Podcasts about memorial sloan kettering

Welcome back to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, we were joined by Dr. Isabel Preeshagul from Memorial Sloan-Kettering to discuss the latest advancements in lung cancer presented at ASCO 2026. Listen us on: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/31BXhY9FM4gPWG10WgE11o Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/oncology-brothers-practice-changing-cancer-discussions/id1653340966 Follow us on social media: X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ We dived into four key studies that could change clinical practice: LIBRETTO-432: exploring the promising event-free survival data with selpercatinib in RET-positive disease and its implications for adjuvant therapy. CROWN 7yr Update: seven-year progression-free survival results with lorlatinib in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer and the associated side effects. CHRYSALIS-2: exciting findings regarding amivantamab for atypical EGFR mutations and its potential to become the new standard of care. HARMONi-6: dual-headed drug ivonescimab combined with chemotherapy in metastatic squamous cell lung cancer and its intriguing results. We also touched on the importance of molecular testing for all patients, regardless of stage or histology, and highlighted the latest updates on tarlatamab in small cell lung cancer. Tune in for an insightful discussion that aims to keep our oncology community informed and engaged with the latest research and treatment options! Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other episodes for more insights on oncology treatments, conference highlights, and FDA approvals. #ASCO2026, #LungCancer, #ALKPositive, #RETPositive, #OncologyBrothers

They promise to boost energy, improve immunity, and even ‘cleanse' your body — but are herbal and dietary supplements really safe for your kidneys? Today, we're diving into the truth behind their labels. In todays episode we heard from: Calvin Meaney is a pharmacist and clinical associate professor of pharmacy practice at the University at Buffalo with specialization in kidney disease. He provides clinical care to patients at the Erie County Medical Center, where he precepts pharmacy students and residents. Calvin's recent research has focused on anemia management in dialysis patients and reducing polypharmacy in older adults. Desirée de Waal, MS, RD, CD, FAND is a Renal Dietitian and Research Coordinator at University of Vermont Medical Center. She has published a variety of articles and book chapters including the value of Medical Nutrition Therapy in Kidney Failure; Hyperlipidemia; Potential Harms of High Protein Diets for Athletes; Bariatric Surgery; Kidney Stones with Metabolic Syndrome; Weighty Issue of Treatment Options for Obese Dialysis Patients; and Nickel Allergy Masquerading as Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Desirée has spoken at multiple conferences on a variety of subjects including sodium, magnesium, home dialysis, obesity, adherence, supplements, and time constraints. She has volunteered as part of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Nutrition Care Manual as Renal Expert, Managing Editor for Renal Nutrition Forum and has participated in Evidence Analysis Library projects. She has been on the National Kidney Foundation Renal Dietitian Spring Clinicals Planning Committee. Desirée was awarded 2013 Vermont's Dietitian of the Year Award and NKF Council of Renal Nutrition 2025 Recognized Renal Dietitian. She is a Board member of the Vermont Affiliate for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics plus Treasurer for the Vermont Kidney Association.   Show Notes: Herbal Remedies Vitamins and CKD CKD Medicines Integrative Medicine: Search About Herbs from Memorial Sloan Kettering

Grab our free Health & Wellness Checklist: https://bit.ly/3uPXhkU Villa Marie Claire: https://www.villamarieclaire.org/ Three weeks before our son Markham passed away, we were told there was nothing more that could be done to treat his cancer. Hearing the word “hospice” felt like surrender. It felt like the end. What we didn't expect was what happened next. In this episode, we share our experience transitioning from Memorial Sloan Kettering to hospice care, the fears we had, the hesitation we felt, and the unexpected peace we found. Hospice wasn't what we thought it would be. It wasn't cold or clinical. It became a place of connection, grace, intentional moments, and love during the hardest days of our lives. If you or someone you love is facing end-of-life decisions, we hope our experience brings clarity and comfort. #retirement_transformed #retirementcouple #retirement BUY MARK'S BOOK! The Evolving Man: Life Virtues Men Don't Talk About [Get the FREE Downsizing Guide] How to prepare to downsize your home https://learn.retirementtransformed.com/downsizing-guide-optin USEFUL FINANCIAL TOOLS https://geni.us/new_retirement Use this link for a FREE 14 Day Trial! [Get the FREE Downsizing Guide] How to prepare to downsize your home CONNECT: Engage in our Free Facebook Community ✔️ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/retirementtransformed ✔️ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/retirementtransformed ✔️ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/retirementtransformed ✔️ Amazon Shop: https://www.amazon.com/shop/retirementtransformed ABOUT RETIREMENT TRANSFORMED Husband and wife duo, Mark & Jody Rollins, inspire and serve as personal guides to meaningful, transformational journeys for individuals who are planning for, going through or are living in retirement. This is everything in retirement beyond your financial plan. We are not financial advisors or medical experts. Any advice we give is our own and should not be taken as professional advice. This video is for informational and entertainment purposes only. Please seek professional assistance before making any financial decisions or changes that can affect your physical or mental health. FTC: Some links mentioned above may be affiliate links, which means we earn a small commission if you buy a product from the specific link. This video is not sponsored. All Content and video segments are copyrighted and owned by ©Retirement Transformed and cannot be used without permission.

While the longevity field is filled with dubious claims and junk science, there have been some truly remarkable advances that will have an impact on how we can live longer and stay healthier. In this episode, Kara unpacks some of them with Dr. Eric Verdin, the president and CEO of the Buck Institute for Research on Aging in Novato, California. The Buck Institute was the first of its kind, and it's at the forefront of all the latest research on longevity.  Later she speaks to Dr. Vinod Balachandran, attending physician and director of The Olayan Center for Cancer Vaccines at Memorial Sloan Kettering in New York. He'll explain his research into mRNA vaccines and their potential to treat and possibly cure pancreatic cancer.  Questions? Comments? Email us at on@voxmedia.com or find us on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Threads, and Bluesky @onwithkaraswisher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, we dived deep into the world of bispecific antibodies approved for multiple myeloma. Joined by myeloma specialists Dr. Hamza Hashmi from Memorial Sloan Kettering and Dr. Cesar Rodriguez from Mount Sinai, they discussed the latest updates, clinical pearls, and practical insights for community oncologists. Listen us on: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/31BXhY9FM4gPWG10WgE11o Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/oncology-brothers-practice-changing-cancer-discussions/id1653340966 Follow us on social media: X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Key topics included: Overview of bispecific antibodies, focusing on GPRC5D and BCMA-targeted therapies. Detailed discussion on talquetamab, teclistamab, elranatamab, and linvoseltamab, including dosing, side effects, and management strategies. Insights on managing cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, and other side effects like dysgeusia, skin toxicity, and infections. Prophylactic measures, including the use of IVIG and tocilizumab, to enhance patient care and quality of life. Whether you're a healthcare professional or simply interested in the latest advancements in cancer treatment, this episode is packed with valuable information. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other episodes for more insights into oncology! #MultipleMyeloma, #BispecificAntibody, #ICANS, #CRSmanagement, #OncologyBrothers

Dr. Jonathan Howard (neurologist and author) and science journalist Wendy Orent return for another sharp, unsparing look at the state of U.S. public health policy. In this episode, the hosts unpack the surprise withdrawal of Casey Means as surgeon general nominee, her replacement by Fox News commentator and MSKCC breast imaging chief Dr. Nicole Saphier, and what the shuffle signals about the fracturing of the MAHA coalition. They dig into Saphier's contradictory record — pro-vaccine statements from 2020 and 2021 set against more recent anti-vaccine messaging, her supplement business (DropRx), and her now-deleted social media posts criticizing Trump and Elon Musk. From there, the conversation turns to the FDA's blocked publication of research showing the COVID and shingles vaccines are safe, the apparent role of former FDA vaccine office chief Dr. Vinay Prasad, and reporting that FDA Commissioner Marty Makary's job is in jeopardy. The episode also covers a small piece of good news — NIH program director Jenna Norton being reinstated after Jay Bhattacharya placed her on administrative leave for organizing the Bethesda Declaration — alongside disturbing developments: RFK Jr. clearing the path for minors to use tanning beds, and the militarized arrest of 78-year-old retired NIH scientist Dr. David Morens. Howard and Orent close on what the Morens arrest reveals about where lab leak conspiracy thinking has led American science and the rule of law. Hosts Dr. Jonathan Howard: Neurologist, professor, and author who writes prolifically on COVID misinformation and public health policy. Wendy Orent: Science journalist and author specializing in infectious disease, evolutionary biology, and public health. Episode Timestamps [00:00] Welcome and Atlanta weather check-in [00:35] Casey Means out, Nicole Saphier in as surgeon general nominee — what it signals about MAHA [01:30] Saphier's role at Memorial Sloan Kettering and her integrative medicine push [02:50] The 2021 WSJ op-ed with Marty Makary: a 10-fold error on pediatric COVID hospitalizations that was never corrected [06:30] Saphier's video opposing COVID vaccines for healthy children — and the framing of myocarditis as a fate worse than death [09:20] Saphier's earlier pro-vaccine statements from 2020 and 2021, and why MAHA now resents her [11:15] DropRx supplements: the surgeon general nominee's tincture business [12:30] Brandy Zadrozny's reporting on Saphier's book and her past criticism of the Plandemic film [13:10] Wendy watches Plandemic so you don't have to: Judy Mikovits and the anti-vaccine machine [14:50] CNN reports Saphier purged posts critical of Trump and Musk before her nomination [15:50] The most disturbing Saphier clip: 'DOGE is one of the greatest things to happen in U.S. history' while telling cancer researchers to 'just pause' [16:50] Harvard's November 2025 finding: hundreds of thousands of deaths from the USAID shutdown [18:20] Good news: Jenna Norton reinstated at NIH after Jay Bhattacharya tried to fire her over the Bethesda Declaration [19:30] Greg Gonsalves on scientists who cooperate with authoritarian science policy [20:10] FDA blocked publication of research showing the COVID and shingles vaccines are safe [21:30] Vinay Prasad: the censorship critic who became a censor [22:30] Why are these people opposed to the shingles vaccine? Howard and Orent on herpes zoster, strokes, and ophthalmic complications [23:50] New evidence: recombinant zoster vaccine linked to reduced dementia risk in adults 65+ [26:10] Marty Makary's FDA in chaos — WSJ, Bloomberg, and Politico reporting on a possible shakeup [28:00] Trump pressures the FDA to approve flavored vapes; ENDS authorization issued the same day [31:00] Makary's interview defending the Replimmune metastatic melanoma rejection — and getting caught in the contradiction [33:30] Who's really driving the FDA shakeup? Biotech investors, not patients [35:30] RFK Jr. clears path for minors to use tanning beds, and what dermatologists are saying [36:30] The arrest of Dr. David Morens: a 78-year-old retired NIH scientist, federal agents, tactical gear, and a strip-search [38:30] Lysenkoism revisited — what the lab leak conspiracy was always going to lead to [40:30] Closing thoughts and sign-off Key Discussion Points The Nicole Saphier Nomination Casey Means was withdrawn as surgeon general nominee and replaced by Dr. Nicole Saphier, head of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and a frequent Fox News medical commentator. Howard revisits Saphier's December 2021 Wall Street Journal op-ed with Marty Makary, which understated pediatric COVID-19 hospitalizations by roughly a factor of 10 because the authors did not realize covid.net data only covered about 10 percent of the U.S. population. The error has never been corrected. Saphier's pre-nomination digital footprint included pro-vaccine statements from 2020 and 2021 alongside more recent anti-vaccine content, criticism of Trump and Elon Musk that has since been purged, and a personal supplement line called DropRx. FDA Censorship of Vaccine Safety Research The FDA blocked publication of internal research finding that the COVID-19 and shingles vaccines are safe, with reporting suggesting Dr. Vinay Prasad's office was involved in the decision before he left the agency. Howard points out the irony: Prasad built much of his public profile complaining about scientific censorship, then engaged in censorship the moment he held FDA power. New peer-reviewed research continues to show the recombinant zoster (shingles) vaccine is associated with reduced dementia risk in adults aged 65 and older, even as senior officials downplay or block such findings. Marty Makary on Thin Ice Multiple outlets — the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, NOTUS, and a Rachel Bade scoop — report Makary is at risk of being removed as FDA Commissioner over conflicts with the White House and his handling of rare-disease drug approvals. The same day Trump publicly pressured the FDA on flavored vapes, the agency issued a press release authorizing new ENDS (electronic nicotine delivery systems) products. In a 15-minute interview, Makary defended the rejection of Replimmune's metastatic melanoma drug by attributing it to career FDA scientists, but the journalist surfaced earlier indications that the initial review team had recommended approval. A Rare Piece of Good News NIH program director Jenna Norton, a key organizer of the Bethesda Declaration, was reinstated after Dr. Jay Bhattacharya placed her on administrative leave. A judge also reinstated several FEMA employees in the same ruling. The Arrest of Dr. David Morens Federal agents in tactical gear and bulletproof vests arrested Dr. David Morens, a 78-year-old retired NIH influenza researcher and former aide to Dr. Anthony Fauci, at his home over allegations he used a private email account to discuss official business and avoid FOIA disclosure. According to reporting in Science, Morens was strip-searched, handcuffed, and driven roughly 65 kilometers for fingerprinting and booking. Howard and Orent frame the arrest as the predictable endpoint of years of lab leak conspiracy rhetoric, and as a clear case of selective political prosecution. Mentioned in This Episode Wall Street Journal op-ed: 'Should You Vaccinate Your Five-Year-Old?' by Nicole Saphier and Marty Makary, December 3, 2021 Plandemic (2020 anti-vaccine film featuring Judy Mikovits) Make America Healthy Again (book by Nicole Saphier) Harvard study, November 2025, on deaths attributable to the USAID shutdown Greg Gonsalves essay on Vichy scientists Bethesda Declaration Alyssa Finley, Wall Street Journal: 'President Trump's Marty Makary Problem' Bloomberg: 'Paranoia, Turmoil and Backlash Inside Marty Makary's FDA' Rachel Bade: 'Scoop: Makary's Job in Jeopardy as White House Considers FDA Shakeup' Liz Esely White, Wall Street Journal: 'Trump Pressures FDA Commissioner to Approve Flavored Vapes' Los Angeles Times: 'RFK Jr. clears path for minors' use of tanning beds, much to the dismay of dermatologists' Science: 'Guns and bulletproof vests: How federal agents arrested a Fauci aide' Brandy Zadrozny — reporting on Nicole Saphier

