Podcasts about Immunotherapy

Matthew Halpert, PhD—immunologist and CEO of Immunocine—joins The Moss Report to discuss an important discovery: a new way to fully activate dendritic cells, the “coaches” of the immune system. When these cells switch on, they can recognize and attack cancer. We talk about what this could mean for the future of immunotherapy: approaches that are more targeted, potentially less toxic, and designed to help the body find what it has been missing. Dr. Halpert explains the insight behind the method, how it differs from current treatments, what early experience looks like, and the key questions that still need testing. If you follow immunotherapy—or are weighing options—this conversation captures a major step forward in understanding how the immune system can be guided to fight cancer. Full article on The Moss Report with transcript: https://www.themossreport.com/immunocine-cancer-center/ Glossary of Terms  https://docs.google.com/document/d/140Gt8VNgexyu-2vjfOgTdPdOqlaFAsvLTOVWLyGwGgE/edit?usp=sharing Cited Paper: MHC class I and II peptide homology regulates the cellular immune response - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32298026/ PubMed - Original Article in FASEB  https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1096/fj.201903002R Immunocine Cancer Center - https://immunocine.com/meet-the-immunocine-team/ Baylor College of Medicine - https://www.bcm.edu/ Resources:

Lexi Silver is 15 years old. She lost both of her parents before she turned 11. That should tell you enough—but it doesn't. Because Lexi isn't here for your pity. She's not a sob story. She's not a trauma statistic. She's a writer, an advocate, and one of the most emotionally intelligent people you'll ever hear speak into a microphone.In this episode, Lexi breaks down what grief actually feels like when you're a kid and the adults around you just don't get it. She talks about losing her mom on Christmas morning, her dad nine months later, how the system let her down, and how Instagram trolls tell her she's faking it for attention. She also explains why she writes, what Experience Camps gave her, how she channels anger into poems, and what to say—and not say—to someone grieving.Her life isn't a Netflix drama. But it should be.And by the way, she's not “so strong.” She's just human. You'll never forget this conversation.RELATED LINKS• Lexi on Instagram: @meet.my.grief• Buy her book: The Girl Behind Grief's Shadow• Experience CampsFEEDBACKLike 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.

Send us a text

Michelle Andrews built a career inside the pharma machine long before anyone knew what “DTC” meant. She helped launch Rituxan and watched Allegra commercials teach America how to ask for pills by name. Then she landed in the cancer fun house herself, stage 4 breast cancer, and learned exactly how hollow all the “journey” slide decks feel when you're the one circling the drain.We talk about what happens when the insider becomes the customer, why pill organizers and wheat field brochures still piss her off, and how she fired doctors who couldn't handle her will to live. You'll hear about the dawn of pharma advertising, the pre-Google advocacy hustle, and what she wants every brand team to finally admit about patient experience.If you've ever wondered who decided windsurfing was the best way to sell allergy meds—or what happens when you stop caring if you make people uncomfortable—listen up.RELATED LINKSMichelle Andrews on LinkedInTrinity Life Sciences – Strategic AdvisoryJade Magazine – Ticking Time Bombs ArticleNIHCM Foundation – Breast Cancer StoryFEEDBACKLike 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.

Dr Brendan O'Shea, General Practitioner.

Could your immune system hold the key to fighting cancer and slowing aging? Dr. Jeff Gross, expert in regenerative medicine and cellular therapies, joins host Dr. Scott A. Johnson to discuss how activated NK (Natural Killer) cell-derived exosomes are reshaping the future of medicine. Unlike traditional chemotherapy or radiation, NK cell exosome therapy offers targeted, non-toxic treatment by unleashing the body's innate ability to recognize and destroy cancer cells. You'll learn how these powerful biological agents work, why they diminish over time, and how "off-the-shelf" solutions could bring life-extending benefits to more people. This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in cancer prevention, immunotherapy, and living longer—stronger.Connect with Dr. Scott A. Johnsonauthorscott.comFacebookInstagramYouTubeLinks to purchase booksConnect with Dr. Jeff GrossReCELLebrate.comInstagramTikTokYouTubeLinkedInTakeawaysCancer is a leading cause of death globally.Natural killer cells play a crucial role in our immune defense.Exosomes are signaling particles that help target abnormal cells.NK cell exosomes can potentially treat cancer without side effects.The presence of senescent cells correlates with biological aging.NK cell exosomes can be used preventively for high-risk individuals.Off-the-shelf NK exosomes simplify treatment processes.Immunotherapy encompasses various methods, including vaccines and antibodies.Reducing senescent cells can enhance health span and longevity.Essential oils may synergize with exosome therapies for enhanced effects.Chapters00:00Introduction to Cancer and Innovative Treatments05:25Understanding Natural Killer Cell Exosomes09:56Comparing NK Cell Exosomes to Traditional Therapies14:25Preventive Applications of NK Cell Exosomes18:59Case Studies and Patient Outcomes23:23The Intersection of Essential Oils and Exosomes24:45Short Outro.m4v

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/NAW865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 6, 2026.Expanding the Bispecific Option Across Hematologic Cancers: Guidance for the Community on Collaborative Care and Accessing Innovative Immunotherapy for Myeloma and Lymphoma In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis program is supported by an independent educational grant from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/NAW865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 6, 2026.Expanding the Bispecific Option Across Hematologic Cancers: Guidance for the Community on Collaborative Care and Accessing Innovative Immunotherapy for Myeloma and Lymphoma In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis program is supported by an independent educational grant from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/NAW865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 6, 2026.Expanding the Bispecific Option Across Hematologic Cancers: Guidance for the Community on Collaborative Care and Accessing Innovative Immunotherapy for Myeloma and Lymphoma In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis program is supported by an independent educational grant from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/NAW865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 6, 2026.Expanding the Bispecific Option Across Hematologic Cancers: Guidance for the Community on Collaborative Care and Accessing Innovative Immunotherapy for Myeloma and Lymphoma In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis program is supported by an independent educational grant from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

Is it time to rethink perioperative immunotherapy in resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers? See the latest data and expert takeaways.   Credit available for this activity expires: 7/18/2026 Earn Credit / Learning Objectives & Disclosures: https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/1002710?ecd=bdc_podcast_libsyn_mscpedu

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/GUA865. CME/MOC/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until July 16, 2026.Achieving Excellence in Gastric/GEJ Cancer Care: Multidisciplinary Guidance on Immunotherapy Platforms in Resectable Disease In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

In this episode, Joseph W. Franses, MD, PhD; Neehar Parikh, MD, MS; and Mark Yarchoan, MD, share their thoughts on incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors into the care of patients with HCC including:Clinical Considerations for Selecting First-line Immunotherapy Combinations for Metastatic HCCOverview of the Latest Data for the Combination of TACE With Immunotherapy (eg, EMERALD-1 Study of TACE and Durvalumab ± Bevacizumab for Unresectable HCC; and LEAP-012 Study of TACE + Lenvatinib + Pembrolizumab) Latest Clinical Data and Updates for Systemic Therapy in Patients With High-Risk Early HCCProgram faculty:Joseph W. Franses, MD, PhDAssistant Professor of MedicineSection of Hematology-OncologyUniversity of ChicagoChicago, IllinoisNeehar Parikh, MD, MSAssociate ProfessorLi Ka Shing Research Professor of HepatologyClinical Director of HepatologyMedical Director, Liver Tumor ProgramDivision of Gastroenterology & HepatologyUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor, MichiganMark Yarchoan, MDAssociate ProfessorSidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer CenterJohns HopkinsBaltimore, Maryland Resources:To access the resources associated with this podcast discussion, please visit the program page to access a recording from a live webinar and a frequently-asked questions commentary on this topic.

For many families, a food allergy diagnosis doesn't just change what's on the menu, it changes how they live. Suddenly, everyday moments like playdates, birthday parties, family vacations, or a simple trip to a restaurant feel like navigating a minefield. Parents become hyper-vigilant, kids feel isolated, and the fear of accidental exposure looms large, casting a shadow over milestones that should be joyful. But what if much of this suffering is preventable? What if the way we introduce food in infancy could reduce not just allergic reactions, but the emotional burden they carry? In this episode, I'm joined once again by Canadian board-certified Pediatric and Adult Allergist/Immunologist Dr. Stuart Carr. With over 3 decades of experience, Dr. Carr is the Chief Medical Officer at Snö Asthma & Allergy in Abu Dhabi. Today, Dr. Carr unpacks the mental health impact of food allergies and reveals how early allergen introduction and oral immunotherapy are reshaping the way we treat and prevent allergies.   Things You'll Learn In This Episode  -Why “just avoid the allergen” is outdated and harmfulAvoidance doesn't just limit diet, it can hardwire fear and worsen immune reactivity. How are avoidance-based strategies doing more harm than good? -The critical mistake parents make after introducing allergensTrying peanut butter once and checking it off the list isn't enough. What frequency and dose prevents allergies from developing? -Reasonable respect vs. unreasonable fearAllergies aren't just a physical issue, they also affect the mental health and quality of life of children and their families. What stresses do allergies cause in families? How does early introduction alleviate these stresses?    Guest Bio Dr. Stuart Carr is a Canadian board-certified Pediatric and Adult Allergist/Immunologist with over three decades of experience. He's been Chief Medical Officer at Snö Asthma & Allergy in Abu Dhabi since January 2019, following 20 years in academic clinical allergy practice in Edmonton, Canada, where he was an Associate Clinical Professor at the University of Alberta. A Past-President of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and a reviewer for their journal, Dr. Carr's primary interests include pediatric asthma, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis. He's currently collaborating on a Canada-wide study examining the safety and effectiveness of oral immunotherapy for peanut and other food allergies in preschool children. Follow his insights at @allergydoc4kidz on Instagram. About Your Host Hosted by Dr. Deepa Grandon, MD MBA, 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 evidenced-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!

