Podcasts about md anderson cancer center

In this episode, medical student Kristen Schill interviews Dr. Subha Hanif and Dr. Obada Obaisi, two physicians specializing in cancer rehabilitation. Dr. Hanif completed her PM&R residency at Mary Free Bed Rehabilitation Hospital and her cancer rehabilitation fellowship at the University of Michigan, and she currently practices at Mayo Clinic. Dr. Obaisi completed his PM&R residency at Rush University Medical Center, followed by a cancer rehabilitation fellowship at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and now practices at Rush University. They discuss the role of cancer rehabilitation within multidisciplinary cancer care, the training pathway into the specialty, and how the field continues to evolve. The conversation also highlights opportunities for medical students to get involved and offers practical advice for those considering cancer rehabilitation as a career.

“Would you risk it all for a baby monkey you've never met?”

Love the episode? Send us a text!What if part of what makes cancer so hard isn't just the diagnosis—but the spaces where care happens?In this eye-opening episode of Breast Cancer Conversations, host Laura Carfang explores how hospital design, architecture, and the built environment directly shape the cancer experience, often in ways patients never realize—but deeply feel.Laura is joined by Abbie Clary, Executive Director of Market Strategies and Growth for Health for All, and a nationally recognized leader in healthcare architecture and experience design. With millions of square feet of cancer and healthcare facilities in her portfolio—including projects at Memorial Sloan Kettering, MD Anderson, and the Shirley Ryan AbilityLab—Abbie pulls back the curtain on how hospitals are designed, who they're designed for, and why women are so often treated as the “outlier.”Together, they discuss trauma-informed design, survivorship-centered care, caregiver inclusion, gender bias in medical spaces, and why healing doesn't only happen through medicine—it happens through dignity, control, and environment.In This Episode, We Talk About:Why hospitals and medical spaces are often designed for a “default male”How architecture impacts anxiety, trauma, and healing for cancer patientsWhat trauma-informed design actually looks like in practiceWhy cancer patients experience healthcare differently than other patientsThe importance of designing for repeat visits, not one-time careHow caregivers and loved ones should be treated as part of the care teamWhy dignity, control, and privacy matter as much as efficiencyGender bias in medical design—from gowns to equipment to workflowsWhy women's pain and discomfort are often minimized in healthcareDesigning cancer centers for survivorship, not just treatmentAbout Today's GuestAbbie Clary, FAIA, FACHA, is the Executive Director of Market Strategies and Growth — Health for All. Her work spans some of the most ambitious healthcare projects in the world, including Memorial Sloan Kettering's new Cancer Care Pavilion, MD Anderson Cancer Center's 2030 facilities master plan, and the Shirley Ryan AbilityLab in Chicago.A nationally sought-after speaker and TEDx presenter, Abbie's work focuses on transforming healthcare through strategic, human-centered design—bridging architecture, culture change, patient experience, and health equity. Her mission is simple but radical: design healthcare spaces that actually support healing, dignity, and belonging. Support the showLatest News: Become a Breast Cancer Conversations+ Member! Sign Up Now. Join our Mailing List - New content drops every Monday! Discover FREE programs, support groups, and resources! Enjoying our content? Please consider supporting our work.

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

Dr. Shivani Gupta comes from a family of people with diabetes, generation by generation, where she's seen the after-effects of suffering with chronic metabolic disease.  Her new book, The Inflammation Code (launching, distills 20 years of studying Ayurveda into simple pillars you can apply to prevent the level of inflammation and disease we see today. When people tell her, "I have brain fog, I'm tired, my sleep is off, my digestion's off, I have stubborn weight gain…I guess this is just aging," her reply is, "No, it's not aging, it's inflammaging." We had a really excellent, in-depth conversation that covered a lot of ground, from black pepper and the blood-brain-barrier to our detox experiences in India. I hope you enjoy the podcast! In this podcast, Dr. Gupta and I discuss: Her study of Ayurveda, a 5,000-year-old system from India that taught us the circadian clock, modern science discovered what Ayurveda taught 5,000 years ago about living in rhythm with nature The three doshas or constitutions of Vata (air/ether), Pitta (fire/water), and Kapha (earth/water)—understanding your constitution helps customize your self-care practices and diet The circadian clock in Ayurveda teaches that 10:00 to 2:00 PM is Pitta (fire) time, when you're most focused and energetic, and meant to eat your biggest meal 10:00 PM to 2:00 AM is the most important time to be asleep, when Pitta fire cleans and clears inflammation, the lymphatic system, and the glymphatic system (lymphatic system of the brain) Vata people are always in motion and prefer jobs where they don't sit still—they're endurance athletes who can run through the day on coffee, green juice, and crackers (but their homework is three square meals) Pitta people are fiery, passionate leaders who tend to crave hot, oily, spicy fried food…but that's the one thing they shouldn't eat because their digestive fire is already like a bonfire! Kapha people are sturdy, strong, and very grounded, but can struggle with sluggish metabolism, low mood or depression, getting stuck, or not wanting to create change Black pepper increases curcumin absorption by 2,000%—scientists at MD Anderson Cancer Center discovered this, which is why traditional Indian cooking always uses turmeric with black pepper What it feels like to experience a Panchakarma detox in India: "massage that feels like abuse" with paper thongs—Dr. Gupta says, "I can't believe you're allowed to do this to me and I'm paying for it" (both she and I had this experience!) Mental inflammation is the stress we create when forcing ourselves to be healthy; if you force workouts, force protein, force intermittent fasting, the stress alone causes the inflammation you're trying to prevent

You're about to biopsy a renal lesion; should you ablate at the same time? In this episode of the BackTable Podcast, host Michael Barraza talks with Dr. Steven Huang from MD Anderson Cancer Center about building an efficient and effective renal biopsy and ablation service line. --- This podcast is supported by: Varian IntelliBlatehttps://www.varian.com/products/interventional-solutions/microwave-ablation-solutions --- SYNPOSIS Dr. Huang first covers referral patterns and the typical pathway that patients take to end up in his clinic. The discussion covers the types of lesions he treats, imaging requirements, and criteria for patient eligibility. He emphasizes the importance of shared decision making when deciding between active surveillance, interventional treatment, and partial nephrectomy. Dr. Huang explains his preferred procedural approach and ablation modalities, including cryo, microwave (MWA), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). He shares his experiences with challenging cases and integrating new technologies like histotripsy and the Siemens interventional package. They also discuss the possibility of a preoperative embolization for larger lesions that could be susceptible to the heat sink effect. Both experts emphasize the importance of collaboration with urologists and ensuring patient safety and expectations. They also touch on the future of the field, discussing the use of AI and robotics. --- TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - Introduction 02:17 - Training Programs at MD Anderson03:23 - Referral Patterns for Renal Ablations07:25 - Patient Management and Virtual Consultations10:59 - Ablation Techniques and Device Selection26:44 - Challenges and Complications27:25 - Approach to Lesions Near Renal Vasculature28:02 - Patient Expectations and Urologist Collaboration33:26 - Post-Procedure Care and Patient Recovery35:30 - Managing Recurrences and Multiple RCCs47:17 - Closing Remarks

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, we discussed two challenging cases focused on Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). We welcomed Dr. Naval Daver, a leading expert from MD Anderson Cancer Center, to discuss: therapy-related AML and de novo AML where induction chemotherapy is not an option. Episode Highlights: • Overview of therapy-related AML and its increasing prevalence due to advancements in solid tumor treatments. • In-depth discussion on the prognosis and treatment options for patients with complex cytogenetics. • Comparison of induction treatments: CPX-351 vs. the traditional 7 + 3 regimen, including survival rates and side effects. • Insights into the use of hypomethylating agents combined with venetoclax for older patients with AML, particularly those with NPM1 mutations. • Practical considerations for administering these treatments in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Whether you're a healthcare professional or simply interested in the latest advancements in oncology, this episode provides valuable insights into the complexities of AML management. Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Don't forget to subscribe for more discussions on treatment algorithms, conference highlights, and the latest FDA approvals! #AcuteMyeloidLeukemia, #TherapyRelatedAML, #DeNovoAML, #TransplantIneligible, #OncologyBrothers

Something New!  For HR teams who discuss this podcast in their team meetings, we've created a discussion starter PDF to help guide your conversation. Download it here https://goodmorninghr.com/EP237  In episode 237, Coffey and DeDe Church discuss recent news items about how shifting economic conditions, technology, and leadership gaps are reshaping the employment landscape.  They discuss the realities of a “low-hire, low-fire” labor market; dehumanizing hiring processes and AI-driven recruiting tools; challenges facing early-career workers and liberal arts graduates; emerging roles created by artificial intelligence; the growing importance of soft skills like problem solving and communication; workforce restructuring, layoffs, and job hugging; employee disengagement and the great detachment; why strong frontline workers often struggle as supervisors; the risks of promoting without leadership training; transparency, feedback, and promotion decisions; and how kindness, accountability, and continuous feedback drive engagement.  Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.   If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for three quarters of a recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.   Media mentioned in this podcast:  From AI bubble fears to the job market's ‘Great Freeze': Economists answer your biggest questions about 2026  Private-Sector Hiring Turned Positive in December After November Losses   Private Hiring Sank in November, ADP Says  US Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook: Fastest Growing Occupations  The 2026 Job Market Outlook: Where the Jobs Are  Economists Are Studying the Slowing Job Market—and Feeling It Themselves  When Good Frontline Workers Make Bad Supervisors  Is Your Leadership Style Too Nice? The Friendship Recession: The Lost Art of Connecting Use Situation-Behavior-Impact (SBI)™ to Understand Intent  About our Guest:  DeDe Church is an attorney, employee relations counselor, workplace and University investigator, and nationally recognized trainer with more than 30 years of experience. She has trained thousands of employees and managers on how to create a productive, respectful culture for clients ranging from Fortune 50 companies to her favorite local pizza shop. Known for her humor and practicality, DeDe is often invited and then re-invited to deliver her high-energy workshops at distinguished conferences and to create videos for employee onboarding and annual training.  As an expert investigator, DeDe relies upon a depth of knowledge to find the facts without causing unnecessary disturbances. Witnesses often say they feel at ease when talking with her because of her approachable nature. In addition, DeDe is often retained to review investigation procedures and to train in-house HR and University professionals on investigation best practices. In recognition of her skills, DeDe has been retained to testify as an expert witness in employment cases more than 20 times by organizations including Uber, BP, and MD Anderson Cancer Center.  DeDe is a former Senior Assistant Attorney General for the State of Texas in the Civil Rights/General Litigation Division. During almost seven years there, she advised dozens of state agencies on the proper response to employee complaints, represented the State in over 30 trials involving discrimination in the workplace, and successfully argued before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court. DeDe received the prestigious Presidential Citation from the President of the Texas State Bar in recognition of outstanding service to the citizens of Texas. Her Bachelor of Arts degree is from Louisiana State University, magna cum laude, and she received a Doctorate of Jurisprudence with Honors from the University of North Carolina School of Law in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.  DeDe Church can be reached at www.dedechurch.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/dede-wilburn-church-a71b748/  About Mike Coffey:  Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher. In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business. Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies. Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association.  Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community. Mike has been rec...