Jordan Belous has always had a soft spot for Pediatric Cancer Patients and when she was 16 years old in 2015 she issued a "challenge", much like the Ice Bucket Challenge, when she created a video that went viral by dancing for 14 seconds to the song WHIP/NAE NAE by Rapper Silento to either Dance or Donate. More than 7000 people took up her challenge and donated more than $100,000 to Memorial Sloan Kettering to fight the cause of Pediatric Cancer. That was the birth of her WHIP PEDIATRIC CANCER Non- Profit. Since that time Jordan has personally developed long standing and iron clad friendships with more than 300 Pediatric Cancer patients and has done extraordinary work for these kids, their families and the cause of Pediatric Cancer. 

I am very excited to launch a very special series for Jake's Take with Jacob Elyachar Podcast. May is Jewish American Heritage Month (JAHM), which annually celebrates the history, culture, and contributions of Jewish Americans to the United States.  There are no words to describe how ecstatic I am to welcome back Ethan Zohn for a third time! Ethan became a household name when he first appeared on Survivor: Africa, the third season of the legendary US reality TV competition. He won seven challenges and the title of “Sole Survivor.” He appeared on Survivor: All-Stars, where he won four challenges but lasted only 21 days, and returned to compete in the milestone season Survivor: Winners at War, where he only won one challenge and lasted 35 days.  Since Survivor, Ethan has become an influential social entrepreneur. With a portion of his Survivor: Africa winnings, he co-founded Grassroot Soccer (GRS). GRS is an adolescent health organization that harnesses the power of soccer to provide young people with the essential information, services, and mentorship they need to lead healthier lives. Since its inception, GRS has expanded to 60 countries in Africa and worldwide, has graduated 13 million youth, and has worked with scores of public—and private-sector partners.  He also raised his voice to fight cancer.  Cancer-free since 2012, Ethan Zohn has been a voice for fighters, survivors, and caregivers of all ages, even chronicling the gritty details of his entire cancer experience for People Magazine. While undergoing treatment, he ran and finished the New York City and Boston marathons to help spread messages of hope and resilience to the world.  Ethan is a champion for investment in new medical research and technology. He is an advisor to numerous hospitals and foundations, such as Cancer Buddy, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and Memorial Sloan Kettering.  As demonstrated by his charitable work, tzedakah, and community involvement, Ethan believes that Jewish values can achieve a better and healthier world. His inspiration to help heal the world stems from being taught at an early age the importance of community, a connection to the Jewish faith, and the preservation of Israel.  Ethan shares his deep bond to Judaism, his connection to the Jewish community, and his relationship with Israel by partnering with Jewish organizations that do critical work worldwide, such as BBYO, the Jewish National Fund, and Maccabi USA.  On this edition of The Jake's Take with Jacob Elyachar Podcast, Ethan Zohn gave his take on Survivor 50, previews Grassroot Soccer's 25th anniversary, and how Grassroot Soccer is going to play a role with the World Cup coming to North America.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/jake-s-take-with-jacob-elyachar--4112003/support.

Lisa Beck, a fitness-focused director of operations from Keller, Texas, was so healthy she wasn't even nervous about her biopsy. The call telling her she had endometrial cancer stopped her in her tracks. What followed was two years of navigating conflicting diagnoses (serous vs. endometrioid cancer), doctors eager to remove everything they could, and her own fierce determination to slow down and make informed decisions. She sought opinions at Texas Oncology, MD Anderson, and Memorial Sloan Kettering, eventually discovered a BRCA1 mutation, and pursued integrative treatments in Tijuana alongside conventional care. Three years cancer-free, Lisa now leads a HealingStrong group in Keller and is newly addicted to pickleball.HealingStrong's mission is to educate, equip and empower our group leaders and group participants through their journey with cancer or other chronic illnesses, and know there is HOPE. We bring this hope through educational materials, webinars, guest speakers, conferences, community small group support and more.Please take advantage of our FREE resources below to help you along your health and healing journey:Support Group DirectoryHolistic Curriculum - Participant GuideSupport Our Mission - DonateAdditional Health ResourcesListen to Previous EpisodesWebsite: healingstrong.org

Stay connected with us at americangroundradio.com, on Facebook, and Instagram. You're listening to American Ground Radio with Louis R. Avallone and Stephen Parr. This is the full show for May 1, 2026. We open with a number the media doesn't want you to focus on — 74% of Americans, including a majority of Democrats and independents, agree it is in America's national interest to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That's according to a Harvard Harris poll, which leans left by about five points. We talk about what it means that three out of four Americans agree on a major national security issue in a country the media tells us is hopelessly divided, why the media's obsession with conflict distorts our understanding of where most Americans actually stand, and why the real division in this country isn't between the American people — it's between the American people and the people who claim to speak for them. In our Top 3 Thing You Need to Know, the 76-day Democrat shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security is officially over — Republicans passed a funding bill over total Democrat obstruction, and Democrats got none of the changes they wanted. ICE and Border Patrol are fully funded. Then President Trump signed an executive order creating Trump IRAs — retirement savings accounts available to Americans who can't access them through their employers, with up to $1,000 in federal matching funds for those earning under $35,000 a year. A 25-year-old who invests $165 a month under the program could have $465,000 by retirement. And President Trump has pulled his second Surgeon General nominee and named Dr. Nicole Sapphire — a licensed radiologist and director of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan Kettering — to the position, after the Senate refused to confirm a nominee who had never completed her medical residency and holds no state medical license. Our American Mamas Teri Netterville and Kimberly Burleson dig into divorce law and whether the system is biased against fathers — and the Kentucky data that is turning heads. After Kentucky made 50-50 shared custody the legal default in 2018, the state's divorce rate fell roughly 25% over the next several years. We talk about why that makes sense, why the financial and custody certainty of equal sharing may be causing couples to work harder to stay together, what firsthand experience with biased family courts looks like, and why loving your children more than you hate your ex is the only standard that actually protects them. We cover the rhetoric-to-violence pipeline — specifically the logical endpoint of eight to ten years of Democrats and media figures calling President Trump a fascist, a Hitler, a pedophile, a rapist, and an existential threat to democracy. We explain why you cannot spend a decade using that language and then stand at a podium after another assassination attempt saying there's no place for political violence. If you believe what you're saying, the violence is the logical conclusion. And that is exactly the problem. In our Digging Deep segment, we do a comprehensive state-by-state accounting of the redistricting war following the Supreme Court's ruling on racial gerrymandering — mapping out where Republicans and Democrats each stand to gain seats, which states are moving, which might move before this fall, and what the net effect could be on House control. We walk through Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio, North Carolina, and a list of Southern states now emboldened by the Supreme Court decision — and on the Democrat side, California, Virginia, and Utah. When you add it all up, Republicans could be looking at a net gain of anywhere from 8 to 26 seats through redistricting alone — in a House currently separated by six seats. We explain who actually started this war — hint: it was Eric Holder and Mark Elias — and why the Supreme Court just changed the rules of the game. We also cover Representative Jamie Raskin's claim that the Supreme Court has been gerrymandered — and explain why that sentence has no meaning, why the Supreme Court is not a political body, what it's actually supposed to do, and what it tells you about where the left is right now that their best argument against a ruling they don't like is a word that doesn't apply. Then we play Fake News Friday — real news, fake news, or really fake news — including John Hinckley Jr. weighing in on the Washington Hilton, Seth Moulton's Nazi submarine comparison to Pete Hegseth, Kamala Harris calling the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps British Redcoats in front of King Charles, and whether President Trump is really considering renaming ICE to the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement so the media will be forced to call them NICE. We also address the UAE's warning that no Iranian arrangements on the Strait of Hormuz can be trusted — and talk about why the UAE may actually benefit from keeping the strait closed, since they have a pipeline that bypasses it entirely. And we close with AJ Haradas at the Boston Marathon — who fell four times after the 26-mile marker and was about to crawl to the finish line when two strangers, Aaron Beggs and Robinson Oliveira, came up on either side and carried him across. Three men who didn't know each other. One finish line. May your pursuit of happiness bring you joy. Listen now wherever you get your podcasts, visit AmericanGroundRadio.com, and join the conversation at 866-AGR-1776! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

l FBI lo dice en su manual de entrenamiento. La CIA, antes de enseñar a sus agentes a desactivar bombas, les enseña a conectar con desconocidos. Y la ciencia, hoy, sabe exactamente por qué. En este episodio nos sumergimos en Súper Comunicadores (Supercommunicators, 2024) de Charles Duhigg (el mismo del Poder de los Hábitos), probablemente el mejor libro sobre comunicación de la última década. Vas a descubrir por qué tus mejores conversaciones, esas en las que te sientes entendido, no dependen del carisma de la otra persona, sino de algo concreto que su cerebro está haciendo, sin que ninguno de los dos lo sepa. Y vas a salir con cinco herramientas concretas para tu próxima conversación importante. Lo que vas a llevarte: ✅ Los 3 tipos de conversación que existen (y por qué la mayoría de problemas de comunicación vienen de no estar en la misma con el otro) ✅ Por qué el supercomunicador casi nunca es el que más habla ✅ Cómo el Dr. Behfar Ehdaie del Memorial Sloan Kettering bajó las cirugías innecesarias un 30% solo cambiando cómo empezaba la conversación ✅ Looping for understanding: la técnica de 3 pasos que une a una activista anti-armas con un policía con 40 armas en casa ✅ Mood y energy: los 2 canales que tu cerebro lee de la otra persona antes incluso de procesar las palabras Si vendes servicios, lideras un equipo, tienes pareja, o simplemente hablas con seres humanos en tu día a día — este episodio te va a cambiar cómo escuchas durante mucho tiempo.

In this episode of the Brown Surgery Podcast, PGY-4 general surgery resident Evan Mitchell sits down with a familiar face: Dr. Josh Cohen. Recently returning to the department as a surgical oncology attending, Dr. Cohen shares his journey from his residency training right here at Brown to his fellowship at Memorial Sloan Kettering, and what it's like starting his new practice.This conversation offers a grounded look into the realities of surgical oncology. Dr. Cohen discusses how to craft a career that balances broad operative skills with specialized cancer care, offering invaluable advice for medical students and residents trying to map out their futures.Key Topics Discussed:Choosing the Specialty: The unique appeal of head-to-toe operations, multidisciplinary care, and integrating complex cases with palliative care.Fellowship Nuances: The distinct differences in training and practice between Surgical Oncology and HPB fellowships.Advice for Trainees: Why you shouldn't stress about specializing too early, and the critical importance of finding a residency that builds a foundation as a strong general surgeon first.A Week in the Life: Managing a schedule dynamically split between the OR, clinic, and dedicated research time.Work-Life Balance & Dispelling Myths: Breaking down the misconception that surgical oncologists must have an intensely rigid personality, and how to maintain healthy boundaries while coordinating complex care across multiple specialties.Guest Bio:Dr. Josh Cohen completed his undergraduate studies at the University of Rochester and medical school at UMass. After completing his general surgery residency at Brown University, he pursued a fellowship at Sloan Kettering before returning to join the Brown surgical faculty.

