for a half hour of pure Gen X therapy. We dug into VHS tracking, Red Dawn paranoia, Michael J. Fox, Bette Midler, and how growing up with no helmets and playgrounds built over concrete somehow didn't kill us.We laughed about being Jewish kids in the suburbs, the crushes we had on thirty-year-olds playing teenagers, and what it means to hit 50 with your humor intact. This episode is part nostalgia trip, part roast of our own generation, and part meditation on the privilege of being alive long enough to look back at it all. If you ever watched Different Strokes “very special episodes” or had a Family Ties lunchbox, this one's for you.RELATED LINKSSally Wolf Official WebsiteSally Wolf on LinkedInSally Wolf on InstagramCosmopolitan Essay: “What It's Like to Have the ‘Good' Cancer”Oprah Daily: “Five Things I Wish Everyone Understood About My Metastatic Breast Cancer Diagnosis”Allure Breast Cancer Photo ShootTom Wilson's “Stop Asking Me the Question” SongFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, 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.

The CE experience for this Podcast is powered by CMEfy - click here to reflect and earn credits.On this episode we have the caring Dr. Amy Comander :Quadruple board certified physician in Internal Medicine, Hematology, Medical Oncology & Lifestyle Medicine Breast oncologist and Director of Breast Oncology and Survivorship at the Massachusetts General Cancer Center Medical director of the Massachusetts General Cancer Center Instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical SchoolAuthorMarathon runner She shares:Her introduction into Lifestyle MedicineHer passion in improving the overall health and well-being of breast cancer survivors through lifestyle interventionsTools for breast cancer survivors and thrivers everywhere to live their best lives Patient transformationsMost recent published data on exercise oncologyPaving the Path to Wellness Group ProgramUsing running as a metaphor for life Power of social connection Newest book: Paving Your Path Through Breast Cancer and BeyondInformation for Dr. Comander:Book  (discount code: 25PAVINGBC)InstagramLinkedInInformation for Dr. Robyn Tiger & StressFreeMD:Check out StressFreeMD & CME offeringsGet the book: Feeling Stressed Is OptionalGet your 4 FREE stress relieving videosPhysicians: join our free private physicians-only Facebook groupRetreatsREVIVE! Lifestyle Medicine Well-Being Group CoachingPrograms on DemandPrivate 1:1 CoachingSchedule your FREE 30-Minute Stress Relief Strategy CallFollow me on Social Media: InstagramLinkedInFacebookTwitterPodcast websitePlease rate & Review the Show!Contactinfo@stressfreemd.net 

Avec Annie Viau, pharmacienne, et Maria Tamer, infirmière praticienne spécialisée en soins pédiatriques, nous allons:définir l'anémie falciforme (drépanocytose) et comprendre sa physiopathologie;   distinguer les principales complications possibles et leur prise en charge respective; discuter des traitements de base de l'anémie falciforme. RéférencesAmerican Society of Hematology. (2025). Sickle cell disease timeline.Société canadienne de pédiatrie (2022). La prévention et la prise en charge des complications aiguës de l'anémie falciforme.Société canadienne de pédiatrie (2024). La prévention et le traitement des infections chez les enfants présentant une asplénie ou une hyposplénie. Protocole HSJ. (2025) Anémie falciforme.CHU Sainte-Justine. (2025) Anémie falciforme. George, A., et al. (2024). Splenic complications in pediatric sickle cell disease: A retrospective cohort review. Pediatric Blood & Cancer, 71(10).Kavanagh, P. L., et al. (2022). Sickle cell disease: A review. JAMA, 328(1).Kazadi, C., Ducruet, T., Forté, S., Robitaille, N., & Pastore, Y. (2024). Positive impacts of universal newborn screening on the outcome of children with sickle cell disease in the province of Quebec: A retrospective cohort study. EJHaem, 5(3).Société canadienne du sang. (202). Anémie falciforme et don de sang.CHU de Québec. (2025). Programme québécois de dépistage néonatal sanguin.Pastore, Y., & Robitaille, N. (2024). Bilan de 10 ans de dépistage des anomalies de l'hémoglobine au Québec [Présentation]. Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux.Association de l'anémie falciforme du Canada.Grégoire-Pelchat, P., Alos, N., Ribault, V., Pastore, Y., Robitaille, N., & Mailhot, G. (2018). Vitamin D Intake and Status of Children With Sickle Cell Disease in Montreal, Canada. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol., 40(8).Les invité(e)s et l'animatrice ne déclarent aucun conflit d'intérêt. Idée originale, réalisation et animation: Émilie Roy-St-PierreCaptation et montage: Antoine Palardy (depuis octobre 2025) et Philippe Lacroix (janvier 2024 à octobre 2025), spécialistes en audiovisuelConseillère en communication: Pascale Chatagnier (depuis mai 2025) ; Katrine Louis-Seize (janvier 2024 à mai 2025)Logo: Équipe des communications et du graphisme du CHU Sainte-JustineMusique: Samuel RossCollègues, ami(e)s et famille, merci pour votre précieux soutien. © mgparkilo 2025 Merci pour l'écoute! Allez mettre une réaction sur vos épisodes préférés, partagez la bonne nouvelle sur Facebook/Instagram et abonnez-vous pour ne rien manquer

Dr. Nikki Maphis didn't just lose a grant. She lost a lifeline. An early-career Alzheimer's researcher driven by her grandmother's diagnosis, Nikki poured years into her work—only to watch it vanish when the NIH's MOSAIC program got axed overnight. Her application wasn't rejected. It was deleted. No feedback. No score. Just gone.In this episode, Oliver Bogler pulls back the curtain on what happens when politics and science collide and promising scientists get crushed in the crossfire. Nikki shares how she's fighting to stay in the field, teaching the next generation, and rewriting her grant for a world where even the word “diversity” can get you blacklisted. The conversation is raw, human, and maddening—a reminder that the real “war on science” doesn't happen in labs. It happens in inboxes.RELATED LINKS:• Dr. Nikki Maphis LinkedIn page• Dr. Nikki Maphis' page at the University of New Mexico• Vanguard News Group coverage• Nature article• PNAS: Contribution of NIH funding to new drug approvals 2010–2016FEEDBACK:Like this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, visit outofpatients.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 Spotlight series episode on Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Blood Editor, Dr. Selina Luger interviews Drs. Laura Michaelis and Alexander Perl on their paper in the series titled “The fit older adult with acute myeloid leukemia: clinical challenges to providing evidence-based frontline treatment”. The conversation explores challenges in treating AML across different patient populations. They also focus on treatment approaches for fit older adults with AML, highlighting the need for less toxic therapies and ongoing randomized trials to better understand treatment efficacy. See the full spotlight series on Acute Myeloid Leukemia in Volume 145 Issue 24 of Blood journal. 

This episode provides comprehensive coverage of key clinical trial updates from the 2025 International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting in Toronto, with special focus on bispecific antibodies and novel immunotherapies across the multiple myeloma disease continuum—from smoldering disease through relapsed/refractory settings. Dr. Alfred Garfall provides expert commentary on study design, efficacy, safety considerations, and clinical implications.Topics Covered1. SMOLDERING MULTIPLE MYELOMALINKER-SMM1Phase 2, open-label study of linvoseltamab monotherapy (200 mg) in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma by 20/2/20 or PETHEMA criteria, with 2-year treatment duration.Discussion Points:Appropriateness of 2-year treatment duration for precursor conditionEfficacy and MRD-negative ratesSafety considerations in asymptomatic populationPatient selection if available today2. NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMAMajesTEC-5Phase 2 trial evaluating three teclistamab-daratumumab-based induction regimens in 49 transplant-eligible NDMM patients, followed by auto-transplant and fixed-duration Tec-Dara maintenance.Discussion Points:Post-induction MRD-negativity rates with Tec-DR and Tec-DVRGrade 3-5 infection rates and infection-related deathsQuestionable utility of bortezomib and need for ASCT with 100% MRD-negativityHigh infection prophylaxis requirementsMagnetisMM-6Phase 1/2 dose-finding study of fixed-dose elranatamab 76 mg Q4W with Dara-Len in 37 transplant-ineligible NDMM patients (median age 75 years).Discussion Points:VGPR or better ratesSafety profile including infections and CRS/ICANSRisk of continuous therapy in elderly/frail populationLINKER-MM4Phase 1/2 study of linvoseltamab monotherapy in NDMM with both transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible pathways, exploring three dose levels (50, 100, 200 mg).Discussion Points:Efficacy of single-agent Linvo in NDMMWhether any NDMM population could achieve long-term control with single-agent BCMA BsAbSafety profile3. RELAPSED/REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMACAMMA-1Phase 1b randomized dose-expansion study of cevostamab (FcRH5×CD3 bispecific) combined with pomalidomide-dexamethasone in BCMA-naïve patients with median 2 prior lines of therapy.Discussion Points:Efficacy and safety resultsPositioning in treatment paradigmUse before BCMA BsAbs?Sonrotoclax + Dexamethasone in t(11;14) R/R MMPhase 1/2 study of sonrotoclax (next-generation BCL2 inhibitor) plus dexamethasone as an all-oral regimen in patients with t(11;14) R/R MM (median 3 prior lines, ~75% triple-exposed).Discussion Points:Efficacy including response rate and PFSSafety profileFuture of BCL2 inhibitors in t(11;14) myeloma in the era of BsAbs and CAR TRedirecTT-1Phase 2 trial combining teclistamab + talquetamab in 90 heavily pretreated patients with R/R extraosseous extramedullary disease (84% triple-class refractory, 36% penta-refractory, 20% prior BCMA CAR T).Discussion Points:Response rate and durability in difficult-to-treat populationSafety concerns with dual bispecific combinationOff-label use considerations4. CAR T-CELL THERAPY TOXICITIESCAR T Immune-Related Adverse Events (UPenn Study - Ho et al)Large cohort study of 198 patients (125 cilta-cel, 73 ide-cel) examining all adverse events other than CRS, ICANS, IEC-HS, and IECAHT.Discussion Points:Landscape of CAR T IRAEs: incidence, types, and timingRisk factors identified for CirAEsMechanism of toxicities and role of CD4+ CAR T-cellsClinical implications: Should prophylactic corticosteroids be used? What ALC threshold? Optimal dose/duration? Prospective studies needed?

