Podcasts about md anderson cancer center

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.

Dr. Hope Rugo and Dr. Kamaria Lee discuss the prevalence of financial toxicity in cancer care in the United States and globally, focusing on breast cancer, and highlight key interventions to mitigate financial hardship. TRANSCRIPT  Dr. Hope Rugo: Hello, and welcome to By the Book, a podcast series from ASCO that features engaging conversations between editors and authors of the ASCO Educational Book. I'm your host, Dr. Hope Rugo. I'm the director of the Women's Cancer Program and division chief of breast medical oncology at the City of Hope Cancer Center, and I'm also the editor-in-chief of the Educational Book. Rising healthcare costs are causing financial distress for patients and their families across the globe. Patients with cancer report financial toxicity as a major impediment to their quality of life, and its association with worse outcomes is well documented. Today, we'll be discussing how patients with breast cancer are uniquely at risk for financial toxicity. Joining me for this discussion is Dr. Kamaria Lee, a fourth-year radiation oncology resident and health equity researcher at MD Anderson Cancer Center and a co-author of the recently published article titled, "Financial Toxicity in Breast Cancer: Why Does It Matter, Who Is at Risk, and How Do We Intervene?" Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode.  Dr. Lee, it's great to have you on this podcast. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Hey, Dr. Rugo. Thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to be here today. I also would like to recognize my co-authors, Dr. Alexandru Eniu, Dr. Christopher Booth, Molly MacDonald, and Dr. Fumiko Chino, who worked on this book chapter with me and did a fantastic presentation on the topic at ASCO this past year. Dr. Hope Rugo: Thanks very much. We'll now just jump into the questions. We know that rising medical costs contribute to a growing financial burden on patients, which has [GC1]  [JG2]  been documented to contribute to lower quality-of-life, compromised clinical care, and worse health outcomes. How are patients with breast cancer uniquely at risk for financial toxicity? How does the problem vary within the breast cancer population in terms of age, racial and ethnic groups, and those who have metastatic disease? Dr. Kamaria Lee: Breast cancer patients are uniquely at risk of financial toxicity for several reasons. Three key reasons are that breast cancer often requires multimodal treatment. So this means patients are receiving surgery, many receive systemic therapies, including hormonal therapies, as well as radiation. And so this requires care coordination and multiple visits that can increase costs. Secondly, another key reason that patients with breast cancer are uniquely at risk for financial toxicity is that there's often a long survivorship period that includes long-term care for toxicities and continued follow-ups, and patients might also be involved in activities regarding advocacy, but also physical therapy and mental health appointments during their prolonged survivorship, which can also add costs. And a third key reason that patients with breast cancer are uniquely at risk for financial toxicity is that the patient population is primarily women. And we know that women are more likely to have increased caregiver responsibilities while also potentially working and managing their treatments, and so this is another contributor. Within the breast cancer population, those who are younger and those who are from marginalized racial/ethnic groups and those with metastatic disease have been shown to be at an increased risk. Those who are younger may be more likely to need childcare during treatment if they have kids, or they're more likely to be employed and not yet retired, which can be disrupted while receiving treatment. And those who are racial/ethnic minorities may have increased financial toxicity due to reasons that exist even after controlling for socioeconomic factors. And some of these reasons have been shown to be increased risk of job or income loss or transportation barriers during treatment. And lastly, for those with metastatic breast cancer, there can be ongoing financial distress due to the long-term care that is needed for treatment, and this can include parking, transportation, and medications while managing their metastatic disease. Dr. Hope Rugo: I think it is really important to understand these issues as you just outlined. There has been a lot of focus on financial toxicity research in recent years, and that has led to novel approaches in screening for financial hardship. Can you tell us about the new screening tools and interventions and how you can easily apply that to clinical practice, keeping in mind that people aren't at MD Anderson with a bunch of support and information on this but are in clinical practice and seeing many, many patients a day with lots of different cancers? Dr. Kamaria Lee: You're exactly right that there is incredible nuance needed in understanding how to best screen for financial hardship in different types of practices. There are multiple financial toxicity tools. The most commonly used tool is the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity, also known as the COST tool. In its full form, it's an 11-item survey. There's also a summary question as well. And these questions look at objective and subjective financial burden, and it uses a five-point Likert scale. For example, one question on the full form is, "I know that I have enough money in savings, retirement, or assets to cover the cost of my treatment," and then patients are able to respond "not at all" to "very much" with a threshold score for financial toxicity risk. Of course, as you noted, one critique of having an 11-item survey is that there's limited time in patient encounters with their providers. And so recently, Thom et al validated an abbreviated two-question version of the COST tool. This validation was done in an urban comprehensive cancer center, and it was found to have a high predictive value to the full measure. We note which two questions are specifically pulled from the full measure within the book chapter. And this is one way that it can be easier for clinicians who are in a busier setting to still screen for financial toxicity with fewer questions. I also do recommend that clinicians who know their clinic's workflow the best, work with their team of nurses, financial navigators, and others to best integrate the tool into their workflow. For some, this may mean sending the two-item survey as a portal message so that patients can answer it before consults. Other times, it could mean having it on the tablet that can be done in the clinic waiting room. And so there are different ways that screening can be done, even in a busy setting, and acknowledging that different practices have different amounts of resources and time. Dr. Hope Rugo: And where would people access that easily? I recognize that that information is in your chapter, or your article that's on PubMed that will be linked to this podcast, but it is nice to just know where people could easily access that online. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Yes, and so you should be able to Google ‘the COST measure', and then there is a website that also has the forms as well. So it's also beyond the book chapter, Googling ‘the COST measure', and then online they would be able to find access to the form. Dr. Hope Rugo: And how often would you do that screening? Dr. Kamaria Lee: So, I think it's definitely important that we are as proactive as possible. And so initially, I recommend that the screening happens at the time of diagnosis, and so if it's done through the portal, it can be sent before the initial consult, or again, however, is best in the workflow. So at the time of diagnosis and then at regular intervals, so throughout the treatment process, but then also into the follow-up period as well to best understand if there's still a financial burden even after the treatments have been completed. Dr. Hope Rugo: I wonder if in the metastatic setting, you could do it at the change of treatment, you know, a month after somebody's changed treatment, because people may not be as aware of the financial constraints when they first get prescribed a drug. It's more when you hear back from how much it's going to cost. And leading into that, I think it's, what do you do with this? So, you know, this cost conversation is really important. You're going to be talking to the patient about the cost considerations when you, for example, see that there are financial issues, you're prescribing treatments. How do we implement impactful structured cost conversations with our breast cancer patients, help identify financial issues, and intervene? How do we intervene? I mean, as physicians often we aren't really all that aware, or providers, of how to address the cost. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Yes, I agree fully that another key time when to screen for financial toxicity is at that transition between treatments to best understand where they're at based off of what they've received previously for care, and then to anticipate needs when changing regimens, such as like you said in the metastatic setting. As we're collecting this information, you're right, we screen, we get this information, and what do we do? I do agree that there is a lack of knowledge among us clinicians of how do we manage this information. What is insurance? How do we manage insurance and help patients with insurance concerns? How do we help them navigate out-of-pocket costs or even the indirect costs of transportation? Those are a lot of things that are not covered in-depth in traditional medical training. And so it can be overwhelming for a lot of clinicians, not only due to time limitations in clinic, but also just having those conversations within their visit. And so what I would say, a key thing to note, is that this is another area for multidisciplinary care. So just as we're treating patients in a multidisciplinary way within oncology as we work with our medical oncology, surgical colleagues across the board, it's knowing that this is another area for multidisciplinary care. So the team members include all of the different oncologists, but it also includes team members such as financial counselors and navigators and social workers and even understanding nonprofit partners who we have who have money that can be set aside to help reduce costs for certain different aspects of treatment. Another thing I will note is that most patients with breast cancer often say they do want to have these conversations still with their clinicians. So they do still see a clinician as someone that can weigh in on the costs of their treatment or can weigh in on this other aspect of their care, even if it's not the actual medication or the radiation. And so patients do desire to hear from their clinicians about this topic, and so I think another way to make it feel less overwhelming for clinicians like ourselves is to know that even small conversations are helpful and then being knowledgeable about within your institution or, like I said, outside of it with nonprofits, being aware of who can I refer this patient to for continued follow-up and for more detailed information and resources. Dr. Hope Rugo: Are those the successful interventions? It's really referring to financial navigators? How do people identify? You know, in an academic center, we often will sort of punt this to social workers or our nurse navigators. What about in the community? What's a successful intervention example of mitigating financial toxicity? Dr. Kamaria Lee: I agree completely that the context at which people are practicing is important to note. So as you alluded to, in some bigger systems, we do have financial navigators and this has been seen to be successful in providing applications and assisting with applications for things such as pharmaceutical assistance, insurance applications, discount opportunities.  Another successful intervention are financial toxicity tumor boards, which I acknowledge might not be able to exist everywhere. But where this is possible, multidisciplinary tumor boards that include both doctors and nurses and social workers and any other members of the care team have been able to effectively decrease patients' personal spending on care costs and decrease co-pays through having a dedicated time to discuss concerns as they arise or even proactively. Otherwise, I think in the community, there are other interventions in regards to understanding different aspects of government programs that might be available for patients that are not, you know, limited to an institution, but that are more nationally available, and then again, also having the nonprofit, you know, partnerships to see other resources that patients can have access to.  And then I would also say that the indirect costs are a significant burden for many patients. So by that, I mean even parking costs, transportation, childcare. And so even though those aren't interventions necessarily with someone who is a financial navigator, I would recommend that even if it's a community practice, they discuss ways that they can help offset those indirect costs with patients with parking or if there are ways to help offset transportation costs or at least educate patients on other centers that may be closer to them or they can still receive wonderful care, and then also making sure that patients are able to even have appointments scheduled in ways that are easier for them financially.  