Host Richie Tevlin and Co-Host Evan Blum talk with Jose Manchola and Scott Novick of Alternate Ending Beer Co., a brewpub in Aberdeen, New Jersey built inside a former movie theater. Scott is the co-founder and owner, who honed his brewing skills at Other Half Brewing in Brooklyn and was named InsideHook's 2026 Brewery of the Year. Jose, known as @YankeeRunner77, is the brewery's Social Media Manager, a craft beer content creator, and the founder of Melesa's Wings, a cancer fundraising campaign that has mobilized over 20 East Coast breweries to raise funds for Memorial Sloan Kettering's Cancer Research Center.   https://www.alternateendingbeerco.com @aebeerco @yankeerunner77 _____________________________________________ THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS!: The Beer Accountant: https://www.paddymaccpa.com/brewerysolutions Patrick McDonald Email: pmcdonald@paddymaccpa.com 267-566-4077 - Licensed CPA Norris McLaughlin P.A. https://norrismclaughlin.com/ted-zeller Ted Zeller Email: tzeller@norris-law.com (484) 765-2220 - Liquor Attorney _______________________________________ EPISODE NOTES: Mentioned Breweries Horus Aged Ales - Oceanside, CA Tree House Brewing - Charlton, MA Troon Brewing - Hopewell, NJ Creature Comforts Brewing - Athens, GA Other Half Brewing - Brooklyn, NY Trillium Brewing - Canton, MA Kane Brewing - Ocean Township, NJ Carton Brewing - Atlantic Highlands, NJ Wayward Lane Brewing - Schoharie, NY Hudson Valley Brewery - Beacon, NY Finback Brewery - Brooklyn, NY The Seed: A Living Beer Project - Atlantic City, NJ Icarus Brewing - Epi 85 - Brick, NJ Human Robot - Epi 10, 15, & 62 - Philadelphia, PA Equilibrium Brewing - Middletown, NY Saurez Family Brewery - Hudson, NY North Park Brewing Co - San Diego, CA Sgraffito Beer - Epi 92 - Philadelphia, PA The TEST Brewery - Brooklyn, NY Esker Hart Artisan Ales - High Bridge, NJ Wild East Brewing - Brooklyn, NY Schilling Beer Co - Littleton, NH Hill Farmstead Brewery - Greensboro Bend, VT Space Cadet Beer - Epi 22 - Philadelphia, PA Mentioned People Sam Cox ‘Mr. Doodle' - Famous Artist Kyle Harrop - Founder at Horus Aged Ales Lisa Haney - Beer Can Illustrator Steve Grodzinsky - Assistant Brewer at Alternate Ending Beer Sam Richardson - Founder of Other Half Brewing Matt Monahan - Founder of Other Half Brewing Andrew Burman - Founder of Other Half Brewing Ken Correll - Epi 15 - Co-Owner of Human Robot Brendan Arnold - Head Brewer at Alternate Ending Beer Jason Goldstein - Epi 85 - Owner of Icarus Brewing Craig Melvin - American Broadcast Journalist Dave Portnoy - Founder of Barstool Sports Will Guidara - American Restaurateur & Author Larry Horwitz - Director of Brewing at Crooked Hammock Brewery Danny Meyer - American Restaurateur & Author Emily Crosby - Events Planner at Alternate Ending Beer Hillary Barile - Manager at Rabbit Hill Farms Ben Clayton - Founder of The TEST Brewery Bob D'Angelo - Owner of Esker Hart Artisan Ales Lindsay Steen - Co-founder of Wild East Brewing Brett Taylor - Co-founder of Wild East Brewing Jan Havránek - Global Sales Director of Lukr  What We Drank? Mount Doom Rauchbier | 4.9% Alternate Ending Beer Co. --------------------- The Royal Rug Pilsner | 4.8% | Mittelfrüh Alternate Ending Beer Co. --------------------- My Only Friend Imperial Stout | 9.8% Alternate Ending Beer Co. --------------------- Re-Animator Lager | 5.2% | Saaz Shine Alternate Ending Beer Co. (Collab w/ Horus Aged Ales) --------------------- Cottonmouth Session IPA | 4.0% Alternate Ending Beer Co.  _______________________________________   STAY CONNECTED: Instagram: ⁠⁠@brewedat⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠@thebrewedatpodcast⁠⁠ Tik Tok: ⁠⁠@brewedat ⁠⁠/ ⁠⁠@thebrewedatpodcast⁠⁠ YouTube: ⁠⁠@brewedat⁠⁠ / ⁠⁠@thebrewedatpodcast⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠BrewedAt Website: ⁠⁠www.brewedat.com

In this segment of Cancer Registry World, Laurie Kirstein, MD, FACS, a breast surgical oncologist in the Division of Surgical Oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and current Chair of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC), discusses her vision and priorities for the CoC. Drawing on the power of cancer registry data, she highlights the essential role Oncology Data Specialists play in advancing cancer care, quality measurement, and program improvement. Tune in to hear how data-driven insights are shaping the future of oncology.

In this episode, Thomas K Varghese, Jr, MD, FACS, is joined by Laurie J Kirstein, MD, FACS, from Memorial Sloan Kettering. They discuss Dr Kirstein's recent article, “Results of an American College of Surgeons Prospective National Quality Improvement Collaborative to Successfully Overcome Barriers to Cancer Care Across the US,” in which 194 American College of Surgeons (ACS)-accredited cancer programs caring for 99,057 patients participated in a National Quality Improvement Collaborative led by the ACS, “Breaking Barriers,” which reduced radiotherapy non-adherence by over 30% at the patient and hospital levels across multiple program types, census regions, and disease sites.   Disclosure Information: Drs Varghese and Kirstein have nothing to disclose.   To earn 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™ for this episode of the JACS Operative Word Podcast, click here to register for the course and complete the evaluation. Listeners can earn CME credit for this podcast for up to 2 years after the original air date.   Chan, Kelley MD, MS; Reilly, Eileen MSW; Janczewski, Lauren M MD, MS; Gentry, Sharon MSN, RN; Biggins, Camille MHA; Haffty, Bruce MD; Shelton, Charles MD; Yang, Anthony D MD, MS, FACS; Weigel, Ronald J MD, PhD, MBA, FACS; Kirstein, Laurie J MD, FACS. Results of an American College of Surgeons Prospective National Quality Improvement Collaborative to Successfully Overcome Barriers to Cancer Care Across the US. Journal of the American College of Surgeons 242(1):p 247-256, January 2026. | DOI: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000001637   Learn more about the Journal of the American College of Surgeons, a monthly peer-reviewed journal publishing original contributions on all aspects of surgery, including scientific articles, collective reviews, experimental investigations, and more.   #JACSOperativeWord

Amy Pierre, MSN, ANP-BC, Flatiron Health and Memorial Sloan Kettering, New York, NY and Peter Voorhees, MD, Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, NC Recorded on March 10, 2026 Amy Pierre, MSN, ANP-BC Senior Clinical Director, Research Oncology, Flatiron Health Nurse Practitioner, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY Peter Voorhees, MD Director, Outreach for Hematologic Malignancies, Plasma Cells Disorder Program, Department of Hematologic Oncology and Blood Disorders Levine Cancer Institute Charlotte, NC Professor, Cancer Medicine Wake Forest University School of Medicine Winston-Salem, NC In this episode, Dr. Peter Voorhees from the Levine Cancer Institute and Amy Pierre, MSN, RN, ANP BC from Flatiron Health and Memorial Sloan Kettering, break down the evolving landscape of myeloma, from early signs and diagnostic criteria to frontline therapy, transplant decisions, and T- cell redirecting therapies. They explore real world challenges in survivorship, treatment toxicity, and disparities in access to advanced therapies, offering practical insights to help care teams support patients more effectively. Tune in for an informative and forward looking discussion shaping the future of myeloma management. Blood Cancer United Resources: Blood Cancer United Accredited and Non-Accredited Healthcare Professional Education Blood Cancer United Resources for Patients

Welcome to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, we dived deep into the current treatment landscape for frontline HER2-positive gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and gastric cancer. Listen us on: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/31BXhY9FM4gPWG10WgE11o Apple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/oncology-brothers-practice-changing-cancer-discussions/id1653340966 Follow us on social media: X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Join us as we welcome Dr. Sunnie Kim from the University of Colorado and Dr. Samuel Cytryn from Memorial Sloan Kettering, who shared their insights on the latest advancements in HER2-targeted therapies. We discussed the pivotal TOGA and KEYNOTE-811, the promising data from the HERIZON-GEA01 study featuring Zanidatamab, and the implications of these findings for clinical practice. Key topics included: Current standard of care for HER2-positive GEJ and gastric cancer The role of PD-L1 status in treatment decisions Mechanisms and efficacy of Zanidatamab compared to traditional therapies Management of side effects, including diarrhea and infusion-related reactions Future directions in HER2-targeted therapies, including T-DXd based on the DESTINY Gastric-04 trial Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for more updates on treatment algorithms, FDA approvals, and conference highlights! Accreditation/Credit Designation Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Acknowledgment of Commercial Support This activity is supported by an educational grant from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Link to gain CME credits from this activity: https://www.gotoper.com/courses/new-precision-strategies-for-her2-gea-interpreting-new-data-to-inform-clinical-practice

Welcome to Ozempic Weightloss Unlocked, where we dive into the latest news on Ozempic, from medical breakthroughs to real-life health impacts.A groundbreaking Cleveland Clinic study of nearly eight thousand patients reveals what happens when people stop GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic or tirzepatide. Those treated for obesity lost eight point four percent of body weight before stopping and regained just zero point five percent one year later. Many restarted the medication, switched to alternatives, or adopted lifestyle changes like dietitian visits, stabilizing their weight better than in clinical trials.This contrasts with a UK meta-analysis in eClinicalMedicine, which found patients regain sixty percent of lost weight within one year after stopping, potentially plateauing at seventy-five percent. Experts stress pairing drugs with diet and exercise to sustain results, as regained weight may be mostly fat.Exciting news on dosing: A small study in Obesity followed thirty patients on semaglutide or tirzepatide who spaced injections to every two weeks or more. After significant initial loss, they maintained weight, with BMI stable and even slight further drops in most. Healthline reports similar real-world success, noting it could cut costs and side effects while broadening access, though larger trials are needed.Switching meds is common too. Powers Health reports only a quarter stick with one GLP-1 drug after a year, but switchers like from Ozempic to Zepbound are more likely to continue treatment.Ozempic mimics gut hormones to curb appetite and aid digestion, leading to fifteen to twenty percent weight loss when combined with healthy habits, per Womens Health Mag. Its approved for type two diabetes but used off-label for obesity. Side effects include nausea, vomiting, and rare pancreatitis risks, so consult your doctor.Emerging data from Memorial Sloan Kettering suggests potential cancer benefits from obesity-related weight loss.Listeners, these updates show Ozempic as a powerful tool, but long-term success hinges on lifestyle. Talk to your healthcare provider.Thank you for tuning in. Subscribe for more episodes. This has been a Quiet Please production. For more, check out Quiet Please dot ai. Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Join us for an insightful conversation with Dr. Lee Jones, who is a clinician, medical educator, mentor, and leader. Dr. Jones completed his bachelor of arts in psychology at Dartmouth, his doctorate of medicine at Columbia, and his residency in psychiatry at UCLA. Dr. Jones then served as chief resident at UCLA, before completing a fellowship in clinical and research consultation-liaison at Memorial Sloan-Kettering, and another research fellowship at UCSD. At Rush Medical College, Dr. Jones is the Vice Dean for Education and Student Experience.Dr. Jones has worked across the full spectrum of health care. His roles have ranged from clinician and educator to chief of multiple services, medical school dean, and national leadership positions with the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Throughout his career, he has led efforts in regulatory compliance, accreditation, and conflict resolution within large, multi-specialty medical organizations. Nationally, he has served on the LCME, and in numerous roles at the AAMC. His clinical practice has focused on emergency medicine and consultation-liaison psychiatry.Come along as the conversation ebbs and flows from the technical to the philosophical.Host: Samantha ShihGuest: Lee JonesProduced By: Samantha ShihAlert & Oriented is a medical student-run clinical reasoning podcast dedicated to providing a unique platform for early learners to practice their skills as a team in real time. In each episode of ‘The Doctor's Playbook' series, one medical student host interviews an expert attending clinician or leader in the medical field. Guests are recruited from diverse specialties and backgrounds. Through structured, yet conversational interviews, the host engages the guest to reflect on their clinical journey – giving listeners insight into the guest's career trajectory.Follow the team on X:A&OA fantastic resource, by learners, for learners in Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, Pediatrics, Psychiatry, Surgery, Primary Care, Emergency Medicine, and Hospital Medicine.