Today, I am excited to speak with Dr. Carl Robinson, Founding Partner at Vantage Leadership Consulting. Carl is a licensed clinical psychologist who has spent the better part of the last 35 years assisting executives and families in preparing for and navigating career-defining moments. His clientele is broad and far-reaching, ranging from non-profit organizations to the Fortune 100, and includes names such as the Federal Reserve System, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Whirlpool, Steel Dynamics, The Hyatt Corporation, and many more. Carl is a highly regarded public speaker, who has authored a number of articles and has frequently been interviewed by various business publications, including the Wall Street Journal. He is a longtime friend, collaborator, and former member of the Advisory Board of FOX. Succession is arguably the most important evergreen topic on the minds of enterprise families and their family offices. Carl shares his views on what is required for success in successions among UHNW families and family offices and talks about the importance of talent assessment as families undertake leadership and ownership succession journeys. Carl offers practical advice for the older generation and those in leadership who are looking to transition control, responsibility, and ownership to the next generation. He also provides invaluable tips and suggestions for the rising gen and those who are poised to step into leadership and fill the shoes of their parents and predecessors. Don't miss this highly instructive conversation with one of the longest-serving, deeply experienced advisor and coach to multigenerational enterprises and family leaders.

This bonus episode is the audio from a Breastcancer.org webinar. Follow-up care after breast cancer is essential. Getting good follow-up care can make a big difference in your long-term health and quality of life. In this Breastcancer.org webinar, you'll find out how often you should see your oncologist after your treatment ends and get other practical advice from our expert panelists and patient advocates. Watch the webinar to get expert advice from the panelists, including:  Marisa C. Weiss, MDChief Medical Officer and Founder, Breastcancer.org Hoda Badr, PhDProfessor, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine Fumiko Chino, MDRadiation Oncologist, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Evelyn Robles-Rodríguez, DNP, APN, AOCNDirector of Outreach, Prevention, and Survivorship, MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper Erin Roesch, MDBreast Medical Oncologist, Cleveland Clinic Megan-Claire ChaseBreast Cancer Program Director, SHARE Cancer SupportPatient Advocate Amanda HelmsPatient Advocate Kate RosenblumPatient Advocate Loriana Hernandez-AldamaTwo-Time Cancer Survivor, Award-winning Journalist, Author

Host Dr. Davide Soldato and guests Dr. Kerin Adelson and Dr. Maureen Canavan discuss JCO article "Association Between Systemic Anticancer Therapy Administration Near the End of Life with Health Care and Hospice Utilization in Older Adults: A SEER Medicare Analysis of End-of-Life Care Quality," highlighting adverse outcomes for patients who receive any type of systemic anticancer therapy(SACT) at EOL (end of life) and the need for better communication between oncologists and patients regarding expected risk and benefits of such treatments to properly align goals-of-care. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Davide Soldato: Hello and welcome to JCO After Hours, the podcast where we sit down with authors from some of the latest articles published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. I am your host, Dr. Davide Soldato, medical oncologist at Ospedale San Martino in Genoa, Italy. Today, we are joined by JCO authors Dr. Maureen Canavan, epidemiologist and associate research scientist at Yale Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy and Effectiveness Research Center; and by Dr. Kerin Adelson, Chief Quality and Value Officer, medical oncologist, and clinical researcher on health services and clinical care delivery at MD Anderson Cancer Center. In the manuscript "Association Between Systemic Anticancer Therapy Administration Near the End of Life With Health Care and Hospice Utilization in Older Adults: A SEER-Medicare Analysis of End-of-Life Care Quality." that you recently published in the JCO, you performed an analysis that included more than 30,000 older adults in the SEER-Medicare database, and you observed that 7.6% of these patients received any systemic anticancer medication within 30 days of death. So, I wanted you to explain why you thought that this was a priority right now, and whether there was any previous data that was published in the literature, and if you think that there was any significant gap in the literature that led you to the research you just published. Dr. Kerin Adelson: We have published a series of articles looking at real-world trends  in patterns of care, particularly related to systemic anticancer therapy at the end of life. This has been gaining increasing focus in recent years because of the understanding that when patients stay on systemic anticancer therapy, that is often a surrogate for a lack of goal-concordant care. So, patients who continue to receive systemic therapy have worse quality of life, are more likely generally to have a medicalized death, and less likely to use hospice. And what our prior work has shown is that more and more we are seeing patients using immunotherapies and targeted therapies towards the end of life. No prior work had really comprehensively examined whether these novel therapies were associated with those same patterns of care increases in acute care utilization and decreases in hospice. Dr. Davide Soldato: So basically, the data that we had up until that point was mostly with cytotoxic chemotherapy, and the emergence of this new treatment, which frequently are thought to be less toxic and so less problematic also in the end of life, led to this research. Is that correct? Dr. Kerin Adelson: Correct. Dr. Maureen Canavan: I would also build on that. I think that as the landscape of cancer care changes, it is important to really understand the availability of treatments, but then also, as Kerin noted, it is important to focus on goal-concordant care. We have established literature, studies we have done and some other studies that have looked at cytotoxic chemotherapy, but with the emergence of these targeted therapies, we really did not know a few things. We did not know the rates of utilization in a large national population, and how that was associated with these elements of medicalized death like ED use, hospitalizations, acute care use. So this was really a question that we had going into it. How can we expand the knowledge base so that both patients and providers can be more cognizant when thinking about goals of care conversations and ensuring that that is in place? Dr. Kerin Adelson: And our work has kind of evolved to answer some critical questions. So, one of our early papers looked at different rates of systemic anticancer therapy at the end of life, and that is where we showed that we were seeing a lot more immunotherapy and targeted therapy. And then we asked the question, well, oncologists generally when they give these treatments, they are hoping that those treatments are going to work and help the patients live longer. So we did another paper where we actually looked at practices who were more aggressive near the end of life and whether they had better overall survival than practices that were less aggressive, accounting for the fact that there could be populations of patients who benefited. And in fact, we showed there was no survival difference. So then this paper sort of answered the question: Well, if it is not having benefit, is this treatment actually doing harm? And this study gets at that question: What are the harms of continuing patients on therapy past the point of benefit? Dr. Maureen Canavan: And I think building off of that, the use of the SEER-Medicare database is a quite robust database. So in this, we have very specific data we can track. We can track the exact type of treatment they had, you know, was it a targeted therapy? Was it immunotherapy? So looking at those subclasses of therapy. We were also able to directly link it within that time frame to the acute care utilization, a limitation that we had in some of our previous work that that data was not always available. So it is more focused in the sense that we were looking at older adults, so patients 66 years of age and older, but we were able to get those individual metrics. So to Kerin's point, we did not see the survival benefit. What do we see then for these medicalized death elements? So the higher rates of all of them across the board. Dr. Davide Soldato: So coming back to the cohort and to the data that you utilized, Dr. Canavan mentioned the use of the SEER system to analyze these data. You already mentioned that you included mostly older adults, so those aged 66 and more. And also there was a little bit of restriction regarding the fact that the patient needed to be covered by Medicare in the last year of death concerning Part A and Part B, and the last 30 days from death concerning Part D. So I just wanted to ask a little bit of a question regarding these findings and whether you think that we also need additional work, especially in the younger population because I think it is something that all of us who work in oncology have seen. The aggressiveness, and this is also something that you showed in your data, tends to increase as the age of the patient tends to decrease. So we tend to be more aggressive towards younger patients. So just a comment on that on the population and generalizability of the findings. Dr. Maureen Canavan: Yeah, I will start with the data question element. Thank you. I think there are a few things to point out for that. So in terms of the restriction to ensure that they had continuous Part D coverage, that was necessary for us to track their oral medication use during that time. So kind of an easy response. The Part A, Part B requirement, it is actually pretty widely used in studies of SEER-Medicare data, and that is you want to establish the patient population, that they are not getting treated with another insurance provider in some way that you are not able to track. So that ensures that we can track not only their systemic anticancer therapy use but also when we are trying to make sure that we are controlling for confounders like chronic conditions and stuff, we are able to track the presence of chronic conditions. So we wanted to make sure we were not biasing the data, so I think that was an important consideration. You do point out very wisely that there are then limitations with the generalizability, and I think we would be lacking if we did not account for that. But I think it is important to establish this baseline relationship association, and then you can step out, we will say, to more diverse populations. So I think we could potentially maybe try to relax the timeline to see if people that might have influx in and out of the Medicare system are still seeing those same rates. I think it is likely they would. But I think to the bigger point that you bring up is that establishing this within the older adults where, you know, we do see as they get older maybe less rates of systemic therapy, extending it to the younger population. There is a challenge with that in that just that data is not available to the robust level that SEER-Medicare is. Both Kerin and I have noted that there is the possibility to look within one specific insurance provider type. Again, recognizing the limitations of the generalizability, but always slowly pushing the needle, finding out more about younger adult populations. And I think this is maybe in an ideal world, but setting the precedent that we really do need to track this on a national scale within younger adults because they do have the need. We do see these higher rates of utilization, and really making sure again with the mindset always of the best interest of patients and the most informative to providers in how we are looking at care. So I think generalizability is definitely a goal. However, there are limitations of the availability of data for younger populations and I think that they are a necessary restraint that all researchers should acknowledge. Dr. Kerin Adelson: Yeah, I think it is important for our audience to understand that health services research and large database research is really limited by what databases are available and what are the characteristics of those databases. So we have done a lot of work in an electronic health record database, and there you can get certain kinds of granularity that you may not be able to get in a payer or a claims-based database. But what you do not get is that comprehensive look at, say, what happens if a patient goes to another practice. Claims-based databases offer you that, but research on US populations is limited by our payment system. So when you look at younger patients, there are so many different insurance companies that when you are trying to get that comprehensive view, it can be hard or very expensive actually. These commercial insurers will sell their data to different databases. So for us, the largest single payer in the United States is the US government, and that is for patients who are over age 65, and that is why you see lots of US-based studies done in the Medicare population. Interestingly, a recent paper by a Canadian group showed very, very similar patterns. It was a significantly smaller study but, right, Canada is a single-payer system and so they were able to really look at all ages, and we did see the same patterns of care in a different payment system. Dr. Davide Soldato: Going back a little bit to the type of treatments that were observed in your manuscript, so we start from a 7.6% of patients who received any type of systemic anticancer therapy within 30 days from death. And when we split the different categories that you analyzed, which I think is a very strong aspect of your manuscript, we see that more or less 50% of the patients received chemotherapy, 20% more or less received immunotherapy, more or less 20% targeted therapy, and then there is a combination of those agents. So just wanted to have a little bit of your opinion compared also to the data that you already published and that you mentioned before. Was this in line with previous data? Was there anything surprising about this? We saw a little bit of a raise in the use of immunotherapy and targeted therapy as you were saying, but still, there is a very high proportion of chemotherapy, 50%. Dr. Kerin Adelson: So I think that really, really reflects the time period in which we studied where immunotherapies were gaining ground. There was tons of excitement and we were seeing this shift. I bet if we do the same study in five years that chemotherapy percent may even go down to half, and we are going to see more and more targeted and immunotherapies, and that is just reflecting the pattern of drug discovery that we are seeing. Dr. Davide Soldato: Coming to the real question that you wanted to answer with this manuscript, so is systemic anticancer therapy associated with worse outcomes in terms of healthcare utilization and use of hospice resources? Was there any hint that for example immunotherapy was related to less of these adverse outcomes? Dr. Kerin Adelson: So I will be honest, I was a little bit surprised that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy was that much more strongly correlated with acute care use at the end of life. You know, I had really thought most likely that what we would see were similar rates. And we did. Each different type of systemic anticancer therapy was associated with significantly higher odds of ending up in the hospital, going to the ICU, dying in the hospital, going to the ED. But that group that got dual therapy was that much higher, you know, over three times the risk. And that surprised me because what it suggested is that there is likely a component of treatment toxicity that is leading to some of the acute care use. It is not simply just a constellation of patients who have not yet transitioned towards hospice or palliative care or end-of-life care who are then more likely to end up in the hospital. But the fact that we see a difference between, say, single-agent immunotherapy and dual combination with chemotherapy does suggest that the treatments are actually contributing to some of what we are seeing. Dr. Davide Soldato: But still, all of the treatments that you evaluated were still associated with higher healthcare utilization. Like there was no signal that, for example, giving immunotherapy at the end of life was not associated with these adverse outcomes. Correct? Dr. Kerin Adelson: Correct. And you will find oncologists out there who will say, actually, these treatments are so good that they might actually lower rates of hospitalization because they keep patients healthy. And certainly, that may be true upstream or earlier in the course of disease, but at the end of life, any form of systemic anticancer therapy is really a surrogate marker for lack of transition towards what is likely appropriate end-of-life therapy. And I just want to point out that time spent in the hospital, going back and forth to invasive procedures, going to the intensive care unit, even going back and forth to an infusion center, that is time that is not spent at home with loved ones for people who have very little time left to live. Dr. Davide Soldato: Thank you very much. That was exactly the point that I wanted you to stress because I think it is really the most important message that we can get as oncologists from this manuscript. Like there is no treatment that is not associated with potentially harming our patient and, as you were saying, taking off time with loved ones in a critical period of the life of these individuals who have been diagnosed and treated for cancer. So, basically what we saw in the paper was a 7.65% utilization of systemic anticancer therapy. And I might imagine that for some oncologists or for some hematologists that might not actually be that much. Like they could potentially say, "Okay, but it is like 7%, it is not that high. I would have expected something higher." So I just wanted a little bit of perspective regarding also quality metrics that we have available for these types of indicators at end-of-life care. What would be the appropriate percentage of people receiving any type of treatment within 30 days from death? Dr. Maureen Canavan: A couple caveats, as a data person I always like to give those. This was among all cancer patients, so not necessarily patients that had been on active treatment. So I think that number was actually quite lower than when we looked in another study about patients that had chemo within the last year, so on, you know, active treatment. So I think that is an element to take into consideration is that those numbers will vary based on who your denominator population is. So that is important to consider. Additionally, the National Quality Forum, they call for reducing rates of systemic therapy at end of life. But I think they, similar to how I would be, are cautious to point out this is the exact number, or it should be zero. Because there are cases where you have to go in line with patient preferences. And if a patient is very adamant that they want to continue treatment, that needs to be a decision that comes between them and their provider. So, you know, the zero, though sounding ideal to us who want to encourage transitions and encourage goals of care conversation is a nice number, it is not a realistic. So, to evade your question completely, I do not think there is a set number. But the goal is to make sure that both patients, providers, everyone is informed and is making the best holistic decision. So there is this natural tendency, I think, to keep fighting both for the patient and the provider to try to beat something, but recognizing the point at which we are beyond a benefit of treatment and what would be most beneficial to the patient in terms of getting back to that idea of, you know, the time with their families and whatnot. So is the number zero? No. Could it probably be lower than we have? I think yes, definitely. Dr. Kerin Adelson: I completely agree with everything Dr. Canavan said. I think one of the other challenges is that this data isn't being tracked and publicly reported across the world. And so what that optimal rate is, is a little unclear. We see different rates also depending on the population included. So one of the things Dr. Canavan said is our database included patients who were likely treated long ago for cancer and cured of their cancer. So they were less likely to die on systemic therapy. But until everybody starts tracking and reporting, it is really hard to know where we are as a country or really as a global population, and then what are the bars that we want to achieve in driving down the rates. I think some data shows that probably something in the range of 10% or below, you know, for patients who have more active cancer is probably where we should be going and driving towards. But until we have more public reporting of these metrics and consistency in how we measure them, it is really hard to come up with a single number. Dr. Davide Soldato: I have the impression that sometimes there is also a little bit of difficulty for the oncologist or the hematologist to really understand who are the patients who are approaching end of life. So there has been some data and you also report some of them in the discussion of the manuscript regarding, for example, prompts inside of the electronic health records or the use of artificial intelligence to try to predict what is the disease course. So just wanted a little bit of perspective if you think that these tools could potentially be helpful and if you think that we will be able at a certain point to implement them in routine clinical care. Dr. Kerin Adelson: I have been working on trying to do this actually at MD Anderson and coming up with a really reliable data tool that will tell us who are the patients who are going to die in short order after receiving systemic anticancer therapy. And it is not that easy, I will say. So, you know, I think we all want this amazing machine learning model that is incredibly reliable. But like any statistical test, there are problems, right? So a very sensitive test that is going to identify high, high risk of dying at the end of life is going to be compromised by false positives. And when an oncologist knows that the test might be a false positive, it becomes very hard for them to take action on it. Similarly, you know, a very, very specific test is going to be compromised by false negatives. So in that case, you could end up having patients who are at risk for dying and still treating them with chemotherapy. And so, you know, I think in the end we need some tools. It will be great if machine learning becomes very reliable and we have the right structured data elements in our electronic health records to give these reliable prediction tools. But I think there are some basic things that we all know, and those are the markers of chronicity of cancer. So patients who have had multiple lines of therapy already, right? Past the point of clinical trial benefit. Patients who have lost significant amounts of weight. Patients who are not getting out of bed and have worse performance status. Patients who are increasingly confused, right? And not mentally engaging the way they did previously. Those markers have been shown in numerous publications by a colleague of mine, David Hui and others, to really be pretty strong predictors, and they resonate with clinicians more than a machine learning score might. You know, I think when clinicians do not understand what the elements in a machine learning tool are, they are less likely to trust it and more likely to say, "Oh, it is a false positive or a false negative." But very few clinicians can argue against the fact that the patient who hasn't gotten out of bed in two weeks is somebody who is less likely to benefit. Dr. Davide Soldato: Dr. Adelson, I would like to close this podcast and I would like to thank you again for joining us today. Dr. Maureen Canavan: Thank you so much. Dr. Kerin Adelson: Thank you so much for having us. Dr. Davide Soldato: Dr. Canavan, Dr. Adelson, we appreciate you sharing more on your JCO article titled "Association Between Systemic Anticancer Therapy Administration Near the End of Life With Health Care and Hospice Utilization in Older Adults: A SEER-Medicare Analysis of End-of-Life Care Quality." If you enjoy our show, please leave us a rating and review and be sure to come back for another episode. You can f ind all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcast. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.    Disclosures Kerin AdelsonStock and Other Ownership Interests: Carrum Health Consulting or Advisory Role: Abbvie, Quantum Health, Gilead SciencesPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Genentech Other Relationship: Genentech/Roche Employment: Emilio Health/Brightline Health(An Immediate Family Member) Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Emilio Health/Brightline Health, Lyra Health (An Immediate Family Member)