Carla Tardiff has spent 17 years as the CEO of Family Reach, a nonprofit that shouldn't have to exist but absolutely does—because in America, cancer comes with a price tag your insurance doesn't cover.We talk about shame, fear, burnout, Wegmans, Syracuse, celebrity telethons, and the godforsaken reality of choosing between food and treatment. Carla's a lifer in this fight, holding the line between humanity and bureaucracy, between data and decency. She's also sharp as hell, deeply funny, and more purpose-driven than half of Congress on a good day.This episode is about the work no one wants to do, the stuff no one wants to say, and why staying angry might be the only way to stay sane.Come for the laughs. Stay for the rage. And find out why Family Reach is the only adult in the room.RELATED LINKSFamily ReachFinancial Resource CenterCarla on LinkedInMorgridge Foundation ProfileAuthority Magazine InterviewSyracuse University FeatureFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, 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 week's episode we'll learn more about a study comparing busulfan-melphalan with melphalan alone as the conditioning protocol for newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible multiple myeloma; then we will discuss data on how three-dimensional transcriptomics can reveal complex interactions between plasma cells and bone marrow microenvironments.Featured ArticlesHigh-dose busulfan-melphalan vs melphalan and reinforced VRD for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a phase 3 GEM trialProfiling the spatial architecture of multiple myeloma in human bone marrow trephine biopsy specimens with spatial transcriptomicsPreclinical advances in glofitamab combinations: a new frontier for non-Hodgkin lymphoma

In this podcast episode, breast cancer experts Manali Bhave, MD, and Erin F. Cobain, MD, discuss their management of patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative early breast cancer including insights on identifying high-risk disease considering clinical/pathological factors and gene expression assays and answering healthcare professional questions on how to personalize adjuvant therapy for these patients. Supported by an educational grant from Lilly.Faculty:Manali Bhave, MDMedical Director, Phase I Clinical Trials UnitAssistant ProfessorDepartment of Hematology and OncologyWinship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlanta, GeorgiaErin F. Cobain, MDAssociate Professor of Internal MedicineDivision of Hematology/OncologyBreast Oncology ProgramUniversity of Michigan Rogel Cancer CenterAnn Arbor, Michigan Link to obtain CME/CE credit: https://bit.ly/46RvtgHLink to Oncology Breast Cancers with additional educational activities: https://bit.ly/4h7R3AO Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this podcast episode, breast cancer experts Manali Bhave, MD, and Erin F. Cobain, MD, discuss their management of patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer including the current treatment algorithm, implementing genomic testing for assessing molecular resistance and guiding treatment decisions, and answering healthcare professional questions on how to personalize therapy for these patients. Supported by an educational grant from Lilly.Faculty:Manali Bhave, MDMedical Director, Phase I Clinical Trials UnitAssistant ProfessorDepartment of Hematology and OncologyWinship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlanta, GeorgiaErin F. Cobain, MDAssociate Professor of Internal MedicineDivision of Hematology/OncologyBreast Oncology ProgramUniversity of Michigan Rogel Cancer CenterAnn Arbor, Michigan Link to obtain CME/CE credit:https://bit.ly/4nUJO1OLink to Oncology Breast Cancers with additional educational activities:https://bit.ly/4nNGlBY Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When a patient presents with portal vein thrombosis (PVT), how do you decide between anticoagulation, intervention, and adjunct therapies? In this episode, Dr. Vijay Ramalingam, vascular and interventional radiologist from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, joins Backtable host Dr. Chris Beck to share his approach to evaluation and management of both acute and chronic PVT.---SYNPOSISThe discussion begins with an overview of the Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis Multidisciplinary Clinic at Beth Israel– a collaboration between Interventional Radiology, Hepatology/Gastroenterology, Surgery and Hematology. Dr. Ramalingam details the clinic's workflow, from initial case conference to the comprehensive single-day patient workup that includes imaging, lab work, and consultations with all three specialties. He shares his algorithm for treatment decisions, breaking down the distinct management pathways for patients with and without cirrhosis, and for those with acute vs. chronic thrombosis.Finally, Dr. Ramalingam details his portal vein recanalization technique during procedure, providing a step-by-step guide to his preferred dual-access approach for complex cases, including his method for trans-splenic access and his trick on how to safely close the splenic tract. He also explains when it's appropriate to use adjunctive therapies like suction thrombectomy and catheter-directed lysis, and describes preliminary data showing that their comprehensive approach leads to a change in management for about 40% of patients.---TIMESTAMPS00:00 - Introduction05:35 - Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis Multidisciplinary Clinic22:24 - Multidisciplinary Approach26:17 - PVT Classification38:47 - Treatment Evaluation and Intervention44:21 - Alternative Treatment Options for PVT49:00 - Procedural Techniques59:53 - Adjunct Techniques and Case Studies01:02:58 - Review of Preliminary Data & Final Thoughts