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

Dr. Pedro Barata and Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe discuss the evolving treatment landscape in gastroesophageal junction and gastric cancers, including the emergence of organ preservation as a selective therapeutic goal, as well as strategies to mitigate disparities in care. Dr. Maduekwe is the senior author of the article, "Organ Preservation for Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Cancers: Ready for Primetime?" in the 2026 ASCO Educational Book. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Pedro Barata: Hello, and welcome to By the Book, a podcast series from ASCO that features compelling perspectives from authors and editors of the ASCO Educational Book. I'm Dr. Pedro Barata. I'm a medical oncologist at University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and an associate professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. I'm also the deputy editor of the ASCO Educational Book. Gastric and gastroesophageal cancers are the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Over the last decade, the treatment landscape has evolved tremendously, and today, organ preservation is emerging as an attainable but still selective therapeutic goal. Today, I'm delighted to be speaking with Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe, an associate professor of surgery and the director of regional therapies in the Division of Surgical Oncology at the Medical College of Wisconsin. Dr. Maduekwe is also the last author of a fantastic paper in the 2026 ASCO Educational Book titled "Organ Preservation for Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Cancers: Ready for Prime Time?" We explore these questions in our conversations today.  Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode as well. Welcome. Thank you for joining us today. Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: Thank you, Dr. Barata. I'm really, really glad to be here. Dr. Pedro Barata: There's been a lot of progress in the treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal cancers. But before we actually dive into some of the key take-home points from your paper, can you just walk us through how systemic therapy has emerged and actually allowed you to start thinking about a curative framework and really informing surgery decision-making? Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: Great, thank you. I'm really excited to be here and I love this topic because, I'm terrified to think of how long ago it was, but I remember in medical school, one of my formative experiences and why I got so interested in oncology was when the very first trials about imatinib were coming through, right? Looking at the effect, I remember so vividly having a lecture as a first-year or second-year medical student, and the professor saying, "This data about this particular kind of cancer is no longer accurate. They don't need bone marrow transplants anymore, they can just take a pill." And that just sounded insane. And we don't have that yet for GI malignancies. But part of what is the promise of precision oncology has always been to me that framework. That framework we have for people with CML who don't have a bone marrow transplant, they take a pill. For people with GIST. And so when we talk about gastric cancers and gastroesophageal cancers, I think the short answer is that systemic therapy has forced surgeons to rethink what "necessary" really means, right? We have the old age saying, "a chance to cut is a chance to cure." And when I started out, the conversation was simple. We diagnose the cancer, we take it out. Surgery's the default. But what's changed really over the last decade and really over the last five years is that systemic therapy has gotten good enough to do what is probably real curative work before we ever enter the operating room. So now when you see a patient whose tumor has essentially melted away on restaging, the question has to shift, right? It's no longer just, "Can I take this out?" It's "Has the biology already done the heavy lifting? Have we already given them systemic therapy, and can we prove it safely so that maybe we don't have to do what is a relatively morbid procedure?" And that shift is what has opened the door to organ preservation. Surgery doesn't disappear, but it becomes more discretionary. Necessary for the patients who need it, and within systems that can allow us to make sure that we're giving it to the right patients. Dr. Pedro Barata: Right, no, that makes total sense. And going back to the outcomes that you get with these systemic therapies, I mean, big efforts to find effective regimens or cocktails of therapies that allow us to go to what we call "complete response," right? Pathologic complete response, or clinical complete response, or even molecular complete response. We're having these conversations across different tumors, hematologic malignancies as well as solid tumors, right? I certainly have those conversations in the GU arena as well. So, when we think of pathologic CRs for GI malignancies, right? If I were to summarize the data, and please correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not an expert in this area, the traditional perioperative chemo gives you pCRs, pathologic complete response, in the single digits. But then when you start getting smarter at identifying biologically distinct tumors such as microsatellite instability, for instance, now you start talking about pCRs over 50%. In other words, half of the patients' cancer goes away, it melts down by offering, in this case, immunotherapy as a backbone of that neoadjuvant. But first of all, this shift, right, from going from these traditional, "not smart" chemotherapy approaches to kind of biologically-driven approaches, and how important is pCR in the context of "Do I really need surgery afterwards?" Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: That's really the crux of the entire conversation, right? We can't proceed and we wouldn't be able to have the conversation about whether organ preservation is even plausible if we hadn't been seeing these rates of pathologic complete response. If there's no viable tumor left at resection, did surgery add something? Are we sure? The challenge before this was how frequently that happened. And then the next one is, as you've already raised, "Can we figure that out without operating?" In the traditional perioperative chemo era, pathologic complete response was relatively rare, like maybe one in twenty patients. When we go to more modern regimens like FLOT, it got closer to one in six. When you add immunotherapy in recent trials like MATTERHORN, it's nearly triple that rate. And it's worth noting here, I'm a health services-health disparities researcher, so we'll just pause here and note that those all sound great, but these landmark trials have significant representation gaps that limit and should inform how confidently we generalize these findings. But back to what you just said, right, the real inflection point is MSI-high disease where, with neoadjuvant dual-checkpoint blockade, trials like NEONIPIGAS and INFINITY show pCR rates that are approaching 50% to 60%. That's not incremental progress, that's a whole new different biological reality. What does that mean? If we're saying that 50% to 60% of the people we take to the OR at the time of surgery will end up having no viable tumor, man, did we need to do a really big surgery? But the problem right now is the gold standard, I think we would mostly agree, the gold standard is pathologic complete response, and we only know that after surgery. I currently tell my patients, right, because I don't want them to be like, "Wait, we did this whole thing." I'm like, "We're going to do this surgery, and my hope is that we're going to do the surgery and there will be no cancer left in your stomach after we take out your stomach." And they're like, "But we took out my stomach and you're saying it's a good thing that there's no cancer." And yes, right now that is true because it's a measure of the efficacy of their systemic therapy. It's a measure of the biology of the disease. But should we be acting on this non-operatively? To do that, we have to find a surrogate. And the surrogate that we have to figure out is complete clinical response. And that's where we have issues with the stomach. In esophageal cancer, the preSANO protocol, which we'll talk about a little bit, validated a structured clinical response evaluation. People got really high-quality endoscopies with bite-on biopsies. They got endoscopic ultrasounds. They got fine-needle aspirations and PET-CT, and adding all of those things together, the miss rate for substantial residual disease was about 10% to 15%. That's a number we can work with. In the stomach, it's a lot more difficult anatomically just given the shape of people's stomachs. There's fibrosis, there's ulceration. A fair number of stomach and GEJ cancers have diffuse histology which makes it difficult to localize and they also have submucosal spread. Those all conceal residual disease. I had a recent case where I scoped the patient during the case, and this person had had a 4 cm ulcer prior to surgery, and I scoped and there was nothing visible. And I was elated. And on the final pathology they had a 7 cm tumor still in place. It was just all submucosal. That's the problem. I'm not a gastroenterologist, but I would have said this was a great clinical response, but because it's gastric, there was a fair amount of submucosal disease that was still there. And our imaging loses accuracy after treatment. So the gap between what looks clean clinically and what's actually there pathologically remains very wide. So I think that's why we're trying to figure it out and make it cleaner. And outside of biomarker-selected settings like MSI-high disease, in general, I'm going to skip to the end and our upshot for the paper, which is that organ preservation, I would say for gastric cancer particularly, should remain investigational. I think we're at the point where the biology is increasingly favorable, but our means of measurement is not there yet. Dr. Pedro Barata: Gotcha. So, this is a perfect segue because you did mention the SANO, just to spell it out, "Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal" trial, so SANO, perfect, I love the abbreviation. It's really catchy. It's fantastic, it's actually a well-put-together perspective effort or program applying to patients. And can you tell us how was that put together and how does that work out for patients? Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: Yeah, I think for those of us in the GI space, we have SANO and then we also have the OPRA for rectum. SANO for the upper GI is what takes organ preservation from theory to something that's clinically credible. The trial asked a very simple question. If a patient with a GEJ adenocarcinoma or esophageal adenocarcinoma achieved what was felt to be a clinical complete response after chemoradiation, would they actually benefit from immediate surgery? And the question was, "Can you safely observe?" And the answer was 'yes'. You could safely observe, but only if you do it right. And what does that mean? At two years, survival with active surveillance was not inferior to those who received an immediate esophagectomy. And those patients had a better early quality of life. Makes sense, right? Your quality of life with an esophagectomy versus not is going to be different. That matters a lot when you consider what the long-term metabolic and functional consequences of an esophagectomy are. The weight loss, nutritional deficiencies that can persist for years. But SANO worked because it was very, very disciplined and not permissive. You mentioned rigor. They were very elegant in their approach and there was a fair amount of rigor. So there were two main principles. The first was that surveillance was front-loaded and intentional. So they had endoscopies with biopsies and imaging every three to four months in the first year and then they progressively spaced it out with explicit criteria for what constituted failure. And then salvage surgery was pre-planned. So, the return-to-surgery pathway was already rehearsed ahead of time. If disease reappeared, take the patient to the OR within weeks. Not sit, figure out what that means, think about it a little bit and debate next steps. They were very clear about what the plan was going to be. So they've given us this blueprint for, like, watching people safely. I think what's remarkable is that if you don't do that, if you don't have that infrastructure, then organ preservation isn't really careful. It's really hopeful. And that's what I really liked about the SANO trial, aside from, I agree, the name is pretty cool. Dr. Pedro Barata: Yeah, no, that's a fantastic point. And that description is spot on. I am thinking as we go through this, where can this be adopted, right? Because, not surprisingly, patients are telling you they're doing a lot better, right, when you don't get the esophagus out or the stomach out. I mean, that makes total sense. So the question is, you know, how do you see those issues related to the logistics, right? Getting the multi-disciplinary team, getting the different assessments of CR. I guess PETs, a lot of people are getting access to imaging these days. How close do you think this is, this kind of program, to be implemented? And maybe I would assume it might need to be validated in different settings, right, including the community. How close or how far do you think you see that being applied out there versus continuing to be a niche program, watch and wait program, in dedicated academic centers? Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: I love this question. So I said at the top of this, I'm a health equity/health disparities researcher, and this is where I worry the most. I love the science of this. I'm really excited about the science. I'm very optimistic. I don't think this is a question of "if," I think it's a question of "when." We are going to get to a point where these conversations will be very, very reasonable and will be options. One of the things I worry about is: who is it going to be an option for? Organ preservation is not just a treatment choice, and I think what you're pointing out very rightly is it's a systems-level intervention. Look at what we just said for SANO. Someone needs to be able to do advanced endoscopy, get the patients back. We have to have the time and space to come back every three to four months. We have to do molecular testing. There needs to be multi-disciplinary review. There needs to be intensive surveillance, and you need to have rapid access to salvage surgery. Where is that infrastructure? In this country, it's mostly in academic centers. I think about the panel we had at ASCO GI, which was fantastic. And as we were having the conversation, you know, we set it up as a debate. So folks were debating either pro-surveillance or pro-surgery. But both groups, both people, were presenting outcomes based on their centers. And it was folks who were fantastic. Dr. Molena, for example, from Memorial Sloan Kettering was talking about their outcomes in esophagectomies [during our session at GI26], but they do hundreds of these cases there per year. What's the reality in this country? 70% to 80% to 90%, depending on which data you look at, of the gastrectomies in the United States occur at low-volume hospitals. Most of the patients at those hospitals are disproportionately uninsured or on government insurance, have lower income and from racial and ethnic minority groups. So if we diffuse organ preservations without the system to support it, we're going to create a two-tiered system of care where whether you have the ability to preserve your organs, to preserve bodily integrity, depends on where you live and where you're treated. The other piece of this is the biomarker testing gap. One of the things that, as you pointed out at the beginning, that's really exciting is for MSI-high tumors. Those are the patients that are most likely to benefit from immunotherapy-based organ preservation. But here's the problem. If the patient isn't tested at time of initial diagnosis before they ever see me as a surgeon, the door to organ preservation is closed before it's ever open. And testing access remains very inconsistent across academic networks. And then there's the financial toxicity piece where, for gastrectomy, pancreatectomy, I do peritoneal malignancies, more than half of those patients experience significant financial toxicity related to their cancer treatment. We're now proposing adding at least two years, that's the preliminary information, right? It's probably going to be longer. At least a couple of years of surveillance visits, repeated endoscopies, immunotherapy costs. How are we going to support patients through that? We're going to have to think about setting up navigation support, geographic solutions, what financial counseling looks like. My patient for clinic yesterday was driving to see me, and they were talking about how they were sliding because it was snowing. And they were sliding for the entire three-hour drive down here. Are we going to tell people like that that they need to drive down to, right, I work at a high-volume center, they're going to need to come here every three months, come rain or snow, to get scoped as opposed to the one-time having a surgery and not needing to have the scopes as frequently? My concern, like I said, I'm an optimist, I think it is going to work. I think we're going to figure out how to make it work. I'm worried about whether when we deploy it, we widen the already existing disparities. Dr. Pedro Barata: Gotcha, and that's a fantastic summary. And as I'm thinking also of what we've been talking in other solid tumors, which one of the following do you think is going to evolve first? So we are starting to use more MRD-based assays, which are based on blood test, whether it's a tumor-informed ctDNA or non-informed. We are also trying to get around or trying to get more information response to systemic therapies out of RNA-seq through gene expression signatures, or development of novel therapeutics which also can help you there. Which one of these areas you think you're going to help this SANO-like approach move forward, or you actually think it's actually all of the above, which makes it even more complicated perhaps? Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: I think it's going to be all of the above for a couple of reasons. I would say if I had to pick just one right now, I think ctDNA is probably the most promising and potentially the missing piece that can help us close the gap between clinical and pathologic response. If you achieve clinical complete response and your ctDNA is negative, so you have clinical and molecular evidence of clearance, maybe that's a low-risk patient for surveillance. If you have clinical complete response but your ctDNA remains positive, I would say you have occult molecular disease and we probably need intensified therapy, closer monitoring, not observation. I think the INFINITY trial is already incorporating ctDNA into its algorithm, so we'll know. I don't think we're at the point where it alone can drive surgical decisions. I think it's going to be a good complement to clinical response evaluation, not a replacement. The issue of where I think it's probably going to be multi-dimensional is the evidence base: who are we testing? Like, what is the diversity, what is the ancestral diversity of these databases that we're using for all of these tests? How do we know that ctDNA levels and RNA-seq expression arrays are the same across different ancestral groups, across different disease types? So I think it's probably going to be an amalgam and we're going to have to figure out some sort of algorithm to help us define it based on the patient characteristics. Like, I think it's probably different, some of this stuff is going to be a little bit different depending on where in the stomach the cancer is. And it's going to be a little bit more difficult to figure out if you have a complete clinical response in the antrum and closer to the pylorus, for example. That might be a little bit more difficult. So maybe the threshold for defining what a clinical complete response needs to be is higher because the therapeutic approach there is not quite as onerous as for something at the GE-junction. Dr. Pedro Barata: Wonderful. And I'm sure AI, whether it's digitization of the pathology from the biopsies and putting all this together, probably might play a role as well in the future.  Dr. Maduekwe, it's been fantastic. Thank you so much for sharing your insights with us and also congrats again for the really well-done review published.  For our listeners, thank you for staying with us. Thank you for your time. We will post a link to this fantastic article we discussed today in the transcript of this episode. And of course, please join us again next month on the By the Book Podcast for more insights on key advances and innovations that are shaping modern oncology. Thank you, everyone. Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: Thank you. Thank you for having me. Watch the ASCO GI26 session: Organ Preservation for Gastroesophageal and Gastric Cancers: Ready for Primetime? 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. Pedro Barata   @PBarataMD    Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe @umaduekwemd Follow ASCO on social media:          @ASCO on X (formerly Twitter)          ASCO on Bluesky         ASCO on Facebook          ASCO on LinkedIn          Disclosures:       Dr. Pedro Barata:   Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Luminate Medical   Honoraria: UroToday   Consulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, BMS, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Eisai, Caris Life Sciences, AstraZeneca, Exelixis, AVEO, Merck, Ipson, Astellas Medivation, Novartis, Dendreon   Speakers' Bureau: AstraZeneca, Merck, Caris Life Sciences, Bayer, Pfizer/Astellas   Research Funding (Inst.): Exelixis, Blue Earth, AVEO, Pfizer, Merck    Dr. Ugwuji Maduekwe: Leadership: Medica Health Research Funding: Cigna    