Send us a textWhat if cancer didn't have to be eradicated, but could be remembered, monitored, and controlled by the immune system itself?In this episode of Causes or Cures, Dr. Eeks speaks with Dr. Zachary Hartman, the lead researcher who revisited an extraordinary breast cancer vaccine trial conducted over 20 years ago. The trial involved a small group of women with advanced breast cancer. Women who, remarkably, are all still alive today.By analyzing their blood decades later, the research team discovered that these women still carried immune cells capable of recognizing their cancer, suggesting durable immune memory lasting more than two decades. (Study link here.)We discuss:The original breast cancer vaccine trial and what it was designed to do, in plain languageWhat it was like to discover that the women from the trial was still alive more than 20 years laterHow the immune systems of these women continued to recognize cancer cells long after the trialWhat CD27-positive immune cells are and why they matter, explained simplyWhy helper CD4 T cells may be just as important, or more important, than killer CD8 T cells when it comes to cancerWhat happened when researchers combined a CD27-boosting antibody with a cancer vaccine in miceWhat surprised the research team mostThe challenges of translating findings from mice to human trialsWhether cancer could someday be managed long-term by the immune systemHow generalizable this immune memory might be across different cancersWhat this research could mean for how we think about vaccines in a post-pandemic worldThe one key message the researcher hopes the public takes awayWhat's next in this line of researchThis episode offers a rare, hopeful (but scientifically grounded) look at how the immune system may be capable of remembering cancer for decades. Guest Bio: Dr. Zachary C. Hartman is an Associate Professor at Duke University in the Departments of Surgery, Pathology, and Integrative Immunobiology, where he also serves as Director of the Center for Applied Therapeutics and is a member of the Cellular and Molecular Biology and Genetics and Genomics programs. He earned his undergraduate degree from Northwestern University and completed his PhD at Duke University, followed by postdoctoral training in tumor immunology and breast oncology at Duke and the MD Anderson Cancer Center. In 2012, Dr. Hartman returned to Duke to establish a research program focused on tumor immunology and the development of cancer immunotherapies, including therapeutic vaccines, immune agonists, checkpoint inhibitors, antibody-based therapies, and strategies to stimulate anti-tumor immune responses.  Work with me? Perhaps we are a good match. You can contact Dr. Eeks at bloomingwellness.com.Follow Eeks on Instagram here.Follow Public Health is WeirdOr Facebook here.Or X.OnSupport the show

In this episode of Off Script, we continue our conversation with Jason Bock, co-founder and CEO of CTMC, diving deeper into the operational and manufacturing challenges shaping the future of curative cell therapies. Jason discusses how CTMC—through its partnership with MD Anderson Cancer Center—is eliminating inefficiencies across development timelines to significantly accelerate clinical progress without increasing risk. He also shares a forward-looking perspective on how cell therapies could one day be ordered and delivered like traditional pharmaceuticals, and what scientific, regulatory, and manufacturing innovations will be required to make that vision a reality.