So even if someone's receiving care out in the community where there's not a financial navigator, as clinicians or our scheduling teams, sometimes there are options to make sure if a patient wants, visits are more so on one day than throughout the week or many hours apart that can really cause loss of income due to missed work. And so there are also kind of more nuanced interventions that can happen even without a financial navigation system in place. Dr. Hope Rugo: I think that those are really good points and it is interesting when you think about financial toxicity. I mean, we worry a lot when patients can't take the drugs because they can't afford them, but there are obviously many other non-treatment, direct treatment-related issues that come up like the parking, childcare, tolls, you know, having a working car, all those kinds of things, and the unexpected things like school is out or something like that that really play a big role where they don't have alternatives. And I think that if we think about just drug costs, I think those are a big issue in the global setting. And your article did address financial toxicity in the global setting. International financial toxicity rates range from 25% of patients with breast cancer in high-income countries to nearly 80% in low- and middle-income countries or LMICs. You had cited a recent meta-analysis of the global burnout from cancer, and that article found that over half of patients faced catastrophic health expenditures. And of course, I travel internationally and have a lot of colleagues who are working in oncology in many countries, and it is really often kind of shocking from our perspective to see what people can get coverage for and how much they have to pay out-of-pocket and how much that changes, that causes a lot of disparity in access to healthcare options, even those that improve survival. Can you comment on the global impact of this problem? Dr. Kamaria Lee: I am glad that you brought this up for discussion as well. Financial toxicity is something that is a significant global issue. As you mentioned, as high as 80% of patients with breast cancer in low- and middle-income countries have had significant financial toxicity. And it's particularly notable that even when looking at breast cancer compared to other malignancies around the world, the burden appears to be worse. This has been seen even in countries with free universal healthcare. One example is Sri Lanka, where they saw high financial toxicity for their patients with breast cancer, even with this free universal healthcare. But there were also those travel costs and just additional out-of-hospital tests that were not covered. Also, literature in low- and middle-income countries shows that patients might also be borrowing money from their social networks, so from their family and their friends, to help cover their treatment costs, and in some cases, people are making daily food compromises to help offset the cost of their care. So there is a really large burden of financial toxicity generally for cancer globally, but also specifically in breast cancer, it warrants specific discussion. In the meta-analysis that you mentioned, they identified key risk factors of financial toxicity globally that included people who had a larger family size, a lower income, a lack of insurance, longer disease duration, so again, the accumulation of visits and costs and co-pay over time, and those who had multiple treatments. And so in the global setting, there is this significant burden, but then I will also note that there is a lack of literature in low-income countries on financial toxicity. So where we suspect that there is a higher burden and where we need to better understand how it's distributed and what interventions can be applied, especially culturally specific interventions for each country and community, there's less research on this topic. So there is definitely an increased need for research in financial toxicity, particularly in the global setting. Dr. Hope Rugo: Yes, and I think that goes on to how we hope that financial toxicity researchers will have approaches to large-scale multi-institutional interventions to improve financial toxicity. I think this is an enormous challenge, but one of the SWOG organizations has done some great work in this area, and a randomized trial addressing cancer-related financial hardship through the delivery of a proactive financial navigation intervention is one area that SWOG has focused on, which I think is really interesting. Of course, that's going to be US-based, which is how we might find our best paths starting. Do you think that's a good path forward, maybe that being able to provide something like that across institutions that are independent of being a cancer only academic center, or more general academic center, or a community practice? You know, is finding ways to help patients with breast cancer and their families understand and better manage financial aspects of cancer care on a national basis the next approach? Dr. Kamaria Lee: Yes, I agree that that is a good approach, and I think the proactive component is also key. We know that patients that are coming to us with any cancer, but including breast cancer, some of them have already experienced a financial burden or have recently had a job loss before even coming to us and having the added distress of our direct costs and our indirect costs. So I think being proactive when they come to us in regards to the additional burden that their cancer treatments may cause is key to try to get ahead of things as much as we can, knowing that even before they've seen us, there might be many financial concerns that they've been navigating.  I think at the national level, that allows us to try to understand things at what might be a higher level of evidence and make sure that we're able to address this for a diverse cohort of patients. I know that sometimes the enrollment can be challenging at the national level when looking at financial toxicity, as then we're involving many different types of financial navigation partners and programs, and so that can maybe make it more complex to understand the best approaches, but I think that it can be done and can really bring our understanding of important financial toxicity interventions to the next level. And then the benefit to families with the proactive component is just allowing them to feel more informed, which can help decrease anticipation, anxiety related to anticipation, and allow them to help plan things moving forward for themselves and for the whole family. Dr. Hope Rugo: Those are really good points and I wonder, I was just thinking as you were talking, that having some kind of a process where you could attach to the electronic health record, you could click on the financial toxicity survey questions that somebody filled out, and then there would be a drop-down menu for interventions or connecting you to people within your clinic or even more broadly that would be potential approaches to manage that toxicity issue so that it doesn't impact care, you know, that people aren't going to decide not to take their medication or not to come in or not to get their labs because of the cost or the transportation or the home care issues that often are a big problem, even parking, as you pointed out, at the cancer center. And actually, we had a philanthropic donor when I was at UCSF who donated a large sum of money for patient assistance, and it was interesting to then have these sequential meetings with all the stakeholders to try and decide how you would use that money. You need a big program, you need to have a way of assessing the things you can intervene with, which is really tough. In that general vein, you know, what are the governmental, institutional, and provider-level actions that are required to help clinicians do our best to do no financial harm, given the fact that we're prescribing really expensive drugs that require a lot of visits when caring for our patients with breast cancer in the curative and in the metastatic setting? Dr. Kamaria Lee: At the governmental level, there are patient assistant programs that do exist, and I think that those can continue and can become more robust. But I also think one element of those is oftentimes the programs that we have at the government level or even institutional levels might have a lot of paperwork or be harder for people with lower literacy levels to complete. And so I think the government can really try to make sure that the paperwork that is given, within reason, with all the information they need, but that the paperwork can be minimized and that there can be clear instructions, as well as increased health insurance options and, you know, medical debt forgiveness as more broad just overall interventions that are needed. I think additionally, institutions that have clinical trials can help ensure that enrollment can be at geographically diverse locations. Some trials do reimburse for travel costs, of course, but sometimes then patients need the reimbursement sooner than it comes. And so I think there's also those considerations of more so upfront funds for patients involved in clinical trials if they're going to have to travel far to be enrolled in that type of care or trying to, again, make clinical trials more available at diverse locations.  I would also say that it's important that those who design clinical trials use what is known as the “Common Sense Oncology” approach of making sure that they're designed in minimizing the use of outcomes that might have a smaller clinical benefit but may have a high financial toxicity. And that also goes to what providers can do, of understanding what's most important to a particular patient in front of them, what outcomes and what benefit, or you know, how many additional months of progression-free survival or things like that might be important to a particular patient and then also educating them and discussing what the associated financial burden is just so that they have the full picture as they make an informed decision. Dr. Hope Rugo: As much as we know. I mean, I think that that's one of the big challenges is that as we prescribe these expensive drugs and often require multiple visits, even, you know, really outside of the clinical trial setting, trying to balance the benefit versus the financial toxicity can be a huge challenge. And that's a big area, I think, that we still need help with, you know. As we have more drugs approved in the early-stage setting and treatments that could be expensive, oral medications, for example, in our Medicare population where the share of cost may be substantial upfront, you know, with an upfront cost, how do we balance the benefits versus the risk? And I think you make an important point that discussing this individually with patients after we found out what the cost is. I think warning patients about the potential for large out-of-pocket cost and asking them to contact us when they know is one way around this. You know, patients feeling like they're sort of out there with a prescription, a recommendation from their doctor, they're scared of their cancer, and they have this huge share of cost that we didn't know about. That's one challenge, and I don't know if there's any suggestions you have about how one should approach that communication with the patient. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Yes, I think part of it is truly looking at each patient as an individual and asking how much they want to know, right? So we all know that patients, some who want more information, some want less, and so I think one way to approach that is asking them about how much information do they want to know, what is most helpful to them. And then also, knowing that if you're in a well-resourced setting that does have the social workers and financial navigators, also making sure it's integrated in the multidisciplinary setting and so that they know who they can go to for what, but also know that as a clinician, you're always happy for them to bring up their concerns and that if it's something that you're not aware of, that you will connect them to the correct multidisciplinary team members who can accurately provide that additional information. Dr. Hope Rugo: Do you have any other additional comments that you'd like to mention that we haven't covered? I think the idea of a financial toxicity screen with two questions that could be implemented at change of therapy or just periodically throughout the course of treatment would be a really great thing, but I think we do need as much information on potential interventions as possible because that's really what challenges people. It's like finding out information that you can't handle. Your article provides a lot of strategies there, which I think are great and can be discussed on a practice and institutional level and applied. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Yeah, I would just like to thank you for the opportunity to discuss such an important topic within oncology and specifically for our patients with breast cancer. I agree that it can feel overwhelming, both for clinicians and patients, to navigate this topic that many of us are not as familiar with, but I would just say that the area of financial toxicity is continuing to evolve as we gather more information on most successful interventions and that our patients can often inform us on, you know, what interventions are most needed as we see them. And so you can have your thinking about it as you see individual patients of, "This person mentioned this could be more useful to them." And so I think also learning from our patients in this space that can seem overwhelming and that maybe we weren't all trained on in medical school to best understand how to approach it and how to give our patients the best care, not just medically, but also financially. Dr. Hope Rugo: Thank you, Dr. Lee, for sharing your insights with us today. Our listeners will find a link, as I mentioned earlier, to the Ed Book article we discussed today in the transcript of this episode. I think it's very useful, a useful resource, and not just for providers, but for clinic staff overall. I think this can be of great value and help open the discussion as well. Dr. Kamaria Lee: Thank you so much, Dr. Rugo. Dr. Hope Rugo: And thanks to our listeners for joining us today. Please join us again next month on By the Book for more insightful views on topics you'll be hearing at Education Sessions from ASCO meetings and our deep dives into new approaches that are shaping modern oncology. Thank you. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Follow today's speakers:       Dr. Hope Rugo  @hope.rugo  Dr. Kamaria Lee @ lee_kamaria Follow ASCO on social media:       @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter)       ASCO on Bluesky      ASCO on Facebook       ASCO on LinkedIn       Disclosures:      Dr. Hope Rugo:   Honoraria: Mylan/Viatris, Chugai Pharma  Consulting/Advisory Role: Napo Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Bristol Myer  Research Funding (Inst.): OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences, Hoffman La-Roche AG/Genentech, In., Stemline Therapeutics, Ambryx    Dr. Kamaria Lee: No relationships to disclose  