Did you know that immunotherapy has shown promise in the perioperative setting for gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma? Credit available for this activity expires: 7/11/26 Earn Credit / Learning Objectives & Disclosures: https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/transforming-gastric-and-gej-cancer-care-perioperative-2025a1000i7e?ecd=bdc_podcast_libsyn_mscpedu

Prof Marina Garassino, Dr John Heymach, Prof Solange Peters and moderator Dr Jacob Sands present key data from the ASCO 2025 Annual Meeting on the management of metastatic NSCLC without targetable mutations, as well as emerging evidence on the role of antibody-drug conjugates for patients with select actionable genomic alterations. CME information and select publications here.

Featuring perspectives from Prof Marina Chiara Garassino, Dr John V Heymach, Prof Solange Peters and Dr Jacob Sands, moderated by Dr Sands, including the following topics: Introduction (0:00) Role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) without a Targetable Tumor Mutation — Prof Peters (2:07) Targeted and Other Novel Therapeutic Strategies for Relapsed Metastatic NSCLC — Prof Garassino (26:30) Potential Role of TROP2-Targeted Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Advanced NSCLC — Dr Sands (50:19) Evolving Role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Care of Patients with Nonmetastatic NSCLC — Dr Heymach (1:12:36) CME information and select publications

Dr. Anne Marie Morse walks into the studio like a one-woman Jersey Broadway show and leaves behind the best damn TED Talk you've never heard. She's a neurologist, sleep medicine doc, narcolepsy expert, founder of D.A.M.M. Good Sleep, and full-time myth buster in a white coat. We talk about why sleep isn't a luxury, why your mattress does matter, and how melatonin is the new Flintstones vitamin with a marketing budget. We unpack the BS around sleep hygiene, blow up the medical gaslighting around “disorders,” and dig into how a former aspiring butterfly became one of the loudest voices for patient-centered science. Also: naps, kids, burnout, CPAPs, co-sleeping, airport pods, the DeLorean, and Carl Sagan. If you think you're getting by on five hours of sleep and vibes, you're not. This episode will make you want to take a nap—and then call your doctor.RELATED LINKSdammgoodsleep.com: https://www.dammgoodsleep.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/anne-marie-morse-753b2821/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dammgoodsleepDocWire News Author Page: https://www.docwirenews.com/author/anne-marie-morseSleep Review Interview: https://sleepreviewmag.com/practice-management/marketing/word-of-mouth/sleep-advocacy-anne-marie-morse/Geisinger Bio: https://providers.geisinger.org/provider/anne-marie-morse/756868SWHR Profile: https://swhr.org/team/anne-marie-morse-do-faasm/FEEDBACKLike 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.

FMF YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@funmedFMI Center for Optimal HealthWebsite: fmioptimal.comInstagram: @fmioptimalFunctional Medicine of Idaho:Website: funmedidaho.comInstagram: @funmedidahoWe provide the highest quality supplements with responsible sourcing and the utmost commitment to purity funmedshop.com + more resources on IG: @funmedfoundations

Gigi Robinson grew up with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, a disease that turns your joints into overcooked spaghetti. Instead of letting it sideline her, she built a career out of telling the truth about invisible illness. We talk about what it takes to grow up faster than you should, why chronic illness is the worst unpaid internship, and how she turned her story into a business. You'll hear about her days schlepping to physical therapy before sunrise, documenting the sterile absurdity of waiting rooms, and finding purpose in the mess. Gigi's not interested in pity or polished narratives. She wants you to see what resilience really looks like, even when it's ugly. If you think you know what an influencer does, think again. This conversation will challenge your assumptions about work, health, and what it means to be seen.RELATED LINKSGigi Robinson Website: https://www.gigirobinson.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gigirobinsonInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/itsgigirobinsonTikTok: @itsgigirobinsonA Kids Book About Chronic Illness: https://akidsco.com/products/a-kids-book-about-chronic-illnessFEEDBACKLike 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.

Why do some physicians dedicate their lives to serving the under-resourced and uninsured? Dr. Mary T. Neal joins Dorothy to share her path from early aspirations, through medical school at a young age, to years in private practice and volunteer work at San Jose Clinic. She describes her shift from pediatrics to obstetrics and gynecology, explaining why she values relationships with pregnant women and their families. At San Jose Clinic, Dr. Neal assists women with gynecological care and helps guide those who are pregnant into OB care. The conversation covers obstacles uninsured women face, including limited transportation and late-stage diagnoses due to lack of regular care. Dr. Neal discusses her encounters with human trafficking survivors, her commitment to cancer research, and the evolution of cancer therapies. Subscribe to Let’s Talk About Your Breasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart, and wherever you get your podcasts. Key Questions Answered 1. How did Dr. Mary T. Neal decide to become a physician? 2. What was Dr. Neal’s journey through medical school and into her specialty? 3. What kind of care does Dr. Neal provide as a volunteer at San Jose Clinic? 4. How do clinics like San Jose and St. Mary’s help the under-resourced population? 5. What are the biggest challenges for uninsured or underserved women in accessing breast care? 6. How is human trafficking encountered in Dr. Neal’s clinical work, and how does she approach it? 7. What makes Dr. Judy Chang notable within the cancer physician community? 8. How did Dr. Neal and her husband meet and what makes their relationship unique? 9. Why are new cancer therapies, specifically immunotherapy, so important according to Dr. Neal? 10. How has Dr. Neal supported cancer research and the local medical community beyond clinical practice? Timestamped Overview 00:00 "Dr. Neal's Community Impact" 03:05 From Pediatrics to Obstetrics Passion 08:22 San Jose's Fight Against Trafficking 11:16 Collaborative Cancer Research Initiative 15:00 "Mammograms: Early Detection Advocated" 18:04 Relationship Beginnings: Meeting Ron 20:40 Values in Relationships and Parenting 25:08 Immunotherapy's Impact on Cancer Control 29:00 "Medicine: A Life of Service"See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Host Doug Stephan and Dr. Ken Kronhaus of Lake Cardiology (352-735-1400) cover a number of topics affecting our health. First up, Doug and Dr. Ken discuss the biggest news stories in the medical world, starting with a focus on good news that heart attack deaths have dropped by nearly 90% since the 1900s, in large part to implementing knowledge of the fundamental risk factors of heart disease.Additionally, a new study suggests a better way to measure weight over BMI (body mass index). The problem with it is that muscle and bone are a lot heavier than fat, which can give a false elevated BMI reading. A BMI over 30 is obesity. There are now high tech devices that can better measure body fat more accurately. Moving on, regular exercise in children isn't only fighting childhood obesity, but also childhood anxiety and depression.Next up, new hope of inverse vaccines that target a specific part of the immune system to suppress, and possibly reverse, autoimmune disease.The next item of interest is what the Health and Human Services is doing with the food and drink products containing synthetic dyes and just how many food products they're actually added to, and the most common is Red 40.Then the question -- how beneficial are pets for our health if we're allergic? Turns out, pet allergens are found in nearly all homes, even homes without pets. Pet allergens are from the pet dander, not their fur, and symptoms of pet allergies often mimic colds or seasonal allergies — sneezing, running nose, nasal congestion, red and/or itchy eyes, coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath, and hives or eczema. Immunotherapy is the only, ultimate relief of pet allergies. If you're looking to reduce allergy symptoms to pets, that would include keeping the pets out of the bedroom, use HEPA air filters, wash hands after petting animals, bathe your pet regularly, and use a vacuums with a double or micro-filter bag.Lastly, Doug and Dr. Ken answer listener questions, including low levels of a common drinking water contaminant linked to premature birth, low birth weight babies, and interference of the bloods ability to carry oxygen. Plus, are juice classes as healthy as we're led to believe? Doug and Dr. Ken discuss that, too. In tandem with that, foods that are filled with microplastics include apples and carrots (most commonly used in juice cleanses). Other foods with higher levels of microplastics include rice, pink Himalayan sea salt, sugar, tea, plant-based nuggets, fish sticks, shrimp, and water. Website: GoodDayHealthShow.comSocial Media: @GoodDayNetworks

In this enlightening episode of Keeping Abreast, Dr. Jenn sits down with world-renowned surgical oncologist Dr. Francisco Contreras to explore how mindset, metabolic therapy, and integrative medicine can change the cancer care conversation.Guided by the influence of his father, a pioneer in holistic oncology, Dr. Contreras shares his path to becoming a surgeon and his mission to treat not just the disease, but the whole person. From patient empowerment to the limitations of conventional care, this episode offers a deep dive into the emotional, spiritual, and metabolic components of healing.You'll hear how innovative therapies at Oasis of Hope combine conventional medicine with holistic practices—and why patient education is the cornerstone of long-term success.This conversation is filled with hope, science, and practical insights to help you take charge of your healing journey.In This Episode, You Will Learn:How Dr. Contreras's father inspired his holistic cancer care approachWhy mindset and empowerment are critical in healingThe science behind metabolic therapy and low-glycemic nutritionWhat immunotherapy is—and how it's changing cancer outcomesHow alternative and conventional treatments can work togetherWhy movement, habit-building, and diet play vital roles in recoveryThe truth about high-dose vitamin C, off-label meds, and natural remediesHow innovative treatments like dendritic cell vaccines and CAR T cells workWhy patients deserve education, options, and hope

The standard treatment for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) has been radical surgery combined with cisplatin-based chemotherapy for eligible patients. However, over 50% of patients face metastatic progression after surgery. This non-CME webinar, presented by a urology expert, will discuss how patients with UC at high risk of recurrence after radical resection may benefit from adjuvant immunotherapy, emphasize the role of multidisciplinary communication in patient care, and review a subcutaneous immunotherapy option for the adjuvant treatment of UC.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VFF865. CME/MOC credit will be available until July 4, 2026.ALL-in on Bispecific Innovation: Guidance on the Present and Future of Off-the-Shelf Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VFF865. CME/MOC credit will be available until July 4, 2026.ALL-in on Bispecific Innovation: Guidance on the Present and Future of Off-the-Shelf Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VFF865. CME/MOC credit will be available until July 4, 2026.ALL-in on Bispecific Innovation: Guidance on the Present and Future of Off-the-Shelf Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VFF865. CME/MOC credit will be available until July 4, 2026.ALL-in on Bispecific Innovation: Guidance on the Present and Future of Off-the-Shelf Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/VFF865. CME/MOC credit will be available until July 4, 2026.ALL-in on Bispecific Innovation: Guidance on the Present and Future of Off-the-Shelf Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia In support of improving patient care, PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported by an independent educational grant from AstraZeneca.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

Wristband that provides relief for upper limb tremor is approved; FDA warns of clinically significant weight loss in younger kids taking ADHD meds; REMS removed for CAR T-cell immunotherapies; treatment approved for lung cancer patients with EGFR exon20 insertion mutations; and CDC committee recommends removing preservative from flu vaccines.