Listen to JCO Global Oncology's Art of Global Oncology article, "Whispers After the Cure: Reflections on Marriage and Malignancy in India” by Dr. Vangipuram Harshil Sai, who is a fourth semester medical student at All India Institute of Medical Sciences. The article is followed by an interview with Harshil Sai and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Sai shares his personal reflection of a visit which transformed into an education in silence, stigma, and the unseen aftermath of survivorship for young women in India. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Whispers After the Cure: Reflections on Marriage and Malignancy in India, Vangipuram, Harshil Sai   A Summer Afternoon and A Story That Stayed The summer break of my fourth semester of medical school offered a fleeting reprieve from the relentless immersion in textbooks and caffeine-fueled study sessions. I had envisioned a few weeks of rest—a pause from the algorithms of diagnosis and the grind of multiple-choice questions that had become my daily rhythm. But one humid afternoon altered that plan. I accompanied my mother—a senior medical oncologist—to her clinic in a Tier 2 city in Southern India. Over the years, I had seen her not just as a clinician but as a quiet force of empathy. She was one of those remarkable physicians who listened not just to symptoms but also to stories. Her practice was rooted in presence, and her calm resilience often made my academic anxieties seem trivial. I settled into a corner chair in the waiting area, where the air was tinged with antiseptic and that uncomfortable waiting room stillness—an alert hush between uncertainty and news. Patients waited in quiet constellations: a man turning the same page of a newspaper, a teenage girl watching her intravenous drip as if it held answers, and a couple clasping hands without meeting eyes. It was in this atmosphere of suspended quiet that Aarthi entered. She was a young woman whose presence was composed yet tentative. Her story would become a quiet inflection point in my understanding of medicine. She was 24 years old, embodying the aspirations tied to a recent engagement. A postgraduate in English literature and a practicing psychologist; she carried herself with a rare blend of intellect, poise, and cultural grace that, in the eyes of many families, made her a deeply desirable bride. Her sari was immaculately draped, her posture measured and calm, yet in the way her fingers intertwined and her eyes briefly lowered, there was a trace of vulnerability—a shadow of the turmoil she carried within. She came alone that day, stepping into the waiting room with a composed demeanor that only hinted at the weight she bore in silence. What began as a day to observe became the beginning of something far more enduring: a glimpse into how healing extends beyond treatment—and how survival, though silent, often speaks the loudest. The Diagnosis That Changed the Wedding The consultation was precipitated by a clinical presentation of persistent neck fullness, low-grade fevers, and drenching night sweats, which had prompted a fine-needle aspiration before her visit. The atmosphere in the room held an implicit gravity, suggesting a moment of significant change. My mother, with her characteristic composure, initiated a diagnostic process with a positron emission tomography-computed tomography and biopsy. As usual, her steady presence provided reassurance amid the uncertainty. A week later, the diagnosis of classic Hodgkin lymphoma, stage IIB, was confirmed. Rapid initiation of ABVD chemotherapy would provide an almost certain pathway to remission and an excellent prognosis. Yet, this clinical assurance did not extend to personal tranquility. Aarthi made a deliberate choice to share the diagnosis with her fiancé—a considerate and empathetic individual from a well-regarded family. Their wedding preparations were already underway with gold reserves secured and a vibrant WhatsApp group of 83 members chronicling the countdown to their big day. Shortly thereafter, a prolonged silence settled, eventually broken by a call from a family member—not the fiancé—indicating that the family had decided to terminate the engagement because of apprehensions about future stability. The union dissolved without public discord, leaving Aarthi to navigate the subsequent journey independently. As expected, 6 months of chemotherapy culminated in a clean scan. Her physical health was restored, but an emotional chasm remained, unrecorded by clinical metrics. Yet beneath that silence was a quiet resilience—a strength that carried her through each cycle of treatment with a resolve as steady as any celebrated elsewhere. The regrowth of her hair prompted a conscious decision to trim it shorter, seemingly an assertion of autonomy. Her discourse on the illness shifted to the third person, suggesting a psychological distancing. Her reactions to inquiries about the terminated engagement were guarded. She would yield only a restrained smile, which intimated a multifaceted emotional response. Her remission was certain, yet the world she stepped back into was layered with quiet hurdles—social, cultural, and unseen—barriers far more intricate than the disease itself. Survivorship Without A Map In the weeks that followed Aarthi's diagnosis, I began to notice a quiet but consistent pattern in the oncology clinic—one that extended beyond medical recovery into the unspoken social aftermath. Among young, unmarried women in India, survivorship often came with a parallel challenge of navigating shifts in how they were perceived, particularly as marriage prospects. In Indian families where marital status is closely tied to stability and future security, a woman with a cancer history, even after complete remission, somehow came to be quietly perceived as less suitable. Proposals that had once moved forward with confidence were paused or reconsidered after disclosure. In some cases, financial discussions came with requests for additional support framed as reassurance rather than rejection. These changes were seldom explicit. Yet, across time, they pointed to a deeper uncertainty—about how survivorship fits into the expectations of traditional life scripts. For women like Aarthi, the narrative shifted toward caution. There were subtle inquiries about reproductive potential or disease recurrence and private deliberations over disclosure during matrimonial discussions, even within educated circles. Meanwhile, my observation of the disparity in how survivorship was interpreted across genders in our country left a profound mark on me. A 31-year-old male investment banker who had recovered from testicular cancer was hailed in local media as a testament to fortitude. Male patients seemed to gain social capital from their cancer journeys. This suggested a cultural framework where female value was quietly reassessed, influencing their post-treatment identity through unstated societal perceptions. Digital Ghosting and the New Untouchability Within the digital landscape of curated profiles and algorithmic matchmaking, the reassessment of female survivorship acquired a new dimension. In one instance, a sustained exchange of text messages ended abruptly following the mention of cancer remission. The final message remained unanswered. This form of silent disengagement—subtle, unspoken, and devoid of confrontation—highlighted how virtual spaces can compound post-treatment vulnerability. Designed to foster connection, these platforms sometimes amplified social distance, introducing a modern form of invisibility. Similar to employment status or religion, a cancer history has become another addition to a checklist used to evaluate compatibility. When Medicine Ends, but Society Does Not Begin As a medical student, I felt a growing discomfort. Our curriculum equips us to manage treatment protocols and survival metrics but rarely prepares us for the intangible burdens that persist after cure. What captures the weight of a canceled engagement? What framework supports the quiet reconstruction of identity after remission? Aarthi's path, echoed by many others, revealed a dissonance that medicine alone could not resolve. The challenge was not solely the illness but the reality that she was now unqualified to return to her normal life. Medicine delivers clean scans and structured follow-up, but social reintegration is less defined. In that space between biological recovery and social acceptance, cancer survivors often stand at the edge of wholeness—clinically well but navigating a quieter uncertainty. A Different Ending Two years later, Aarthi's journey took a quiet turn. At a spiritual retreat in Bengaluru, she met an ear, nose, and throat resident who had lost his father to lung cancer. Their connection, shaped by shared experiences, evolved into a partnership grounded in empathy and mutual respect. They married the following year. Their invitation carried a brief but powerful line: “Cancer Survivor. Love Thriver. Come celebrate both.” Today, they comanage a private hospital in Hyderabad. Aarthi leads psycho-oncology services, whereas her partner performs surgeries. He often notes that her presence brings a calm to the clinic that no medication can replicate. Aarthi's journey continues to guide me as I progress through my medical training, reminding me that cure and closure often follow separate paths. Healing, I have come to understand, extends beyond the clinic. It often unfolds in quieter spaces where scans no longer guide us. The real curriculum in oncology lies not only in staging and response rates but in recognizing the many transitions—social, emotional, and cultural—that survivors must navigate long after treatment has concluded. Social stigma is often a second metastasis—undetectable by imaging but present in tone, hesitation, and traditions that quietly redefine survivorship. For many women of marriageable age, treatment marks not the end of struggle but the start of another kind of uncertainty. These survivors carry wounds that do not bleed. Yet, they persist, navigate, and redefine strength on their own terms. Aarthi's quiet resilience became a point of reckoning for me, not as a medical case, but as a guide. Her story is not one of illness alone, but of dignity quietly reclaimed. “Out of suffering have emerged the strongest souls; the most massive characters are seared with scars.”—Khalil Gibran.   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. In oncology, we often focus on treatment and a way to find a cure. But what about the expectations and challenges a patient may face from their diagnosis, and even discrimination, especially in different cultures? Today, we're going to examine that space with Harshil Vangipuram, a medical student from India whose JCO Global Oncology article, "Whispers After the Cure: Reflections on Marriage and Malignancy in India," touches on this complexity after treatment. Harshil, thank you for contributing to JCO Global Oncology and for joining us to discuss your article. Harshil Vangipuram: Thank you for having me, Dr. Sekeres. I was raised by a family of oncologists, my mother being a senior medical oncologist and father a senior radiation oncologist. I had exposure to contrasting worlds, which were resource constrained and a cutting edge technology world. And I have unfulfilled curiosity, and I'm still learning, forming ideals. I also see patients as my teachers, so I think that might be helpful. Mikkael Sekeres: Thank you so much for a little bit of that background. So, tell us a little bit about your journey through life so far. Where were you born and where did you do your education? Harshil Vangipuram: I was born in a state called Gujarat in the western part of India. My father got transferred to the southern part of India, so I did my education there. That's it, yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: Okay. That's enough. You're not that old. You haven't had the sort of training and final job that a lot of us have gone through. So, what about your story as a writer? How did you first get interested in writing, and how long have you been writing reflective or narrative pieces? Harshil Vangipuram: I read some books from Indian authors and from foreign, too. And they actually inspired me how patient care was being seen around globally. I always used to carry a hand note. I used to write what I used to see in the clinical postings here at AIIMS. And actually, journaling started as a stress relief for me, and slowly, after hearing patients' stories, it almost became an obligation to write about them. Mikkael Sekeres: Obligation, you use that word, which is such an interesting one. How did writing become an obligation? What did you feel obliged to do when writing about some of the patients you were seeing for the first time? Harshil Vangipuram: Many of them were having struggles which were not seen by everybody. And I got astonished by their confidence and resilience in those situations. So, I thought that I should write about them so that everybody knows about it. And these social stigmas were never talked by anyone around them. So, I felt that if I could voice them, others might eventually know about them. So, that's pretty much the reason I wrote. Mikkael Sekeres: It's so interesting. The people we meet every single day, particularly in hematology oncology, bring such fascinating backgrounds to us, and they're backgrounds that may be unfamiliar to us. And I think that as doctors and writers, we do often feel obliged to tell their stories from the mountaintops, to let other people in on some of the aspects of life and medical care that they're going through and just how inspiring some of these patients can be. Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah, yeah, very true. Very true. Mikkael Sekeres: You mentioned that your mom is a medical oncologist. What kind of influence did she have on your decision to enter medicine and perhaps your own specialty one day? Harshil Vangipuram: Observing my mother practice influenced a lot, and she taught me that medicine is not only about treating a patient, but also listening to their problems. It may be more present in the room. The textbooks I read didn't capture live experiences. I always thought that stories will stay with people longer than actual survival curves. Writing filled that gap between what I studied and what I felt in the OPD. Mikkael Sekeres: It's a great phrase you just whipped out. Patients' stories will stay with us longer than survival curves. Can you tell us a little bit about where her clinic is located? You said in southern India. Can you describe the types of patients she sees? Harshil Vangipuram: It's a small town called Nellore in Andhra Pradesh state. The patients are, most of the time, from a rural population where decisions are mostly family-driven and there's a tight community surveillance and the stigmas are more overt, too. A few of them can be from urban population also, but they have subtler discriminations towards stigmas. Mikkael Sekeres: Can you explain a little further what you mean by decisions are often family-driven? Harshil Vangipuram: If we take marriage, it is often seen as an alliance between two families that are trying to increase their social value, their economic status, and respect in the society. In arranged marriages, for suppose, it's basically driven between these concepts. Mikkael Sekeres: I don't know if it's too personal to ask, but are your parents in an arranged marriage? Harshil Vangipuram: No, not at all. Mikkael Sekeres: So not all the marriages in the clinic are arranged marriages. Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: You know, when you said that decisions are family-driven, you mentioned that people are in arranged marriages. And I wanted to talk a little bit about the stigma you highlight in your essay. I'll talk about that in a second. I thought you were going to go down a route about medical decisions being family-driven, meaning people have to support their families, and getting medical care is costly and takes time away from work, and that sometimes influences decisions about treating cancer. What examples have you seen of that in shadowing your mom? Harshil Vangipuram: I have seen patients who have Hodgkin's lymphoma, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer, who were in the age of 25 to 35, who were getting married. Many of them actually got their engagements broken. And many of them got rejected at matrimonial apps. Many of them also had been told to increase the dowry that is given actually in the form of financial security. Mikkael Sekeres: In your essay, you describe a woman who is engaged and who has a new diagnosis of Hodgkin lymphoma. Can you talk a little bit about the process of getting engaged and marrying in southern India? Harshil Vangipuram: We have the arranged marriage, love marriage, and hybrid, which is kind of arranged and kind of in love. Mostly, these problems really occur in arranged marriages. In love marriages, we don't see that that often because both are understanding about themselves and their families. And both families actually accept them both. Mikkael Sekeres: What's the process of going through an arranged marriage? What happens? Harshil Vangipuram: It can be through parents, relatives, or any known ones or through peers. We just find a man or woman who has a similar caste, who has a good financial income, and people who are respected by the society. And obviously, both the families should have aligned interests for them to accept the marriage. Mikkael Sekeres: About how often are marriages arranged and how often are they love marriages in southern India where you live? Harshil Vangipuram: Almost 90% of the marriages are arranged here. Mikkael Sekeres: Wow. So, your parents were unusual then for having a love marriage. Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: In your essay, you write, and I'm going to quote you now, "Among young, unmarried women in India, survivorship often came with a parallel challenge of navigating shifts in how they were perceived, particularly as marriage prospects. In Indian families where marital status is closely tied to stability and future security, a woman with a cancer history, even after complete remission, somehow came to be quietly perceived as less suitable." Wow, that's a really moving statement. I'm curious, what stories have you seen where, in your words, women became less suitable as a marriage prospect? Harshil Vangipuram: For women, the most important thing in a marriage is, what do you call, a family honor, fertility, and economic status in the community. So, after a long dose of chemo, many people think that people become infertile. In India, basically, we have many misconceptions and stigmas. So, people obviously think that people who have got cancer can spread it to their children or are infertile and are often excluded out of the society as a marriage prospect. Mikkael Sekeres: Gosh, that must be devastating. Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: Does the same occur for men? So, is it also true that if a man has cancer, that he is perceived as less fertile, or it may be perceived that he can pass the cancer on to children? Harshil Vangipuram: Here, after a man beats cancer, they start to celebrate it, like they have achieved something, and it's not like that for a woman. Mikkael Sekeres: In your essay, you do write about a happy ending for one woman. Can you tell us about that? Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah, a cancer survivor obviously met her true love of life in Bengaluru, who was an ENT resident then. And his father died from lung cancer. So obviously, he knew what it felt to beat cancer. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah, he'd been through it himself. And the irony, of course, is that most cancer treatments that we give do not lead to infertility, so it's a complete misperception. Harshil Vangipuram: Yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: Tell us about your future. What are the next steps for you in your training and what do you hope to specialize in and practice? Harshil Vangipuram: Actually, I'm working on another paper which involves financial toxicity after treatment and post treatment depression. I think it would be completed in another year. And after that, after my med school is completed, I think I'm going to pursue oncology or hematology as my branch of interest. Mikkael Sekeres: Wonderful. It's thrilling to hear that somebody who is as sensitive to his patients and both their medical needs and their needs outside of medicine will be entering our field. It'll be great to know that you'll be taking care of our future patients. Harshil Vangipuram: The pleasure is all mine, sir. Mikkael Sekeres: Harshil Vangipuram, I want to thank you for choosing JCO Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology and for submitting your great piece, "Whispers After the Cure: Reflections on Marriage and Malignancy in India" to JCO Global Oncology. To our listeners, 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, 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 from the Sylvester Cancer Center, University of Miami. Have a good day. 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 Vangipuram Harshil Sai is a fourth semester medical student at All India Institute of Medical Sciences. Additional Reading Impact of Gender of the Child on Health Care–Seeking Behavior of Caregivers of Childhood Patients With Cancer: A Mixed-Methods Study | JCO Global Oncology