Genetic testing and counseling are crucial components of precision medicine in cancer care, enabling clinicians to deliver the right care, to the right patient, at the right time. i3 Health's educational activity, Pathways to Precision: Integrating Genetic Counseling and Testing Into Cancer Care, provides a comprehensive foundation for incorporating these tools into practice. In this follow-up interview to the activity, co-chairs Dr. Filipa Lynce, Director of the Inflammatory Breast Cancer at Harvard Medical School, and Catherine Skefos, Certified Genetic Counselor at MD Anderson Cancer Center, share advances that have occurred in the field since the activity was recorded, including clinical trial updates and novel insights for clinicians. Click here to complete the free CME/NCPD/CE activity: bit.ly/3HqXjpX

Host: Charles Turck, PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP Guest: Sairah Ahmed, MD The treatment landscape for relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma has significantly shifted, with CAR T-cell therapies now offering curative potential in the second-line setting. But these advances also raise important questions, like how to identify the right candidates and navigate logistical barriers to ensure timely, equitable access. Joining Dr. Charles Turck to explore these critical considerations is Dr. Saira Ahmed, Associate Professor in the Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma and the CAR T Program Director in the Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma at the MD Anderson Cancer Center.

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!

This episode of Beauty Bytes with Dr. Kay features Dr. Jason Yuan, a licensed naturopathic physician, acupuncturist, and leading educator in consciousness-informed healing. Dr. Yuan specializes in biofield therapies, bridging ancient healing practices with modern science to help individuals awaken their inner healer. Dr. Yuan shares his personal journey from chronic eczema to exploring the profound connection between thoughts, emotions, and physical health. He delves into cutting-edge research, including studies from MD Anderson Cancer Center, demonstrating how conscious intention can subtly impact cellular processes. Learn about the science of biofield, the power of breathwork and meditation to cultivate inner energy, and how these practices can influence everything from pain management to overall well-being. Discover how your inner energy radiates outward, affecting your appearance and interactions, and why energetic hygiene is as important as physical hygiene. Dr. Yuen also discusses the future of integrative medicine, where understanding the biofield becomes a crucial pillar for holistic health and longevity. Find Dr. Jason Yuan on Instagram @DrJasonYuan.

Join us for a dynamic conversation with two powerhouse leaders in patient access: Alexandra Blake Martinez, MHSA, Associate Vice President of Access Strategic Operations at MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Tesha Montgomery, BSN, MHA, Senior Vice President of Access at Houston Methodist. Speaking from their shared hometown of Houston, the site of the 2025 Patient Access Collaborative Symposium, these visionary leaders reflect on the event's key themes — from the rising strategic importance of access to transformative innovations like AI. You'll hear candid insights on moving from reaction to prevention, navigating workforce challenges, embracing data-driven leadership, and redefining access as a strategic imperative. Whether you attended the symposium or not, this episode delivers valuable takeaways and fresh perspective from two of the nation's top access executives.  

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, Chris Campbell, MD, discuss the following articles from the June 2025 issue: “Superior Retention of Aged Fat Graft by Supplementing Young Adipose-Derived Stromal Cells in a Murine Model” by Tran, Jin, Zhou, et al. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/StromalCellEffect Special guest, Chris Campbell, MD is the director of microsurgery and associate program director of the Plastic Surgery Residency Program at the University of Virginia. In addition to his cosmetic practice, Dr. Campbell performs complex cancer reconstruction. After completing undergraduate and medical school at the University of North Carolina, he completed plastic surgery residency at the University of Virginia and completed subspecialty training in cancer reconstruction and microsurgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCJune25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

Host Sarah Burke interviews director, producer, and writer Robin Bicknell about her career in media and her latest documentary series, Secrets of the Bunny Ranch. They discuss the impact of HBO's Cathouse, the misrepresentation and exploitation of sex workers in media, and the importance of personal stories in documentary filmmaking. Robin shares her journey into the industry, her experiences as a woman in media, and the mental health challenges faced while conducting interviews. The conversation highlights the resilience of women and the need for empathetic storytelling in the media. More About Robin Bicknell: Based in Toronto, Canada, with family roots in Louisiana and Indiana, Bicknell has built an international reputation for crafting high-end pop culture and deeply human stories, marked by her exceptional ability to connect with subjects and audiences.  Most recently, Bicknell directed and co-wrote all six episodes of the highly anticipated A&E series Secrets of the Bunny Ranch.  She also helmed the feature documentary Ice Age America for Discovery Channel, ARTÉ, and CBC's The Nature of Things, a riveting exploration of a maverick archaeologist's discoveries in central Mexico. The film was nominated for a 2024 Realscreen Award and a Banff Rockie Award.  Her acclaimed film The Machine That Feels, featuring Margaret Atwood and Jane Goodall, delves into how AI is beginning to mirror uniquely human qualities like empathy, emotional intelligence, and creativity. The documentary received multiple nominations, including at Realscreen 2023. Additional credits include the multi-nominated Black Watch Snipers, documenting five WWII snipers' survival against overwhelming odds, and Camp X: Secret Agent School, the breakthrough feature on the clandestine WWII spy training camp that laid the groundwork for the CIA. Bicknell also directed, produced, and wrote The Curse of the Axe, a feature documentary narrated by Robbie Robertson about a mysterious ancient village, winner of the Silver Hugo at the Chicago International Film Festival. Bicknell's Ice Bridge won Best History Documentary at the 2019 Canadian Screen Awards.  In 2018, her film The Genetic Revolution tackled the controversial gene-editing technology CRISPR, earning a prestigious nomination for Best Science and Technology Film at the 2019 Banff Television Awards and three Canadian Screen Award nominations. Her earlier works include The Need for Speed, A&E's deep dive into illegal street racing, The Real Superhumans and the Quest for the Future Fantastic, winner of the Banff Television Award for Best Canadian Program and A Child's Choice, the poignant journey of four children with terminal cancer at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston Texas.  This show is sponsored by BetterHelp. Find out more: https://betterhelp.com/womeninmedia Connect with Sarah and Women in Media Network: https://www.womeninmedia.network/ https://www.instagram.com/wimnetwork https://www.instagram.com/burketalks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Abby Trahan is the Associate Director of Philanthropy at MD Anderson Cancer Center and one of two recipients of the 2025 Outstanding Young Professional award from the Association of Fundraising Professionals. In just five years, Abby has delivered transformational fundraising results—from growing monthly giving at the Houston Food Bank to securing major gifts and endowed support at the University of Houston Law Center. Now at MD Anderson, she brings her passion for equity, mentorship, and community-driven impact to one of the nation's leading cancer centers. We spoke with her live at ICON, the association's international conference in Seattle, Washington.

In this episode of BioTalk, Amy C. Hay, Chief Business and Strategy Officer at the Cell Therapy Manufacturing Center (CTMC), joins the conversation to explore the evolving landscape of cell and gene therapy. Amy shares insights from her extensive career in oncology care and innovation, highlighting the role CTMC—a joint venture between National Resilience and MD Anderson Cancer Center—is playing in accelerating the transition from discovery to commercialization. She discusses the current state of the industry, what disruption really means in this context, and how new business models can drive stability and impact for early-stage biotech companies. Amy also offers her perspective on how manufacturing must evolve to meet clinical demand, and how CTMC is positioned to lead in this next era of therapeutic development.   Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant.   Amy C. Hay is the Chief Business and Strategy Officer at the Cell Therapy Manufacturing Center (CTMC), a joint venture between National Resilience and MD Anderson Cancer Center. She brings decades of experience in oncology care, strategic growth, and healthcare innovation to her role, where she leads business strategy, partnerships, and long-term growth initiatives. Prior to CTMC, Amy held leadership roles at Varian (a Siemens Healthineers company), MD Anderson Cancer Center, and several global consulting efforts focused on advancing cancer care. Her career spans work across the U.S. and internationally, with a focus on driving innovation, commercialization, and patient access in complex health systems.

In this episode of SurgOnc Today, Dr. Olga Kantor from Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dr. Taiwo Adesoye from MD Anderson Cancer Center discuss the breast track highlights of the SSO 2025 Annual Meeting, focusing on a few potentially practice changing trials presented at the meeting. In case you missed the meeting, be sure to check out the On Demand content, now available at https://learn.surgonc.org/.

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, Chris Campbell, MD, discuss the following articles from the June 2025 issue: “Long-Term Volume Retention of Breast Augmentation with Fat Grafting Depends on Weight Changes: A 3-Year Prospective Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study” by Ørholt, Weltz, Hemmingsen, et al. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/FatGraftRetentxn   Special guest, Chris Campbell, MD is the director of microsurgery and associate program director of the Plastic Surgery Residency Program at the University of Virginia. In addition to his cosmetic practice, Dr. Campbell performs complex cancer reconstruction. After completing undergraduate and medical school at the University of North Carolina, he completed plastic surgery residency at the University of Virginia and completed subspecialty training in cancer reconstruction and microsurgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCJune25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

Shaden Khalaf, MD, assistant professor, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. She specializes in cardiac imaging and its application to cardio-oncology, today we speak with her about pericardial disease in oncology patients.