“Vax to the Future: Cancer Immunity Revolution

Liver cancer, especially hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), remains a major health concern worldwide. In Latin America, the situation becomes more difficult due to limited access to advanced treatments and the high prevalence of underlying liver diseases. A recent research paper, published in Volume 16 of Oncotarget by researchers from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia, offers valuable insights into how patients in the region respond to a widely used immunotherapy regimen. This real-world study explores both the effectiveness of treatment and the risks of immune-related side effects. Understanding Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Why It is So Difficult to Treat Hepatocellular carcinoma is often diagnosed at an advanced stage and frequently occurs in people with pre-existing liver conditions such as cirrhosis. Standard treatments like surgery or local therapies are not always possible in these cases. In recent years, the combination of two drugs—atezolizumab and bevacizumab—has shown promise in extending survival. However, most of the evidence comes from controlled clinical trials that may not represent the realities faced by healthcare providers and patients in Latin America. The Study: Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Latin America In a multicenter study titled “Immune-mediated adverse events following atezolizumab and bevacizumab in a multinational Latin American cohort of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma,” led by Leonardo Gomes da Fonseca from Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, and Federico Piñero from Hospital Universitario Austral, Argentina, researchers aimed to fill that gap. The study included 99 patients with advanced HCC from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. All patients received the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab. The main objectives were to assess how frequently immune-related side effects, known as immune-related adverse events (irAEs), occurred and whether these events affected overall survival. Full blog - https://www.oncotarget.org/2025/07/02/immunotherapy-safety-for-hepatocellular-carcinoma-in-latin-america-insights-from-a-real-world-study/ Paper DOI - https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28721 Correspondence to - Federico Piñero - fpinerof@cas.austral.edu.ar Video short - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gk3oQwzIC-E Sign up for free Altmetric alerts about this article - https://oncotarget.altmetric.com/details/email_updates?id=10.18632%2Foncotarget.28721 Subscribe for free publication alerts from Oncotarget - https://www.oncotarget.com/subscribe/ Keywords - cancer, liver cancer, immunotherapy, adverse events, immunology, real-world To learn more about Oncotarget, please visit https://www.oncotarget.com and connect with us: Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/Oncotarget/ X - https://twitter.com/oncotarget Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/oncotargetjrnl/ YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@OncotargetJournal LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/oncotarget Pinterest - https://www.pinterest.com/oncotarget/ Reddit - https://www.reddit.com/user/Oncotarget/ Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/0gRwT6BqYWJzxzmjPJwtVh MEDIA@IMPACTJOURNALS.COM

Episode Description:If you've ever wondered what happens when a Bronx-born pediatric nurse with stage 4 colon cancer survives, raises a kid, becomes a policy shark, and fights like hell for the ignored, meet Vanessa Ghigliotty. She's not inspirational. She's a bulldozer. We go way back—like pre-Stupid Cancer back—when there was no “young adult cancer movement,” just a handful of pissed-off survivors building something out of nothing. This episode is personal. Vanessa and I built the plane while flying it. She fought to be heard, showed up in chemo dragging her kid to IEP meetings, and never stopped screaming for the rest of us to get what we needed. We talk war stories, progress, side-eyeing advocacy fads, TikTok activism, gatekeeping, policy wins, and why being loud is still necessary. And yeah—she's a damn good mom. Probably a better one than you. You'll laugh. You'll cry. You'll want to scream into a pillow. Come for the nostalgia. Stay for the righteous anger and iced coffee.RELATED LINKSVanessa on LinkedInColorectal Cancer Alliance: Vanessa's StoryZenOnco Interview with VanessaFEEDBACKLike 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.

Send us a textIt's a common scenario for a cancer patient. They're undergoing treatment and get what's known as a peripherally inserted central catheter or PICC (pronounced “pick”) line to make it more convenient to administer drugs. They are in and out of the hospital or just the clinic frequently to see various providers. The treatment they receive may run down their immune system a little bit. Just having cancer may have damaged their immune system.So then they get an infection.Perhaps it's no big deal. A round of antibiotics may take care of it. However, increasingly, these infections are resistant to antibiotics – something known as antimicrobial resistance or AMR.Then, the patient must wait weeks or even months to resume cancer treatment while the infection is treated. And, all too often, the infection itself may kill the patient. In fact, infections are the second-leading cause of death for cancer patients.Dr. Yehoda M. Martei, Assistant Professor of Medicine (Hematology-Oncology) at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, and colleagues have been working to find out just how common these infections are. Among patients hospitalized for treatment, cancer patients were up to twice as likely to get a drug-resistant infection, she and colleagues found. Among outpatients – people getting treatment at clinics or offices but not staying in the hospital – cancer patients had three times the risk of drug-resistant infections.Listen as Dr. Martei tells One World, One Health host Maggie Fox about her findings, what they mean, and what must be done to protect cancer patients and ensure infections don't stop them from getting the treatment they need.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/EHA865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until June 30, 2026.Hope on the Horizon in Gastric Cancer: Breakthroughs in Personalized Care With Immunotherapy and Targeted Strategies In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Hope For Stomach Cancer. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported through independent educational grants from Astellas, AstraZeneca, BeOne Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/AAPA information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/AWM865. CME/MOC/AAPA credit will be available until June 30, 2026.Strategies for Immunotherapy Success in NSCLC: How to Incorporate Modern ICI Platforms Across the Disease Continuum In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and LUNGevity Foundation. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported through independent educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/EHA865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until June 30, 2026.Hope on the Horizon in Gastric Cancer: Breakthroughs in Personalized Care With Immunotherapy and Targeted Strategies In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Hope For Stomach Cancer. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported through independent educational grants from Astellas, AstraZeneca, BeOne Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

This content has been developed for healthcare professionals only. Patients who seek health information should consult with their physician or relevant patient advocacy groups.For the full presentation, downloadable Practice Aids, slides, and complete CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE information, and to apply for credit, please visit us at PeerView.com/EHA865. CME/MOC/NCPD/AAPA/IPCE credit will be available until June 30, 2026.Hope on the Horizon in Gastric Cancer: Breakthroughs in Personalized Care With Immunotherapy and Targeted Strategies In support of improving patient care, this activity has been planned and implemented by PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, and Hope For Stomach Cancer. PVI, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, is jointly accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), and the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), to provide continuing education for the healthcare team.SupportThis activity is supported through independent educational grants from Astellas, AstraZeneca, BeOne Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.Disclosure information is available at the beginning of the video presentation.