Listen to JCO's Art of Oncology article, "A Fight Bigger Than Myeloma” by Dr. Adeel Khan, an Assistant Professor of Medicine and Public Health at UT Southwestern. The article is followed by an interview with Dr. Adeel Khan and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Dr. Khan shares the story of a patient whose multiple myeloma diagnosis and treatment serves as a reminder of the civil liberties progress we've made and that we have more to go. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: A Fighter Bigger Than Myeloma, by Adeel M. Khan, MD, MPH, MS  I met her during the early part of my clinical training in hematology/oncology. She was in her late 70s, dressed in a rust-colored cardigan and a headwrap with patterns that reminded me of Ghanaian kente cloth. Her eyes were sharp, her tone polite but direct. You could tell from the moment she spoke that she had lived a life where she had to advocate—for herself, for her family, for her place in rooms that were not always welcoming.  Her chart said “multiple myeloma, R-ISS II,” but it did not say that she had first come to an emergency room at least a year earlier complaining of back pain and fatigue and had been told it was probably arthritis or old age. It did not mention that she had seen three different doctors before someone ordered the laboratory tests that finally began to work up her anemia and increasingly compromised kidney function. It would take another trio of doctors to eventually order a magnetic resonance imaging whose ghostly lytic lesions led down the path to a bone marrow biopsy and her cancer diagnosis. When I brought this up gently during one of our early appointments, she looked at me and said, “They don't hear pain the same when it comes from someone like me.” As a Black woman from the Deep South, she had grown up learning how to navigate a health care system that did not always believe her. She told me stories about being dismissed, misdiagnosed, and interrupted. She was born into an era of structural violence where she would be ignored at best and mistreated at worst. She carried the weight of those moments, but she also carried strength, and clarity, and the kind of dignity that made people sit up straighter in their leather chairs when she entered the room. She was one of the most quietly revolutionary people I have ever known, having grown up during a time of civil rights activism. She had even taken part in bending Dr King's long arc of the moral universe toward justice and could share story upon story from her glory days. Her myeloma treatments were not easy. Chemotherapy rarely is. She shared that there were days when her body was tired of fighting, when her bones ached, her blood counts dropped, and her neuropathic pain throbbed. In the back of my mind, I thought how tragic it was that her delayed diagnosis added unnecessary complications and whether she too thought of that. She was fully mindful of the issues people with her skin color faced in our American healthcare system and society as a whole and revealed how that motivated her to carry forward. “If I don't take up space here,” she told me once, “then someone else like me won't either.” Over the course of our visits, I came to understand that she did not see her myeloma as the hardest fight of her life. Not by a long shot. Her primary struggle was centered on life in Birmingham in the 1950s where separate but equal was still the law of the land; her mother cleaned houses, her father worked odd jobs, and her own prospects were uncertain. She admired the writings of Richard Wright and Jean Toomer and was not shy in sharing her passions. One day, during a particularly tough visit—her disease had progressed and we were down to limited options—I found myself meandering. We went through the usual workup and discussions: laboratory test results, symptoms, and treatment options. I offered the prospect of clinical trials, but she shook her head gently and said, “I've done my time in experiments—I can't give myself to a system that gave my people so little.” I paused. It was the first hint of what would become a larger conversation—not just about medicine, but about history. She was well aware of the atrocities of the Tuskegee syphilis trials in her home state, the Kligman experiments on incarcerated Black men, and the forced sterilization of women of color. As dependent upon medicine as she was in her old age, it carried a bloody stain of dehumanizing racism that soured her against it. Outwardly, I had little in common with her. As a young South Asian man growing up in times more conscious of racial injustice, I was far removed from these historical crimes. Although I learned of them during my education, I did not internalize their impact on the patients in front of me in clinic. But through her I came to comprehend just how scarring and enduring these events can be and how they can rob someone of trust. And the truth is the health care system had not treated her well. She had personal stories of doctors who did not believe her pain, nurses who assumed she was uneducated,  and being passed over for better options, better care, and better answers. “But I kept showing up,” she said. “Because that's what we do. We show up even when we're not wanted.” Her stories to me were revelations. In her younger years, she had helped organize teachers at her school when they tried to fire a fellow Black teacher who seemingly spoke too loud in a meeting. She had lived through redlining, through the crack epidemic, through watching young Black men vanish into prisons, and still she rose every day and worked as a public school teacher for decades. She worked for a system that largely did not work for her. I came to admire that about her—that in simply living day-to-day life with plain dignity and acute awareness of society's issues, she promoted change by living it. “You want to talk about cancer?” she once said, half laughing. “Try walking into a bank in 1972 with a good credit score and a Black face. That's a disease this country still hasn't cured.” Curiously, she did not say these things with bitterness. Not even anger, really. Just clarity. Like someone who had long ago made peace with the truth, even if it was sharp. In clinic, she challenged my every assumption—about treatment tolerance, about compliance, about who is difficult, and who is “advocating.” And she taught me to look differently at the ways bias lingers in medicine. Not just in data or policies, but in subtle moments: the tone we use when explaining options, the hesitations in our tests and referrals, and the assumptions we may not even realize we are making. And she did not just expect good care—she demanded it. She told me early on, “Don't you treat me like I'm anything other than your mother.” That landed. And in seeing patients before me now, I remind myself to wonder who they were in their past lives, what baggage burdens them, and how it all shapes their perspectives. So from my view, she fought multiple myeloma with everything she had, but from hers, she fought something bigger: an entire system shaped by inequality. And ultimately, she made me better to realize that, not just as a doctor, but as a human being. In my years since knowing her, completing my training, and beginning my practice, I reflect on her grace. I think not just about her life, but what it means to practice medicine in a world that often forgets what patients carry with them into the clinic—generations of weight, of injustice, of strength. 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. I am so happy that today we are joined by Adeel Khan, who's Assistant Professor of Medicine and Public Health at UT Southwestern in Dallas to talk about his Journal of Clinical Oncology article, “A Fight Bigger than Myeloma.” Our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Adeel, thank you so much for contributing to JCO and for joining us to discuss your article. Adeel Khan: Thank you so much for having me. It's a pleasure to be here. Mikkael Sekeres: Adeel, I don't want to be disingenuous to our readers by acting as if we've just met. You and I have known each other for a decade since you were still in your training. I wonder if for our listeners you can tell us a little bit about yourself, where are you from and and walk us through your career so far. Adeel Khan: More than happy to. So, I grew up mostly in Oklahoma, but I've sort of lived around in the Northeast and here in the Southwest where I am currently. I did college at the University of Oklahoma. I did medical school at the University of Michigan. I did residency with good fortune at the Cleveland Clinic where I happened to get to know you and have continued to know you since. I did my fellowship then in hematology oncology at Beth Israel Deaconess in the Harvard system and along the way of all that I did a Masters of Public Health at Harvard and a Masters of Science and Epidemiology at Columbia, and that pinball finally settled here to UT Southwestern here in Dallas which I am very happy to make my second home. Mikkael Sekeres: That's great. I will say just for our listeners you've been a superstar since the moment you were a resident. It's been a real treat for me to get to know you over the years. Adeel Khan: Thank you so much. Mikkael Sekeres: Can you tell us a little bit about your own story as a writer? You're a good writer. We get submissions from some really good writers every single week. It's a real privilege to be an editor for the Art of Oncology section and it's always reinvigorating to me to see how many good writers there are in medicine. How did you start your journey as a writer and how long have you been writing reflective narrative pieces? Adeel Khan: I would say if I went back to let's say high school, you know, people tend to be divided into kind of like the sciency types versus the literary arts types and you're kind of an either/or, you know, you didn't really have as much crossover then. But you know, I actually didn't mind when we had an essay due and I liked writing back then, and when I entered college I did a minor in English because I actually did enjoy that and I just liked the idea of being able to put your thoughts on paper in a way immortalizing them. Adeel Khan: And then as I sort of pursuing medicine more and more, publishing is really- it has all kinds of flavors to it and scientific publishing is obviously what has been emphasized, but you know, there's so many things to talk about within medicine. There's the science and the art of the field, and as I've moved along, I've written different pieces focusing really on patient stories and interactions. And I think my motivation has always been that as I have gotten particularly nowadays increasingly busy, I've had the fortune and misfortune of becoming more and more busy, it's easy to lose the opportunity to really connect with people that makes what we do meaningful. And so in those times when you know, and they can be rare, but when you really get to connect with someone in front of you who you're helping to care for, it's really refreshing and it's rejuvenating and I've tried to keep that with me as long as I can as I've gone through my journey. Mikkael Sekeres: There's a lot of jumping off points from what you just said, Adeel. I wonder if I can start with do you consider yourself an English major who's good at science or do you consider yourself a scientist who's a good writer? Adeel Khan: I think I'm too humble to say either. I think I was really a science major who just happened to like writing and reading and kept that as a part of myself. Mikkael Sekeres: Because I think there are a cadre of doctors who are actually English majors and have learned to turn science into storytelling and that's their entrée into science and medicine. I remember I talked for a while with David Scadden about this. He's a brilliant translational scientist who's based at Mass General who also teaches a writing course to the Harvard undergrads and who was an English major when he was an undergrad at Case Western. We've talked about this, about how there are people, I'll include myself in this, who just think different, who probably have these liberal arts brains and they figured out a way to convert science into a way a liberal arts person can understand it. Adeel Khan: Yeah, I mean narrative medicine has been I think around all along and it has only kind of been recently named as a field, but I mean it very much speaks to that that there's so much more than just G proteins in medicine. Mikkael Sekeres: I'm thrilled to hear that by the way. You mentioned you were an English minor. Are there particular writers who are an influence on you or can you talk about what's the most recent book or article you've read? Adeel Khan: Oh, that is a great question. Paulo Coelho is someone I've liked for a long time, The Alchemist. I really liked it because I read it after I had lived in Egypt. I lived in Egypt between college and med school as a study abroad program, and I had actually been to the Faiyum Oasis where the protagonist in that story ends up. And so it was just a fascinating story to me that I could trace some of the steps that are discussed in the book and it's so much- it's a story about self discovery which at that phase of life that I was in was you know, very much a theme of my own life. And so that's one that definitely stands out in my head. Mikkael Sekeres: Do you think reading pieces outside of medicine makes you a better scientist? Adeel Khan: I think absolutely. I think it makes you a better human being. In some ways I lament that so much of what I do reading now is so much just about what's in the field, what's new in myeloma, what's new in hematology oncology and I sort of miss the escape to reading other things and being able to pursue it. And even broader than just what a novel really offers. I mean, I grew up reading comic books too and I've always loved superheroes and fiction whether it's Star Wars and other things. And really they're just stories and the medium- there might be connotations whether it's a comic book or a or a novel, but they're just different mediums, but the fact that they're just stories is fundamental. I actually think to myself that it's so fascinating that the earliest piece of writing that we've really retained as human beings is we believe, the Epic of Gilgamesh, which is really a story of a superhero when you think about it, you know, and it's it's fiction, it's phantasmic in so many ways. But it speaks to how stories are just vital as people. Mikkael Sekeres: And what is it about graphic novels or my kids now of course call them graphic novels. We're not allowed to call them comic books. Adeel Khan: As they've been renamed, yeah. Mikkael Sekeres: What is it about graphic novels or comic books or the story of a hero that appeals to us in medicine? Adeel Khan: I think it's in some ways a parable of what we're doing. There's something so powerful and fundamental about this idea of good-evil and we can rename it in different ways, but that you're trying to overcome something that's an issue, an obstacle. And when you think about what we do in- particularly in oncology, that's very much what we're trying to do. We're trying to overcome an illness, a disease, to try to help the person in front of us. And it has different aspects to it. It could be someone pursuing something in a lab, it can be treating someone in front of you in clinic, but that simple dichotomy of there's something good about what you're doing because there's something bad in front of you is just the fundamental that runs through it all. Mikkael Sekeres: It's fascinating. I wonder if 30, 40, 50 years ago people would have said, “Oh, it's because the doctor is the hero,” but we don't view ourselves that way anymore. The patient is the hero. I love how you posit this as a good versus evil, the evil of course being cancer and the good everything that our patients do and that we try to to help to do to overcome that. Adeel Khan: For sure. Mikkael Sekeres: You wrote a really great essay about a woman who was a patient of yours. Can you tell me a little bit about what inspired you this time to make this connection and to write about this woman? Adeel Khan: Within the past year or so as I had been just really- the fortune and misfortune of getting busier, I lamented that I just wasn't able to spend as much time with patients in the way that I used to. One of the beauties of medical school and you know, to some degree residency and certainly fellowship is that you just have a little bit more time as a trainee, student and trainee where you can really bond with your patients I think a little bit more. And so in trying to kind of refresh my motivation, I was thinking about just kind of randomly some stories that I've kept in the back of my mind and this patient's story is one that stood out to me as I was recalling things. It was so fascinating to me because she had the disease which I now focus on. And the way that she viewed it and the way that she viewed it as a part of her life was just so different than what I think most people think of. And in that way it was very revitalizing that her focus in her life was part of a broader theme of the way that I think she viewed society. And this was just one piece of her own part of that much, much larger puzzle. Mikkael Sekeres: You really write lovingly about her and about how meaningful her context was in how you cared for her and what her experience was in the medical system. I wonder if I can read a little bit of what you wrote because it really did grab me as well. I'm going to start out by quoting you where you say, “Outwardly, I had little in common with her. As a young South Asian man growing up in times more conscious of racial injustice, I was far removed from these historical crimes. Though I learned of them during my education, I did not internalize their impact on the patients in front of me in clinic. But through her, I came to comprehend just how scarring and enduring these events can be and how they can rob someone of trust.” Wow, there's a lot there. Could you start with what was your perspective as a young South Asian man growing up in Oklahoma and what your view was of racial injustice compared to what her experience was of racial injustice? Adeel Khan: Yeah, I have to admit I don't know that I thought that much of it back then and I think that that's part of what it is. You know, being someone who was South Asian, I'm Pakistani, I have Indian roots, and coming into American history and as we learned about it there's so much about slavery and the theme of slavery unfortunately and and the struggles that enslaved peoples have. And you know, as a relatively recent immigrant, I didn't see myself in that narrative. I didn't see myself in that historical reality. But I knew about it intellectually, you know, I knew about the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments, you know, I learned about all these things and and you learned about how atrocious so much of it is. But again, not being so directly connected, I did not put myself in that same role as someone to view it so close to myself. I will say it hit a little bit more after 9/11 when you know, I was randomly stopped at airport security a little bit more often in those days and again, I think that speaks to racial injustices, you know, I was certainly profiled looking back then, I've been held by TSA in the past, but even that is very minor compared to what African Americans have dealt with here. And this patient in just kind of sharing her tidbits during our time together, I was not directly asking her so much of this. She was really offering a lot of it to me as we would talk and she would be very generous in sharing parts of her story. And over time I kind of understood the broader narrative of her life. You know, it was clear how much of all that was actually in the forefront of her head. Adeel Khan: And I think she might have been a little bit more unique in the way that she kept it there, but she was hyper vigilant of issues of society and the roots that brought a given society to where it is here. I kind of got to know her, this is during the COVID pandemic and this was after the injustice of what happened to George Floyd and so it was a theme that I think people were talking about more and so I think she felt comfortable in saying really what was quite a bit that was stewing in the back of her head seemingly at all times. Mikkael Sekeres: It's so interesting you talk about what you endured after 9/11 as being, I'm going to quote you now, “minor” compared to what she's been through, but even a minor affront like that can really compromise your trust. You write about her, “As a Black woman from the deep South, she had grown up learning how to navigate a healthcare system that did not always believe her.” Can you expand on that a little bit? How is it that the healthcare system didn't believe her and what can we do going into interactions with patients from different backgrounds where we're incorporating that there's a compromise of trust and we have to make up for that? Adeel Khan: Yeah, and I think you know, it's so unfortunate that so many people have stories like this where, in her case really it was back pain that was her presenting symptom. This is long before she knew me. And she'd had the back pain for quite some time, but being an older woman, she was in her 70s at that time, she was not in phenomenal health for other reasons. It sounds like she was just kind of ignored, told that it was old age, tendon changes, she did not have meaningful imaging for some time. When she finally did after seeing a slew of different providers, that's when it was revealed like there's something more significant here. And then when you kind of piece that a little bit retrospectively and I think she certainly sensed this and I did when I- hindsight's always 20/20, when I looked through things, it's like, well, this probably could have been caught much earlier. It's just that no one really I think listened to what she was speaking to with her pain and the gravity that was actually behind it. And it just speaks to the fact that I think we have to be more thoughtful in what we take away from patients and not to ignore even small comments because they might be revealing of something much bigger behind them. Mikkael Sekeres: You quote her, you have some really great quotes in your essay where you just listen to what she says and transcribe it because what she says is very meaningful. And one of the quotes you provide from her is, “They don't hear pain the same when it comes from someone like me.” Wow. “When it comes from someone like me,” someone like her, how was it that people weren't hearing her description of pain, something that was different that was going on in her body and how can we be more attentive to people when they complain about things like pain? Adeel Khan: It's unfortunate that there's even known data to show how depending upon a patient's melanin content in their skin, how likely they are to get pain medications and what happens to them is different and this is an unfortunate example of that where I think she just wasn't heard properly. And so it wasn't addressed properly and she was not shy about saying that. I mean I think she sensed that. She was very clear in feeling that herself and in wanting to have better care, she was still prevented and hence why she had to go from provider to provider. Mikkael Sekeres: You've lived in a bunch of different places in the country. I mean, following your path, you've been in Oklahoma, you've been in Michigan, Ohio, Massachusetts, and now Texas. Do you think that we as providers have to have different levels of sensitivity depending on where in the country we're practicing and how some of our patients' trust in healthcare may have been compromised in those different parts of the country? Adeel Khan: I think absolutely. I mean this particular patient was from Alabama which has a heavy history that she was again very aware of and for those of us reading history books are also very aware of too. And it's interesting how, while the U.S. is in some ways- has some aspects that are monolithic, but it's very much not so. It's very patchy and people are different, you know, if I take one theme that we're talking about here is obviously racial injustice, but if you take something like obesity, you know, prevalence rates are very different throughout the country and attitudes surrounding it are also very different. And I think we do- ought to be mindful that in treating the patient in front of us, it's not done without context. And so how they view their illness and their situation is going to be different depending upon the state, depending upon the city, depending upon actually even the era that they grew up in. So I would say now, if you took actually a similar patient, but you put her in a very modern context post-year 2000, she's likely to have different feelings of the situation around her than someone who was born in this case in the 1940s. And that just speaks to the fact that circumstances change and we should be recognizing that as providers, even though it's not always easy to. Mikkael Sekeres: Well, it just emphasizes how very important it is to know the history of the place where we practice and how it's affected our patients' perceptions of healthcare and trust and being cared for, particularly now as there's such a movement to whitewash that history and eliminate it from major institutions like the Smithsonian. It has been such a pleasure to have Adeel Khan here. He is Assistant Professor of Medicine, Public Health at UT Southwestern in Dallas and wrote just a great JCO article called “A Fight Bigger Than Myeloma.” Adeel, thank you so much for submitting your article and for joining us today. Dr. Adeel Khan: Thank you so much for having me. It's been a pleasure. 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 JCO Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. 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 Adeel Khan is an Assistant Professor of Medicine and Public Health at UT Southwestern.