What if food were treated as care, not convenience?In this episode of The Caring Economy, we sit down with Laura Pensiero, a registered dietitian, chef, and leading voice in the Food Is Medicine movement, to unpack how nutrition quietly shapes nearly every outcome we care about, from long-term health to workplace resilience to healthcare costs.Laura shares her journey from the Hudson Valley to professional kitchens to collaborating with physicians at Memorial Sloan Kettering, where she helped translate clinical research into practical, everyday nourishment. We explore why dietary patterns like the Mediterranean diet continue to outperform trends, what precision and personalized nutrition could unlock next, and why food remains one of the most underutilized tools in modern healthcare.At a moment when health systems are strained, burnout is widespread, and prevention is finally entering the policy conversation, this episode asks a deeper question: what would it look like to build a system that supports care before crisis?This conversation is about food, but it's also about leadership, systems, and rethinking what we value in a caring economy.

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, we are joined by Dr. Komal Jhaveri, a breast medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering, to discuss the evolving landscape of metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer, particularly focusing on low and ultra-low HER2 expression. Key topics include: • The significance of the DESTINY Breast-04 and DESTINY Breast-06 studies and their impact on treatment options. • The definition and implications of low and ultra-low HER2 expression in clinical practice. • The importance of HER2 testing and the dynamic nature of HER2 expression in tumors. • Treatment sequencing strategies, including the use of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) like trastuzumab deruxtecan (TDXd) and sasituzumab govitecan. • Management of treatment-related toxicities, including ILD, nausea, and alopecia. Join us for an insightful discussion that aims to keep healthcare professionals updated on the latest advancements in cancer care. 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 episodes and insights!

Welcome back to the Oncology Brothers podcast! In this episode, we continue the CME series on HER2-positive GEJ and gastric cancer, shifting focus to the essential topic of treatment toxicity management. We're joined by two leading experts: Dr. Geoffrey Ku from Memorial Sloan Kettering and Dr. Shruti Patel from Stanford University. Building on their previous discussion of upper GI treatment algorithm with Dr. Rutika Mehta, this episode delves into the practical realities of managing patients on complex regimens. Drs. Ku & Patel break down the side effect profiles across the treatment continuum—from frontline trastuzumab-based combinations to emerging therapies like zanidatamab—and provide actionable strategies for community oncologists. Episode Highlights: • Practical management of frontline side effects with FOLFOX/XELOX chemotherapy plus trastuzumab and pembrolizumab • Reality check on trastuzumab cardiotoxicity: incidence rates and monitoring protocols in gastric vs. breast cancer • Immune-related adverse events with checkpoint inhibitors: what's common vs. rare in GI cancers • Critical insights on zanidatamab's synergistic diarrhea toxicity and mandatory prophylaxis strategies • TDXd (Enhertu) in second-line: moving beyond ILD fears to address frequent cytopenias and marrow management • Expert consensus on infusion reaction management for novel biologics • The importance of managing baseline symptoms in patients with dysphagia and nausea This episode bridges the gap between trial data and clinical practice, offering real-world wisdom on keeping patients on effective therapies through proactive toxicity management. Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers •⁠  Website: https://oncbrothers.com/ Don't forget to subscribe for our complete CME series covering treatment algorithms, FDA approvals, and practical management strategies! Accreditation/Credit Designation Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Physicians' Education Resource®, LLC designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.25 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Acknowledgment of Commercial Support This activity is supported by an educational grant from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Link to gain CME credits from this activity: https://www.gotoper.com/courses/navigating-the-adverse-event-landscape-in-her2-gea-therapy

What if thousands of men are losing their sexual function treating a cancer that was never going to kill them? In this episode, I sit down with Dr. Shawn Zimberg — board-certified radiation oncologist and medical director at Advanced Radiation Centers of New York — to unpack the truth about prostate cancer screening, overtreatment, and what every man over 40 needs to know. Dr. Zimberg reveals that the prostate cancer industry has an overtreatment problem — and genomic testing is exposing which tumors need aggressive treatment and which don't. We break down why PSA is broken, why Gleason scores don't tell the full story, and how cadaver studies show men from their 20s to 80s harbor prostate cancer cells that never become clinically significant. We also dive into the science behind radiation therapy, the BioProtect balloon spacer (Dr. Zimberg has performed nearly 2,000 — more than anyone in the world), and the cutting-edge radioligand therapy changing outcomes for stage 4 prostate cancer. If you're a man, love a man, or work with men in health or performance, this is essential listening. About the guest:Dr. Shawn Zimberg is a board-certified radiation oncologist, medical director at Advanced Radiation Centers of New York, and director of radiation oncology at Bronx Care Hospital. He trained at Memorial Sloan Kettering and has pioneered the use of rectal spacer technology in prostate cancer treatment, having performed nearly 2,000 PioProtect balloon procedures — more than any other physician in the world. *** Reduce your risk of Alzheimer's with my science-backed protocol for women 30+: https://go.neuroathletics.com.au/brain-code-yt Subscribe to The Neuro Experience for more conversations at the intersection of brain science and performance. I'm committed to bringing you evidence-based insights that you can apply to your own health journey. *** A huge thank you to my sponsors for supporting this episode. Check them out and enjoy exclusive discounts: Troscriptions — Get 10% off your first order at https://troscriptions.com/neuro or enter code NEURO at checkout. *** I'm Louisa Nicola — clinical neurophysiologist — Alzheimer's prevention specialist — founder of Neuro Athletics. My mission is to translate cutting-edge neuroscience into actionable strategies for cognitive longevity, peak performance, and brain disease prevention. If you're committed to optimizing your brain — reducing Alzheimer's risk — and staying mentally sharp for life, you're in the right place. Stay sharp. Stay informed. Join thousands who subscribe to the Neuro Athletics Newsletter → https://bit.ly/3ewI5P0 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/louisanicola_/ Twitter : https://twitter.com/louisanicola_ *** Topics discussed:00:00:00 Introduction: The Prostate Cancer Overtreatment Crisis 00:02:11 Understanding the Prostate: Anatomy and Function 00:04:43 The Cancer Paradox: Size Does Not Equal Risk 00:07:43 Radiation Oncology: The Specialty Explained 00:11:08 Lifetime Risk and Genetic Factors 00:15:32 PSA Testing: The Gold Standard Screening Tool 00:20:36 The Diagnostic Journey: MRI and Biopsy Techniques 00:25:27 The Ejaculation Study: Myth or Reality? 00:33:15 Gleason Scores Decoded: Understanding Aggressiveness 00:37:03 Molecular Profiling: Looking Under the Hood 00:39:27 Treatment Pathways: Surveillance, Surgery, or Radiation 00:41:02 Active Surveillance: When Watching is Appropriate 00:43:31 Stage 4 and Radio Ligand Therapy: The New Frontier 00:48:21 Testosterone and Prostate Cancer: The Complex Relationship 00:52:38 Radiation Therapy Explained: DNA Damage and Healing 00:55:28 The Bioprotect Balloon: Revolutionary Rectal Protection 00:56:07 The Therapeutic Ratio: Maximizing Cure, Minimizing Damage 00:46:39 Robotic Prostatectomy and Surgical Options 01:06:36 Prevention and Early Detection: What Men Need to Know 01:08:28 Closing Thoughts and Where to Find Dr. Zimberg Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What if the future of childhood cancer looked different? Safer treatments, targeted therapies, and doctors who carry personal stories that fuel every decision? Today's guest is one of those rare voices changing everything. In this powerful episode, Dr. Jess Puzzuoli takes us inside the world of pediatric oncology. A place filled with courage, heartbreak, hope, and breakthroughs that most people never hear about. From the rising rates of childhood cancer to the emotional weight families carry, she breaks down the truth behind the numbers and the real-life moments that matter most. This isn't just a medical conversation… it's a human one. ✨ In this episode, we discuss: • Why childhood cancer rates are increasing • The massive research gap affecting pediatric patients • How targeted therapies + new treatments are transforming outcomes • The emotional reality for parents, siblings, and caregivers • What children REALLY experience during treatment • The importance of play, support teams, and trauma awareness • Dr. Jess's deeply personal “why” that fuels her work every day If you've ever wanted a clearer understanding of pediatric cancer and the hope that exists right now this episode will open your eyes and strengthen your heart.   Immortalize your voice by being an ALL TALK ONCOLOGY GUEST! Just fill-out this FORM.   Invite Kenny Perkins to Speak or Participate on your event. Just fill-out this FORM.   SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS: All Talk Oncology: Instagram & Facebook JOIN OUR FREE COMMUNITY: Facebook Community WEBSITE: www.alltalkoncology.com

From breakthrough AI diagnostics to personalized immunotherapy treatments, cancer care is undergoing a revolution that's already saving lives.Dr. Ross Levine, Chief Scientific Officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering, shares how new technologies are helping doctors detect cancer earlier, treat it more effectively, and transform what was once untreatable into manageable conditions. Whether you're navigating cancer personally or professionally, this conversation offers crucial insights into the future of medicine and why there's unprecedented hope in cancer treatment today.You can find Ross at: Website | Episode TranscriptIf you LOVED this episode, don't miss a single conversation in our Future of Medicine series, airing every Monday through December. Follow Good Life Project wherever you listen to podcasts to catch them all.Check out our offerings & partners: Join My New Writing Project: Awake at the WheelVisit Our Sponsor Page For Great Resources & Discount Codes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of The Oncology Brothers, we discussed the recent approval of Epcoritamab for relapsed refractory follicular lymphoma. Joined by Dr. Gilles Salles from Memorial Sloan Kettering, we dived into the EPCOR FL1 study, which highlighted the combination of Epcoritamab with rituximab and lenalidomide, showcasing significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rates. Key topics included: • The mechanism of action of Epcoritamab as a bispecific antibody targeting CD20 and CD3. • Study design and findings from the EPCOR FL1 trial. • Step-up dosing schedule and its implications for patient management. • Side effects to monitor, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). • The role of minimal residual disease (MRD) and ctDNA in treatment decisions. Join us as we explored the future of treatment options in follicular lymphoma and the potential impact on patient quality of life. 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 like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for more updates on the latest in oncology! #Epcoritamab #FollicularLymphoma #BispecificAntibody #CRS #Immunotherapy #OncologyBrothers #Lymphoma