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, Chris Campbell, MD, discuss the following articles from the June 2025 issue: “Intraoperative Surgical Guidance for DIEP Flap Harvest Using Augmented Reality” by Edgcumbe, Jiang, Ho, et al. Read the article for FREE: https://bit.ly/DIEP_AR Special guest, Chris Campbell, MD is the director of microsurgery and associate program director of the Plastic Surgery Residency Program at the University of Virginia. In addition to his cosmetic practice, Dr. Campbell performs complex cancer reconstruction. After completing undergraduate and medical school at the University of North Carolina, he completed plastic surgery residency at the University of Virginia and completed subspecialty training in cancer reconstruction and microsurgery at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.  READ the articles discussed in this podcast as well as free related content: https://bit.ly/JCJune25Collection The views expressed by hosts and guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policies or positions of ASPS.

It's official — NeuWave is exiting the market. In this episode, Dr. Christopher Beck hosts a conversation with Dr. Josh Kuban, an interventional radiologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center, to discuss the impact that NeuWave's microwave tumor ablation technology has had on the field of interventional oncology and the recent announcement of its discontinuation, scheduled for March 2026. --- This podcast is supported by: Medtronic Emprint --- SYNPOSIS Dr. Kuban reflects on NeuWave's innovative beginnings in microwave ablation, which expanded to include four distinct systems and advanced ablation confirmation software. At its peak, the company held over 50% of the microwave ablation market and played a pivotal role in reshaping interventional radiology's view of the safety and effectiveness of this treatment approach. He also shares how NeuWave's departure will affect his practice and outlines the steps he's taking to prepare his team for the transition to alternative devices. The discussion broadens to the current landscape of microwave ablation, spotlighting emerging players in ablation confirmation software and robotic technologies. --- TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - Introduction2:14 - Overview of Neuwave's Rise7:01 - Decision to Discontinue 14:56 - Navigating the Switch Different Technologies 21:54 - Buyback Program24:33 - Forecasting New Developments --- RESOURCES BackTable IND Ep. 23- Approach the Problem with Vision: Part I of the Neuwave Story : https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/23/approach-the-problem-with-vision-part-i-of-the-neuwave-story BackTable IND Ep. 24- Trials and Tribulations: Part II of the Neuwave Story: https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/24/trials-tribulations-part-ii-of-the-neuwave-story BackTable IND Ep. 25- Next Level Stuff, the Exit: Part III of the Neuwave Story:https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/25/next-level-stuff-the-exit-part-iii-of-the-neuwave-story Johnson & Johnson Press Release Regarding Discontinuation of NeuWave:https://www.medline.com/media/assets/pdf/vendor-list/Disco_notice.pdfMedTronic Emprint Ablation: https://www.medtronic.com/covidien/en-gb/products/ablation-systems/emprint-ablation-system.html Varian MicroThermX Ablation: https://www.varian.com/products/interventional-oncology/microthermx Safety and Effectiveness of Microwave Ablation of Liver Tumors: Initial Real-World Results from the Multinational NeuWave Observational Liver Ablation (NOLA) Registry (Odisio, 2025):https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39848330/

It's official — NeuWave is exiting the market. In this episode, Dr. Christopher Beck hosts a conversation with Dr. Josh Kuban, an interventional radiologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center, to discuss the impact that NeuWave's microwave tumor ablation technology has had on the field of interventional oncology and the recent announcement of its discontinuation, scheduled for March 2026. --- This podcast is supported by: Medtronic Emprint https://www.medtronic.com/emprint --- SYNPOSIS Dr. Kuban reflects on NeuWave's innovative beginnings in microwave ablation, which expanded to include four distinct systems and advanced ablation confirmation software. At its peak, the company held over 50% of the microwave ablation market and played a pivotal role in reshaping interventional radiology's view of the safety and effectiveness of this treatment approach. He also shares how NeuWave's departure will affect his practice and outlines the steps he's taking to prepare his team for the transition to alternative devices. The discussion broadens to the current landscape of microwave ablation, spotlighting emerging players in ablation confirmation software and robotic technologies. --- TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - Introduction2:14 - Overview of Neuwave's Rise7:01 - Decision to Discontinue 14:56 - Navigating the Switch Different Technologies 21:54 - Buyback Program24:33 - Forecasting New Developments --- RESOURCES BackTable IND Ep. 23- Approach the Problem with Vision: Part I of the Neuwave Story : https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/23/approach-the-problem-with-vision-part-i-of-the-neuwave-story BackTable IND Ep. 24- Trials and Tribulations: Part II of the Neuwave Story: https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/24/trials-tribulations-part-ii-of-the-neuwave-story BackTable IND Ep. 25- Next Level Stuff, the Exit: Part III of the Neuwave Story:https://www.backtable.com/shows/industry/podcasts/25/next-level-stuff-the-exit-part-iii-of-the-neuwave-story Johnson & Johnson Press Release Regarding Discontinuation of NeuWave:https://www.medline.com/media/assets/pdf/vendor-list/Disco_notice.pdfMedTronic Emprint Ablation: https://www.medtronic.com/covidien/en-gb/products/ablation-systems/emprint-ablation-system.html Varian MicroThermX Ablation: https://www.varian.com/products/interventional-oncology/microthermx Safety and Effectiveness of Microwave Ablation of Liver Tumors: Initial Real-World Results from the Multinational NeuWave Observational Liver Ablation (NOLA) Registry (Odisio, 2025):https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39848330/

في هذه الحلقة المميزة، نستضيف الدكتور أسامة مولوي، أستاذ الفيزياء التصويرية ورئيس قسم فيزياء الطب النووي في مركز إم دي أندرسون للسرطان (MD Anderson Cancer Center)، أحد أبرز المراكز العالمية في علاج السرطان.من بداياته كباحث في مركز سلون كيترينغ التذكاري بنيويورك، إلى أن أصبح أحد الأسماء الرائدة عالميًا في التصوير البوزيتروني (PET/CT)، يأخذنا الدكتور مولوي في رحلة عبر مسيرته العلمية والبحثية المتميزة، ويكشف لنا عن أحدث التقنيات والمستجدات في عالم التصوير الطبي.

Dr. Jennifer Wargo is an Associate Professor in the Department of Surgical Oncology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and a Stand Up To Cancer researcher. Jennifer is a physician scientist, and this means she splits her time between providing care to patients and doing research to find better ways of treating disease. Specifically, Jennifer performs surgeries and treats patients one day each week. She spends the rest of her week studying how to better treat patients with cancer and how cancer may ultimately be prevented. When she's not doing research or treating patients, Jennifer enjoys spending quality time with her family. Some of their favorite activities include going for walks, biking, hiking, and visiting the beach. Jennifer also likes to explore her creative side through art and photography, as well as to be active through running, biking, yoga, and surfing. She received her A.S. degree in nursing and B.S. degree in biology from Gwynedd-Mercy College. Afterwards, Jennifer attended the Medical College of Pennsylvania where she earned her M.D. Jennifer completed her Clinical Internship and Residency in General Surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital. Next, Jennifer was a Research Fellow in Surgical Oncology at the University of California, Los Angeles. She then accepted a Clinical Residency in General Surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital. From 2006-2008, Jennifer was a Clinical Fellow in Surgical Oncology at the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health. She then served on the faculty at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard University. In 2012, Jennifer received her MMSc. degree in Medical Science from Harvard University. Jennifer joined the faculty at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in 2013. She is Board Certified by the American Board of Surgery, and she has received numerous awards and honors throughout her career. These have included the R. Lee Clark Prize and Best Boss Award from the MD Anderson Cancer Center, the Rising STARS and The Regents' Health Research Scholars Awards from the University of Texas System, the Outstanding Young Investigator and Outstanding Investigator Awards from the Society for Melanoma Research, as well as a Stand Up To Cancer Innovative Research Grant for her microbiome work. She has also received other awards for excellence in teaching, research, and patient care. In our interview, Jennifer shares more about her life and science.

On Thursday's show: We learn about a $150 million donation that will create the Kinder Children's Cancer Center, a new initiative to fight childhood cancer at MD Anderson Cancer Center and Texas Children's Hospital. The gift is one of the largest such donations in the history of the Texas Medical Center and one of the largest ever given to a pediatric hospital in the country.Also this hour: Comedian Ramy Youssef performs Friday night at House of Blues, and he has a new animated series on Amazon Prime called #1 Happy Family USA! We revisit a 2019 conversation with him about how he got into comedy and about how much of his standup material and work on television has revolved around the experience of growing up Muslim in America.Then, a Houston mother lost her parental rights to her children for life because of allegations her ex-husband made in court. We learn why the Texas Supreme Court unanimously overturned that ruling and what it means for how protective orders are issued here.And Laura Walker visits a farm run by the Socialites Riding Network, a Black-owned nonprofit that teaches sustainable agriculture and an appreciation for animals.