Dr. Diwakar Davar and Dr. Jason Luke discuss novel agents in melanoma and other promising new data in the field of immunotherapy that were presented at the 2025 ASCO Annual Meeting. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Diwakar Davar: Hello. My name is Diwakar Davar, and I am welcoming you to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm an associate professor of medicine and the clinical director of the Melanoma and Skin Cancer Program at the University of Pittsburgh's Hillman Cancer Center. Today, I'm joined by my colleague and good friend, Dr. Jason Luke. Dr. Luke is a professor of medicine. He is also the associate director of clinical research and the director of the Phase 1 IDDC Program at the University of Pittsburgh's Hillman Cancer Center. He and I are going to be discussing some key advancements in melanoma and skin cancers that were presented at the 2025 ASCO Annual Meeting. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode.  Jason, it is great to have you back on the podcast. Dr. Jason Luke: Thanks again so much for the opportunity, and I'm really looking forward to it. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Perfect. So we will go ahead and start talking a little bit about a couple of key abstracts in both the drug development immunotherapy space and the melanoma space. The first couple of abstracts, the first two, will cover melanoma. So, the first is LBA9500, which was essentially the primary results of RELATIVITY-098. RELATIVITY-098 was a phase 3 trial that compared nivolumab plus relatlimab in a fixed-dose combination against nivolumab alone for the adjuvant treatment of resected high-risk disease. Jason, do you want to maybe give us a brief context of what this is? Dr. Jason Luke: Yeah, it's great, thanks. So as almost all listeners, of course, will be aware, the use of anti–PD-1 immunotherapies really revolutionized melanoma oncology over the last 10 to 15 years. And it has become a standard of care in the adjuvant setting as well. But to review, in patients with stage III melanoma, treatment can be targeted towards BRAF with BRAF and MEK combination therapy, where that's relevant, or anti–PD-1 with nivolumab or pembrolizumab are a standard of care. And more recently, we've had the development of neoadjuvant approaches for palpable stage III disease. And in that space, if patients present, based on two different studies, either pembrolizumab or nivolumab plus ipilimumab can be given prior to surgery for somewhere in the 6- to 9-week range. And so all of these therapies have improved time-to-event endpoints, such as relapse-free or event-free survival. It's worth noting, however, that despite those advances, we've had a couple different trials now that have actually failed in this adjuvant setting, most high profile being the CheckMate-915 study, which looked at nivolumab plus ipilimumab and unfortunately was a negative study. So, with RELATIVITY-047, which was the trial of nivolumab plus relatlimab that showed an improvement in progression-free survival for metastatic disease, there's a lot of interest, and we've been awaiting these data for a long time for RELATIVITY-098, which, of course, is this adjuvant trial of LAG-3 blockade with relatlimab plus nivolumab. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Great. So with that, let's briefly discuss the trial design and the results. So this was a randomized, phase 3, blinded study, so double-blinded, so neither the investigators knew what the patients were getting, nor did the patients know what they were getting. The treatment investigational arm was nivolumab plus relatlimab in the fixed-dose combination. So that's the nivolumab standard fixed dose with relatlimab that was FDA approved in RELATIVITY-047. And the control arm was nivolumab by itself. The duration of treatment was 1 year. The patient population consisted of resected high-risk stage III or IV patients. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed RFS. Stage and geography were the standard stratifying factors, and they were included, and most of the criteria were balanced across both arms. What we know at this point is that the 2-year RFS rate was 64% and 62% in the nivolumab and nivolumab-combination arms, respectively. The 2-year DMFS rate was similarly equivalent: 76% with nivolumab monotherapy, 73% with the combination. And similar to what you had talked about with CheckMate 915, unfortunately, the addition of LAG-3 did not appear to improve the RFS or DMFS compared to control in this patient population. So, tell us a little bit about your take on this and what do you think might be the reasons why this trial was negative? Dr. Jason Luke: It's really unfortunate that we have this negative phase 3 trial. There had been a lot of hope that the combination of nivolumab with relatlimab would be a better tolerated combination that increased the efficacy. So in the metastatic setting, we do have 047, the study that demonstrated nivolumab plus relatlimab, but now we have this negative trial in the adjuvant setting. And so as to why exactly, I think is a complicated scenario. You know, when we look at the hazard ratios for relapse-free survival, the primary endpoint, as well as the secondary endpoints for distant metastasis-free survival, we see that the hazard ratio is approximately 1. So there's basically no difference. And that really suggests that relatlimab in this setting had no impact whatsoever on therapeutic outcomes in terms of efficacy. Now, it's worth noting that there was a biomarker subanalysis that was presented in conjunction with these data that looked at some immunophenotyping, both from circulating T cells, CD8 T cells, as well as from the tumor microenvironment from patients who were treated, both in the previous metastatic trial, the RELATIVITY-047 study, and now in this adjuvant study in the RELATIVITY-098 study. And to briefly summarize those, what was identified was that T cells in advanced melanoma seemed to have higher expression levels of LAG-3 relative to T cells that are circulating in patients that are in the adjuvant setting. In addition to that, there was a suggestion that the magnitude of increase is greater in the advanced setting versus adjuvant. And the overall summary of this is that the suggested rationale for why this was a negative trial may have been that the target of LAG-3 is not expressed as highly in the adjuvant setting as it is in the metastatic setting. And so while the data that were presented, I think, support this kind of an idea, I am a little bit cautious that this is actually the reason for why the trial was negative, however. I would say we're not really sure yet as to why the trial was negative, but the fact that the hazard ratios for the major endpoints were essentially 1 suggests that there was no impact whatsoever from relatlimab. And this really makes one wonder whether or not building on anti–PD-1 in the adjuvant setting is feasible because anti–PD-1 works so well. You would think that even if the levels of LAG-3 expression were slightly different, you would have seen a trend in one direction or another by adding a second drug, relatlimab, in this scenario. So overall, I think it's an unfortunate circumstance that the trial is negative. Clearly there's going to be no role for relatlimab in the adjuvant setting. I think this really makes one wonder about the utility of LAG-3 blockade and how powerful it really can be. I think it's probably worth pointing out there's another adjuvant trial ongoing now of a different PD-1 and LAG-3 combination, and that's cemiplimab plus fianlimab, a LAG-3 antibody that's being dosed from another trial sponsor at a much higher dose, and perhaps that may make some level of difference. But certainly, these are unfortunate results that will not advance the field beyond where we were at already. Dr. Diwakar Davar: And to your point about third-generation checkpoint factors that were negative, I guess it's probably worth noting that a trial that you were involved with, KeyVibe-010, that evaluated the PD-1 TIGIT co-formulation of vibostolimab, MK-4280A, was also, unfortunately, similarly negative. So, to your point, it's not clear that all these third-generation receptors are necessarily going to have the same impact in the adjuvant setting, even if they, you know, for example, like TIGIT, and they sometimes may not even have an effect at all in the advanced cancer setting. So, we'll see what the HARMONY phase 3 trial, that's the Regeneron cemiplimab/fianlimab versus pembrolizumab control with cemiplimab with fianlimab at two different doses, we'll see how that reads out. But certainly, as you've said, LAG-3 does not, unfortunately, appear to have an impact in the adjuvant setting. So let's move on to LBA9501. This is the primary analysis of EORTC-2139-MG or the Columbus-AD trial. This was a randomized trial of encorafenib and binimetinib, which we will abbreviate as enco-bini going forward, compared to placebo in high-risk stage II setting in melanoma in patients with BRAF V600E or K mutant disease. So Jason, you know, you happen to know one or two things about the resected stage II setting, so maybe contextualize the stage II setting for us based on the trials that you've led, KEYNOTE-716, as well as CheckMate-76K, set us up to talk about Columbus-AD. Dr. Jason Luke: Thanks for that introduction, and certainly stage II disease has been something I've worked a lot on. The rationale for that has been that building off of the activity of anti–PD-1 in metastatic melanoma and then seeing the activity in stage III, like we just talked about, it was a curious circumstance that dating back about 7 to 8 years ago, there was no availability to use anti–PD-1 for high-risk stage II patients, even though the risk of recurrence and death from melanoma in the context of stage IIB and IIC melanoma is in fact similar or actually higher than in stage IIIA or IIIB, where anti–PD-1 was approved. And in that context, a couple of different trials that you alluded to, the Keynote-716 study that I led, as well as the CheckMate 76K trial, evaluated pembrolizumab and nivolumab, respectively, showing an improvement in relapse-free and distant metastasis-free survival, and both of those agents have subsequently been approved for use in the adjuvant setting by the US FDA as well as the European Medicines Agency.  So bringing then to this abstract, throughout melanoma oncology, we've seen that the impact of anti–PD-1 immunotherapy versus BRAF and MEK-targeted therapy have had very similar outcomes on a sort of comparison basis, both in frontline metastatic and then in adjuvant setting. So it was a totally reasonable question to ask: Could we use adjuvant BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy? And I think all of us expected the answer would be yes. As we get into the discussion of the trial, I think the unfortunate circumstance was that the timing of this clinical trial being delayed somewhat, unfortunately, made it very difficult to accrue the trial, and so we're going to have to try to read through the tea leaves sort of, based on only a partially complete data set. Dr. Diwakar Davar: So, in terms of the results, they wanted to enroll 815 patients, they only enrolled 110. The RFS and DMFS were marginally improved in the treatment arm but certainly not significantly, which is not surprising because the trial had only accrued 16% to 18% of its complete accrual. As such, we really can't abstract from the stage III COMBI-AD data to stage II patients. And certainly in this setting, one would argue that the primary treatment options certainly remain either anti–PD-1 monotherapy, either with pembrolizumab or nivolumab, based on 716 or 76K, or potentially active surveillance for the patients who are not inclined to get treated.  Can you tell us a little bit about how you foresee drug development going forward in this space because, you know, for example, with HARMONY, certainly IIC disease is a part of HARMONY. We will know at least a little bit about that in this space. So what do you think about the stage IIB/C patient population? Is this a patient population in which future combinations are going to be helpful, and how would you think about where we can go forward from here? Dr. Jason Luke: It is an unfortunate circumstance that this trial could not be accrued at the pace that was necessary. I think all of us believe that the results would have been positive if they'd been able to accrue the trial. In the preliminary data set that they did disclose of that 110 patients, you know, it's clear there is a difference at a, you know, a landmark at a year. They showed a 16% difference, and that would be in line with what has been seen in stage III. And so, you know, I think it's really kind of too bad. There's really going to be no regulatory approach for this consideration. So using BRAF and MEK inhibition in stage II is not going to be part of standard practice moving into the future. To your point, though, about where will the field go? I think what we're already realizing is that in the adjuvant setting, we're really overtreating the total population. And so beyond merely staging by AJCC criteria, we need to move to biomarker selection to help inform which patients truly need the treatment. And in that regard, I don't think we've crystallized together as a field as yet, but the kinds of things that people are thinking about are the integration of molecular biomarkers like ctDNA. When it's positive, it can be very helpful, but in melanoma, we found that, unfortunately, the rates are quite low, you know, in the 10% to 15% range in the adjuvant setting. So then another consideration would be factors in the primary tumor, such as gene expression profiling or other considerations.  And so I think the future of adjuvant clinical trials will be an integration of both the standard AJCC staging system as well as some kind of overlaid molecular biomarker that helps to enrich for a higher-risk population of patients because on a high level, when you abstract out, it's just clearly the case that we're rather substantially overtreating the totality of the population, especially given that in all of our adjuvant studies to date for anti–PD-1, we have not yet shown that there's an overall survival advantage. And so some are even arguing perhaps we should even reserve treatment until patients progress. I think that's a complicated subject, and standard of care at this point is to offer adjuvant therapy, but certainly a lot more to do because many patients, you know, unfortunately, still do progress and move on to metastatic disease. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Let's transition to Abstract 2508. So we're moving on from the melanoma to the novel immunotherapy abstracts. And this is a very, very, very fascinating drug. It's IMA203. So Abstract 2508 is a phase 1 clinical update of IMA203. IMA203 is an autologous TCR-T construct targeting PRAME in patients with heavily pretreated PD-1-refractory metastatic melanoma. So Jason, in the PD-1 and CTLA-4-refractory settings, treatment options are either autologous TIL, response rate, you know, ballpark 29% to 31%, oncolytic viral therapy, RP1 with nivolumab, ORR about 30-ish percent. So new options are needed. Can you tell us a little bit about IMA203? Perhaps tell us for the audience, what is the difference between a TCR-T and traditional autologous TIL? And a little bit about this drug, IMA203, and how it distinguishes itself from the competing TIL products in the landscape. Dr. Jason Luke: I'm extremely enthusiastic about IMA203. I think that it really has transformative potential based on these results and hopefully from the phase 3 trial that's open to accrual now. So, what is IMA203? We said it's a TCR-T cell product. So what that means is that T cells are removed from a patient, and then they can be transduced through various technologies, but inserted into those T cells, we can then add a T-cell receptor that's very specific to a single antigen, and in this case, it's PRAME. So that then is contrasted quite a bit from the TIL process, which includes a surgical resection of a tumor where T cells are removed, but they're not specific necessarily to the cancer, and they're grown up in the lab and then given to the patient. They're both adoptive cell transfer products, but they're very different. One is genetically modified, and the other one is not. And so the process for generating a TCR-T cell is that patients are required to have a new biomarker that some may not be familiar with, which is HLA profiling. So the T-cell receptor requires matching to the concomitant HLA for which the peptide is bound in. And so the classic one that is used in most oncology practices is A*02:01 because approximately 48% of Caucasians have A*02:01, and the frequency of HLA in other ethnicities starts to become highly variable. But in patients who are identified to have A*02:01 genotype, we can then remove blood via leukapheresis or an apheresis product, and then insert via lentiviral transduction this T-cell receptor targeting PRAME. Patients are then brought back to the hospital where they can receive lymphodepleting chemotherapy and then receive the reinfusion of the TCR-T cells. Again, in contrast with the TIL process, however, these T cells are extremely potent, and we do not need to give high-dose interleukin-2, which is administered in the context of TIL. Given that process, we have this clinical trial in front of us now, and at ASCO, the update was from the phase 1 study, which was looking at IMA203 in an efficacy population of melanoma patients who were refractory at checkpoint blockade and actually multiple lines of therapy. So here, there were 33 patients and a response rate of approximately 50% was observed in this population of patients, notably with a duration of response approximately a year in that treatment group. And I realize that these were heavily pretreated patients who had a range of very high-risk features. And approximately half the population had uveal melanoma, which people may be aware is a generally speaking more difficult-to-treat subtype of melanoma that metastasizes to the liver, which again has been a site of resistance to cancer immunotherapy. So these results are extremely promising. To summarize them from what I said, it's easier to make TCR-T cells because we can remove blood from the patient to transduce the T cells, and we don't have to put them through surgery. We can then infuse them, and based on these results, it looks like the response rate to IMA203 is a little bit more than double what we expect from lifileucel. And then, whereas with lifileucel or TILs, we have to give high-dose IL-2, here we do not have to give high-dose IL-2. And so that's pretty promising. And a clinical trial is ongoing now called the SUPREME phase 3 clinical trial, which is hoping to validate these results in a randomized global study. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Now, one thing that I wanted to go over with you, because you know this trial particularly well, is what you think of the likelihood of success, and then we'll talk a little bit about the trial design. But in your mind, do you think that this is a trial that has got a reasonable likelihood of success, maybe even a high likelihood of success? And maybe let's contextualize that to say an alternative trial, such as, for example, the TebeAM trial, which is essentially a T-cell bispecific targeting GP100. It's being compared against SOC, investigator's choice control, also in a similarly heavily pretreated patient population. Dr. Jason Luke: So both trials, I think, have a strong chance of success. They are very different kinds of agents. And so the CD3 bispecific that you referred to, tebentafusp, likely has an effect of delaying progression, which in patients with advanced disease could have a value that might manifest as overall survival. With TCR-T cells, by contrast, we see a very high response rate with some of the patients going into very durable long-term benefit. And so I do think that the SUPREME clinical trial has a very high chance of success. It will be the first clinical trial in solid tumor oncology randomizing patients to receive a cell therapy as compared with a standard of care. And within that standard of care control arm, TILs are allowed as a treatment. And so it will also be the first study that will compare TCR-T cells against TILs in a randomized phase 3. But going back to the data that we've seen in the phase 1 trial, what we observe is that the duration of response is really connected to the quality of the response, meaning if you have more than a 50% tumor shrinkage, those patients do very, very well. But even in patients who have less than 50% tumor shrinkage, the median progression-free survival right now is about 4.5 months. And again, as we think about trial design, standard of care options for patients who are in this situation are unfortunately very bad. And the progression-free survival in that population is probably more like 2 months. So this is a trial that has a very high likelihood of being positive because the possibility of long-term response is there, but even for patients who don't get a durable response, they're likely going to benefit more than they would have based on standard chemotherapy or retreatment with an anti–PD-1 agent. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Really, a very important trial to enroll, a trial that is first in many ways. First of a new generation of TCR-T agents, first trial to look at cell therapy in the control arm, a new standard of efficacy, but potentially also if this trial is successful, it will also be a new standard of trial conduct, a new kind of trial, of a set of trials that will be done in the second-line immunotherapy-refractory space. So let's pivot to the last trial that we were going to discuss, which was Abstract 2501. Abstract 2501 is a first-in-human phase 1/2 trial evaluating BNT142, which is the first-in-class mRNA-encoded bispecific targeting Claudin-6 and CD3 in patients with Claudin-positive tumors. We'll talk a little bit about this, but maybe let's start by talking a little bit about Claudin-6. So Claudin-6 is a very interesting new target. It's a target that's highly expressed in GI and ovarian tumors. There are a whole plethora of Claudin-6-targeting agents, including T-cell bispecifics and Claudin-6-directed CAR-Ts that are being developed. But BNT142 is novel. It's a novel lipid nanoparticle LNP-encapsulated mRNA. The mRNA encodes an anti–Claudin-6 CD3 bispecific termed RiboMAB-021. And it then is administered to the patient. The BNT142-encoding mRNA LNPs are taken up by the liver and translated into the active drug. So Jason, tell us a little bit about this agent. Why you think it's novel, if you think it's novel, and let's talk a little bit then about the results. Dr. Jason Luke: So I certainly think this is a novel agent, and I think this is just the first of what will probably become a new paradigm in oncology drug development. And so you alluded to this, but just to rehash it quickly, the drug is encoded as genetic information that's placed in the lipid nanoparticle and then is infused into the patient. And after the lipid nanoparticles are taken up by the liver, which is the most common place that LNPs are usually taken up, that genetic material in the mRNA starts to be translated into the actual protein, and that protein is the drug. So this is in vivo generation, so the patient is making their own drug inside their body. I think it's a really, really interesting approach. So for any drug that could be encoded as a genetic sequence, and in this case, it's a bispecific, as you mentioned, CD3-Claudin-6 engager, this could have a tremendous impact on how we think about pharmacology and novel drug development moving into the future in oncology. So I think it's an extremely interesting drug, the like of which we'll probably see only more moving forward. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Let's maybe briefly talk about the results. You know, the patient population was heavily pretreated, 65 or so patients, mostly ovarian cancer. Two-thirds of the patients were ovarian cancer, the rest were germ cell and lung cancer patients. But let's talk a little bit about the efficacy. The disease control rate was about 58% in the phase 1 population as a whole, but 75% in the ovarian patient population. Now tell us a little bit about the interesting things about the drug in terms of the pharmacokinetics, and also then maybe we can pivot to the clinical activity by dose level. Dr. Jason Luke: Well, so they did present in their presentation at ASCO a proportionality showing that as higher doses were administered, that greater amounts of the drug were being made inside the patient. And so that's an interesting observation, and it's an important one, right? Suggesting that the pharmacology that we classically think of by administering drugs by IV, for example, would still be in play. And that did translate into some level of efficacy, particularly at the higher dose levels. Now, the caveat that I'll make a note of is that disease control rate is an endpoint that I think we have to be careful about because what that really means is sometimes a little bit unclear. Sometimes patients have slowly growing tumors and so on and so forth. And the clinical relevance of disease control, if it doesn't last at least 6 months, I think is probably pretty questionable. So I think these are extremely interesting data, and there's some preliminary sense that getting the dose up is going to matter because the treatment responses were mostly observed at the highest dose levels. There's also a caveat, however, that across the field of CD3 bispecific molecules like this, there's been quite a bit of heterogeneity in terms of the response rate, with some of them only really generating stable disease responses and other ones having more robust responses. And so I think this is a really interesting initial foray into this space. My best understanding is this molecule is not moving forward further after this, but I think that this really does set it up to be able to chase after multiple different drug targets on a CD3 bispecific backbone, both in ovarian cancer, but then basically across all of oncology. Dr. Diwakar Davar: Perfect. This is a very new sort of exciting arena where we're going to be looking at, in many ways, these programmable constructs, whether we're looking at in vivo-generated, in this case, a T-cell bispecific, but we've also got newer drugs where we are essentially giving drugs where people are generating in vivo CAR T, and also potentially even in vivo TCR-T. But certainly lots of new excitement around this entire class of drugs. And so, what we'd like to do at this point in time is switch to essentially the fact that we've got a very, very exciting set of data at ASCO 2025. You've heard from Dr. Luke regarding the advances in both early drug development but also in advanced cutaneous melanoma. And Jason, as always, thank you so much for sharing your very valuable and great, fantastic insights with us on the ASCO Daily News Podcast. Dr. Jason Luke: Well, thanks again for the opportunity. Dr. Diwakar Davar: And thank you to our listeners for taking your time to listen today. You will find the links to the abstracts that we discussed today in the transcript of this episode. And finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Follow today's speakers:    Dr. Diwakar Davar    @diwakardavar    Dr. Jason Luke @jasonlukemd Follow ASCO on social media:     @ASCO on Twitter       ASCO on Bluesky   ASCO on Facebook       ASCO on LinkedIn   Disclosures:     Dr. Diwakar Davar:      Honoraria: Merck, Tesaro, Array BioPharma, Immunocore, Instil Bio, Vedanta Biosciences     Consulting or Advisory Role: Instil Bio, Vedanta Biosciences     Consulting or Advisory Role (Immediate family member): Shionogi     Research Funding: Merck, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, CellSight Technologies, GSK, Merck, Arvus Biosciences, Arcus Biosciences     Research Funding (Inst.): Zucero Therapeutics     Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Application No.: 63/124,231 Title: COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING CANCER Applicant: University of Pittsburgh–Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education Inventors: Diwakar Davar Filing Date: December 11, 2020 Country: United States MCC Reference: 10504-059PV1 Your Reference: 05545; and Application No.: 63/208,719 Enteric Microbiotype Signatures of Immune-related Adverse Events and Response in Relation to Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy     Dr. Jason Luke:     Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Actym Therapeutics, Mavu Pharmaceutical, Pyxis, Alphamab Oncology, Tempest Therapeutics, Kanaph Therapeutics, Onc.AI, Arch Oncology, Stipe, NeoTX     Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, EMD Serono, Novartis, 7 Hills Pharma, Janssen, Reflexion Medical, Tempest Therapeutics, Alphamab Oncology, Spring Bank, Abbvie, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Incyte, Mersana, Partner Therapeutics, Synlogic, Eisai, Werewolf, Ribon Therapeutics, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Nektar, Regeneron, Rubius, Tesaro, Xilio, Xencor, Alnylam, Crown Bioscience, Flame Biosciences, Genentech, Kadmon, KSQ Therapeutics, Immunocore, Inzen, Pfizer, Silicon Therapeutics, TRex Bio, Bright Peak, Onc.AI, STipe, Codiak Biosciences, Day One Therapeutics, Endeavor, Gilead Sciences, Hotspot Therapeutics, SERVIER, STINGthera, Synthekine     Research Funding (Inst.): Merck , Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie, Macrogenics, Xencor, Array BioPharma, Agios, Astellas Pharma , EMD Serono, Immatics, Kadmon, Moderna Therapeutics, Nektar, Spring bank, Trishula, KAHR Medical, Fstar, Genmab, Ikena Oncology, Numab, Replimmune, Rubius Therapeutics, Synlogic, Takeda, Tizona Therapeutics, Inc., BioNTech AG, Scholar Rock, Next Cure     Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Serial #15/612,657 (Cancer Immunotherapy), and Serial #PCT/US18/36052 (Microbiome Biomarkers for Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Responsiveness: Diagnostic, Prognostic and Therapeutic Uses Thereof)     Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Array BioPharma, EMD Serono, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Reflexion Medical, Mersana, Pyxis, Xilio