In this episode of The Oncology Brothers, we discussed the recent approval of Epcoritamab for relapsed refractory follicular lymphoma. Joined by Dr. Gilles Salles from Memorial Sloan Kettering, we dived into the EPCOR FL1 study, which highlighted the combination of Epcoritamab with rituximab and lenalidomide, showcasing significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rates. Key topics included: • The mechanism of action of Epcoritamab as a bispecific antibody targeting CD20 and CD3. • Study design and findings from the EPCOR FL1 trial. • Step-up dosing schedule and its implications for patient management. • Side effects to monitor, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). • The role of minimal residual disease (MRD) and ctDNA in treatment decisions. Join us as we explored the future of treatment options in follicular lymphoma and the potential impact on patient quality of life. 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 like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell for more updates on the latest in oncology! #Epcoritamab #FollicularLymphoma #BispecificAntibody #CRS #Immunotherapy #OncologyBrothers #Lymphoma

In this episode of The Oncology Brothers, we dived into the pivotal study of MATTERHORN, which explored the addition of Durvalumab to perioperative FLOT chemotherapy for patients with resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. Join us as we welcome Dr. Yelena Y. Janjigian, a medical oncologist from Memorial Sloan Kettering and the lead author of the MATTERHORN study. Dr. Janjigian shared insights on the study's design, findings, and the implications for clinical practice, including: • The significance of the study in the context of recent FDA approvals and treatment advancements. • Key survival data, including a three-year overall survival rate of 68.6% with Durvalumab. • The feasibility of combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy and impact on surgical outcomes. • Management of side effects and clinical pearls for practitioners. We also discussed the potential for extrapolating this data to esophageal adenocarcinoma and the role of PD-L1 status in treatment decisions. Whether you're a seasoned oncologist or just starting in the field, this episode is packed with valuable information to help you provide the best care for your patients. 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 like, share, and subscribe for more practice-changing updates in oncology! #MATTERHORN #GastricCancer #Immunotherapy #Durvalumab #OncologyBrothers #GIOncology

In this episode, Joe Moore sits down with Dr. Jason Konner, a longtime oncologist who recently left his full-time clinical role at Memorial Sloan Kettering to devote himself to the emerging intersection of cancer care and psychedelics. Dr Konner shares how, after more than two decades treating people, he hit a wall. The accumulated grief, constant exposure to death, and intensity of oncology left him deeply burned out, though he didn't have that language for it at the time. A chance moment in a yoga class, overhearing someone say "ayahuasca retreat" just before he was scheduled for hernia surgery, became the turning point. Within a week, he was in the jungle. That first week with ayahuasca, followed later by work with mushrooms, "absolutely transformed" his life. His fear of death lifted. The burnout he hadn't even recognized in himself was both revealed and relieved. When he returned to his practice, Konner describes feeling like he suddenly had a "superpower": he could stay present, connected, and compassionate with patients facing advanced disease without collapsing under the emotional weight. He and Joe explore what this third path looks like: not the classic binary between either hardening and distancing as self-protection, or staying open-hearted and getting shattered. Instead, psychedelics helped him hold deep relationship with patients and families while maintaining inner stability and meaning. This opened space for authentic conversations about spirituality, fear, grief, and what it means to live with (or die from) cancer. From there, Dr Konner zooms out to critique the broader oncology system: The lack of training and support for oncologists around their own emotional and existential load, How little space there is for relational work even though it's central to healing, Why many support groups and standard psychiatric approaches (like reflexively prescribing SSRIs) often miss the mark for people dealing with cancer, How caregivers, partners, family members, and others are deeply affected but rarely truly supported. Joe and Jason then dig into psychedelics and oncology as a frontier: easing existential distress in patients with terminal cancer, the neglected suffering of caregivers, the potential role of psychedelics in helping people relate differently to death, and what it might mean for ICU use, aggressive end-of-life interventions, and overall healthcare costs if more people could make decisions from a place of peace rather than terror. Dr Konner also shares a striking ovarian cancer case that hinted at powerful immune changes after shamanic work, and why he believes we need new research paradigms that can honor the integrity of retreat and ceremonial settings while still learning from them. Finally, he talks about his early-stage project, Psychedelic Oncology, and his hope that the first wave of change starts with clinicians themselves becoming more psychedelic-literate—and, where appropriate, doing their own inner work—so better options can eventually reach the people who need them most. Learn more - https://psychedeliconcology.com/

On this episode of DGTL Voices, Ed interviews Mary Ann Conner, the Chief Nursing Informatics Officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering. They discuss Mary Ann's extensive career in nursing, her educational journey, and the evolution of nursing informatics. Mary Ann shares her insights on the importance of mentorship, the role of technology in nursing, and offers valuable advice for new and mid-career nurses. The conversation also touches on the future of nursing informatics, and the significance of caring in nursing practice.

Dr. Dennis Gross is the renowned dermatologist and the founder of Dr. Dennis Gross Skincare, a clinical-grade skincare brand rooted in science and results. Before launching his line, Dr. Gross worked as a skin cancer researcher at Memorial Sloan Kettering, where he developed a deep understanding of how skin behaves at a cellular level. His experience treating patients in his New York dermatology practice inspired him to create effective, non-irritating products that deliver visible results without downtime. The brand is best known for its Alpha Beta Daily Peels, which revolutionized at-home exfoliation. Combining medical expertise with clean, innovative formulations, Dr. Dennis Gross Skincare bridges the gap between professional treatments and everyday skincare. The line focuses on improving skin health through proven active ingredients, like vitamin C, retinol, and alpha hydroxy acids. Today, Dr. Gross continues to lead the brand with a philosophy centered on education, transparency, and evidence-based skincare.In this episode, Dr. Dennis Gross also discusses:Skin transformations and the emotions beneath themThe secret to radiant skin at home–the alpha beta peelsWhy collagen is the holy grail of skincareWhat electrolyte loss means for your skin healthInside their FDA-cleared 3-minute led treatmentDemystifying skin science in the age of social mediaWe hope you enjoy this episode and gain valuable insights into Dr. Dennis Gross' journey and the growth of Dr. Dennis Gross Skincare. Don't forget to subscribe to the Glam & Grow podcast for more in-depth conversations with the most incredible brands, founders, and more.Be sure to check out Dr. Dennis Gross at www.drdennisgross.com/ and on Instagram at @drdennisgrossRated #1 Best Beauty Business Podcast on FeedPostThis episode is brought to you by WavebreakLeading direct-to-consumer brands hire Wavebreak to turn email marketing into a top revenue driver.Most eCommerce brands don't email right... and it costs them. At Wavebreak, our eCommerce email marketing agency helps qualified brands recapture 7+ figures of lost revenue each year.From abandoned cart emails to Black Friday campaigns, our best-in-class team manage the entire process: strategy, design, copywriting, coding, and testing. All aimed at driving growth, profit, brand recognition, and most importantly, ROI.Curious if Wavebreak is right for you? Reach out at Wavebreak.co

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

In this special live episode of the SHE MD Podcast, Olivia Munn joins Dr. Thaïs Aliabadi, Mary Alice Haney, Dr. Shari Goldfarb, and Kristen Dahlgren, for a powerful Breast Cancer Awareness Month panel in New York City. The event coincided with NBC's Today Show coverage and the lighting of the Empire State Building in pink — marking the launch of a national conversation around early detection, AI, and prevention.Together, they explore how lifetime risk assessments, dense breast screening, and AI mammogram prediction tools like Clarity Breast are transforming breast health. The panel also discusses cancer vaccine research, genetic testing, and the importance of women knowing their individual risk scores.Listeners will hear Olivia's personal story of early detection after a high-risk score prompted further imaging, leading to her diagnosis and recovery. This episode offers clarity, action, and hope — empowering every listener to become their own health advocate and partner with their medical team.Subscribe to SHE MD Podcast for expert tips on PCOS, Endometriosis, fertility, and hormonal balance. Share with friends and visit the SHE MD website and Ovii for research-backed resources, holistic health strategies, and expert guidance on women's health and well-being.What You'll LearnHow lifetime risk assessment tools can identify breast cancer risk before symptoms appearWhy dense breast tissue requires supplemental screening beyond mammogramsHow AI predictive tools like Clarity Breast are revolutionizing early detectionThe promise of vaccine research and genetic testing in future breast cancer preventionKey Timestamps(00:00) Live event intro and Breast Cancer Awareness Month context(03:30) Olivia's story: risk score, MRI findings, and early diagnosis(13:00) Dr. Aliabadi and Dr. Goldfarb on dense breast screening and AI tools(16:00) Cancer vaccine and immunotherapy discussion with Kristen Dahlgren(27:00) Genetic testing and family history: understanding your risk(34:00) Audience Q&A: emotional recovery and advocacy(42:00) Is there support for young women being diagnosed with breast cancer?(51:30) Clarifying the term Risk AssessmentKey TakeawaysEvery woman should know her lifetime breast cancer risk scoreDense breasts may obscure cancers — MRI and ultrasound can save livesAI mammogram tools are changing detection from reactive to predictiveResearch into cancer vaccines offers hope for prevention and recurrence reductionAdvocacy and awareness remain key — early action leads to better outcomesGuest BiosOlivia MunnOlivia Munn is an actress, health advocate, and breast cancer survivor. After receiving a high lifetime risk assessment score, she underwent further imaging that revealed cancer across multiple quadrants, leading to a bilateral mastectomy. Since publicly sharing her diagnosis in 2024, she has dedicated her platform toward raising awareness about early detection, risk assessment, and empowering women with knowledge about their breast health.Dr. Shari Goldfarb, MDDr. Shari Goldfarb is a breast medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering, with a clinical focus on early and advanced breast cancer. Her research centers on survivorship, symptom management, fertility, sexual health, and quality of life for breast cancer patients. She participates in clinical trials aimed at improving outcomes for women during and after treatment.Kristen DahlgrenKristen Dahlgren is a former NBC correspondent who, after her own stage 2 breast cancer diagnosis, left journalism to found the Cancer Vaccine Coalition. She collaborates with top cancer centers to accelerate immunotherapy and vaccine development in breast cancer and advocates for preventive strategies beyond current standards.LinksOlivia Munn – https://www.instagram.com/oliviamunnDr. Shari Goldfarb – https://www.mskcc.org/profile/shari-goldfarbKristen Dahlgren – https://www.linkedin.com/in/kristen-dahlgren-886519292/Donna McKay – https://www.bcrf.org/teamResources MentionedBreast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF) – Funding for innovative breast cancer research and prevention programs