My conversation with Dr Emanuel begins at about 34 minutes Subscribe and Watch Interviews LIVE : On YOUTUBE.com/StandUpWithPete ON SubstackStandUpWithPete Stand Up is a daily podcast. I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. This show is Ad free and fully supported by listeners like you! Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous soul In Eat Your Ice Cream, renowned health expert Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel argues that life is not a competition to live the longest, and that "wellness" shouldn't be difficult; it should be an invisible part of one's lifestyle that yields maximum health benefits with the least work Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD, is the Vice Provost for Global Initiatives, the Co-Director of the Healthcare Transformation Institute, and the Diane v.S. Levy and Robert M. Levy University Professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. Emanuel is an oncologist and world leader in health policy and bioethics. He is a Special Advisor to the Director General of the World Health Organization, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, and member of the Council on Foreign Relations.  He was the founding chair of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health and held that position until August of 2011. From 2009 to 2011, he served as a Special Advisor on Health Policy to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and National Economic Council. In this role, he was instrumental in drafting the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Emanuel also served on the Biden-Harris Transition Covid Advisory Board. Dr. Emanuel is the most widely cited bioethicist in history.  He has over 350 publications and has authored or edited 15 books. His recent publications include the books Which Country Has the World's Best Health Care (2020), Prescription for the Future (2017), Reinventing American Health Care: How the Affordable Care Act Will Improve our Terribly Complex, Blatantly Unjust, Outrageously Expensive, Grossly Inefficient, Error Prone System (2014) and Brothers Emanuel: A Memoir of an American Family (2013). In 2008, he published Healthcare, Guaranteed: A Simple, Secure Solution for America, which included his own recommendations for health care reform. Dr. Emanuel regularly contributes to the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, and often appears on BBC, NPR, CNN, MSNBC and other media outlets. He has received numerous awards including election to the National Academy of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Association of American Physicians, and the Royal College of Medicine (UK). He has been named a Dan David Prize Laureate in Bioethics, and is a recipient of the AMA-Burroughs Wellcome Leadership Award, the Public Service Award from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Lifetime Achievement Award from the American Society of Bioethics and Humanities, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation David E. Rogers Award, President's Medal for Social Justice Roosevelt University, and the John Mendelsohn Award from the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Emanuel has received honorary degrees from Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Union Graduate College, the Medical College of Wisconsin, and Macalester College. In 2023, he became a Guggenheim Fellow. Dr. Emanuel is a graduate of Amherst College. He holds a M.Sc. from Oxford University in Biochemistry, and received his M.D. from Harvard Medical School and his Ph.D. in political philosophy from Harvard University. On YOUTUBE.com/StandUpWithPete ON SubstackStandUpWithPete   Listen rate and review on Apple Podcasts Listen rate and review on Spotify Pete On Instagram Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on Twitter Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift Send Pete $ Directly on Venmo  

Autologous cell therapies have shown the promise of single-dose, curative treatments for patients with advanced cancers. But even with major scientific and regulatory progress, the field now faces its toughest challenge yet: achieving sustainable, scalable manufacturing for highly personalized therapies. In this episode of Off Script, we spoke with Jason Bock, co-founder and CEO of CTMC, a purpose-driven cell therapy accelerator. Jason discusses why scale remains the central barrier for autologous therapies, the significance of CTMC's partnership with MD Anderson Cancer Center, and how fit-for-purpose manufacturing models can shorten vein-to-vein time and bring transformative treatments to patients faster.

Edward M. Schaeffer, MD, PhD, moderates a thoughtful conversation with two former Northwestern Urology residents, Richard Matulewicz, MD, MSCI, MS, urologic surgeon at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Neema Navai, MD, MHCM, professor and chair of the department of urology and special advisor to the chief physician executive for care development at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Together, they share insights from their professional journeys, explore the evolving landscape of urologic care and discuss how their experiences have shaped their career paths and approach to patient care.

The most widely used COVID-19 vaccines may offer a surprise benefit for some cancer patients—revving up their immune systems to help fight tumors. People with advanced lung or skin cancer who were taking certain immunotherapy drugs lived substantially longer if they also got a Pfizer or Moderna shot within 100 days of starting treatment, according to preliminary research reported in the journal Nature. And it had nothing to do with virus infections. Instead, the molecule that powers those specific vaccines, mRNA, appears to help the immune system respond better to the cutting-edge cancer treatment, concluded researchers from MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and the University of Florida. The vaccine “acts like a siren to activate immune cells throughout the body,” said lead researcher Dr. Adam Grippin of MD Anderson. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has raised skepticism about mRNA vaccines, cutting $500 million in funding for some uses of the technology. But this research team found its results so promising that it is preparing a more rigorous study to see if mRNA coronavirus vaccines should be paired with cancer drugs called checkpoint inhibitors—an interim step while it designs new mRNA vaccines for use in cancer. A healthy immune system often kills cancer cells before they become a threat. But some tumors evolve to hide from immune attack. Checkpoint inhibitors remove that cloak. It's a powerful treatment—when it works. Some people's immune cells still don't recognize the tumor. Messenger RNA, or mRNA, is naturally found in every cell, and it contains genetic instructions for our bodies to make proteins. While best known as the Nobel Prize-winning technology behind COVID-19 vaccines, scientists have long been trying to create personalized mRNA “treatment vaccines” that train immune cells to spot unique features of a patient's tumor. Dr. Grippin and his Florida colleagues had been developing personalized mRNA cancer vaccines when they realized that even one created without a specific target appeared to spur similar immune activity against cancer. This article was provided by The Associated Press.

Steve Austin has been a pastor and senior director at Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas - the largest church in America - for over 20 years. He has overseen 24 ministries and 40 adult Bible classes and has been a frequent speaker. Steve has ministered to thousands of sick people and their families in the largest medical center in the world - the Texas Medical Center in Houston - and did hospital chaplaincy training at MD Anderson Cancer Center, the world's top cancer center. He is the President and Executive Director of Living Hope Chaplaincy, a nonprofit organization that trains and mobilizes volunteers to provide spiritual care to hospital patients, their families, and healthcare workers.STEVE'S BOOK:https://a.co/d/fAQc9sX

Dr. Bailey arrives in Oxford after three years with Vanderbilt athletics. Additionally, Dr. Bailey has spent the last two years with Expansive Insight, a private practice focused on a broad range of mental health counseling, intervention and psychotherapy measures. "Oxford has already shown its kindness to my family," Bailey said. "I'm excited about serving in the 'Sip and being a part of the athletics family here at Ole Miss. I think being a sport psychologist is the coolest job in the world. It's truly a calling to work in mental health and sport performance, and I'm glad to serve the athletes here at Ole Miss." Prior to his time at Vanderbilt, Dr. Bailey acquired a wealth of experience in counseling and mental health treatment, most recently serving as a Predoctoral Psychology Intern for Duke University's CAPS program during the 2021-22 academic year. Further experience came with the Austin, Texas Fire Department and Emergency Medical Services unit, the 'Center for Relationships', a community wellness center in Austin, MD Anderson Cancer Center, work with persons who are incarcerated, and the University of Texas Counseling and Mental Health Center. Additionally, Dr. Bailey has spent the last 10 years providing counseling services to local clients, including children, adolescents, and adults presenting with depression, anxiety, grief and loss, PTSD, OCD, marital and relationship issues, body image, sports and fitness and much more. Dr. Bailey is a licensed psychologist, licensed social worker, and a certified mental performance consultant. Dr. Bailey is also a lifelong athlete and sports fan. A native of Austin, Texas, Dr. Bailey holds a doctorate in counseling psychology from the University of Texas at Austin in 2022. Dr. Bailey also earned his master's of science in social work and bachelor's degree in psychology at Texas in 2012 and 2009, respectively.

Recognition is no longer just about t-shirts or medals - it's about meaning. Thoughtful, mission-driven recognition strategies can deepen fundraisers' emotional connection and inspire long-term loyalty.In this episode, Marcie Maxwell talks with Meredith Perkins, Director of Peer-to-Peer Fundraising at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Meredith shares how her team has evolved recognition from transactional to transformational, creating experiences that honor fundraisers' motivations and celebrate their impact.From weaving MD Anderson's mission to eliminate cancer into every recognition moment to reimagining branded products with purpose, Meredith offers practical ways to make participants feel valued and connected. She also dives into how feedback and metrics guide continuous improvement, ensuring each recognition effort aligns with participant expectations and program goals.Together, we'll explore:How to design recognition programs that strengthen mission connection and emotional engagementCreative ways to recognize and reward fundraisers across participation levels and yearsPractical methods for measuring impact and evolving recognition strategies for sustained success​Mentioned Linkswww.MDAnderson.org/Fundraisewww.MDAnderson.org/BootWalkwww.MDAnderson.org/DIYwww.MDAnderson.org/Remember​Stay Connected on LinkedInConnect with MeredithConnect with MarcieConnect with the Peer-to-Peer Professional Forum (00:00) - Welcome to The P2P Soap Box

Isabel González entrevista a la Dra. Silvia Pérez Rodrigo.

Love the episode? Send us a text!Inside the VIKTORIA-1 trial with Dr. Rachel LaymanWhat the New Genitolasib Data Mean for ER+ / HER2- Metastatic Breast CancerIn this episode of Breast Cancer Conversations, Laura sits down with Dr. Rachel Layman, breast medical oncologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center, to unpack what's new in ER-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer—and why clinical trials are not just a last-ditch option.Dr. Layman walks us through the VIKTORIA-1 trial, a phase III study of a new IV drug (genitolasib, “G” for short) that targets the PAM pathway, which cancer cells often use to grow and outsmart standard hormone therapy. She explains, in plain language, what PIC3CA mutations are, what “wild-type” means, and why this trial is so exciting even for people without a PIC3CA mutation.You'll hear:Why ER-positive breast cancer is the most common subtype—and still a major driver of metastatic diseaseHow clinical trials are designed, and why they're often most powerful earlier in treatment (not only when “nothing else is left”)A clear explanation of the VIKTORIA-1 study design: who was eligible, how the drug is given, and what the results showedWhat “progression-free survival” means and how adding “G” changed the numbers compared to standard therapy aloneHonest talk about side effects (mouth sores, rash, blood sugar changes), and how teams are preventing and managing themHow patients can look up trials like VIKTORIA-1 and VIKTORIA-2 on ClinicalTrials.gov and bring these conversations back to their own oncologistsWhether you're living with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer, supporting someone who is, or simply trying to understand the rapidly evolving science, this episode offers both education and hope.Support the showLatest News: Become a Breast Cancer Conversations+ Member! Sign Up Now. Join our Mailing List - New content drops every Monday!