Join melanoma authority Michael A. Davies, MD, PhD, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, as he navigates the latest breakthroughs in immunotherapy and targeted treatments transforming outcomes for patients with melanoma. Discover how predictive biomarkers, strategic combination therapies, and personalized treatment sequencing are revolutionizing care across neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic settings. This podcast is essential listening for oncology professionals seeking evidence-based approaches to combat this challenging disease affecting over 100,000 Americans annually. Click here to listen to module 2 of this podcast series: [link] Click here to claim your CME/NCPD credit: [link]

In this concluding module, Michael A. Davies, MD, PhD, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, addresses the critical challenges of managing treatment-associated toxicities in the era of advanced melanoma therapies. Discover practical strategies for handling immune-related adverse events, implementing comprehensive supportive care, and optimizing patient education. This podcast is critical for oncology professionals seeking to balance therapeutic efficacy with quality of life for patients receiving cutting-edge immunotherapy and targeted treatments. Click here to go back and listen to module 1 of this podcast series: [link] Click here to claim your CME/NCPD credit: [link]

In this episode, Dr. Jennifer Bickel, Chief Wellness Officer at MD Anderson Cancer Center, shares insights into how she's working to build a system-wide culture of well-being. She discusses the importance of operational changes, the development of a Wellness Institute, and tailored strategies to support oncology staff facing emotional and systemic challenges.

For this episode, we're going back to a familiar villain from podcast-past because  unfortunately, healthcare villains have a habit of staying relevant. This is a guy who made his fame by cozying up to Oprah while schilling diet pills, supplements, and medical conspiracy theories – it's Doctor Oz, who is now Trump's nominee for Director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. That's right, the man who has previously claimed that there are deadly levels of arsenic in apple juice, that most olive oil is fake, that “Reparative Therapy” can cure homosexuality, and that hydroxychloroquine cures COVID, is pretty close to running our largest public health systems. Today I'm talking with Dr. Diljeet Singh of Physicians for a National Health program about what that means for you and the country at large, and how we can do something about it!  NOTE: At the Medicare for All Podcast, we've had a brief, unplanned hiatus due to pesky technical issues – and the fact that Trump is keeping us busy in our organizing work – but we are very excited to be back! I'm flying solo right now while my regular cohost Ben is saving the environment at his 9 to 5 organizing job, but that feels like important work as well, so we're going to give him a pass and send him our love! https://www.youtube.com/live/3ZUE4sOTI_g?si=WGg97KnP-UxktIsu Our guest for this episode was the brilliant Dr. Diljeet Singh! She's a women's health advocate, an integrative gynecologic oncologist, and the President of Physicians for a National Health Program. Dr. Singh received her medical degree from Northwestern University and her master's degree from the Harvard School of Public Health. She completed an obstetrics and gynecology residency at Johns Hopkins and a gynecologic oncology fellowship at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. She completed her doctoral degree in public health on cost analysis at the University of Texas School of Public Health and an associate fellowship in integrative medicine at the University of Arizona. Dr. Singh and our friends at Physicians for a National Health Program are going all out to let folks know about the serious danger Dr. Oz poses to our national health! Check out the videos from their Dr. Oz Shadow Hearing below: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLO8yDO3B42TdHs6GC-PcLez2ZHfZ4CfTN&si=Q3YMJR1IEvr9uHX1 Even though it is likely that the Senate will make it official later this month, as of April 1st, Dr. Oz still hasn't been confirmed, so if you're listening to this in the next couple weeks, you may still be able to call your Senators to ask them to come to their senses! Reach their offices through the Capitol Hill switchboard: (202) 224-3121. Follow & Support the Pod! Don't forget to like this episode and subscribe to The Medicare for All Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform! This show is a project of the Healthcare NOW Education Fund! This show is a project of the Healthcare-NOW Education Fund! If you want to support our work, you can donate at our website, healthcare-now.org.

In this episode, we delve into the key clinically relevant abstracts in leukemia and myeloid neoplasms with Dr. Jayastu Senapati from the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Here are the links to the abstracts we discussed: Older AML: Ven+HMA vs 7+3Abstract 450: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper210320.htmlAbstract 971: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper202801.htmlAbstract 969: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper199267.htmlVenetoclax resistance mechanismshttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39478230/FLAG-GO vs FLAG-IDA https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/144/Supplement%201/1513/532742/Gemtuzumab-Ozogamicin-Added-to-Fludarabine CPX-351: Abstract 55: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper207094.htmlAbstract 60: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper200413.htmlMenin Inhibitors Abstract 211 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper194384.htmlAbstract 212 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper207106.htmlAbstract 213 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper194827.htmlAbstracts 214 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper198218.htmlAbstract 215 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper198218.htmlAbstract 216 https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper204375.html FLT3 inhibitors Abstract 221: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper201595.html MDS Abstract 349: https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper194510.html ATRA in MDS:  https://ash.confex.com/ash/2024/webprogram/Paper200433.html  

Host: Jennifer Caudle, DO Guest: Naval Daver, MD Not only is CD123 one of the most common antigens expressed on the surface of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) tumors, but it's also associated with more proliferative disease that's resistant to standard therapies. Given its prevalence and potential implications, a number of different CD123-targeting approaches are under investigation, including antibody-drug conjugates, bi-specific antibodies, fusion protein, and CAR T-cell therapy. In light of these new approaches, Dr. Jennifer Caudle and Dr. Naval Daver discuss the importance of targeting CD123 in AML. Dr. Daver is a Professor and Director of the Leukemia Research Alliance Program in the Department of Leukemia at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Early detection is critical for improving cancer survival rates, yet pancreatic cancer remains challenging to detect. A recent breakthrough from Mayo Clinic researchers offers new hope. Artificial intelligence models demonstrate the potential to detect pancreatic cancer earlier and with remarkable accuracy. Learn more about this life-changing innovation in early cancer detection. Featured experts include Ajit Goenka, M.D., radiologist and professor of radiology at Mayo Clinic's Comprehensive Cancer Center and Suresh Chari, M.D., professor, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition in the Division of Internal Medicine at MD Anderson Cancer Center.Get the latest health information from Mayo Clinic's experts, subscribe to Mayo Clinic's newsletter for free today:  https://mayocl.in/3EcNPNc

Up for the Fight: How to Advocate for Yourself as You Battle Cancer―from a Five-Time Survivor by Bill C. Potts Amazon.com Billcpotts.com The guide endorsed by MD Anderson Cancer Center and the Mayo Clinic, and used by Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation patients. Imagine a road map for the entire cancer journey, for both patients and their loved ones. That's what this book is. Think What to Expect When You're Expecting, but for navigating the complexities of a cancer diagnosis, its treatment, and beyond. Up for the Fight empowers you to take control of your cancer journey with advice from five-time cancer survivor Bill C. Potts. Learn to be your own advocate, build the right care team, and prioritize your emotional and mental well-being. Discover practical tips for comfortable treatment days, side effect management, and understanding test results. Gain valuable insights on diet, exercise, and staying active while navigating the impacts of treatment and the disease on your immune system. Special sections offer guidance for supporting loved ones with cancer, facing mortality with peace, and realigning your priorities to truly live your life to the fullest. This book equips you with the knowledge and tools you need to fight this battle, all from the perspective of a tenacious cancer veteran.About the author Bill C. Potts is a motivational speaker, creative business leader, energetic community builder, and dedicated father and husband. A five-time cancer survivor, he pursues life with the utmost passion and drive. While his kids say he's “sometimes slightly embarrassing,” they also admit he's the “toughest man we have ever met.” He loves his job and wakes up each morning expecting an A+ day—because every day is an A+ day, no matter the circumstances. An IRONMAN triathlete and the co-founder of marketing agency Remedy 365, Bill lives in St. Petersburg, Florida, with his wife, Kim, and their dog Pippa.

Unique, patient-focused manufacturing models are needed to scale up innovative cell therapies for cancer and one company, CTMC, is challenging the status quo to achieve this and get them to patients. In a new pharmaphorum podcast, web editor Nicole Raleigh speaks with Jason Bock, co-founder and CEO of CTMC, a first-of-its-kind cell therapy engine aiming to advance novel scientific breakthroughs into medicines developed rapidly and robustly to - ultimately - end cancer. Taking learnings from the monoclonal antibody field to come up with a fit-for-purpose solution, Bock discusses his work in the joint venture between the MD Anderson Cancer Center and biopharmaceutical manufacturer Resilience – combining industrial manufacturing and development capabilities with the work of an academic medical centre. CTMC's is a “patient adjacent” manufacturing model – crucial when it comes to developing personalised therapies (especially when dealing with living cells), and Bock explains how patient-centric approaches streamline manufacturing processes, improve efficacy, and allow for that personalised treatment approach, particularly when the supply chain is local. You can listen to episode 168a of the pharmaphorum podcast in the player below, download the episode to your computer, or find it - and subscribe to the rest of the series - in iTunes, Spotify, Amazon Music, Podbean, and pretty much wherever you get your other podcasts!

In this episode of the INS Infusion Room, host Derek Fox engages with Jennifer Acelajado and Hammam Ahmed, both clinical outcome specialists at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, to discuss the critical topic of catheter-to-vein ratio (CVR) in vascular access nursing. They share their extensive backgrounds in nursing, the importance of patient education, and the role of their vascular access team in enhancing patient experience through effective practices. The conversation delves into their research on CVR, comparing different methodologies and definitions, and emphasizes the need for clear standards in practice to improve patient outcomes. The episode concludes with an invitation to the upcoming INS annual meeting, where they will present their findings.

In this episode, Dr. Michelle F. DeVeau, Director of the Leadership Institute, and Dr. Amanda Woods, Associate Leadership Institute Analyst at MD Anderson Cancer Center, discuss their innovative coaching programs, the impact on leadership retention and development, and how data-driven strategies are shaping the future of coaching in healthcare organizations.

Dr Akila Viswanathan speaks with Dr Robert Coppes from The University Medical Center Groningen, Dr David Jaffray from MD Anderson Cancer Center and Dr Helen McNair from The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust Institute of Cancer Research to look ahead to the future of radiation oncology as they discuss how to improve decision making, incorporating artificial intelligence, adapt to new training methods, improve safety and sustainability and much more for Seminars in Radiation Oncology.