Dr. Vamsi Velcheti and Dr. Nate Pennell discuss novel treatment approaches in small cell and non-small cell lung cancer that were featured at the 2025 ASCO Annual Meeting. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Hello, I'm Dr. Vamsi Velcheti, your guest host of the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm a professor of medicine and chief of hematology and oncology at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida. The 2025 ASCO Annual Meeting featured some exciting advancements in small cell lung cancer, targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer, and other novel [treatment] approaches. Today, I'm delighted to be joined by Dr. Nate Pennell to discuss some of the key abstracts that are advancing the lung cancer field. Dr. Pennell is the co-director of the Cleveland Clinic Lung Cancer Program and also the vice chair of clinical research at the Taussig Cancer Institute. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode. Nate, it's great to have you back on the podcast. Thanks so much for being here. Dr. Nate Pennell: Thanks, Vamsi. Always a pleasure. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Let's get started, and I think the first abstract that really caught my attention was Abstract 8516, “The Randomized Trial of Relevance of Time of Day of Immunotherapy for Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.” What are your thoughts about this, Nate? Dr. Nate Pennell: I agree. I thought this was one of the most discussed abstracts, certainly in the lung cancer session, but I think even outside of lung cancer, it got some discussion. So, just to put this in perspective, there have been a number of publications that have all been remarkably consistent, and not just in lung cancer but across multiple cancer types, that immunotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, are commonly used. And all of them have suggested, when looking at retrospective cohorts, that patients who receive immune checkpoint inhibitors earlier in the day – so in the morning or before the early afternoon – for whatever reason, appear to have better outcomes than those who get it later in the day, and this has been repeated. And I think many people just sort of assumed that this was some sort of strange association and that there was something fundamentally different from a prognostic standpoint in people who came in in the morning to get their treatment versus those who came later in the afternoon, and that was probably the explanation. The authors of this randomized trial actually decided to test this concept. And so, about 210 patients with previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer were randomly assigned to get chemo and immune checkpoint inhibitor – either pembrolizumab or sintilimab – and half of them were randomly assigned to get the treatment before 3 PM in the afternoon, and half of them were assigned to get it after 3 PM in the afternoon. And it almost completely recapitulated what was seen in the retrospective cohorts. So, the median progression-free survival in those who got earlier treatment was 13.2 months versus only 6.5 months in those who got it later in the day. So, really enormous difference with a hazard ratio of 0.43, which was statistically significant. And perhaps even more striking, the median overall survival was not reached in the early group versus 17.8 months in the late group with a hazard ratio of 0.43, also highly statistically significant. Even the response rate was 20% higher in the early patients; 75% response rate compared to 56% in the late-time-of-day patients. So very consistent across all measures of efficacy with pretty good matched characteristics across the different groups. And so, I have to tell you, I don't know what to make of this. I certainly was a skeptic about the retrospective series, but now we have a prospective randomized trial that shows essentially the same thing. So, maybe there is a difference between getting treated in the morning, although I have yet to hear someone give a very good mechanistic explanation as to why this would be. What were your thoughts on this? Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: It's indeed fascinating, Nate, and I actually think this was a very interesting abstract. Really, I was caught off guard looking at the data. I mean, if it were a drug, we would be so excited, right? I mean, with those kind of survival benefits. I don't know. I think circadian rhythm probably has something to do with it, like different cytokine profiles at the time of administration. I mean, who knows? But I think it's a randomized trial, and I think I would expect to see a mad rush for treatment appointments early in the morning given this, and at least I want my patients to come in first thing in the morning. It'll be interesting to see. Dr. Nate Pennell: It's important to point out that in this study, everyone got chemo and immunotherapy. And, at least in our cancer center, most patients who are getting platinum-doublet chemotherapy and immunotherapy actually do get treated earlier in the day already, just because of the length of the infusion appointment that's needed. So it really is oftentimes people getting single-agent immunotherapy who are often getting the later, shorter visits. But if you have a choice, I think it would be very reasonable to have people treated earlier in the day. And I do think most of the impressions that I got from people about this is that they would like to see it reproduced but certainly well worth further investigation. And I personally would like to see more investigation into what the rationale would be for this because I still can't quite figure out, yes, if you got it at, say, you know, 5 PM, that's later in the day and I can understand that maybe your immune system is somewhat less receptive at that point than it would be in the morning. But because these checkpoint inhibitors have such long half-lives, it's still in your system the next morning when your immune system is supposedly more receptive. So I don't quite understand why that would be the case. Well, let's move on to the next study. I would like to hear your thoughts on Abstract 8515, “Plasma-Guided, Adaptive First-Line Chemoimmunotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.” Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, this was another abstract that seems to be really interesting in my opinion. I think there's kind of a lot of emphasis lately on ctDNA and MRD-based assays to monitor disease. In the lung cancer space, we haven't had a lot of clinical trials looking at this prospectively, and this was one of those pilot studies where they looked at circulating free DNA (cfDNA)-based response-adaptive strategy for frontline patients who are PD-L1 positive. So, patients started with pembrolizumab monotherapy, and based on plasma molecular response after 2 cycles, those patients without response received early treatment intensification with a platinum doublet. So the approach essentially was to reduce the chemotherapy exposure in patients who respond to immunotherapy. And only about 17.5% of the patients on the trial received chemotherapy based on lack of molecular response. So, in this trial, what they found was patients with the cfDNA response had a markedly improved PFS of 16.4 months versus 4.8 months. So essentially, like, this is a really nice study to set a foundation on which we have to do larger studies to incorporate molecular markers trying to look at cfDNA response to inform treatment strategy, either escalation or de-escalation strategies. So, I thought it was a very interesting study. Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah. I mean, we always have this question for patients, “Should they get immunotherapy alone or combined with chemo?” and I think this certainly is intriguing, suggesting that there may be ways you can monitor people and perhaps rescue those that aren't going to respond to single agent. I'd like to see a randomized trial against, you know, this strategy, perhaps against everyone getting, say, chemoimmunotherapy or make sure that you're not potentially harming people by doing this strategy. But I agree, it's time to move beyond just observing that cell-free DNA is prognostic and important and start using it to actually guide treatment. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, and I would just caution though, like, you know, I think we need more data, but, however, it's certainly a very interesting piece of data to kind of help inform future trials. So, there was another abstract that caught my attention, and I think this would be a very interesting abstract in the EGFR space. Abstract 8506, "Patritumab Deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) in Resistant EGFR-Mutant Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Third-Generation EGFR TKI," it's the HERTHENA-Lung02 study. What do you think about the results of this study? Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah, this was, I would say, very widely anticipated and ultimately a little disappointing, despite being a positive trial. So, these are patients with EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer who have progressed after a third-generation EGFR TKI like osimertinib. This is really an area of major unmet need. We do have drugs like amivantamab in this space, but still definitely an area where essentially patients move from having a highly effective oral therapy to being in the realm of chemotherapy as their best option. So, this HER3 antibody-drug conjugate, patritumab deruxtecan, had some good single-arm data for this. And we're sort of hoping this would become an available option for patients. This trial was designed against platinum-doublet chemotherapy in this setting and with a primary endpoint of progression-free survival. And it actually was positive for improved progression-free survival compared to chemo with a hazard ratio of 0.77. But when you look at the medians, you can see that the median PFS was only 5.8 versus 5.4 months. It was really a modest difference between the two arms. And on the interim analysis, it appeared that there will not be a difference in overall survival between the two arms. In fact, the hazard ratio at the interim analysis was 0.98 for the two arms. So based on this, unfortunately, the company that developed the HER3-DXd has withdrawn their application to the FDA for approval of the drug, anticipating that they probably wouldn't get past approval without that overall survival endpoint. So, unfortunately, probably not, at least for the near future, going to be a new option for these patients. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, I think this is a space that's clearly an unmet need, and this was a big disappointment, I should say. I think all of us were going into the meeting anticipating some change in the standard of care here. Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah, I agree. It was something that I was telling patients, honestly, that I was expecting this to be coming, and so now, definitely a bit of a disappointment. But it happens and, hopefully, it will still find perhaps a role or other drugs with a similar target. Certainly an active area. Well, let's leave the EGFR-mutant space and move into small cell. There were a couple of very impactful studies. And one of them was Abstract 8006, “Lurbinectedin Plus Atezolizumab as First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer, Primary Results from the Phase III IMforte Trial.” So, what was your impression of this? Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, I think this is definitely an interesting study, and small cell, I remember those days when we had barely any studies of small cell at ASCO, and now we have a lot of exciting developments in the small cell space. It's really good to see. The IMforte trial is essentially like a maintenance lurbinectedin trial with atezolizumab maintenance. And the study was a positive trial. The primary endpoint was a PFS, and the study showed improvement in both PFS and OS with the addition of lurbinectedin to atezolizumab maintenance. And definitely, it's a positive trial, met its primary endpoint, but I always am a little skeptical of adding maintenance cytotoxic therapies here in this setting. In my practice, and I'd like to hear your opinion, Nate, most patients with small cell after 4 cycles of a platinum doublet, they're kind of really beaten up. Adding more cytotoxic therapy in the maintenance space is going to be tough, I think, for a lot of patients. But also, most importantly, I think this rapidly evolving landscape for patients with small cell lung cancer with multiple new, exciting agents, actually like some FDA-approved like tarlatamab, also like a lot of these emerging therapeutics like I-DXd and other ADCs in this space. You kind of wonder, is it really optimal strategy to bring on like another cytotoxic agent right after induction chemotherapy, or do you kind of delay that? Or maybe have like a different strategy in terms of maintenance. I know that the tarlatamab maintenance trial is probably going to read out at some point too. I think it's a little challenging. The hazard ratio is also 0.73. As I said, it's a positive trial, but it's just incremental benefit of adding lurbi. And also on the trial, we need to also pay attention to the post-progression second-line treatments, number of patients who received tarlatamab or any other investigational agents.  So I think it's a lot of questions still. I'm not quite sure I'd be able to embrace this completely. I think a vast majority of my patients might not be eligible anyway for cytotoxic chemotherapy maintenance right away, but yeah, it's tough. Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah. I would call this a single and not a home run. It definitely is real. It was a real overall survival benefit. Certainly not surprising that a maintenance therapy would improve progression-free survival. We've known that for a long time in small cell, but first to really show an overall survival benefit. But I completely agree with you. I mean, many people are not going to want to continue further cytotoxics after 4 cycles of platinum-doublet chemo. So I would say, for those that are young and healthy and fly through chemo without a lot of toxicity, I think certainly something worth mentioning. The problem with small cell, of course, is that so many people get sick so quickly while on that observation period after first-line chemo that they don't make it to second-line treatment. And so, giving everyone maintenance therapy essentially ensures everyone gets that second-line treatment. But they also lose that potentially precious few months where they feel good and normal and are able to be off of treatment. So, I would say this is something where we're really going to have to kind of sit and have that shared decision-making visit with patients and decide what's meaningful to them. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, I agree. The next abstract that was a Late-Breaking Abstract, 8000, “Overall Survival of Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in CheckMate-816.” This was a highly anticipated read-out of the OS data from 816. What did you make of this abstract? Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah, I thought this was great. Of course, CheckMate-816 changed practice a number of years ago when it first reported out. So, this was the first of the neoadjuvant or perioperative chemoimmunotherapy studies in resectable non-small cell lung cancer. So, just to review, this was a phase 3 study for patients with what we would now consider stage II or stage IIIA resectable non-small cell lung cancer. And they received three cycles of either chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus nivolumab, and that was it. That was the whole treatment. No adjuvant treatment was given afterwards. They went to resection. And patients who received the chemoimmunotherapy had a much higher pathologic complete response rate and a much better event-free survival. And based on this, this regimen was approved and, I think, at least in the United States, widely adopted.  Now, since the first presentation of CheckMate 816, there have been a number of perioperative studies that have included an adjuvant component of immunotherapy – KEYNOTE-671, the AEGEAN study – and these also have shown improved outcomes. The KEYNOTE study with pembrolizumab also with an overall survival benefit. And I think people forgot a little bit about CheckMate-816. So, this was the 5-year overall survival final analysis. And it did show a statistically and, I think, clinically meaningful difference in overall survival with the 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemo-nivo compared to chemo with a hazard ratio of 0.72. The 5-year overall survival of 65% in the chemo-IO group versus 55% with the chemo alone. So a meaningful improvement. And interestingly, that hazard ratio of 0.72 is very similar to what was seen in the peri-operative pembro study that included the adjuvant component. So, very much still relevant for people who think that perhaps the value of those neoadjuvant treatments might be really where most of the impact comes from this type of approach. They also gave us an update on those with pathologic complete response, showing really astronomically good outcomes. If you have a pathologic complete response, which was more than a quarter of patients, the long-term survival was just phenomenal. I mean, 95% alive at 5 years if they were in that group and suggesting that in those patients at least, the adjuvant treatment may not be all that important.  So, I think this was an exciting update and still leaves very much the open question about the importance of continuing immunotherapy after surgery after the neoadjuvant component. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, I completely agree, Nate. I think the million-dollar question is: “Is there like a population of patients who don't have complete response but like maybe close to complete response?” So, would you like still consider stopping adjuvant IO? I probably would not be comfortable, but I think sometimes, you know, we all have patients who are like very apprehensive of continuing treatments. So, I think that we really need more studies, especially for those patients who don't achieve a complete CR. I think trying to find strategies for like de-escalation based on MRD or other risk factors. But we need more trials in that space to inform not just de-escalation, but there are some patients who don't respond at all to a neoadjuvant IO. So, there may be an opportunity for escalating adjuvant therapies. So, it is an interesting space to watch out for. Dr. Nate Pennell: No, absolutely. Moving to KRAS-mutant space, so our very common situation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, we had the results of Abstract 8500, “First-Line Adagrasib With Pembrolizumab in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic KRASG12C-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer” from the phase 2 portion of the KRYSTAL-7 study. Why was this an interesting and important study? Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: First of all, there were attempts to kind of combine KRASG12C inhibitors in the past with immune checkpoint inhibitors, notably sotorasib with pembrolizumab. Unfortunately, those trials have led to like a lot of toxicity, with increased especially liver toxicity, which was a major issue. This is a phase 2 study of adagrasib in combination with pembrolizumab, and this is a study in the frontline setting in patients with the G12C-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. And across all the PD-L1 groups, the ORR was 44%, and the median PFS was 11 months, comparable to the previous data that we have seen with adagrasib in this setting. So it's not like a major improvement in clinical efficacy. However, I think the toxicity profile that we were seeing was slightly better than the previous trials in combination with sotorasib, but you still have a fair amount of transaminitis even in the study. At this point, this is not ready for clinical primetime. I don't think we should be using sotorasib or adagrasib in the frontline or even in the second line in combination with checkpoint inhibitors. Combining these drugs with checkpoint inhibitors in the clinical practice might lead to adverse outcomes. So, we need to wait for more data like newer-generation G12C inhibitors which are also being studied in combination, so we'll have to kind of wait for more data to emerge in this space. Dr. Nate Pennell: I agree, this is not immediately practice changing. This is really an attempt to try to combine targeted treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitor. And I agree with you that, you know, it does appear to be perhaps a little bit better tolerated than some of the prior combinations that have tried in this space. The outcomes overall were not that impressive, although in the PD-L1 greater than 50%, it did have a better response rate perhaps than you would expect with either drug alone. And I do think that the company is focusing on that population for a future randomized trial, which certainly would inform this question better. But in the meantime, I agree with you, there's a lot of newer drugs that are coming along that potentially may be more active and better tolerated. And so, I'd say for now, interesting but we'll wait and see. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, so now moving back again to small cell. So, there was a Late-Breaking Abstract, 8008. This is a study of tarlatamab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for small cell lung cancer. They presented the primary analysis of the phase III DeLLphi-304 study. What do you think about this? Dr. Nate Pennell: Yeah, I thought this was really exciting. This was, I would say, perhaps the most important lung study that was presented. Tarlatamab is, of course, the anti-DLL3 bispecific T-cell engager compound, which is already FDA approved based on a prior single-arm phase II study, which showed a very nice response rate as a single agent in previously treated small cell lung cancer and relatively manageable side effects, although somewhat unique to solid tumor docs in the use of these bispecific drugs in things like cytokine release syndrome and ICANS, the neurologic toxicities. So, this trial was important because tarlatamab was approved, but there were also other chemotherapy drugs approved in the previously treated space. And so, this was a head-to-head second-line competition comparison between tarlatamab and either topotecan, lurbinectedin, or amrubicin in previously treated small cell patients with a primary endpoint of overall survival. So, a very well-designed trial. And it did show, I think, a very impressive improvement in overall survival with a median overall survival in the tarlatamab group of 13.6 months compared to 8.3 months with chemotherapy, hazard ratio of 0.6. And progression-free survival was also longer at 4.2 months versus 3.2 months, hazard ratio of 0.72. In addition to showing improvements in cancer-related symptoms that were improved in tarlatamab compared to chemotherapy, there was actually also significantly lower rates of serious treatment-related adverse events with tarlatamab compared to chemotherapy. So, you do still see the cytokine release syndrome, which is seen in most people but is manageable because these patients are admitted to the hospital for the first two cycles, as well as a significant number of patients with neurologic side effects, the so-called ICANS, which also can be treated with steroids. And so, I think based upon the very significant improvement in outcomes, I would expect that this should become our kind of standard second-line treatment since it seems to be much better than chemo. However, tarlatamab is definitely a new drug that a lot of places are not used to using, and I think a lot of cancer centers, especially ones that aren't tied to a hospital, may have questions about how to deal with the CRS. So, I'm curious your thoughts on that. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, thank you, Nate. And I completely agree. I think the data looked really promising, and I've already been using tarlatamab in the second-line space. The durability of response and overall, having used tarlatamab quite a bit - like, I participated in some of the early trials and also used it as standard of care - tarlatamab has unique challenges in terms of like need for hospitalization for monitoring for the first few treatments and make sure, you know, we monitor those patients for CRS and ICANS. But once you get past that initial administration and monitoring of CRS, these patients have a much better quality of life, they're off chemotherapy, and I think it's really about the logistics of actually administering tarlatamab and coordination with the hospital and administration in the outpatient setting. It's definitely challenging, but I think it definitely can be done and should be done given what we are seeing in terms of clinical efficacy here. Dr. Nate Pennell: I agree. I think hospital systems now are just going to have to find a way to be able to get this on formulary and use it because it clearly seems to be more effective and generally better tolerated by patients. So, should move forward, I think. Finally, there's an abstract I wanted to ask you about, Abstract 8001, which is the “Neoadjuvant osimertinib with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in resectable epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: The NeoADAURA Study”. And this is one that I think was also fairly highly anticipated. So, what are your thoughts? Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: You know, I wasn't probably surprised with the results, and I believe we were all expecting a positive trial, and we certainly were handed a positive trial here. It's a phase III trial of osimertinib and chemotherapy or osimertinib in the neoadjuvant space followed by surgery, followed by osimertinib. It's a global phase 3 trial and very well conducted, and patients with stage II to stage IIIB were enrolled in the study. And in the trial, patients who had a neoadjuvant osimertinib with or without chemotherapy showed a significant improvement in major pathologic response rates over chemotherapy alone. And the EFS was also positive for osimertinib and chemotherapy, osimertinib monotherapy as well compared to chemotherapy alone. So overall, the study met its primary endpoint, and I think it sheds light on how we manage our patients with early-stage lung cancer. I think osimertinib, we know that osimertinib is already FDA approved in the adjuvant space, but what we didn't really know is how was osimertinib going to work in the neoadjuvant space. And there are always situations, especially for stage III patients, where we are on the fence about, are these patients already close to being metastatic? They have, like, almost all these patients have micrometastatic disease, even if they have stage III. As we saw in the LAURA data, when you look at the control arm, it was like a very short PFS. Chemoradiation does nothing for those patients, and I think these patients have systemic mets, either gross or micrometastatic disease at onset. So, it's really important to incorporate osimertinib early in the treatment course. And I think, especially for the locally advanced patients, I think it's even more important to kind of incorporate osimertinib in the neoadjuvant space and get effective local control with surgery and treat them with adjuvant. I'm curious to hear your thoughts, Nate. Dr. Nate Pennell: I am a believer and have long been a believer in targeted adjuvant treatments, and, you know, it has always bothered me somewhat that we're using our far and away most effective systemic therapy; we wait until after they go through all their pre-op treatments, they go through surgery, then they go through chemotherapy, and then finally months later, they get their osimertinib, and it still clearly improves survival in the adjuvant setting. Why not just start the osimertinib as soon as you know that the patient has EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer, and then you can move on to surgery and adjuvant treatment afterwards? And I think what was remarkable about this study is that all of these patients almost - 90% in each arm - went to surgery. So, you weren't harming them with the neoadjuvant treatment. And clearly better major pathologic response, nodal downstaging, event-free survival was better. But I don't know that this trial is ever going to show an overall survival difference between neoadjuvant versus just surgery and adjuvant treatment, given how effective the drug is in the adjuvant setting. Nonetheless, I think the data is compelling enough to consider this, certainly for our N2-positive, stage IIIA patients or a IIIB who might be otherwise surgical candidates. I think based on this, I would certainly consider that. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Yeah, and especially for EGFR, like even for stage IIIB patients, in the light of the LAURA study, those patients who do not do too well with chemoradiation. So you're kind of delaying effective systemic therapy, as you said, waiting for the chemoradiation to finish. So I think probably time to revisit how we kind of manage these locally advanced EGFR patients. Dr. Nate Pennell: Yep, I agree. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: Nate, thank you so much for sharing your fantastic insights today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast. It's been an exciting ASCO again. You know, we've seen a lot of positive trials impacting our care of non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer patients. Dr. Nate Pennell: Thanks for inviting me, Vamsi. Always a pleasure to discuss these with you. Dr. Vamsi Velcheti: And thanks to our listeners for your time today. You will find links to all of the abstracts discussed today in the transcript of the episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear from the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review, subscribe wherever you get your podcast. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. More on today's speakers:    Dr. Vamsi Velcheti   @VamsiVelcheti    Dr. Nathan Pennell   @n8pennell   Follow ASCO on social media:     @ASCO on Twitter     ASCO on Facebook     ASCO on LinkedIn   ASCO on BlueSky   Disclosures:   Dr. Vamsi Velcheti:   Honoraria: ITeos Therapeutics   Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Foundation Medicine, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Novartis, Lilly, EMD Serono, GSK, Amgen, Elevation Oncology, Taiho Oncology, Merus   Research Funding (Inst.): Genentech, Trovagene, Eisai, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Alkermes, NantOmics, Genoptix, Altor BioScience, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Atreca, Heat Biologics, Leap Therapeutics, RSIP Vision, GlaxoSmithKline   Dr. Nathan Pennell:     Consulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Cota Healthcare, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Amgen, G1 Therapeutics, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Viosera, Xencor, Mirati Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi/Regeneron    Research Funding (Inst): Genentech, AstraZeneca, Merck, Loxo, Altor BioScience, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Jounce Therapeutics, Mirati Therapeutics, Heat Biologics, WindMIL, Sanofi 