Synopsis: Nimbus Therapeutics CEO Abbas Kazimi walks Alok Tayi through the company's evolving pipeline and playbook for choosing the right risks in a noisy biotech environment. From Werner helicase for MSI-high cancers to a highly selective SIK2 program and GLP-1–adjacent strategies focused on body composition, Abbas details how Nimbus balances rigor, speed, and capital efficiency. He shares candid lessons from pausing and later resurrecting AMPK beta in partnership with Eli Lilly, the decision to remain modality-agnostic but small-molecule-centric, and the importance of knowing when not to chase the latest fad. Throughout, Abbas returns to a consistent theme: success at Nimbus comes from disciplined target selection, deep collaboration, and a culture that empowers teams to make hard calls in service of patients rather than headlines. Biography: Abbas Kazimi is the Chief Executive Officer of Nimbus Therapeutics. Previously, he served as Chief Business Officer, leading the company's strategic and corporate development efforts while overseeing business operations. Since joining Nimbus in 2014, he has helped raise over $630 million in equity financing and led transactions totaling more than $8 billion. Notably, Mr. Kazimi spearheaded the $6 billion sale of Nimbus's TYK2 program to Takeda, the $1.2 billion sale of its NASH (ACC) program to Gilead, and multiple licensing deals exceeding $1.5 billion with partners such as Genentech, Celgene/Roche, and Eli Lilly. Under his leadership, Nimbus has advanced four programs into the clinic, returned over $4 billion to investors, and continues to expand its computational drug discovery and clinical development capabilities. In 2025, Mr. Kazimi joined the board of Unnatural Products (UNP), a biotech company pioneering orally delivered macrocyclic peptides to tackle previously undruggable targets. He also serves on the Editorial Advisory Board for In Vivo magazine, a leading publication offering strategic insights and analysis of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medtech, and consumer health industries. Along with his family, he established the Kazimi Family Endowment for Data Science in Oncology at MD Anderson Cancer Center. This endowment reflects their personal commitment to philanthropy and their vision for revolutionizing cancer treatment through data-driven innovation. At the core of Mr. Kazimi's leadership is a deep sense of purpose—one that seeks to change the trajectory of medical diagnoses where options are limited. The ability to give patients, prescribers, and families a new outlook on life is a powerful responsibility—and one he knows the biopharmaceutical sector has the ability to fulfill. Before Nimbus, he was at Extera Partners, LLC (formerly PureTech Development, LLC), where he provided strategic advisory, supported fundraising, and executed numerous business development transactions. Earlier in his career, he was with JSB-Partners, LP, a specialized investment banking and advisory firm serving biotech and pharmaceutical companies. Mr. Kazimi holds a B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin and an M.S. from Harvard University.

In this episode, Dane Groeneveld speaks with Mickie DeVeau, Director of the Leadership Institute at MD Anderson Cancer Center, about how one of the world's leading healthcare organizations builds leadership capacity at every level.Mickie shares how MD Anderson's coaching culture empowers employees—from physicians to administrative staff—to lead with empathy, accountability, and purpose. Their conversation explores how structured development, shared responsibility, and authentic connection help make “Making Cancer History” more than a tagline.

Have you ever gotten up for a full day's work in a haunted coal mine and thought, "Boy, I really hope that bird in a cage doesn't stop singing and doom us all"? No? Then you clearly weren't with the RPGBOT crew in Part 2 of our Old Gods of Appalachia charity stream—where coal dust has claws, headlamps are your best friend, and it turns out you can get shot-in-the-foot vibes without ever firing a gun. Buckle up, y'all. Things are getting deep, dark, and very dusty. Support MD Anderson Cancer Research Before we go further, remember: this campaign was part of a live charity event supporting MD Anderson Cancer Center, one of the top cancer hospitals in the world. Their mission is simple but critical: end cancer for patients everywhere through advanced research, treatment, and compassionate care. You can still make a difference. Donate today at https://mdanderson.donordrive.com/participants/9351 — every dollar helps bring hope, healing, and lifesaving treatment to real people in the fight for their lives. Previously, on the RPGBOT charity stream: Jessie and Isaiah arrived in Williams Holler—an Appalachian company town where coal mine doom meets fire-eyed-almost-deer and fatal sermons about salvation through suffering. After a run-in with a not-deer and a meet-and-greet with Mister T and his questionable Applejack theology, our heroes found themselves deep in the mines for mandatory community service, hammering rocks for redemption. Episode 2 picks up right where we left off: with moonshiner chaos, clumsy pickaxe injuries, Tommyknocker rituals, and a collapsing mine shaft that proves this town is as deadly belowground as it is above. In this episode of the RPGBOT Podcast, the gang digs deeper into Old Gods of Appalachia—both narratively and literally—as they're sent into the bowels of the Williams Holler coal mine to "earn their keep" under the watchful eye of foreman Josh CC. Join Jessie and Isaiah as they: Learn about Tommyknockers—ghostly Appalachian mine spirits who love pennies and hate eye contact. Perform citation-needed rituals involving canaries, fish bits, and whispered thanks. Fail basic pickaxe maneuvers (looking at you, Isaiah) and experience the dark gift of GM intrusions, brought to you by generous donors. Discover strange, ancient artifacts deep underground—hint: they might belong to the town's ominous apple orchard daughter. Encounter a creature that definitely isn't a dog made of coal and bad vibes. Try desperately to outrun physics, collapse, and tiny angry men with stone axes through lightless tunnels. All while raising money for MD Anderson Cancer Research, whose work helps real people—unlike some podcast characters we could name. Key Takeaways Horror is better underground: Claustrophobic tunnels, unstable lanterns, and monster-dust dogs? That's premium Appalachian fear. Cypher System shines in survival tension: Speed and might rolls build both narrative and actual sweat. Tommyknockers are the coal miner's cryptid: They warn you with knocks—if you leave them snacks and don't embarrass them. GM intrusions are extra spicy during charity games: The more you donate, the more you make the players quietly panic. Jessie can shoot, quip, and pull people out of holes: The perfect outlaw protagonist energy. This mine is getting worse by the minute: Strange artifacts, broken elevators, dead canaries? It's all very "maybe we leave now." Basket of weird fruit: The orchard, Mr. T, and a thing calling itself "the green" are part of a cosmic tug-of-war that's barely begun. Thank You to the Old Gods and Monte Cook A huge thank-you to Steve Shell, Cam Collins, and the DeepNerd Media team for creating the masterwork that is Old Gods of Appalachia. Their audio drama is the gold standard of Appalachian horror storytelling—and the Old Gods of Appalachia Roleplaying Game, built on Monte Cook Games' Cypher System, brings that dread to your table with terrifying finesse. Want to experience this world for yourself? Listen to Old Gods of Appalachia wherever you get your podcasts Buy the RPG at montecookgames.com/old-gods-of-appalachia-rpg Bring some "not a deer" terror into your next campaign Let the Old Gods whisper you home. Welcome to the RPGBOT Podcast. If you love Dungeons & Dragons, Pathfinder, and tabletop RPGs, this is the podcast for you. Support the show for free: Rate and review us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any podcast app. It helps new listeners find the best RPG podcast for D&D and Pathfinder players. Level up your experience: Join us on Patreon to unlock ad-free access to RPGBOT.net and the RPGBOT Podcast, chat with us and the community on the RPGBOT Discord, and jump into live-streamed RPG podcast recordings. Support while you shop: Use our Amazon affiliate link at https://amzn.to/3NwElxQ and help us keep building tools and guides for the RPG community. Meet the Hosts Tyler Kamstra – Master of mechanics, seeing the Pathfinder action economy like Neo in the Matrix. Randall James – Lore buff and technologist, always ready to debate which Lord of the Rings edition reigns supreme. Ash Ely – Resident cynic, chaos agent, and AI's worst nightmare, bringing pure table-flipping RPG podcast energy. Join the RPGBOT team where fantasy roleplaying meets real strategy, sarcasm, and community chaos. How to Find Us: In-depth articles, guides, handbooks, reviews, news on Tabletop Role Playing at RPGBOT.net Tyler Kamstra BlueSky: @rpgbot.net TikTok: @RPGBOTDOTNET Ash Ely Professional Game Master on StartPlaying.Games BlueSky: @GravenAshes YouTube: @ashravenmedia Randall James BlueSky: @GrimoireRPG Amateurjack.com Read Melancon: A Grimoire Tale (affiliate link) Producer Dan @Lzr_illuminati

Have you ever gotten up for a full day's work in a haunted coal mine and thought, "Boy, I really hope that bird in a cage doesn't stop singing and doom us all"? No? Then you clearly weren't with the RPGBOT crew in Part 2 of our Old Gods of Appalachia charity stream—where coal dust has claws, headlamps are your best friend, and it turns out you can get shot-in-the-foot vibes without ever firing a gun. Buckle up, y'all. Things are getting deep, dark, and very dusty. Support MD Anderson Cancer Research Before we go further, remember: this campaign was part of a live charity event supporting MD Anderson Cancer Center, one of the top cancer hospitals in the world. Their mission is simple but critical: end cancer for patients everywhere through advanced research, treatment, and compassionate care. You can still make a difference. Donate today at https://mdanderson.donordrive.com/participants/9351 — every dollar helps bring hope, healing, and lifesaving treatment to real people in the fight for their lives. Previously, on the RPGBOT charity stream: Jessie and Isaiah arrived in Williams Holler—an Appalachian company town where coal mine doom meets fire-eyed-almost-deer and fatal sermons about salvation through suffering. After a run-in with a not-deer and a meet-and-greet with Mister T and his questionable Applejack theology, our heroes found themselves deep in the mines for mandatory community service, hammering rocks for redemption. Episode 2 picks up right where we left off: with moonshiner chaos, clumsy pickaxe injuries, Tommyknocker rituals, and a collapsing mine shaft that proves this town is as deadly belowground as it is above. In this episode of the RPGBOT Podcast, the gang digs deeper into Old Gods of Appalachia—both narratively and literally—as they're sent into the bowels of the Williams Holler coal mine to "earn their keep" under the watchful eye of foreman Josh CC. Join Jessie and Isaiah as they: Learn about Tommyknockers—ghostly Appalachian mine spirits who love pennies and hate eye contact. Perform citation-needed rituals involving canaries, fish bits, and whispered thanks. Fail basic pickaxe maneuvers (looking at you, Isaiah) and experience the dark gift of GM intrusions, brought to you by generous donors. Discover strange, ancient artifacts deep underground—hint: they might belong to the town's ominous apple orchard daughter. Encounter a creature that definitely isn't a dog made of coal and bad vibes. Try desperately to outrun physics, collapse, and tiny angry men with stone axes through lightless tunnels. All while raising money for MD Anderson Cancer Research, whose work helps real people—unlike some podcast characters we could name. Key Takeaways Horror is better underground: Claustrophobic tunnels, unstable lanterns, and monster-dust dogs? That's premium Appalachian fear. Cypher System shines in survival tension: Speed and might rolls build both narrative and actual sweat. Tommyknockers are the coal miner's cryptid: They warn you with knocks—if you leave them snacks and don't embarrass them. GM intrusions are extra spicy during charity games: The more you donate, the more you make the players quietly panic. Jessie can shoot, quip, and pull people out of holes: The perfect outlaw protagonist energy. This mine is getting worse by the minute: Strange artifacts, broken elevators, dead canaries? It's all very "maybe we leave now." Basket of weird fruit: The orchard, Mr. T, and a thing calling itself "the green" are part of a cosmic tug-of-war that's barely begun. Thank You to the Old Gods and Monte Cook A huge thank-you to Steve Shell, Cam Collins, and the DeepNerd Media team for creating the masterwork that is Old Gods of Appalachia. Their audio drama is the gold standard of Appalachian horror storytelling—and the Old Gods of Appalachia Roleplaying Game, built on Monte Cook Games' Cypher System, brings that dread to your table with terrifying finesse. Want to experience this world for yourself? Listen to Old Gods of Appalachia wherever you get your podcasts Buy the RPG at montecookgames.com/old-gods-of-appalachia-rpg Bring some "not a deer" terror into your next campaign Let the Old Gods whisper you home. Welcome to the RPGBOT Podcast. If you love Dungeons & Dragons, Pathfinder, and tabletop RPGs, this is the podcast for you. Support the show for free: Rate and review us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any podcast app. It helps new listeners find the best RPG podcast for D&D and Pathfinder players. Level up your experience: Join us on Patreon to unlock ad-free access to RPGBOT.net and the RPGBOT Podcast, chat with us and the community on the RPGBOT Discord, and jump into live-streamed RPG podcast recordings. Support while you shop: Use our Amazon affiliate link at https://amzn.to/3NwElxQ and help us keep building tools and guides for the RPG community. Meet the Hosts Tyler Kamstra – Master of mechanics, seeing the Pathfinder action economy like Neo in the Matrix. Randall James – Lore buff and technologist, always ready to debate which Lord of the Rings edition reigns supreme. Ash Ely – Resident cynic, chaos agent, and AI's worst nightmare, bringing pure table-flipping RPG podcast energy. Join the RPGBOT team where fantasy roleplaying meets real strategy, sarcasm, and community chaos. How to Find Us: In-depth articles, guides, handbooks, reviews, news on Tabletop Role Playing at RPGBOT.net Tyler Kamstra BlueSky: @rpgbot.net TikTok: @RPGBOTDOTNET Ash Ely Professional Game Master on StartPlaying.Games BlueSky: @GravenAshes YouTube: @ashravenmedia Randall James BlueSky: @GrimoireRPG Amateurjack.com Read Melancon: A Grimoire Tale (affiliate link) Producer Dan @Lzr_illuminati