Jason Westin, M.D., MS, FACP, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX Recorded on January 21, 2025 Jason Westin, M.D., MS, FACP Professor, Department of Lymphoma & Myeloma Lead, Lymphoma & Myeloma Service Line Director, Lymphoma Clinical Research Section Chief, Aggressive and Indolent Lymphoma MD Anderson Cancer Center Houston, TX In this episode, Dr. Jason Westin from MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas explores CAR T-cell therapy, covering both current and emerging indications. He highlights the educational needs of patients and caregivers, as well as the essential role of community and academic collaboration before and after treatment. Dr. Westin also discusses the use of minimal/measurable residual disease (MRD) in treatment planning, future directions of CAR-T, and ongoing clinical trials. Tune in to stay up-to-date on the latest advancements in CAR T-cell therapy! This episode is supported by Allogene Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson& Johnson & Legend Biotech, and Kite, a Gilead Company.

In this episode, we discuss the management of CML with Dr. Hagop Kantarjian from MD Anderson Cancer Center. Here are the key articles we discussed:  1. ASC4FIRST RCT: Asciminib in newly diagnosed CML. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38820078/ 2. 5-year follow-up of ENESTnd RCT (nilotinib): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26837842/ 3. 10-year follow-up of ENESTnd RCT (nilotinib): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33414482/ 4. 10-year follow-up of CML-IV RCT (imatinib): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25676422/ 5. MD Anderson data on low-dose dasatinib (50 mg): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36054032/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31553487/ 6. CML: 2025 update on diagnosis, therapy, and monitoring: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39093014/ 

RUSH MD Anderson Cancer Center offers leading-edge treatments for GI cancers, including targeted therapies, immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and minimally invasive surgical options. Our multidisciplinary team of medical oncologists, gastroenterologists, surgical oncologists, colorectal surgeons and interventional radiologists work together to provide our patients with tailored treatment plans to each patient's specific diagnosis and needs. Audrey Kam, MD, is the director of GI medical oncology at RUSH MD Anderson, as well as the research director of GI medical oncology at RUSH MD Anderson. She specializes in treating gastrointestinal cancers including colorectal, esophageal, gastrointestinal, liver, pancreatic and stomach cancers. Sam Pappas, MD, is the Division Chief of Surgical Oncology at Rush University Medical Center. He specializes in treating upper abdominal cancers, including ones in the esophagus, stomach, pancreas, liver and bile duct. “We love collaborating in immediate proximity to each other within RUSH MD Anderson. This helps to ensure coordinated, multidisciplinary discussions that are patient-focused,” explains Dr. Pappas.

In this episode of Bladder Cancer Matters, host Rick Bangs is joined by the esteemed Dr. Ashish Kamat of MD Anderson Cancer Center to dive into the often-overlooked world of histologic subtypes, or variants, of bladder cancer. These rare subtypes can significantly alter how bladder cancer behaves and responds to treatment. Dr. Kamat breaks down the science behind these variants in a way that's both accessible and empowering for patients, offering crucial insights into why understanding your specific diagnosis matters. From the differences between common urothelial cancer and variants to the critical questions patients should ask their doctors, this conversation is packed with valuable information for anyone navigating a bladder cancer journey.

A typical human lifespan is approximately three billion heartbeats in duration. Lasting that long requires not only intrinsic stability, but an impressive capacity for self-repair. Nevertheless, things do occasionally break down, and cancer is one of the most dramatic examples of such breakdown. Given that the body is generally so good at protecting itself, can we harness our internal security patrol - the immune system - to fight cancer? This is the hope of Nobel Laureate James Allison, who works on studying the structure and behavior of immune cells, and ways to coax them into fighting cancer. This approach offers hope of a way to combat cancer effectively, lastingly, and in a relatively gentle way.Support Mindscape on Patreon.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2025/01/27/303-james-p-allison-on-fighting-cancer-with-the-immune-system/James P. Allison received his Ph.D. in biology from the University of Texas at Austin. He is currently Regental Professor and Chair of the Department of Immunology, the Olga Keith Wiess Distinguished University Chair for Cancer Research, Director of the Parker Institute for Cancer Research, and Director of the James P. Allison Institute at MD Anderson Cancer Center. He is the subject of the documentary film Jim Allison: Breakthrough. Among his numerous awards are the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences and the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.Web pageNobel Prize citationGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

At RUSH MD Anderson Cancer Center, oncologists provide patient-centered, cutting-edge care, such as immunotherapies, targeted therapies and minimally invasive surgeries for the treatment of lung cancer. In addition, RUSH MD Anderson clinicians offer patients access to some of the most innovative clinical trials available nationwide. In this episode, Helen Ross, MD, discusses some of the exciting new clinical trials that Rush is participating in, as well as rising rates of lung cancer in young adults and how to best care for them. Helen Ross, MD, is a thoracic medical oncologist and an expert in the care of patients with cancers of the chest, including lung cancers, mesothelioma and thymic cancers. Dr. Ross is director of research and clinical trials at RUSH MD Anderson. She is also a professor in the Department of Internal Medicine and serves as interim chief of the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Cellular Therapy. “We're only opening clinical trials onsite that are the right fit for our patients. We have an expedited review at RUSH MD Anderson to cut activation time and are working to further reduce that time to bring those trials more quickly to our patients.”

Welcome to another episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, hosts Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain are joined by Dr. Robert Orlowski from MD Anderson Cancer Center to discuss groundbreaking studies presented at ASH 2024 focused on multiple myeloma. We dived into four key studies: 1.⁠ ⁠AQUILA: Explore the impact of early intervention using daratumumab for smoldering myeloma, which showed improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). 2.⁠ ⁠Dara Based Quad Therapy: We discuss a meta-analysis reaffirming the use of quadruplet therapy with anti-CD38 for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma as the standard of care. 3.⁠ CARTITUDE-4: study highlights the benefits of CAR-T therapy in earlier lines of treatment for patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease. 4.⁠ ⁠Role of IVIG with BCMA Bispecific Antibodies: Discover how IVIG can reduce infection rates and improve overall survival when used alongside BCMA-targeted therapies. Tune in for an insightful discussion that will enhance your understanding of the latest advancements in multiple myeloma treatment. Don't forget to check out our other episodes on CLL, myeloma, and lymphoma from ASH 2024! Subscribe to the Oncology Brothers for more updates and expert insights in oncology! Website: http://www.oncbrothers.com/  X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers  Contact us at info@oncbrothers.com

Welcome to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, hosts Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain dive into the recent FDA approval of Zanidatamab, a bispecific HER2 antibody, for HER2 amplified, unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer. Join us as we discuss the HERIZON-BTC-01 study with Dr. Shubham Pant, a GI medical oncologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center and one of the study's authors. We explore the significance of HER2 testing in biliary tract cancers, the study's design, key findings, and the implications for treatment strategies in the community oncology setting. Key topics include: • Overview of biliary tract cancer and its treatment landscape • Study design and patient characteristics from the HERIZON-BTC-01 trial • Key findings, including overall response rates and duration of response • The importance of HER2 testing and its implications for treatment sequencing • Side effect profiles and management strategies for Zanidatamab • Future directions and ongoing clinical trials Don't miss this insightful discussion that highlights the exciting advancements in HER2-targeted therapies for biliary tract cancer. Make sure to subscribe for more updates on recent FDA approvals, treatment algorithms, and conference highlights. We look forward to seeing you at GI ASCO 2025 in person! Website: http://www.oncbrothers.com/ X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers Contact us at info@oncbrothers.com

Welcome to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, hosts Drs. Rahul and Rohit Gosain dive deep into the rapidly evolving world of CAR T cell therapy, a groundbreaking treatment for various hematologic malignancies. Joined by experts Dr. Surbhi Sidana from Stanford University and Dr. Jason Westin from MD Anderson Cancer Center, we explore the mechanism of action of CAR T cells, their side effects, and management strategies.   Episode Highlights: Understanding CAR T cell therapy and its application in hematologic malignancies and solid tumors. Mechanism of action: How CAR T cells are engineered to target cancer cells. Acute side effects: Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity, including clinical pearls for management. Chronic side effects: Monitoring for infections, cytopenias, and the risk of secondary malignancies. The importance of bridging therapy and managing tumor burden before CAR T treatment. Insights for community oncologists on patient management and communication with CAR T centers.   Join us for an informative discussion that emphasizes the importance of recognizing and managing the unique side effects of CAR T therapy to ensure the best outcomes for patients. Don't forget to check out our other episodes for more insights into recent advances in hematology and oncology!   Subscribe for more discussions on FDA approvals, treatment algorithms, and conference highlights. We are the Oncology Brothers!   Website: http://www.oncbrothers.com/ X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers Contact us at info@oncbrothers.com

The Human Side of Dermatopathology: A Conversation with Dr. Victor PrietoIn this episode, Dr. Victor Prieto, a pathologist and dermatopathologist at MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses the fallibility of experts, the importance of addressing mistakes in medicine, and the crucial balance of experience and humility in clinical practice. He shares insights into improving patient care by learning from errors, the significance of self-care, and the profound impact of a doctor's work on patients' lives. Dr. Prieto also offers advice on finding mentorship and reinforces the value of passion and dedication in the medical profession.00:00 Introduction and Guest Welcome00:45 The Fallibility of Experts03:07 Addressing Mistakes in Medicine05:46 Work-Life Balance in Medicine07:44 The Rewards of a Medical Career09:39 Final Thoughts and Advice