Jennifer J. Brown is a scientist, a writer, and a mother who never got the luxury of separating those roles. Her memoir When the Baby Is Not OK: Hopes & Genes is a punch to the gut of polite society and a medical system that expects parents to smile through trauma. She wrote it because she had to. Because the people who gave her the diagnosis didn't give her the truth. Because a Harvard-educated geneticist with two daughters born with PKU still couldn't get a straight answer from the very system she trained in.We sat down in the studio to talk about the unbearable loneliness of rare disease parenting, the disconnect between medical knowledge and human connection, and what it means to weaponize science against silence. She talks about bias in the NICU, the failure of healthcare communication, and why “resilience” is a lazy word. Her daughters are grown now. One's a playwright. One's an artist. And Jennifer is still raising hell.This is a conversation about control, trauma, survival, and rewriting the script when the world hands you someone else's lines.Bring tissues. Then bring receipts.RELATED LINKS• When the Baby Is Not OK (Book)• Jennifer's Website• Jennifer on LinkedInFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, visit outofpatients.show.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This episode of Standard Deviation features Oliver Bogler in conversation with Dr Na Zhao, a cancer biologist caught in the crossfire of science, politics, and survival. Na's life reads like a brutal lab experiment in persistence.She grew up in China, lost her mother and aunt to breast cancer before she turned twelve, then came to the United States to chase science as both an immigrant and a survivor's daughter. She worked two decades to reach the brink of independence as a cancer researcher, only to watch offers and grants vanish in the political chaos of 2025.Oliver brings her story into sharp focus, tracing the impossible climb toward a tenure-track position and the human cost of a system that pulls the ladder up just as people like Na reach for it. This conversation pulls back the curtain on the NIH funding crisis, the toll on early-career scientists, and what happens when personal tragedy fuels professional ambition.Listeners will walk away with a raw sense of how fragile the future of cancer research really is, and why people like Na refuse to stop climbing.RELATED LINKSDr Zhao at Baylor College of MedicineDr Zhao on LinkedInDr Zhao's Science articleIndirect Costs explained by US CongressFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, email podcast@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