In this episode of “Moving Medicine Forward,” Tara Mink,expert in cell and gene therapy for more than 25 years, joins to discuss the science, promise, and challenges of CAR-T therapy. Tara explains how CAR-T works, its remarkable durability, and the side effects clinicians manage. She also discusses the future of gene therapy, barriers to access, and how the field is expanding into new disease areas. 01:05 Tara explains the CAR-T process, including how T cells are collected, genetically modified with a chimeric antigen receptor, expanded, and then reinfused into the patient.01:49 Discussion of CAR-T's efficacy, described as both remarkable and durable. It's positioned as a “one and done” therapy that typically requires no maintenance.02:30 Tara outlines common side effects like cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity, emphasizing their manageability with proper early intervention.03:18 The future of gene therapy is promising, with projections of 1,500 new therapies emerging by 2030, according to the Cardinal 2025 report.04:00 Key challenges include the high cost of research and treatment, limited insurance coverage, accessibility to treatment centers, and widespread misinformation in the medical community.06:37 Solutions include expanding treatment access, supporting outpatient models, partnering with third-party services, and improving insurance and patient education.09:25 Commercial hurdles are explored, such as the need for better technologies that reduce side effects and the importance of building provider confidence in administering CAR-T in community settings.10:08 An overview of where CAR-T is headed, including gastrointestinal conditions, prostate cancer, neuroblastoma, lung and breast cancer, and autoimmune diseases. 12:00 Tara shares how patient outcomes have dramatically improved over the last decade, with some blood cancer patients now living 25–30 years post-treatment.13:06 Encouragement for patients to seek expert guidance, confirm the treatment fits their diagnosis, and work closely with their provider teams for the best path forward. 