The RPGBOT crew descends into the haunted hollers of Appalachia—where faith, fire, and coal run deep, and the locals don't much care for outsiders asking questions. Between GM intrusions, cursed deer, and whiskey-soaked theology, our heroes quickly learn that in Old Gods of Appalachia, salvation's a dangerous business. Welcome to the mines, y'all—hope you brought your holy water and your lucky charm. Support the MD Anderson Cancer Center If you're looking to make a meaningful impact today, please consider donating to MD Anderson. Your gift supports cutting-edge cancer research, world-class patient care, and education & prevention efforts — all part of their mission to "Make Cancer History®." MD Anderson Cancer Center MD Anderson treats patients from around the globe, advances new therapies through clinical trials, and drives programs that prevent cancer before it starts.

The RPGBOT crew descends into the haunted hollers of Appalachia—where faith, fire, and coal run deep, and the locals don't much care for outsiders asking questions. Between GM intrusions, cursed deer, and whiskey-soaked theology, our heroes quickly learn that in Old Gods of Appalachia, salvation's a dangerous business. Welcome to the mines, y'all—hope you brought your holy water and your lucky charm. Support the MD Anderson Cancer Center If you're looking to make a meaningful impact today, please consider donating to MD Anderson. Your gift supports cutting-edge cancer research, world-class patient care, and education & prevention efforts — all part of their mission to "Make Cancer History®." MD Anderson Cancer Center MD Anderson treats patients from around the globe, advances new therapies through clinical trials, and drives programs that prevent cancer before it starts.

In cancer care, ethical challenges rarely come with easy answers.When should treatment stop? How do teams manage moral distress? And what happens when AI begins to shape clinical decisions?In this episode, Dr. Nico Nortjé, Executive Director for the Center for Clinical Ethics in Cancer Care at MD Anderson Cancer Center, joins host Ginger to explore how oncology professionals navigate those moments when medical facts and human emotions collide.Dr. Nortjé shares what he's learned from leading ethics consultations, guiding care teams through end-of-life discussions, moral distress, and the new ethical questions raised by technology.You'll learn:How to recognize and address moral distress before it leads to burnoutHow ethics consults can turn uncertainty into team alignmentHow to approach treatment-limiting conversations with empathyWhat to consider when AI starts influencing care decisionsListen for a grounded, thoughtful look at what ethics really means in oncology today.

Dr. Gordon Guo, Radiation Oncologist, discusses the facts and the myths regarding prostate cancer. Ex: Fact - 1 in 8 men will develop prostate cancer; Myth - If you have no symptoms, you don't have the disease. Dr. Guo also speaks to what patients need to know about testing, diagnosis, and treatment protocols.

LeeAnn Mengel, Vice President Administrator, joins JMN to recap Baptist MD Anderson Cancer Center's evolution over the past ten years, and looks toward continued expansion, growing resources, and continuing innovative holistic care.

Becky Ness, Oncology Social Worker, joins JMN to discuss ways cancer can impact family dynamics during and after treatment. She advocates support groups, communication, and social work teaching cooperation and prioritization to help families rally in care and support wihtout their o the patient's individual identities being subsumed by cancer. Her approach is that whole-person healing is the goal, not just clinical resolution.

Theresa Pola, Outpatient Dietitian, joins JMN to discuss the role of lifestyle and diet in cancer prevention, treatment, and recovery. She also speaks to how nutritional needs can change relative to treatment protocols, and the impacts that exercise, relaxation, and stress management can have on overall health.

Dr. Kim LaBree, Assistant Administator of Patient Services, addresses a number of listener questions regarding local area health concerns, diagnostic processes, and Baptist MD Anderson Cancer Center care resources. Se asserts that the most important part of preventative or clinical care is routine checkups with your primary care physician. If you need to establish a primary care physician, Baptist invites you to contact them at 904-202-4YOU (4968).

Dr. Laila Samiian, Chief of Breast Surgical Oncology, discusses the importance of screening and prevention resources for breast health, as Breast Cancer Awareness month wraps up. She shares how care processes vary with the patient's age, breast density, and individual needs, as each patient's cancer is different.

Joel Laton, Lead Chaplain, joins JMN to share his role and the role of his team of chaplains in the holistic treatment process at Baptist MD Anderson Cancer Center. Spiritual and pastoral care extends to spouses and family members, offering support and guidance for the "person," during clinical care processes.

Dr. Bill Putnam, Medical Director, joins JMN and shares how Baptist MD Anderson Cancer Center has evolved and provided cutting edge cancer treatment resources for a decade - and how they work to meet the needs in various area communities, with campuses at Baptist Downtown, Baptist South, Baptist Clay, and more.

This episode of Lung Cancer Considered covers highlights from the 2025 ESMO Annual Meeting held October 17th to the 21st in Berlin, Germany. Guests are: Dr. Xiuning Le from MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. Dr. Pedro Rocha from Vall d'Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona, Spain. Dr. Riyaz Shah, a consultant medical oncologist at the Kent Oncology Centre in the United Kingdom.

In this episode of ASTCT's Titans of Transplant series, Dr. Taha Al-Juhaishi welcomes Dr. Sattva Neelapu of MD Anderson Cancer Center for a deep and insightful conversation on the evolution, challenges and future of CAR T therapy.From the groundbreaking ZUMA-1 trial to today's expandinglandscape of commercial CAR T products, Dr. Neelapu shares pivotal clinical experiences, lessons learned in toxicity management and reflections on mentorship and innovation. This episode offers a look at the progress made, the barriers that remain and the opportunities ahead for the next generation of leaders in cellular therapy.

This new mini-series on Behind the Knife will delve into the technical aspects of the Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery, developed through the American College of Surgeons Cancer Research Program. This first episode highlights the colon cancer operative standard. Hosts: Timothy Vreeland, MD, FACS (@vreelant) is an Assistant Professor of Surgery at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and Surgical Oncologist at Brooke Army Medical Center Lexy (Alexandra) Adams, MD, MPH (@lexyadams16) is a Surgical Oncology fellow at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Guest: George Chang, MD, MS, MHCM, FACS, FASCRS, FSSO is a Professor and the interim Department Chair in the Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center.   Learning Objectives: The extent of colon mobilization and resection depends on tumor location, with high vascular ligation of the tumor-bearing segment to complete adequate regional lymphadenectomy. The technical steps of right colectomy are reviewed, including high ligation of the ileocolic pedicle at the level of the superior mesenteric vein, and the right branch of the middle colic artery if present. Tips and tricks are discussed to identify vascular structures and avoid central vascular injury. Links to Papers Referenced in this Episode Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery, Volume 1: Breast, Lung, Pancreas, Colon https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer-programs/cancer-surgery-standards-program/operative-standards-for-cancer-surgery/purchase/ Kindle edition: https://www.amazon.com/Operative-Standards-Cancer-Surgery-Section-ebook/dp/B07MWSNFSB Short-term outcomes of complete mesocolic excision versus D2 dissection in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy for right colon cancer (RELARC): a randomized, controlled, phase 3, superiority trial Lancet Oncol. 2021 Mar; 22(3):391-401. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33587893/ Impact of Proximal Vascular Ligation on Survival of Patients with Colon Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Jan;25(1):38-45. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27942902/ Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.   If you liked this episode, check out our recent episodes here: https://behindtheknife.org/listen Behind the Knife Premium: General Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/general-surgery-oral-board-review Trauma Surgery Video Atlas: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/trauma-surgery-video-atlas Dominate Surgery: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Clerkship: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-clerkship Dominate Surgery for APPs: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Rotation: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-for-apps-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-rotation Vascular Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/vascular-surgery-oral-board-audio-review Colorectal Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/colorectal-surgery-oral-board-audio-review Surgical Oncology Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/surgical-oncology-oral-board-audio-review Cardiothoracic Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/cardiothoracic-surgery-oral-board-audio-review Download our App: Apple App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/behind-the-knife/id1672420049 Android/Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.btk.app&hl=en_US