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

JCO PO author Dr. Asaf Maoz at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute shares insights into article, “Causes of Death Among Individuals with Lynch Syndrome in the Immunotherapy Era.” Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Dr. Maoz discuss the causes of death in individuals with LS and the evolving role of immunotherapy. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Hello, and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCOPO articles. I'm your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, podcast editor for JCO Precision Oncology and Associate Professor Medicine, at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center. Today, I'm super thrilled to be joined by Dr. Asaf Maoz, Medical Oncologist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and faculty at the Harvard Medical School, and also lead author on the JCO Precision Oncology article entitled "Causes of Death Among Individuals with Lynch Syndrome in the Immunotherapy Era." This publication will be a concurrent publication with an oral presentation at the annual CGA meeting. At the time of this recording, our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Asaf, I'm excited to welcome you on this podcast. Thank you for joining us today. Dr. Asaf Maoz: Thank you so much for highlighting our paper. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Absolutely. And I was just talking to you that we met several years back when you were a trainee, and it looks like you've worked a lot in this field now, and it's very exciting to see that you consider JCOPO as a relevant home for some of your work. And the topic that you have published on is of significant interest to trainees from a precision medicine standpoint, to oncologists in general, covers a lot of aspects of immunotherapy. So, I'm really excited to talk to you about all of this. Dr. Asaf Maoz: Me too, me too. And yeah, I think JCOPO has great content in the area of cancer genetics and has done a lot to disseminate the knowledge in that area. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Wonderful. So, let's get started and start off, given that we have hosts of different kinds of individuals who listen to this podcast, especially when driving from home to work or back, for the sake of making everything simple, can we start by asking you what is Lynch syndrome? How is it diagnosed? What are some of the main things to consider when you're trying to talk an individual where you suspect Lynch syndrome? Dr. Asaf Maoz: Lynch syndrome is an inherited predisposition to cancer, and it is common. So, we used to think that, or there's a general notion in the medical community that it is a rare condition, but we actually know now from multiple studies, including studies that look at the general population and do genetic testing regardless of any clinical phenotype, that Lynch syndrome is found in about 1 in 300 people in the general population. If you think about it in the United States, that means that there are over a million people living with Lynch syndrome in the United States. Unfortunately, most individuals with Lynch syndrome don't know they have Lynch syndrome at the current time, and that's where a lot of the efforts in the community are being made to help detect more individuals who have Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is caused by pathogenic germline variants in mismatch repair genes, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2, or as a result of pathogenic variants in EPCAM that cause silencing of the MSH2 gene. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Excellent. Thank you for that explanation. Now, one of the other things I also realized, similar to BRCA germline mutations, where you require a second hit for individuals with Lynch syndrome to have mismatch repair deficient cancers, you also require a second hit to have that second hit result in an MSI-high cancer. Could you help us understand the difference of these two concepts where generally Lynch syndrome is thought of to be cancers that are mismatch repair deficient, but that's not necessarily true for all cases as we see in your paper. Can you tease this out for us a little bit more? Dr. Asaf Maoz: Of course, of course. So, the germline defect is in one of the mismatch repair genes, and these genes are responsible for DNA mismatch repair, as their name implies. Now, in a normal cell, we think that one working copy is generally enough to maintain the mismatch repair machinery intact. What happens in tumors, as you alluded to, is that there is a second hit in the same mismatch repair gene that has the pathogenic germline variant, and that causes the mismatch repair machinery not to work anymore. And so what happens is that there is formation of mutations in the cancer cell that are not present in other cells in the body. And we know that there are specific types of mutations that are associated with defects in mismatch repair mechanisms, and those are associated a lot of times with frameshift mutations. And we have termed them ‘microsatellites'. So there are areas in the genome that have repeats, for example, you know, if you have AAAA or GAGA, and those areas are particularly susceptible to mutations when the mismatch repair machinery is not working. And so we can measure that with DNA microsatellite instability testing. But we can also get a sense of whether the mismatch repair machinery is functioning by looking at protein expression on the surface of cancer cells and by doing immunohistochemistry. More recently, we're also able to infer whether the mismatch repair machinery is working by doing next-generation sequencing and looking at many, many microsatellites and whether they have this DNA instability in the microsatellites. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Excellent explanation. As a segue to what you just mentioned, and this reminds me of some work that one of my good friends, collaborators, Amin Nassar, whom you also know, I believe, had done a year and a half back, was published in Cancer Cell as a brief report, I believe, where the concept was that when you look at these mismatch repair deficient cancers, there is a difference between NGS testing, IHC testing, and maybe to some extent, PCR testing, where you can have discordances. Have you seen that in your clinical experience? What are some of your thoughts there? And if a trainee were to ask, what would be the gold standard to test individuals where you suspect mismatch repair deficient-related Lynch syndrome cancers? How would you test those individuals? Dr. Asaf Maoz: We do sometimes see discordance, you know, from large series, the concordance rate is very high, and in most series it's over 95%. And so from a practical perspective, if we're thinking about the recommendation to screen all colorectal cancer and all endometrial cancer for mismatch repair deficiency, I think either PCR-based testing or immunohistochemistry is acceptable because the concordance rate is very high. There are rare cases where it is not concordant, doing multiple of the tests makes sense at that time. If you think about the difference between the tests, the immunohistochemistry looks at protein expression, which is a surrogate for whether there is mismatch repair deficiency or not, right? Because ultimately, the mismatch repair deficiency is manifested in the mutations. So if the PCR does not show microsatellite instability and now NGS does not show microsatellite instability, the IHC may be a false positive. At the end of the day, the functional analysis of whether there are actually unstable microsatellites either by PCR or by NGS is what I would consider more informative. But IHC again is an excellent test and concordant with those results in over 95% of cases. Now there is also an issue of sampling. It's possible that there's heterogeneity within the tumor. We published a case in JCOPO about heterogeneity of the mismatch repair status, and that was both by immunohistochemistry, but also by PCR. So there are some caveats and interpreting these tests does require some expertise, and I'm always happy to chat with trainees or whoever has an interesting or challenging case. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thanks again for that very easy to understand explanation. Now going to management strategies, could you elaborate a little bit upon the neo-adjuvant data currently, or the metastatic data which I think more people are familiar with for immunotherapy in individuals with MSI-high cancers? Dr. Asaf Maoz: Yeah, that's an excellent question and obviously a very broad topic. Individuals with Lynch syndrome typically develop tumors that are mismatch repair deficient or microsatellite unstable. And we have seen over the last 15 years or so that these tumors, because they have a lot of mutations and because these mutations are very immunogenic, we have seen that they respond very well to immunotherapy. And this has been shown across disease sites and has been shown across disease settings. And for that reason, immunotherapy was approved for MSI-high or mismatch repair deficient cancer regardless of the anatomic site. It was the first tissue-agnostic approval by the FDA in 2017. And so there are exciting studies both in the metastatic setting where we see individuals who respond to immunotherapy for many years, and one could wonder whether their cancer is going to come back or not. And also in the earlier setting, for example, the Cercek et al. study in the New England Journal from Sloan Kettering, where they showed that neoadjuvant immunotherapy can cause durable responses for rectal cancer that is mismatch repair deficient. And in that series, the patients did not require surgery or radiation, which is standard of care for rectal cancer otherwise. And there's also exciting data in the adjuvant space, as was presented in ASCO by Dr. Sinicrope, the ATOMIC study, and many more efforts to bring immunotherapy into the treatment landscape for individuals with MSI-high cancer, including individuals with Lynch syndrome. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: A lot of activity, especially in the neo-adjuvant and adjuvant space over the last two years or so. Now going to the actual reason why we are here is your study. Could you tell us why you looked at this idea of patients who had Lynch syndrome and died, and the reasons for their death? What was the thought that triggered this project? Dr. Asaf Maoz: As we were talking about, we now know that immunotherapy really has changed the treatment landscape for individuals with Lynch syndrome, and that most cancers that individuals with Lynch syndrome do have this mismatch repair deficiency. But we also know that individuals with Lynch syndrome can develop tumors that do not have mismatch repair deficiency, and we call them mismatch repair proficient or microsatellite stable. And there was a series from Memorial Sloan Kettering showing that in colorectal cancer, about 10% of the tumors that individuals with Lynch syndrome developed did not have mismatch repair deficiency. In addition to that, we anecdotally saw that some of our patients with Lynch syndrome died of causes that were not mismatch repair deficient tumors. We wanted to see how that has changed since immunotherapy was approved in a tissue-agnostic manner, meaning that we could look at this regardless of where the cancer started, because we would anticipate that if the tumor was mismatch repair deficient, the patient would be able to access immunotherapy as standard of care. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you. And then you looked at different aspects of correlations with regards to individuals that had an MSI-high cancer with Lynch syndrome or an MSS cancer with Lynch syndrome. Could you elaborate on some of the important findings that you identified as well as some of the unusual findings that perhaps we did not know about, even though the sample size is limited, but what were some of the unique things that you did identify through this project? Dr. Asaf Maoz: The first question was what cause is leading to death in individuals with Lynch syndrome? And we had 54 patients that we identified that had died since the approval of immunotherapy in 2017, 44 of which died of cancer-related causes. And when we looked at cancer-related causes of death, we wanted to know how many of those were due to mismatch repair deficient tumors versus mismatch repair proficient tumors or MS-stable tumors. And we found, somewhat surprisingly, that 43% of patients in our cohort actually died of tumors that were microsatellite stable or mismatch repair proficient, meaning of tumors that are not typically associated with Lynch syndrome. This is not entirely surprising as a cause of death because we know that immunotherapy does not typically work for tumors that are microsatellite stable. And so in the metastatic setting, there are much less cases of durable remissions with treatment. But it was helpful to have that figure as an important benchmark. There are previous studies about causes of death in Lynch syndrome, and particularly from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database in Europe. Those have provided really important information about cause of death by cancer site, but they typically don't have mismatch repair status and are more difficult to interpret in that regard. They also don't include a large number of individuals who have PMS2 Lynch syndrome, which is the most common, but least penetrant form of Lynch syndrome. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: As far as the subtype of pathogenic germline variants is concerned, did you notice anything unusual? And I've always had this question, and you may know more about this data, is: In the bigger context of immunotherapy, does the type of the pathogenic germline variant for Lynch syndrome associated MSI-high cancers, does that impact or have an association with the kind of outcomes, how soon a cancer progresses or how many exceptional responders perhaps with MSI-high cancers actually have a certain specific pathogenic germline variant? Dr. Asaf Maoz: That's an excellent question, and certainly we need more data in that space. We know that the type of germline mutation, or the gene in which there is a germline pathogenic variant, determines to a large degree the cancer risk, right? So we know that individuals who have germline pathogenic variants in MLH1 or MSH2 have a much higher colorectal cancer risk than, for example, PMS2. We know that for PMS2, the risks are more limited to colorectal and endometrial, and may be lower risk of other cancers. We also know that, you know, the spectrum of disease may change based on the pathogenic germline variants. For example, individuals who have MSH2 associated Lynch syndrome have more risk of additional cancers in other organs like the urinary tract and other less common Lynch-associated tumors. The question about response to therapy is one where we have much less information. There are studies that are trying to assess this, but I don't think the answer is there yet. Some of the non-clinical data looks at how many mutations there are based on the pathogenic variant and what the nature of those mutations are, whether they're more frameshift or others. But I think we still need more clinical data to understand whether the response to immunotherapy differs. It's also complicated by the fact that the immunotherapy landscape is changing, especially in the metastatic setting, now with the approval of combination ipilimumab and nivolumab for first-line treatment of colorectal cancer that is microsatellite unstable. But in our study, we did find that, as you would expect, there is an enrichment in MS-stable cancers among those with PMS2 Lynch syndrome. Again, our denominator is those who died, right? So this is not the best way to look at the question whether this is overall true, that is more addressed by the study that Sloan Kettering published. But we do see, as we would anticipate, that there are more microsatellite stable cancers among those with PMS2 Lynch syndrome that died. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: A lot to uncover there for sure. This study and perhaps some of the other work that you're doing is slowly advancing our understanding of some of these concepts. So I'd like to shift gears to a couple of provocative questions that I generally like to ask. The first is, in your opinion, and you may or may not have data to back this up, which is okay, and that's why we're having a conversation about it. In your opinion, do you think the type or the quality of the neoantigen is different based on the pathogenic germline variant and a Lynch syndrome associated MSI-high cancer? Dr. Asaf Maoz: I think there are some data out there that, you know, I can't cite off the top of my mind, but there are some data out there that suggest that that may be the case. I think the key question is the quality, right? I think that whether these differences that are found on a molecular level also translate to a clinical difference in response is something that is unknown at this moment. Some people hypothesize that if the tumor has less neoantigens, there's less of a response to immunotherapy. But I think we really need to be careful before making those assertions on a clinical level. I do think it's a really important question that needs to be answered, among others because, you know, in the colorectal space, for example, where we have both the option of doing ipilimumab with nivolumab and the option of doing pembrolizumab, we don't really know which patients need the CTLA-4 blockade versus which patients can receive PD-1 blockade alone and avoid the potential excess toxicity of the CTLA-4 blockade. There are a lot of interesting questions there that still need to be answered. And of course, individuals with Lynch syndrome are just a fraction of those individuals who have MSI-high cancer. So there's also the question about whether non-Lynch syndrome associated MSI-high cancer responds differently to immunotherapy than Lynch syndrome associated MSI-high cancer. A lot of very interesting questions in the field for sure. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Absolutely. My second question is more about trying to understand the role of ctDNA, MRD monitoring in individuals with Lynch syndrome. If somebody has a germline, you know, Lynch syndrome MSI-high cancer, when you do a tumor-informed ctDNA assessment, what do you capture generally there? Because, and this question stems from a discussion I've had with somebody regarding EGFR lung cancer, since I treat individuals with lung cancer, and the concept generally is that even if the tissue showed EGFR, but for MRD monitoring, when you do a barcoded sequence of different tumor specific mutations, it's not actually the EGFR that they track in the blood when they do ctDNA assessment. But from a Lynch syndrome standpoint, if you have a germline, right, which is the first hit, and then you have the somatic in the tumor, which is the second hit, are you aware or have you tried to look into this where what is exactly being followed if one had to follow MRD in a Lynch syndrome MSI-high colorectal cancer? Dr. Asaf Maoz: I think a lot of the MRD assays are proprietary, and so we don't receive information about what the mutations that are being tracked are. In general, the idea is to track mutations that we would not expect to disappear as part of resistant mechanisms. We want these to be truncal mutations. We want these to be mutations in which resistance is not expected to result in reversion mutations. But what specifically is being tracked is something that I don't know because these assays, the tumor-informed ones, are proprietary, and we don't get the results regarding specific mutations. When it's circulating tumor DNA that is not necessarily tumor-informed, we do get those results, but that is less so about the specific selection of mutations. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for clarifying that question to some extent, of course, as you said, we don't know a lot, and we don't know what we don't know. That's the most important thing that I've learned in the process of understanding precision medicine and genomics, and it's a very fast-paced evolving field. Last question related to your project, what is the next step? Are you planning any next steps as a bigger multicenter study or validation of some sort? Dr. Asaf Maoz: There are two big questions that this study raises. One, is this true across multiple other sites, right? Because this is a single center study, and we really need additional centers to look at their data and validate whether they are also seeing that a substantial portion of deaths in individuals with Lynch syndrome are attributable to mismatch repair proficient cancer. The other question is whether we can look at specifically MSI-high cancer versus MS-stable cancer and understand what the mortality rate for each of those are. From a clinical perspective, it's important to counsel individuals with Lynch syndrome about general cancer screening outside of mismatch repair deficient tumors and to understand that there is also a risk of mismatch repair proficient tumors and that treatment for those tumors would be different. There's a lot of work to be done in the future. Another major area of need is to see whether tumors that are microsatellite stable can be sensitized to immunotherapy, and that is beyond the Lynch syndrome field, but that is something that certainly would benefit these individuals with Lynch syndrome who develop mismatch repair proficient cancer. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: That's very interesting to hear, and we'll look forward to seeing some of those developments shape in the next few years. Now, I'd like to spend a minute, minute and a half on you specifically as a researcher, clinician, scientist. Could you briefly highlight - because I remember meeting you several years back as a trainee, with your interest in genomics, computational research - could you briefly tell us what led you to hereditary cancer syndromes based on your research and work? What are some of the things that you learned along the way that other early career investigators can perhaps take lessons from? Dr. Asaf Maoz: Big questions there, thanks for asking. I got interested in the field of hereditary cancer syndromes when I came to the United States and started doing lab research in Stephen Gruber's lab at the time at USC. He's now at City of Hope. And my interest was originally looking at immunotherapy and immunology, but I went to the case conferences where we were learning about individuals with hereditary cancer, and those were kind of earlier days where we were still trying to figure out how to test and what the implications for these individuals would be. And through fellowship, I was also very interested in that, and I did my senior fellowship years with Dr. Yurgelun here at Dana-Farber, who is the director of the Lynch Syndrome Center. And I I think it's the combination between being able to treat individuals based on precision medicine and what the germline mutation is, but also the ability to prevent cancer and to develop strategies to intercept cancer early that is really appealing to me in this field. It's also a great field to be in because it's a small field. If you come to the CGA-IGC meeting, you'll be able to interact with everyone. Everyone is super collaborative, super nice, and I really recommend it to trainees. The CGA-IGC annual meeting is really a great opportunity to learn more and experience some of the advancement specifically in the GI hereditary space. Lessons for trainees. I think there are a lot of lessons that I could think about, but I think finding strong and supportive mentors is one of the things that has helped me most. I think that just having close relationship with your mentor, having frequent discussions and honest discussions about what is feasible, what is going to make a difference for your patients and your research and what you want to focus on is really important. And so I think if I had to choose one thing, I would say choose a mentor that you trust, that you feel you have a good relationship with, and that has the availability to support you. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you so much for those insightful comments, and thank you for sharing with us your journey, your project, and some of your interesting thoughts on this concept of hereditary cancers. Hopefully, we'll see more of this work being published in JCOPO through your lab or work from others. Dr. Asaf Maoz: Thank you so much. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at ASCO.org/podcasts. 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 HSS Presents, rheumatologist Dr. Anne Bass is joined by Dr. Deanna Jannat-Khah of HSS and Dr. Michael Postow of Memorial Sloan Kettering to explore immune checkpoint inhibitor–induced arthritis. They discuss how life-saving immunotherapies for cancer can trigger inflammatory joint disease, the challenges of balancing tumor control with autoimmune toxicity, and the latest evidence on safe use of steroids and biologics. The panel also highlights ongoing research into mechanisms, phenotypes, and long-term outcomes, underscoring the importance of multidisciplinary care for cancer patients who develop musculoskeletal complications from immunotherapy.