Dr. Van Morris presents the new evidence-based guideline on systemic therapy for localized anal squamous cell carcinoma. Dr. Morris discusses the key recommendations from the Expert Panel, including recommended radiosensitizing chemotherapy agents, dosing and schedule recommendations, the role of induction chemotherapy and ongoing adjuvant chemotherapy, and considerations for special populations. He emphasizes the importance of this first guideline from ASCO on anal squamous cell carcinoma for both clinicians and patients with stage I-III anal cancer, and ongoing research the panel is looking to for the future. Read the full guideline, “Systemic Therapy for Stage I-III Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline” at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines. TRANSCRIPT This guideline, clinical tools, and resources are available at http://www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines. Read the full text of the guideline and review authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO-24-02120 Brittany Harvey: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines podcast, one of ASCO's podcasts, delivering timely information to keep you up to date on the latest changes, challenges and advances in oncology. You can find all the shows, including this one at asco.org/podcasts. My name is Brittany Harvey and today I'm interviewing Dr. Van Morris from MD Anderson Cancer Center, co-chair on “Systemic Therapy for Stage I-III Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline.” Thank you for being here today, Dr. Morris. Dr. Van Morris: Thank you for having me. On behalf of our committee who put together the guidelines, I'm really excited to be here and talk with you today. Brittany Harvey: Great. Then, before we discuss this guideline, I'd like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its guidelines and ensuring that the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy is followed for each guideline. The disclosures of potential conflicts of interest for the guideline panel, including Dr. Morris, who has joined us here today, are available online with the publication of the guideline in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, which is linked in the show notes. So then, to jump into the content of this guideline, Dr. Morris, can you provide an overview of both the purpose and the scope of this guideline on stage I to III anal squamous cell carcinoma? Dr. Van Morris: So anal cancer is considered a rare malignancy for patients in the United States and across the world as well. Even though it's not something we see as commonly, for example, as the adjacent colorectal cancer, this still is a cancer that is rising in incidence every year in the United States. And really, despite the presence of the preventative HPV vaccines, which we hope will ultimately prevent and eradicate this cancer, we still expect the incidence to continue to rise in the coming decades before we really start seeing numbers begin to decrease as a result of the vaccine. So this is an alarming trend for which oncologists will continue to see likely more and more cases and new diagnoses every year. So we wanted to review the most recent literature and provide oncologists up to date recommendations for how they can best take care of patients with a new diagnosis of localized anal cancer. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. I appreciate that background and context to set the stage for this guideline. So then next I'd like to review the key recommendations of this guideline. So starting from the first clinical question, what are the recommended radiosensitizing, doublet or single chemotherapy agents for patients with stage I to III anal cancer? Dr. Van Morris: It's true that really the standard treatment for patients with localized anal cancer has not changed over the last literally half century. When the Nigro regimen was first reported back in 1974, 50 years ago, the standard of care for patients with a new diagnosis of localized anal cancer centers around concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy. And we looked at the various randomized control trials and the highest level of evidence which has been reported over the past decades, and really for most patients, the standard of care continues to remain doublet cytotoxic chemotherapy in combination with radiation. We reported that the most commonly, and I think most accepted, regimen here is a combination regimen of 5-FU, intravenous 5-fluorouracil with mitomycin C. And this most commonly is given on a week 1 to 5 regimen. The 5-FU, we recommended a dose of 1000 milligrams per meter squared per day on days 1 to 4 and then on days 29 to 32 of the radiation treatment. And then the mitomycin C, looking at various trials, has been given at a dose of 10 milligrams per meter squared on day 1 and day 29, or alternatively a single dose of mitomycin C at 12 milligrams per meter squared on day 1. I think that the thing that's important for clinicians and patients alike to remember is that this chemotherapy can be very toxic in patients who are undergoing a curative-intent therapy for this diagnosis of localized anal cancer. I think it's just important for oncologists to be watching closely the blood counts for the patients to make sure that the myelosuppression doesn't get too bad. And then in select cases, if that is the case, when the oncologist opts to go for the day 1 and day 29 dosing, it may be prudent, if the myelosuppression is too excessive, to consider withholding that day 29 dose. Brittany Harvey: Great. Thank you for providing those recommendations along with some of those dosing and the schedule recommendations from the expert panel. So are there any other alternate dose or schedule recommendations from the expert panel? Dr. Van Morris: Yeah, but I think that we saw with the ACT II data that was a randomized trial that was done out of the UK that compared 5-FU mitomycin with 5-FU cisplatin as two different doublet cytotoxic regimens, that overall outcomes were very similar between the two regimens in terms of curative outcomes for patients treated whether 5-FU mitomycin or 5-FU cisplatin. So certainly there is evidence supporting the use of cisplatin as a second cytotoxic agent with 5-fluorouracil. In the ACT II study that was given at a dose of 60 milligrams per meter squared on days 1 and 29 along with the 5-FU at the regimen I talked about previously. There is other lower level of evidence data suggesting that even the 5-FU and cisplatin can be given on a weekly schedule and that that can be safe. Actually, at my institution at MD Anderson, that is our standard practice pattern as well. There's also the option when we're thinking about giving pelvic radiation for patients with lower GI cancers, many oncologists in the treatment of localized rectal adenocarcinoma are accustomed to using capecitabine as a chemosensitizer in patients with localized rectal cancer. If I'm giving chemoradiation for a patient with localized anal cancer, can I substitute the intravenous 5-FU with oral capecitabine? And although the evidence is not as strong in terms of available data with regards to randomized controlled trials, there certainly is data that suggests that capecitabine may be an acceptable alternative in lieu of intravenous 5-fluorouracil that would be given at a dose of 825 milligrams per meter squared on days of radiation. But certainly, I think that that's a feasible approach as well and maybe even associated with less hematologic toxicity than intravenous 5-FU would be. Brittany Harvey: Great. It's important to understand all the options that are out there for patients with early-stage anal squamous cell carcinoma. So in addition to those chemoradiation recommendations, what is recommended from the expert panel regarding induction chemotherapy or ongoing adjuvant chemotherapy for this patient population? Dr. Van Morris: When we think about treating patients with lower GI cancers with curative intent therapies, when we think about the more common rectal adenocarcinoma, oncologists may be used to giving chemoradiation followed by subsequent cytotoxic chemotherapy. But actually when you look at the data for anal cancer, really there's not any data that strongly supports the use of either induction chemotherapy prior to chemoradiation or adjuvant post-chemoradiation chemotherapy. The RTOG 98-11 study was a trial which evaluated the role of induction 5-fluorouracil prior to chemoradiation and did not show any survival benefit or improved outcomes with the use of induction chemotherapy in a randomized control trial setting. The ACT II trial, which I referenced earlier, was a 2 x 2 design where patients were either randomized to concurrent chemoradiation with 5-FU mitomycin C or concurrent chemoradiation with 5-FU cisplatin. But then there was a second randomization after chemoradiation where half of the study participants received adjuvant cisplatin 5-fluorouracil after completion of their chemo radiation, or the other half were randomized to the standard of care, which of course would be observation. And what that trial showed was that there was no added benefit with the addition of post-chemoradiation cytotoxic chemotherapy. So we look at these data and say that in general, for the general population of patients with localized stages I to III anal cancer, there really is no supporting data suggesting benefit of either induction chemotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy. And to that end, really it's concurrent chemoradiation remains the standard of care at this time for patients with a new diagnosis of localized anal cancer. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's just as important to know what is not recommended as it is to know what is recommended for these patients. And so I thank you for explaining the evidence behind that decision from the panel as well. So then, are there any other considerations for special populations that oncologists should consider? Dr. Van Morris: I think so. I think that anal cancer is a disease where we don't see that many patients being diagnosed earlier at a younger age, especially in relation to the alarming trend of early onset colorectal cancer that we're currently seeing right now. So there may be patients who come with a new diagnosis of localized anal cancer who are an octogenarian at an advanced age or may have other significant medical comorbidities. And if that is the case, we get called about this quite frequently from outside institutions. I have an 85 year old who is coming to my clinic with this diagnosis. I don't feel comfortable giving this patient doublet cytotoxics, what options do I have? Especially given other organ dysfunction that may precede this diagnosis. And I think that in that case, there are times when it's okay safely to drop the mitomycin C and opt for single agent 5-fluorouracil as a single cytotoxic agent. So I think that that would be something that we've certainly incorporated into our practice at our institution. There's also an association between various autoimmune disorders, patients on immunosuppression, even persons living with HIV being at higher risk for this virally associated cancer. So I think that, again, if the patient is coming with baseline immunosuppression for these reasons prior to treatment, certainly kind of being in tune to the potential for hematologic toxicity. And watching these patients very closely as they're getting chemoradiation remains really important. Brittany Harvey: Definitely. So, you've just discussed some of those comorbidities and patient characteristics that are important for clinicians to consider when deciding which regimens to offer. So in addition to those, in your view, what is the importance of this guideline and how will it impact clinical practice for clinicians who are reading this guideline. Dr. Van Morris: Chemoradiation remains a very effective option and most patients will be cured with this diagnosis and with this treatment. So it's important to make sure that these patients are able to safely get through their treatment, minimizing treatment delays due to toxicities which may come about because of the treatment, and really help to carry them over the finish line so that they have the best likelihood for achieving cure. So we really hope that these data will provide oncologists with a readily available summary of the existing data that they can refer to and continue to help as many patients as possible achieve and experience a cure. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. So then to build on that, it's great to have this first guideline from ASCO on anal squamous cell carcinoma. But how will these new recommendations affect patients with stage I to III anal cancer? Dr. Van Morris: I certainly hope it will allow patients and oncologists to know what their options are. It certainly is not a one size fits all treatment approach with regards to the options which are available. Depending on the patient, depending on the various medical conditions that may accompany them, these treatments may need to be tailored to most safely get them through their treatment. Brittany Harvey: I appreciate you describing the importance of this guideline for both clinicians and patients. So what other outstanding questions and future research do you anticipate seeing in this field? Dr. Van Morris: It's a really good question and I think that there is a lot coming on the horizon. Even though the standard treatment has really not changed over the last half century, I think it still remains true that not all patients will achieve cure with a chemoradiation treatment. So a recent trial has completed enrollment in the United States, this is the EA2165 trial led by one of our committee members, Dr. Rajdev and Dr. Eng as well, that's looking at the use of nivolumab anti PD-1 immunotherapy after completion of concurrent chemo adiation. So in that trial, patients were randomized to concurrent chemoradiation followed by either observation or six months of adjuvant anti PD-1 therapy. We're really awaiting the results of that. Hopefully if we see an improvement with the addition of nivolumab following concurrent chemoradiation, our hope would be that more patients would be able to achieve a cure. So we're certainly looking forward to the outcomes of that EA2165 study. And then I think one question that we often get from our patients in the clinics is, “What is the role of circulating tumor DNA in the management of my disease?” And really, to date there have been some series which have shown that we can assess patients or circulating tumor DNA after completion of their concurrent chemo radiation that may need to start about three months after to give time for the radiation to wear off and most accurately prognosticate that. But I think that this will be a powerful tool moving forward, hopefully, not only in the surveillance to identify patients who may be at high risk for recurrence, but ultimately to translate that into next generation clinical trials which would treat patients at higher risk for recurrence by virtue of a detectable circulating tumor DNA result. In doing so, hopefully cure even more patients with this diagnosis. Brittany Harvey: Yes, we'll look forward to these developments and hope to add more options for potential treatment and surveillance for patients with anal cancer. So, I want to thank you so much for your work to develop these guidelines and share these recommendations with us and everything that the expert panel did to put this guideline together. Thank you for your time today, Dr. Morris. Dr. Van Morris: Thank you. And thank you to ASCO for helping to keep this information out there and ready for oncologists for this rare cancer. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. And finally, thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast. To read the full guideline, go to www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines. You can also find many of our guidelines and interactive resources in the free ASCO Guidelines app, which is available in the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you've heard today, please rate and review the podcast and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode.   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.    