Dr. Monty Pal and Dr. Fumiko Chino discuss several of the top abstracts presented at the 2025 ASCO Quality Care Symposium, including research on federally funded clinical trials and financial reimbursement for trial participation. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Monty Pal: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I am your host, Dr. Monty Pal. I am a medical oncologist, professor, and vice chair of academic affairs at the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center in Los Angeles. Today, we are highlighting key abstracts that were presented at the 2025 ASCO Quality Care Symposium. I am delighted to be joined today by the chair of this year's meeting, Dr. Fumiko Chino. Dr. Chino is an associate professor in radiation oncology at MD Anderson Cancer Center with a research focus on access, affordability, and equity. She is also a consultant editor of JCO Oncology Practice and the host of the Put into Practice podcast. I have got to listen to that.  Dr. Chino, welcome, and thanks so much for being on the podcast today. Dr. Fumiko Chino: I am overjoyed to be here, and absolutely, you should take a listen. Dr. Monty Pal: Definitely. And FYI for listeners, our full disclosures are all available in the transcript of this episode, so do have a look if you are inclined. Now, we have really seen some fantastic advances in health services and quality and supportive care, digital health, and beyond. There are some great abstracts that were presented at this year's meeting. I have actually picked a couple that I am particularly interested in and that I believe you share my interest in as well.  So, the first is an abstract actually from my friends at SWOG (Abstract 94). So, this was a terrific abstract from Joe Unger and Michael LeBlanc and Dawn Hershman. And this, I think, really hits on a very, very key issue right now, which is the benefit of federally funded trials. Do you mind just kind of spelling out some of the observations from what I think is a really brilliant piece of work? Dr. Fumiko Chino: Absolutely, and I think Dr. Unger's work is really important for our current funding environment. I think that this research is really essential to do to show the role of federal sponsorship in the design and conduct of clinical trials. Because what they did was really look at a landscape analysis over the last 20 years looking at funding and were able to show quite clearly that federal funding really matters for advancing the science in cancer care. So what they showed was that the federal funding was more commonly essential for early-stage clinical trials, so those phase 1, phase 2 trials that really help advance the science. And that federal funding was really essential for multimodality drug combinations, combinations with drug and surgery, combinations with drug and radiation. Those trials were much more likely to be federal funded. And then the last thing is that they showed that the patients that are, I think, the largest at risk for gaps in care who really need the advancements in science that keep U.S. health care amazing and wonderful and world-leading, so the kids, the pediatric patients, the patients with rare cancers, and the patients actually that could benefit from de-escalation or right-sizing of treatment, they were also all more likely to have federal funding. So I think this research that was presented really shows that if, unfortunately, current status of restricted federal funding continues, that we are going to lose out in terms of the next generation of cancer cures, cancer de-escalations, and the type of combination treatments that make advancements in science. Dr. Monty Pal: Indeed. You know, I always point to Joe Unger's paper, and I think it is in JAMA Oncology, right, that showed life-years gained from NCI trials. It is such an important piece of work. I think this is a really nice complement to that, isn't it, to show the specific areas that otherwise would be, am I right in saying, kind of largely untouched? Dr. Fumiko Chino: I think you are right in that what we know from what industry will sponsor versus what the federal government will sponsor, that the federal government really helps make up the gap to really make those advancements that save lives, that lead to more birthdays, that advance our knowledge and our capacity for providing more cures and more successful futures for our patients. I always like pointing to the de-escalation research, which is, and this is not to dig pharma, but no pharmaceutical company is going to run a trial that says you can give less of their drug, right? It just does not make sense for the business end of the science. And so, thinking about how to right-size treatments, how to do more with less, that really is the purview of the federal government. Dr. Monty Pal: Absolutely. Absolutely.  I am going to shift gears here and bring up another abstract that I found to be quite intriguing, and this relates to reimbursement of expenses, et cetera, for clinical trials. This is an abstract from Courtney Williams and team. It brings to mind the importance, I think, of recognizing the hardships that patients take on by clinical trials, but I also would love for you to comment on that sort of fine line between reimbursement for expenses and then, you know, sort of undue enticement. It is a challenging balance there. But give me your reflections on this abstract. Dr. Fumiko Chino: Absolutely. You are speaking about Dr. Williams' Abstract 93 from the Alabama group, and Alabama actually has this incredible group of health services researchers which is, are doing really important work in this space. What this trial shows is that, you know, it is a small pilot study, it is 30-something patients that received some support primarily for their travel and additional expenses related to their clinical trial participation for breast cancer. It showed that the money helps, and I think what we all know is that it is expensive to participate in clinical trials. It requires additional visits. It often requires some significant travel burden for our patients, and I do not feel that money reimbursement for clinical trial expenses is an inducement. Nobody participates in a clinical trial to get the money for their gas, right? We know that our patients are making some pretty significant sacrifices in order to participate in clinical trials, and what this type of program does is just actually reimburse them for their outlaying of funds.  And I loved this trial because the patients were actually given $1,000 a month for the first 4 months of their trial participation, and what the study showed is that the patients were using it for things like travel-related food, for things like transportation, caregiver expenses, or even some of their out-of-pocket medical expenses like cost sharing or prescriptions. And that they said that overall, the reimbursement really made a difference in terms of their capacity for staying on the clinical trial. Because we know our clinical trials really are not able to enroll the full diversity of patients that often have a disease, and that the patients that are at biggest risk for a health care disparity or a gap in care are also the least likely to enroll in a clinical trial.  Programs like this are an essential part of showing how financial toxicity can be overcome with pretty straightforward assistance to patients to help reimburse them for the things that they are already taking out of their pocket, for parking costs, for that $10 soup that they buy at the cancer center, for those additional expenses that we are, unfortunately, putting on them. Dr. Monty Pal: Very well said. And you know, I have started to dabble in clinical trials looking at CAR T-cell therapies for kidney cancer, and I have to tell you, it is just insane the amount of cost that a patient would have to take on to comply with the stipulations for some of these novel therapies. We require that they stay within 30 minutes of the facility for 28 days, and unless we are compensating for some of that, I mean, how can one afford a hotel stay that is that long? I mean, it is just, it is unprecedented, and it would certainly provide a huge barrier to many patients who would otherwise enroll. Really well said. I also wanted to bring up another financially driven topic, and treating renal cell, again, I would say the vast majority, 90% plus of my patients in clinic are on oral drug therapies. And I cannot tell you how often a patient will show up in my practice and say, "Doc, I have got 15 days out of this 30-day prescription left. What do I do with it?" You know, or some come with pill bottles from a deceased loved one. And it is so frustrating to say, "Take it to the pharmacy and they will just get rid of it for you." But sounds like there is an abstract from Dr. Mackler, Abstract 102, that seems to address this topic quite well. Am I right? Dr. Fumiko Chino: Absolutely. This presentation, I was the most excited about seeing because this group, which helps run a cancer drug repository, theirs is called YesRx, presented their data from the last approximately two years of running this repository, and they were able to show incredible benefit for their patients in Michigan. And it is a really straightforward program. It is run by pharmacists. It has support from the legislation in Michigan. And what they were able to show is that they repurposed medications that would otherwise have been discarded. They delivered them directly to the oncologist, which then actually dispersed them to the patients. They helped 1,000 patients in less than two years. They saved them millions of dollars, over $15 million presented in the abstract. And it is just a win-win-win because I know that patients actually, and sometimes patient caregivers, they feel very sad to have spent a lot of money out of pocket for their medication, and then if they have a dose reduction or, obviously, you know, if the surviving spouse then has to get rid of their medication, just dispose of them, it is very disheartening. And this is a way of kind of reclaiming power for patients. So they were able to accept donations from all over the state of Michigan and then also help over 1,000 patients. And so, it is a phenomenal program. Dr. Monty Pal: Just wild when I came across the dollar amounts, right, that they were saving. It just, it seems like a place that, you know, we just have to look, as cancer centers, right, and really take this on. Just brilliant. On that same theme of cost savings and so forth, you know, I think there has been a lot of focus on what recent policies have done in the context of us having access to therapies and so forth. And one of the topics that has come up is the Inflation Reduction Act and how changes pertaining to the IRA have really played a role in one's ability to take on some of these expensive prescriptions. And I believe John Lin and colleagues tackled that issue in Abstract 97. Could you comment on that, Fumiko? Dr. Fumiko Chino: Absolutely. Dr. Lin is one of my colleagues here at MD Anderson, so I know him very well, and he has been doing really phenomenal work over the last several years with looking at drug affordability and access. And what his analysis shows is that for patients, after the Inflation Reduction Act's cap on out-of-pocket expenses, is that it really did show that out-of-pocket expenses decreased. So what the Inflation Reduction Act did is that it eliminated the 5% co-insurance and placed this $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket expenses. And what that led to for these patients that were not able to have the low-income subsidy is that there were lower costs, and that there was a lower rate of drug abandonment, meaning that the prescription was not refilled. There was also a lower rate of unfilled prescriptions as well. And I think that it shows that health policy really can improve access to care. I think the flip side of the fact that the IRA, this policy, really did seem to help people is that what his research showed is that actually, even with the benefits of this cap, is that actually it is still really high in terms of the rate of people who are not able to fill their prescriptions or that completely abandon them over time. And that unfortunately, even with this change, that over half of people without the low-income subsidy were potentially not getting the full benefit of their medications because they were not able to afford them. And so I think it really kind of highlights that we still need to do more work about making drugs affordable. Dr. Monty Pal: Indeed, indeed. And I mean, in a setting like this, I mean, I think it is important to recognize that $2,000 is a lot, it is a big chunk of change, right, for a lot of families in the U.S. What do you think of the prospect of, like, decreasing that cap? Is that something that from a policy standpoint you would be supportive of? Dr. Fumiko Chino: Well, so something that is a real option for patients on Medicare is there is something called the Medicare Prescription Payment Plan, and what it allows you to do is actually prorate the $2,000 over the whole year. And so instead of having to pay $2,000 as soon as you fill your prescription, because you are going to have, if you have an expensive medication, it is essentially you have to pay the $2,000 in January, right? It allows you to prorate it, so essentially $170 a month, and that comes to you as like a regular bill. And I think that as rolled out as part of the IRA is a really lovely way of thinking about how do we make these payments more stable over time, so it is not a huge hit sort of at the beginning of the year. And I think that alone actually can make a difference in terms of trying to help make sure that people can actually get their medications. Dr. Monty Pal: That is an excellent tip. Excellent tip.  We are going to shift gears entirely. We have been talking a lot about the dollars and cents of things and talk about an abstract from Sophia Smith and colleagues. So this is Abstract 550 at your meeting. And this hinged on a program of sorts to deal with post-traumatic stress disorder. We do not often think about PTSD in the vernacular for oncology patients, but indeed, I mean, it is something that they must face, especially in the context of long-term survivorship. Can you talk a little bit about Dr. Smith's abstract? Dr. Fumiko Chino: Absolutely. I love this work from Dr. Smith, who is at Duke. She worked with Dr. Applebaum, who was my old colleague at Memorial Sloan Kettering. And this group of researchers really is trying to figure out how to best support people into survivorship so that they can actually thrive. And their patient population for this work was actually people who received stem cell transplant, and they focused on people who had PTSD symptoms. And what they were able to show through this SMART design, which is essentially this serial, multiple randomized trial, so everyone got randomized upfront to either usual care or this app, so this digital app that actually helped coach people through cancer distress. And then for the people who were non-responders, they were then additionally randomized to either the app plus coaching or a therapist versus the cognitive behavioral therapy or CBT.  And what they were able to show is that, number one, anyone who had the app seemed like they did better than those who did not start the path with the app. But then the additional help of either the therapist or the coach or the CBT made additional benefit over time. And so, I think this shows a really nice stepped care, which is you can potentially have some right-sizing of treatments cost saving, if we sort of give everyone the app, which is, I think, overall pretty low cost. And that for the people who do not get the full benefit from the app, then you can think about these maybe more tailored approaches, the therapist, the coach, the CBT, but that some people actually just respond to the app. And I think it allows us to, again, right-size the care for our patients. And I think it is really innovative to think about how technology can help improve access to care in the setting of something like PTSD. Dr. Monty Pal: Brilliant summary. Brilliant summary.  Gosh, it looks like such an exciting meeting this year. Congratulations on a terrific program for the ASCO Quality Care Symposium. I know you played a huge role in developing it, and thanks for sharing your insights on the ASCO Daily News Podcast. Dr. Fumiko Chino: No, I really appreciate you having me. ASCO Quality is my favorite meeting of the year. You know, it is really a phenomenal meeting, and I am so excited for next year in Boston in 2026. Dr. Monty Pal: Awesome. And thanks to our listeners too. You are going to find links to all the abstracts that we discussed today in the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you heard today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. More on today's speakers: Dr. Sumanta (Monty) Pal  @montypal Dr. Fumiko Chino @fumikochino Follow ASCO on social media: @ASCO on Twitter ASCO on Bluesky ASCO on Facebook ASCO on LinkedIn Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest: Dr. Monty Pal:     Speakers' Bureau: MJH Life Sciences, IntrisiQ, Peerview Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Merck, Osel, Genentech, Crispr Therapeutics, Adicet Bio, ArsenalBio, Xencor, Miyarsian Pharmaceutical Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Crispr Therapeutics, Ipsen, Exelixis Dr. Fumiko Chino:  Consulting or Advisory Role: Institute for Value Based Medicine Research Funding: Merck