It is essential for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) to have a foundation of care prior to discharge after their cancer treatment, and the multidisciplinary care team, including primary care providers (PCPs), must be equipped to support these patients. In this episode, CANCER BUZZ speaks with Scott J. Capozza, PT, MSPT, on his journey navigating care after cancer treatment as a young adult and his ASCO JCO Oncology Practice article, “Patient is Otherwise Healthy.” CANCER BUZZ then speaks with Melody Griffith, MSW, LMSW, Outpatient Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology social worker at Mayo Clinic Arizona, on her role in patient navigation and how her department supports AYAs through their entire cancer continuum. CANCER BUZZ concludes with Cathy Lee-Miller, MD, director of AYA Oncology Clinic at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, on their cohort training program preparing PCPs for managing AYA survivorship care.    “The late effects for young adults are very real and a lot of times they are not recognized because we look otherwise healthy on the outside, but that belies what's going on internally.” - Scott J. Capozza, PT, MSPT   “We talk about post-traumatic stress, but also post-traumatic growth and what they bring with them and what they've learned through their process. It's not just the treatment, right? After treatment, there's a lot of years left to live.” - Melody Griffith, MSW, LMSW   “We really try and help empower these patients, particularly AYAs who maybe relied on their parents for their medical care before... We really try to spell that out for people so they can take responsibility and take charge of their own long-term health.” - Cathy Lee-Miller, MD   Scott J. Capozza, PT, MSPT Board Certified Clinical Specialist in Oncologic Physical Therapy  YNHH Outpatient Oncology Rehabilitation Services Smilow Cancer Hospital Adult Cancer Survivorship Clinic New Haven, CT   Melody Griffith, MSW, LMSW Outpatient Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology Social Worker Mayo Clinic Arizona Phoenix, AZ   Cathy Lee-Miller, MD Director, AYA Oncology Clinic Associate Professor, Pediatric Hematology/Oncology/Transplant & Cellular Therapy University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center Madison, WI    This podcast is part of the AYA Oncology Screening and Survivorship Services program, made possible through the support from The Arizona Clinical Oncology Society, Indiana Oncology Society, and Wisconsin Association of Hematology and Oncology. Resources: The Arizona Clinical Oncology Society: https://tacos.accc-cancer.org/resources/adolescent-and-young-adult-cancer-resources Indiana Oncology Society: https://inos.accc-cancer.org/resources/aya-cancer-resources Wisconsin Association of Hematology and Oncology: https://waho.accc-cancer.org/resources/adolescent-and-young-adult-cancer-resources

In this week's episode we'll learn about targeting the tissue factor pathway inhibitor with a monoclonal antibody to rebalance HEMOSTASIS in hemophilia A and B. In the phase 3 BASIS trial, the monoclonal antibody marstacimab reduced bleeding events, and was generally well tolerated, with no unanticipated side effects. After that: matched-donor allogeneic CD19 CAR-T for adult B-ALL. Given after allogeneic transplantation, CAR-donor lymphocyte infusion after lymphodepleting chemotherapy was associated with favorable efficacy and a tolerable safety profile. Finally: a new prognostic index for mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome. Comprised of four prognostic factors, the “CLIPI” could enable more personalized treatment of cutaneous lymphomas, identifying patients who may benefit from intensified treatment.Featured ArticlesMarstacimab prophylaxis in hemophilia A/B without inhibitors: results from the phase 3 BASIS trialMatched donor allogeneic CAR-T for adult B-ALL: toxicity, efficacy, repeat dosing, and the importance of lymphodepletionA new prognostic index (CLIPI) for advanced cutaneous lymphoma enables precise patient risk stratification

In this How I Treat podcast episode, Laura Michaelis, MD interviews Sung-Yun Pai, MD about their recently published article in Blood journal "How I treat Wiskott-Alrich syndrome". They highlight recent updates in treatment, including new risk-benefit calculations due to safer treatments and longer follow-ups. Challenges include late diagnosis, lack of well-matched donors, and limited gene therapy availability. They emphasize the importance of early referral to specialized centers and the need for discussions about curative intent therapies, including transplant and gene therapy. The conversation also covers the complexities of gene therapy, such as the need for better conditioning agents and the challenges of achieving full correction in all cell types.