Risa Arin doesn't just talk about health literacy. She built the damn platform. As founder and CEO of XpertPatient.com (yes, expert with no E), Risa's taking a wrecking ball to how cancer education is delivered. A Cornell alum, cancer caregiver, and ex-agency insider who once sold Doritos to teens, she now applies that same marketing muscle to helping patients actually understand the garbage fire that is our healthcare system. We talk about why she left the “complacent social safety” of agency life, how her mom unknowingly used her own site during treatment, what it's like to pitch cancer education after someone pitches warm cookies, and why healthcare should come with a map, a translator, and a refund policy. Risa brings data, chutzpah, and Murphy Brown energy to the conversation—and you'll leave smarter, angrier, and maybe even a little more hopeful.RELATED LINKS• XpertPatient.com• Risa Arin on LinkedIn• XpertPatient & Antidote Partnership• XpertPatient Featured on KTLA• 2024 Health Award BioFEEDBACKLike 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.

This is episode three of Swimming with Shadows: A Radiolab Week of Sharks.Today, we take a trip across the world, from the south coast of Australia to … Wisconsin. Here, scientists are scouring shark blood to find one of nature's hidden keys, a molecular superhero that might unlock our ability to cure cancer: shark antibodies. They're small. They're flexible. And they can fit into nooks and crannies on tumors that our antibodies can't.We journey back 500 million years to the moment sharks got these special powers and head to the underground labs transforming these monsters into healers. Can these animals we fear so much actually save us? Special thanks to Mike Criscitiello, David Schatz, Mary Rose Madden, Ryan Ogilvie, Margot Wohl, Sofi LaLonde, and Isabelle Bérubé.EPISODE CREDITS: Reported by - Becca BresslerProduced by - Becca Bressler and Matt KieltyOriginal music from - Matt Kielty and Jeremy BloomSound design contributed by - Matt Kielty, Jeremy Bloom, and Becca Bresslerwith mixing help from - Jeremy BloomFact-checking by - Diane Kellyand Edited by  - Pat WaltersSignup for our newsletter!! It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)!Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab (https://members.radiolab.org/) today.Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing radiolab@wnyc.org.Leadership support for Radiolab's science programming is provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation Initiative, and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Dr. Jamie Wells is back—and this time, she brought a book. We cover everything from biomedical design screwups to the glorified billing software known as the EHR. Jamie's new book, A Clinical Lens on Pediatric Engineering, is a masterclass in what happens when you stop treating kids like small, drunk adults and start designing medicine around actual human factors. We talk about AI in pediatric radiology, why drug repurposing might save lives faster than biotech IPOs, and the absurdity of thinking one-size-fits-all in healthcare still works.Jamie's a former physician, a health policy disruptor, a bioethicist, an MIT director, and a recovering adjunct professor. She's also a unicorn. We dig into the wonk, throw shade at bad design, and channel our inner Lisa Simpsons. This one's for anyone who ever wondered why kids' hospitals feel like hell and why “make it taste like bubblegum” might be the most important clinical innovation of all time. You'll laugh, you'll learn, and you might get angry enough to fix something.RELATED LINKSJamie Wells on LinkedInBook: A Clinical Lens on Pediatric Engineering (Amazon)Book on SpringerDrexel BioMed ProfileGlobal Blockchain Business CouncilJamie's HuffPost ArticlesFEEDBACKLike 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.