In this episode of the IJGC podcast, Editor-in-Chief Dr. Pedro Ramirez is joined by Drs. Drs. Anne Knisely and Nitecki Wilke to discuss Racial and Sociodemographic Disparities with Novel Therapeutics. Dr. Knisely is a 3rd year gynecologic oncology fellow at MD Anderson Cancer Center. She is originally from the New York City area and completed her residency training in Ob/Gyn at Columbia University in 2022 where Dr. Jason Wright served as her primary research mentor. Her current research focuses on early phase clinical trials, minimal residual disease in ovarian cancer, and sociodemographic factors that affect oncologic treatment and outcomes. She is a current SGO/GOG-F BRIDGES Research Scholar. In her free time, she mostly chases around her two toddlers, Zoe (3.5) and Isaiah (2). Dr. Nitecki Wilke is a gynecologic oncologist and assistant professor at the department of gynecologic oncology and reproductive medicine at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.   Highlights: Of the 6242 patients who met inclusion criteria and were included in the final cohort, 4.4% received a PARP inhibitor, 34% received bevacizumab, and 6% received both.  On multivariable analysis, non-Hispanic Black patients were 23% less likely than non-Hispanic white patients to receive either targeted therapy Most patients in the study were treated in the recurrent setting; we suspect that the potential barriers to guideline-concordant prescription of these therapeutics would persist in the upfront treatment setting, but future studies are required to validate this. A key area of focus to reduce disparities in access to targeted therapies should be ensuring adequate reimbursement for genetic/ biomarker testing as well as brainstorming creative solutions to expand access to genetic counseling, including the use of mainstreaming. Use of the SEER-Medicare database specifically reduces external validity of this study, but the results are nonetheless hypothesis generating and should spark conversation regarding potential inequitable receipt of PARP inhibitors and bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer

Join us for an insightful episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast as we dive deep into the world of gynecologic oncology, focusing specifically on endometrial cancer. Hosted by Drs. Rohit and Rahul Gosain, this episode features Dr. Shannon Westin, a Professor of Gynecology, Oncology, and Reproductive Medicine at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. In this episode, we explored: •⁠  ⁠The different histologies of endometrial cancer, including endometrioid, serous, clear cell, and undifferentiated types. •⁠  ⁠The evolving landscape of molecular classification and its impact on treatment decisions. •⁠  ⁠The current treatment paradigms for early-stage and advanced endometrial cancer, including the role of surgery, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy. •⁠  ⁠The significance of NGS (Next-Generation Sequencing) testing in identifying actionable mutations, such as MSI-high tumors and HER2-positive cancers. •⁠  ⁠The latest advancements in adjuvant therapies and the potential of combining chemotherapy with immunotherapy. Whether you're a healthcare professional or simply interested in the latest developments in cancer treatment, this episode is packed with valuable insights and expert opinions. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other discussions focusing on ovarian cancer and more! Website: http://www.oncbrothers.com/ X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers Contact us at info@oncbrothers.com

Join us for a conversation with Dr. Raghu Kalluri, a leading figure in cancer biology, who serves as the Chair of the Department of Cancer Biology at MD Anderson Cancer Center. With over 300 publications, multiple successful biotech ventures, and groundbreaking work in exosome research, Dr. Kalluri discusses the intricate relationship between science, medicine, and industry, his career path from researcher to entrepreneur, and his exciting vision for using innovation to transform cancer care.

On this episode of "The HemOnc Pulse," Naval Daver, MD, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center, joins Chadi Nabhan, MD, MBA, FACP, to discuss news on acute myeloid leukemia coming out of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Society of Hematologic Oncology in Houston, Texas.

In this episode, we review key components of the landmark MAGIC and FLOT-4 trials that investigated perioperative chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer.  We discuss limitations of both trials and the evolving clinical landscape of gastric cancer treatment. Hosts: - Timothy Vreeland, MD, FACS (@vreelant) is an Associate Professor of Surgery at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and Surgical Oncologist/HPB surgeon at Brooke Army Medical Center. - Daniel Nelson, DO, FACS (@usarmydoc24) is a Surgical Oncologist/HPB surgeon at Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center. - Connor Chick, MD (@connor_chick) is a Surgical Oncology Senior Fellow at Ohio State. - Lexy (Alexandra) Adams, MD, MPH (@lexyadams16) is a Surgical Oncology Junior Fellow at MD Anderson Cancer Center. - Beth (Elizabeth) Barbera, MD (@elizcarpenter16) is a PGY-6 General Surgery resident at Brooke Army Medical Center.  Learning Objectives:  1.     Understand background, methodology, results, and interpretation of the MAGIC trial. 2.     Understand background, methodology, results, and interpretation of the FLOT trial. 3.     Be able to discuss the evolution of chemotherapeutic regimens in the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer and rationale for their use. 4.     Be able to describe key limitations for the above regimens. 5.     Discuss the the evolving clinical landscape for chemotherapy in gastroesophageal junction tumors. Links to Papers Referenced in this Episode: Journal Articles: Cunningham, D., Allum, W. H., Stenning, S. P., Thompson, J. N., Van de Velde, C. J., Nicolson, M., ... & Chua, Y. J. (2006). Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 355(1), 11-20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16822992/ Al-Batran, S. E., Homann, N., Pauligk, C., Goetze, T. O., Meiler, J., Kasper, S., ... & Hofheinz, R. D. (2019). Perioperative chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel versus fluorouracil or capecitabine plus cisplatin and epirubicin for locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4): a randomised, phase 2/3 trial. The Lancet, 393(10184), 1948-1957. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30982686/ 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://app.behindtheknife.org/listen

Palliative care is an essential component to high-quality care for patients with cancer. How can access to palliative care be expanded? Eduardo Bruera, MD, from MD Anderson Cancer Center speaks with JAMA Editor in Chief Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo about 2 new trials in JAMA that address access to care and what more it will take for executives, insurers, and regulators to support palliative care programs. Related Content: Improving Palliative Care Access for Patients With Cancer Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer

While we often like to talk about research findings that shows us statistical significance in data and solid numbers we can lean on for treatment approaches… What about the kind of data that ISN'T objectively measured? The kind that shows us what patients or other clinicians experience think, or believe. I'm talking about qualitative research! Is qualitative research viewed as “less reputable” than quantitative research? What kind of valuable information can we pull from patient experiences, opinions, and views? Beatrice Manduchi PhD, MSc, BSc (SLP) is here to talk all about it in today's episode of the Swallow Your Pride podcast! Beatrice is a speech-language pathologist who went from clinician to researcher and is currently working as a postdoc fellow at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Beatrice specializes in dysphagia, particularly in head and neck cancer. Tune into this episode to take a break from numerical data and explore the world of qualitative research and its impact on dysphagia! Link to show notes: https://syppodcast.com/340 TIMESTAMPS: Qualitative Research Interest (00:03:20) Importance of Qualitative Methods (00:05:17) Qualitative Research vs. Quantitative Research (00:06:07) Impact of Qualitative Research on Dysphagia (00:09:37) Patient Perspectives in Research (00:10:51) Integrating Qualitative Research with Clinical Practice (00:12:14) Conducting Qualitative Research (00:15:02) Data Saturation in Qualitative Research (00:17:22) The Role of Frameworks in Qualitative Research (00:20:18) Passion for Patient-Centered Research (00:22:18) Understanding Bias in Interviews (00:23:16) Nuances of Interview Guides (00:24:18) Proactive vs. Reactive Therapies (00:26:11) Patient Comfort with Therapies (00:29:00) Streamlined Processes in Therapy (00:30:22) Patient Education Importance (00:32:52) Setting Diet Goals (00:33:56) Shared Decision-Making Challenges (00:38:01) Surprising Findings from the Study (00:39:17) Next Steps in Research (00:41:22) The post 340 – The Power of Qualitative Research in Speech and Language Pathology – Beatrice Manduchi PhD, MSc, BSc (SLP) appeared first on Swallow Your Pride Podcast.