Listen in as we discuss considerations, challenges, and strategies related to the use and switching of biosimilars in clinical practice.  You'll hear communication tips to address patient and prescriber concerns as well as operational considerations for integrating biosimilars into practice.  Special guests:Bharati Bhardwaja, PharmD, BCPS, LSSBBRheumatology Clinical Pharmacy SpecialistKaiser Permanente ColoradoMegan May, PharmD, BCOP, FHOPA, FAPOClinical Oncology Pharmacy SpecialistBaptist Health Lexington/Hamburg Cancer Care CenterYou'll also hear practical advice from TRC's Editorial Advisory Board member:Craig D. Williams, PharmD, FNLA, BCPSClinical Professor of Pharmacy PracticeOregon Health and Science UniversityFor the purposes of disclosure, Dr. Megan May reports relevant financial relationships [lung cancer] with Amgen, AstraZeneca, Pharmacosmos (speakers bureau). The other speakers have nothing to disclose.  All relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.This podcast is an excerpt from one of TRC's monthly live CE webinars, the full webinar originally aired in August 2025.TRC Healthcare offers CE credit for this podcast. Log in to your Pharmacist's Letter, Pharmacy Technician's Letter,or Prescriber Insights account and look for the title of this podcast in the list of available CE courses.Claim CreditThe clinical resources mentioned during the podcast are part of a subscription to Pharmacist's Letter, Pharmacy Technician's Letter, and Prescriber Insights: FAQ: Facts About BiosimilarsChart: Comparison of Insulins (United States)Chart: Biologics for Rheumatoid ArthritisChart: Biologics for Crohn's DiseaseUse code mt1025 at checkout for 10% off a new subscription.Send us a text****

Guest: Alexis Leonard Sickle cell disease management traditionally involves two primary treatment approaches: disease-modifying therapies and curative strategies. While disease-modifying therapies can help reduce complications associated with the disease, they do not correct or fix them, which is why curative strategies are appealing to some patients and physicians. Join Dr. Alexis Leonard as she discusses the current management landscape for sickle cell disease, including disease-modifying treatments, curative strategies, and potential gene therapies. Dr. Leonard works in the Department of Hematology at St. Jude's Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee.

Guest: Alexis Leonard CRISPR technology, while relatively new, has shown potential in treating patients with sickle cell disease by increasing fetal hemoglobin. Though this gene therapy comes with safety considerations, refinements and advancements in CRISPR technology can offer new management options for sickle cell disease patients. Learn about the history of CRISPR as a sickle cell disease treatment and the future of this strategy with Dr. Alexis Leonard, who works in the Department of Hematology at St. Jude's Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee.

Guest: Alexis Leonard With two FDA-approved gene therapies, including the first CRISPR-based treatment, curative strategies for sickle cell disease are continuing to expand the treatment landscape. However, challenges remain in optimizing safety and accessibility, particularly for patients unable to tolerate current myeloablative conditioning. Learn about advancements in ex vivo editing, such as improved stem cell targeting and multiplex editing, and the possibility of in vivo approaches that may help transform sickle cell disease management with Dr. Alexis Leonard, who works in the Department of Hematology at St. Jude's Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee.

Katie Henry has seen some things. From nonprofit bootstraps to Big Pharma boardrooms, she's been inside the machine—and still believes we can fix it. We go deep on her winding road from folding sweaters at J.Crew to launching a vibrator-based advocacy campaign that accidentally changed the sexual health narrative in breast cancer.Katie doesn't pull punches. She's a born problem solver with zero tolerance for pink fluff and performative empathy. We talk survivor semantics, band camp trauma, nonprofit burnout, and why “Didi” is the grandparent alter ego you never saw coming.She's Murphy Brown with a marimba. Veronica Sawyer in pharma. Carla Tortelli with an oncology Rolodex. And she still calls herself a learner.This is one of the most honest, hilarious, and refreshingly real conversations I've had. Period.RELATED LINKS:Katie Henry on LinkedInKatie Henry on ResearchGateLiving Beyond Breast CancerNational Breast Cancer CoalitionFEEDBACK:Like this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, 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 week's episode, we'll learn more about relationships between Epstein-Barr virus genomic variants and human diseases, including hematological malignancies; the presence and timing of somatic GATA1 mutations and their relationship to a Down syndrome-specific form of leukemia; and new definitions for high-risk multiple myeloma that emphasize the presence of two or more high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities.Featured Articles:Association of Epstein-Barr virus genomic alterations with human pathologiesClinical significance of preleukemic somatic GATA1 mutations in children with Down syndromeBiallelic antigen escape is a mechanism of resistance to anti-CD38 antibodies in multiple myeloma

In this episode of Child Life On Call, guest Maite Rodriguez shares her daughter Alessia's inspiring journey with sickle cell disease (SCD)—from diagnosis at birth and painful crises to finding a cure through a pediatric bone marrow transplant at Memorial Sloan Kettering. Maite discusses the challenges of long-term treatments like hydroxyurea, the emotional toll of hospitalizations, and her family's decision to pursue IVF to create a genetic match. She also introduces her bilingual children's book, Just Like the Moon, which helps families explain sickle cell to children, siblings, and communities.   ⏱️ Episode Timestamps 00:05 – Newborn diagnosis and the first sickle cell pain crisis 09:00 – Daily medications: penicillin, folic acid, and hydroxyurea 20:00 – How advocacy, research, and community support make a difference 25:00 – Considering a cure: bone marrow transplant and IVF journey 31:00 – Why Memorial Sloan Kettering was chosen for Alessia's transplant 41:00 – Life after transplant: cured of sickle cell, dancing in the rain 48:00 – Writing Just Like the Moon, a bilingual sickle cell book for kids

In this episode of Blood Cancer Talks, hosts Eddie, Ashwin, and Raj welcome two distinguished experts to explore the cutting-edge field of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in B-cell lymphomas. Dr. David Russler-Germain, a lymphoma clinician from Siteman Cancer Centre at Washington University in St. Louis, returns as a familiar voice to the podcast audience. Joining him is Dr. Ash Alizadeh, the Moghadam Family Professor of Medicine, Oncology, and Hematology at Stanford University and leader of the Cancer Genomics Program at Stanford Cancer Institute. Dr. Alizadeh has been instrumental in advancing our understanding of lymphomagenesis and lymphoma genetics over the past two decades, pioneering multiple ctDNA techniques that are revolutionizing cancer care. Together, they discuss the transformative potential of ctDNA technology in B-cell lymphomas, particularly DLBCL, covering everything from the technical evolution of biomarker detection to groundbreaking clinical data that may reshape how we monitor and treat these aggressive cancers. Key Discussion Topics1. Genetic Heterogeneity in B-Cell LymphomasComplex genetic landscape of DLBCLImplications for treatment strategiesNeed for personalized approaches 2. Clinical Need for ctDNA in LymphomaWhy ctDNA is needed in aggressive lymphomas:Curative vs. non-curative treatment settingsLimitations of current PET imagingAdditional prognostic information beyond imagingRisk stratification capabilitiesPotential to avoid overtreatmentTherapy adaptation opportunities 3. Challenges in Lymphoma MRD AssessmentWhy lymphoma MRD is more complex than other hematologic malignancies:Differences from acute leukemias, CLL, and myelomaTechnical challenges specific to lymphoid tumorsLower circulating tumor burden compared to liquid tumors 4. ClonoSEQ TechnologyMechanism: Immunoglobulin sequencing approachAdvantages: Established platform with regulatory approvalDisadvantages: Limited sensitivity in peripheral blood, requires adequate tumor sample 5. CAPP-Seq TechnologyFull Name: Cancer Personalized Profiling by Deep SequencingInnovation: Developed ~10 years ago by Dr. Alizadeh's groupMechanism: Targeted sequencing of cancer-specific mutationsAdvantages: High sensitivity, personalized approach 6. PhasED-Seq TechnologyEvolution: Next-generation advancement of CAPP-SeqKey Improvements: Enhanced sensitivity and specificityTechnical Advances: Phased variant detection Clinical Data Highlights1. Remission Assessment by ctDNA in LBCL on 5 prospective studies of frontline anthracycline-based chemo-immunotherapy: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40802906/2. Prospective validation of end of treatment ctDNA-MRD by PhasED-Seq in DLBCL patients from HOVON-902 clinical trial: https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.70003. Korean data on prognostic utility of ctDNA: https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/142/Supplement%201/69/501573 