In this inspiring episode of Black Men in Medicine, host Dr. Corey Gatewood sits down with Dr. Eric Flenaugh, a distinguished Critical Care Interventional Pulmonologist based in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. Flenaugh serves as Associate Professor of Medicine, Vice Chair, and Chief of the Pulmonary Section at Morehouse School of Medicine and Grady Memorial Hospital, where he has dedicated his career to caring for Atlanta's diverse and underserved communities.A graduate of the University of Texas Health Science Center and MD Anderson Cancer Center, Dr. Flenaugh's journey reflects an unwavering commitment to excellence, mentorship, and advancing equity in healthcare.In this conversation, Dr. Flenaugh shares what drew him to the field of pulmonology and how his passion for critical care was tested—and ultimately strengthened—during the COVID-19 pandemic in one of the nation's least restricted states. He discusses leading with courage and compassion through unprecedented times, balancing the weight of loss with an enduring duty to serve.Dr. Flenaugh also highlights the importance of building and sustaining meaningful relationships, both within medicine and beyond, and how his experiences at Morehouse and Grady have deepened his sense of purpose. Together, he and Dr. Gatewood explore racial disparities in pulmonary health, from differences in lung cancer risk to inequities in access and diagnosis.Beyond the ICU, Dr. Flenaugh expresses his creativity as a filmmaker that allows him to find balance outside of medicine.Tune in for a candid, thought-provoking conversation that reminds us medicine is more than the treatment of disease, it's about breathing life into communities, relationships, and dreams. As we bring you nothing but the gems!

Dr. Beata Lerman is a distinguished scientist with over 22 years of biomedical development experience renowned for her work in immuno-oncology and cancer research at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Inspired by her personal battle with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, she co-invented and patented two cancer immunotherapy treatments. After seeing the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially on health compromised people, she founded Sinless Treats LLC and became a partner in Revogreen Inc. Beata makes her home in Houston, Texas.

Host: Peter Buch, MD, FACG, AGAF, FACP Guest: Yinghong Wang, MD, PhD, MS Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) colitis comes with unique diagnostic and treatment challenges, which means that recognizing and managing it effectively is key to the best outcomes. Joining Dr. Peter Buch to share her insights on caring for patients with this complex condition is Dr. Yinghong Wang. Dr. Wang is a Professor in the Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, as well as Director of the Oncology-GI Toxicity Program, Director of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation, Deputy Division Head of Research in the Division of Internal Medicine, and Chair of the MD Anderson Cancer Center Immunotherapy Toxicity Working Group.

In this episode of the Award-winning PRS Journal Club Podcast, 2025 Resident Ambassadors to the PRS Editorial Board – Christopher Kalmar, Ilana Margulies, and Amanda Sergesketter- and special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, discuss the following articles from the September 2025 issue: “Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction: The Laterothoracic Approach without Robotic Assistance” by Pozzo, Lhuaire, Mernier, et al. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/NSM_IBR Special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, was most recently the Acting Chair, the Director of Clinical Research and Professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Currently, he is a Physician Executive and the Surgery Service Line Chief of Beaumont, where he also serves as Professor of Plastic Surgery. In this role, Dr. Selber is responsible for all surgical activities within the Beaumont System, including 8 hospitals overseeing 2000 surgeons. Dr. Selber completed surgery residency at the University of Pennsylvania and fellowship in Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Selber's clinical practice is exclusively complex cancer reconstruction. He is a surgical innovator, developing numerous techniques, and author of the only robotic plastic surgery textbook.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCSept25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

In this episode of the Award-winning PRS Journal Club Podcast, 2025 Resident Ambassadors to the PRS Editorial Board – Christopher Kalmar, Ilana Margulies, and Amanda Sergesketter- and special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, discuss the following articles from the September 2025 issue: “Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction with Profunda Artery Perforator Flaps” by Haddock, Teotia, and Farr. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/SPrNSM_PAPflaps Special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, was most recently the Acting Chair, the Director of Clinical Research and Professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Currently, he is a Physician Executive and the Surgery Service Line Chief of Beaumont, where he also serves as Professor of Plastic Surgery. In this role, Dr. Selber is responsible for all surgical activities within the Beaumont System, including 8 hospitals overseeing 2000 surgeons. Dr. Selber completed surgery residency at the University of Pennsylvania and fellowship in Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Selber's clinical practice is exclusively complex cancer reconstruction. He is a surgical innovator, developing numerous techniques, and author of the only robotic plastic surgery textbook.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCSept25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

Sponsored By: → Cornbread Hemp | For an exclusive offer go to cornbreadhemp.com/drg and use promo code DRG for 30% OFF your first order! → JASPR | For an exclusive offer go to jaspr.co/DRG and get $200 OFF for a limited time. Sign up for our newsletter! https://drchristiangonzalez.com/newsletter/ Episode summary For empaths, introverts, and anyone who feels other people's moods deeply: this episode is for you. Dr. G sits down with Dr. Jason Yuan (ND)—a naturopathic doctor who blends energy healing with practical basics (sleep, minerals, breath, gut care). He explains pranic healing in plain English (think acupuncture without needles) and shares simple habits to use after hard talks, busy rooms, or long days. • Post-conversation reset (60–120s): pause, breathe a little slower through your nose, then say one release line (silently or aloud): “I release what isn't mine.” • Salt routine: in the shower, rub a handful of salt over shoulders/arms and rinse; or take a bath with 1–2 cups of salt to clear that heavy, lingering feeling. • Grounding: spend 5–10 minutes barefoot on grass/earth. No yard? Stand still indoors, feel your feet, and breathe slowly for a minute.• Why sensitive people “catch” the room's mood—and how to turn the volume down• How pranic (hands-off) energy work helps the body reset • Daily rhythm basics (sleep, minerals, steady meals) that make you more resilient About the guest: I'm with Dr. Jason Yuan, a naturopathic doctor who grounds energy practices in physiology—nervous system, breath, minerals, and gut. He cites mind–body research at MD Anderson Cancer Center where a healer's brain-state shifts were linked to changes in cells, and he turns those insights into simple, repeatable routines. Listen now to get the full walkthrough and context behind each step. Timestamps: 0:00 - Introduction 1:36 - Rapid Fire 4:43 - Dr. Yuan's Journey from Skeptic to Energy Healer 8:13 - 25 Years of Eczema: Personal Healing Story 11:57 - What Creates Energy Blocks and Congestion 16:44 - Research: MD Anderson Cancer Study Results 22:12 - Jesus & Collective Consciousness Healing 27:54 - The Three Bodies: Physical, Emotional & Mental 34:31 - Biofield vs Quantum Field Explained 39:30 - Soul as Driver: The Chariot Metaphor 45:07 - Practical Tools: Salt Baths & Energy Hygiene 50:32 - Energetic Cords: How People Drain Your Energy 55:18 - Virtual Sessions & Learning Pronic Healing

In this episode of the Award-winning PRS Journal Club Podcast, 2025 Resident Ambassadors to the PRS Editorial Board – Christopher Kalmar, Ilana Margulies, and Amanda Sergesketter- and special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, discuss the following articles from the September 2025 issue: “Assessing the Shift: Increasing Rates of Immediate Breast Reconstruction by Nonplastic Surgeons: Insights from a Nationwide Analysis” by Kilmer, Pawly, Wehelie. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/BreastReconShift Special guest, Jesse Selber, MD, was most recently the Acting Chair, the Director of Clinical Research and Professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Currently, he is a Physician Executive and the Surgery Service Line Chief of Beaumont, where he also serves as Professor of Plastic Surgery. In this role, Dr. Selber is responsible for all surgical activities within the Beaumont System, including 8 hospitals overseeing 2000 surgeons. Dr. Selber completed surgery residency at the University of Pennsylvania and fellowship in Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Selber's clinical practice is exclusively complex cancer reconstruction. He is a surgical innovator, developing numerous techniques, and author of the only robotic plastic surgery textbook.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCSept25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

In this special live episode of Tech Talk, a Mortar & Pestle production, Erin Michael, Director of Member Engagement, is joined by Tiffany Kofroth, CSPT, CPhT-Adv, Advanced Pharmacy Technician in Continuing Pharmacy Education at the University of Texas at MD Anderson Cancer Center from and Mindy Stephens, as they discuss their compounding journeys.

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain dive into the complexities of relapsed refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with FLT3 mutations. Joined by leukemia specialists Dr. Uma Borate from the Ohio State University and Dr. Naval Daver from the MD Anderson Cancer Center, the discussion focused on real-life cases and the current standard of care for patients with FLT3-positive AML. Key topics included: •⁠  ⁠The importance of retesting for FLT3 mutations at the time of relapse •⁠  ⁠Treatment paradigms for fit vs. unfit patients •⁠  ⁠The role of Gilteritinib and combination therapies in relapsed settings •⁠  ⁠Management of side effects, including cytopenias and differentiation syndrome •⁠  ⁠Insights into the use of hypomethylating agents and the potential of oral therapies Whether you're a healthcare professional or someone interested in the latest advancements in cancer care, this episode provides valuable insights into the management of challenging AML cases. Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Don't forget to subscribe for more discussions on the latest in oncology!