In this week's episode we'll learn about Azacitidine in VEXAS syndrome. Treatment can provide responses in patients with this complex autoinflammatory disorder. But relapse rates were high, so long-term therapy may be required to maintain disease control. After that: A step forward in precision blood matching. High-throughput array genotyping enables extended matching to reduce antibody formation. The results show the potential for reducing harm in regularly transfused patients. Finally, identifying a new vulnerability in TP53-mutated AML. Loss of the tumor suppressor BAP1 defines a unique subtype of TP53-mutated de novo AML. BAP1 loss also confers sensitivity to BCL-xL inhibitors in vivo, opening a new therapeutic avenue.Featured ArticlesEfficacy and safety of azacitidine for VEXAS syndrome: a large-scale retrospective study from FRENVEXArray genotyping of transfusion-relevant blood cell antigens in 6946 ancestrally diverse study participantsLoss of BAP1 defines a unique subtype of TP53-mutated de novo AML and confers sensitivity to BCL-xL inhibitors

In this Review Series episode, Associate Editor Dr. Hervé Dombret speaks with Dr. Mark Litzow about the latest immunotherapy advances for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL). The discussion highlights innovative treatments like blinatumomab and inotuzumab, which are showing remarkable success in clinical trials, including an 85% three-year survival rate and over 90% complete remission in elderly patients. Researchers are focusing on reducing chemotherapy intensity, developing personalized treatment approaches, and identifying optimal immunotherapy strategies for different ALL subtypes. The conversation underscores a promising shift towards more targeted, less toxic treatments that could significantly improve patient outcomes across various age groups and disease characteristics. These emerging therapies represent a potential paradigm shift in ALL treatment, offering hope for more effective and less aggressive therapeutic interventions.Read Dr. Litzow's paper “Incorporation of immunotherapy into frontline treatment for adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia” or find the whole review series on acute lymphoblastic leukemia in volume 145 issue 14 of Blood Journal. 

Sophie Sargent walked into the studio already owning the mic. A pandemic-era media rebel raised in New Hampshire, trained in Homeland Security (yep), and shaped by rejection, she's built a career out of DM'ing her way into rooms and then owning them. At 25, she's juggling chronic illness, chronic overachievement, and a generation that gets dismissed before it even speaks.We talk Lyme disease, Lyme denial, and the healthcare gaslighting that comes when you “look fine” but your body says otherwise. We dive into rejection as a career accelerant, mental health as content porn, and what it means to chase purpose without sacrificing identity. Sophie's a former morning radio host, country music interviewer, and Boston-based creator with a real voice—and she uses it.No fake podcast voice. No daddy-daughter moment. Just two loudmouths from different planets figuring out what it means to be seen, believed, and taken seriously in a system designed to do the opposite.Spoiler: She's smarter than I was at 25. And she'll probably be your boss someday.RELATED LINKSSophie on InstagramSophie on YouTubeSophie on LinkedInMedium article: “Redefining Rejection”See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

What happens when you hand a mic to the most extroverted, uncensored Gen Z career coach in New York? You get Olivia Battinelli—adjunct professor, student advisor, mentor, speaker, and unfiltered truth-teller on everything from invisible illness to resume crimes.We talked about growing up Jewish-Italian in Westchester, surviving the Big Four's corporate Kool-Aid, and quitting a job after 7 months because the shower goals weren't working out. She runs NYU Steinhardt's internship program by day, roasts Takis and “rate my professor” trolls by night, and somehow makes room for maple syrup takes, career coaching, and a boyfriend named Dom who sounds like a supporting character from The Sopranos.She teaches kids how to talk to humans. She's allergic to BS. And she might be the most Alexis Rose-meets-Maeve Wiley-mashup ever dropped into your feed. Welcome to her first podcast interview. It's pure gold.RELATED LINKS:Olivia Battinelli on LinkedInOlivia's Liv It Up Coaching WebsiteOlivia on InstagramNYU Steinhardt Faculty PageFEEDBACK:Like this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, 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 today's episode, we had the pleasure of speaking with John N. Allan, MD, and Melissa Rubianes about factors that influence treatment decision-making in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Allan is an associate professor of clinical medicine and a member of the lymphoma faculty in the Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, as well as a member of the CLL Research Center at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York. Rubianes is a hematology/oncology physician assistant (PA) at Weill Cornell.  In our exclusive interview, Allan and Rubianes discussed best practices for oncologists and PAs when it comes to collaborating with each other to make treatment decisions for patients with CLL, disease factors and patient characteristics that affect their treatment sequencing decisions, ongoing studies and emerging therapies for CLL that they're excited to see, and more. 

Amanda Janitz is an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Hudson College of Public Health. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Executive Managing Editor of the Journal. A.E. Janitz and Others. Improving Care Coordination for Indigenous Patients with Cancer. N Engl J Med 2025;393:940-942.

Darshali Vyas is a pulmonary and critical care fellow at Massachusetts General Hospital. Stephen Morrissey, the interviewer, is the Executive Managing Editor of the Journal. D.A. Vyas, L.G. Eisenstein, and D.S. Jones. The Race-Correction Debates — Progress, Tensions, and Future Directions. N Engl J Med 2025;393:1029-1036.

This episode is sponsored by Invivyd, Inc.Marc Elia is a biotech investor, the Chairman of the Board at Invivyd, and a Long COVID patient who decided to challenge the system while still stuck inside it. He's not here for corporate platitudes, regulatory shoulder shrugs, or vaccine-era gaslighting. This is not a conversation about politics, but it's about power and choice and the right to receive care and treatment no matter your condition.In this episode, we cover everything from broken clinical pathways to meme coins and the eternal shame of being old enough to remember Eastern Airlines. Marc talks about what it means to build tools instead of just complaining, what Long COVID has done to his body and his patience, and why the illusion of “choice” in healthcare is a luxury most patients don't have.This conversation doesn't ask for empathy. It demands it.RELATED LINKSMarc Elia on LinkedInInvivyd Company SiteMarc's Bio at InvivydFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship inquiries, email podcast@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In today's episode, we had the pleasure of speaking with Balazs Halmos, MD, MS, about the phase 2 VISION trial (NCT02864992) evaluating tepotinib (Tepmetko) in patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutation–positive non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Dr Halmos is a professor in the Department of Oncology (Medical Oncology) and the Department of Medicine (Oncology and Hematology), director of Thoracic Oncology, and associate director of Clinical Science at Montefiore Einstein Comprehensive Cancer Center in Bronx, New York. In our exclusive interview, Halmos discussed the rationale and design of the VISION trial, the significance of MET exon 14 skipping mutations as a distinct oncogenic driver, and the clinical utility of tepotinib, which is a selective MET TKI. He reviewed the trial's efficacy results, which demonstrated consistent response rates across lines of therapy and diagnostic methods, as well as tolerability findings that highlighted the importance of monitoring and managing MET-related adverse effects. Dr Halmos also reflected on subgroup analyses from the trial, noting the agent's activity across treatment settings, particularly in older patients and those with central nervous system involvement. Additionally, Halmos underscored the critical role of comprehensive biomarker testing in NSCLC, highlighting how parallel tissue- and circulating tumor DNA–based testing can optimize timely identification of actionable alterations and ensure patients receive the most effective frontline therapy. He also discussed practical considerations for dose selection and modifications with tepotinib, offering insights into strategies for maximizing treatment benefit and maintaining patient quality of life.

After years of carrying the weight of lead, Shannon and Cooper find a path out from under the darkness and into the sunlight.LEAD: how this story ends is up to us is an audio docudrama series that tells the true story of one child, his mysterious lead poisoning, and his mother's unwavering fight to keep him safe. A true story written by Shannon Burkett. Directed by Alan Taylor. Starring Merritt Wever, Alessandro Nivola, Cynthia Nixon, and Cooper Burkett.Lead was produced by Shannon Burkett. Co-produced by Jenny Maguire. Featuring Amy Acker, Tom Butler, Dennis T. Carnegie, James Carpinello, Geneva Carr, Dann Fink, Alice Kris, Adriane Lenox, Katie O'Sullivan, Greg Pirenti, Armando Riesco, Shirley Rumierk, Thom Sesma, and Lana Young. Music by Peter Salett. “Joy In Resistance” written by Abena Koomson-Davis and performed by Resistance Revival Chorus. Casting by Alaine Alldaffer and Lisa Donadio. Sound Design by Andy Kris. Recording Engineer Krissopher Chevannes.For corresponding visuals and more information on how to protect children from lead exposure please go to https://endleadpoisoning.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The deficits from the lead poisoning continue to intensify, Shannon channels her anger and grief into holding the people who hurt her son responsible.LEAD how this story ends is up to us is a true story written and produced by Shannon Burkett. Co-produced by Jenny Maguire. Directed by Alan Taylor. Starring Merritt Wever, Alessandro Nivola, Cynthia Nixon, and Cooper Burkett.EP4 features Eboni Booth, Sasha Eden, Kevin Kane, April Matthis, Alysia Reiner, and Mandy Siegfried. Casting by Alaine Alldaffer and Lisa Donadio. Music by Peter Salett. Sound Design by Andy Kris. Recording Engineer Krissopher Chevannes.For corresponding visuals and more information on how to protect children from lead exposure please go to https://endleadpoisoning.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.