Before the Pink Ribbon, talking about breast cancer was taboo. In this episode, we uncover the shocking and inspiring history of breast cancer awareness and the three women who defied a dismissive medical establishment to save millions of lives. Author Judith L. Pearson joins us to discuss her groundbreaking book, "Radical Sisters," revealing how Shirley Temple Black, Rose Kushner, and Evelyn Lauder launched a revolution from their hospital beds and boardrooms. How did a child star, a determined journalist, and a cosmetics mogul tear down the wall of silence and change medicine forever?This deep dive into the evolution of breast cancer advocacy explores the dark ages of treatment and the courageous fight for patient rights. Judith L. Pearson details the brutal radical mastectomy history, specifically the disfiguring Halstead radical mastectomy, a procedure that persisted long after it was proven ineffective. We revisit the pivotal moment of Shirley Temple Black breast cancer advocacy when the beloved star held an unprecedented 1972 press conference from her hospital room, urging women not to be afraid and to perform self-exams. The episode then follows the tenacious activist Rose Kushner and the one-step procedure, a barbaric practice where women went in for a biopsy and woke up with their breasts removed without their consent. Kushner's relentless research and in-your-face advocacy, including a daring appearance on the Donahue show, forced the medical community to confront its paternalism. Finally, we explore the origins of the Evelyn Lauder Pink Ribbon Campaign and her "department store" concept for cancer care at Memorial Sloan Kettering, which was born from the frustrating and fragmented patient experience. This interview sheds light on the complete history of breast cancer awareness, from comparing the fight for funding to the AIDS movement to the discovery of the BRCA gene mutation, revealing a story of courage, tragedy, and ultimate triumph.About Our Guest:Judith L. Pearson is an author and historical biographer specializing in uncovering the stories of overlooked heroes. In her book, "Radical Sisters: The Women Who Pushed for and Paved the Way to Breast Cancer Awareness," she reveals the untold story of the three women whose personal battles and public advocacy transformed medicine and created the modern breast cancer movement.Timestamps / Chapters:(00:00) The Three Women Who Transformed Breast Cancer Awareness(03:31) Shirley Temple Black's Groundbreaking 1972 Announcement(06:05) Rose Kushner's Daring Appearance on the Donahue Show(09:07) The Near-Death Experiences That Shaped the "Radical Sisters"(14:38) How Shirley Temple's Press Conference Changed Everything(19:22) The Brutal History of the Halstead Radical Mastectomy(24:19) Rose Kushner's Fight Against the "One-Step Procedure"(29:56) Evelyn Lauder's Philanthropic Vision Before and After Her Diagnosis(32:28) Learning from the AIDS Movement to Fight for Funding(36:04) Evelyn Lauder's "Department Store" Concept for Cancer Care(40:10) The True Origin Story of the Pink Ribbon Campaign

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

This month, the Department of Health and Human Services terminated almost $500 million in mRNA vaccine development grants and contracts. While HHS has said that these cuts won't affect mRNA cancer research, some researchers have expressed concern about the impact on their ongoing work. In light of these developments, we're revisiting a conversation from February.A team at Memorial Sloan Kettering is developing an mRNA vaccine for pancreatic cancer, which is notoriously difficult to treat. A few years ago, the team embarked on a small trial to test the vaccine's safety. Sixteen patients with pancreatic cancer received it, and half of them had a strong immune response. A follow-up study found that in six of those patients, the cancer hadn't relapsed after three years.Host Flora Lichtman spoke to study author Vinod Balachandran about the work, which has not yet been affected by the cuts, according to Memorial Sloan Kettering.Guest: Dr. Vinod Balachandran is an associate attending surgeon and Director of The Olayan Center for Cancer Vaccines at Memorial Sloan Kettering in New York, New York.Transcripts for each segment will be available after the show airs on sciencefriday.com.  Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

In this episode, we speak with Kevin Bhatt, Managing Partner at Long Ridge Equity Partners, a specialist growth equity firm focused on the financial and business technology sectors.  Kevin joined Long Ridge in 2010 and serves as a Managing Partner and member of the firm's Investment Committee. He leads the overall strategic direction of the firm and oversees deal teams responsible for sourcing, evaluating, and managing portfolio companies.  Throughout his investing career, Kevin has served on the boards of numerous public and private financial and business services companies, working closely with visionary leadership teams to build category-defining businesses. Long Ridge was recognized by GrowthCap as a Top Growth Equity Firm of 2024. Kevin supports Memorial Sloan Kettering. To learn more about this organization click here. I am your host RJ Lumba. We hope you enjoy the show. If you like the episode click to follow.

In this episode of Elevate Care, host Keri Perez engages in an insightful conversation with Tomya Watt, Chief People Officer at AMN Healthcare, about the evolving role of Chief Human Resource Officers (CHROs). Together, they explore how CHROs have transitioned from transactional roles to becoming strategic, solution-driven partners in the C-suite. The discussion highlights the power of data in driving workforce transformation, the importance of aligning talent strategies with business goals, and how holistic workforce solutions and technology integration can elevate patient care and organizational success.Chapters00:00 The Evolving Role of CHROs06:08 Holistic Workforce Solutions and Technology Integration09:23 Aligning Talent Strategies for Workforce TransformationWant to keep the conversation going?Join Tomya for an upcoming Becker's Healthcare webinar:Turn Workforce Risk Into Enterprise Value: The CHRO Playbook

Guests: Kenya DeJarnette, Yoga Therapist and Cancer Survivor Tina Paul, Yoga Therapist and Instructor at Memorial Sloan Kettering and MUIHIn this powerful episode, host Dr. Amy Wheeler sits down with yoga therapist Kenya DeJarnette and her former professor Tina Paul for a deeply moving conversation on healing, resilience, and finding one's path through cancer and beyond. Kenya shares her transformational journey from a breast cancer diagnosis to discovering yoga therapy as a lifeline—a practice that reconnected her to her body, her faith, and her purpose.Through heartfelt storytelling, Kenya reflects on how yoga helped her navigate infertility, grief, trauma, and the physical toll of cancer treatment. With grace and courage, she opens up about how being part of a supportive yoga and cancer care community reawakened her fighting spirit and taught her to embrace life with newfound openness.Tina Paul offers a behind-the-scenes look at the integrative yoga therapy work being done at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, describing the role of therapeutic presence, breath, movement, and research in supporting those undergoing cancer treatment.Together, the three explore themes of:Nervous system dysregulation and the role of breath and yoga in recoveryFaith, spirituality, and openness to healing across different modalitiesYoga Nidra as a gateway to deeper rest and reconnectionCommunity as medicine for trauma and illnessThe importance of clinical training in yoga therapyHow yoga can bring people back to their true selfKey Quotes:

The mirror doesn't lie, but it doesn't have to be your enemy either. As wrinkles, dryness, and sagging skin become a part of your reality, it's easy to feel betrayed by your reflection. But what if midlife skin changes weren't a crisis but a chance to evolve your skincare game?In this episode, board-certified dermatologist Dr. Mary Alice Mina joins us to share what actually works for skin over 50 – and trust me, it's probably not what you've been hearing on social media. With her extensive training from top institutions like Harvard and Memorial Sloan Kettering, Dr. Mina cuts through the noise with refreshing honesty, tackling everything from the sunscreen debate to the viral trend of putting vaginal estrogen on your face (spoiler: it works!).We dive into practical tips for navigating midlife skin, including how to use tretinoin without the peeling nightmare, why evening out your complexion is a game-changer, and whether those pricey red light masks are worth it. Plus, Dr. Mina shares why having a positive mindset about aging can actually improve your skin and health.Whether you're dealing with thinning hair (we've got oral minoxidil covered), thinking about your first cosmetic procedure, or just looking for a skin routine that really works, this episode offers straightforward, expert advice. Get ready to improve your relationship with the mirror and start feeling confident in your own skin.Like what you hear? Subscribe for more midlife health tips!You can find Dr. Mary Alice Mina at  https://www.theskinreal.com/https://www.atlantadermsurgery.com/The Skin Real Podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-skin-real/id1638619358https://www.instagram.com/drminaskin_________________________________________Are you ready to reclaim your midlife body and health? I went through my own personal journey through menopause, the struggle with midsection weight gain, and feeling run-down. Faster Way, a transformative six-week group program, set me on the path to sustainable change. I'd love to work with you! Let me help you reach your health and fitness goals.https://www.fasterwaycoach.com/?aid=MicheleFolanHave questions about Faster Way? Please email me at:mfolanfasterway@gmail.com After trying countless products that overpromised and underdelivered, RIMAN skincare finally gave me real, visible results—restoring my glow, firmness, and confidence in my skin at 61. RIMAN Korea's #1 Skincare Line - https://michelefolan.riman.com*Transcripts are done with AI and may not be perfectly accurate.**This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute the practice of medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare services, including the giving of medical advice. The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice for any medical condition they may have and should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such conditions.

When your doctor says you need “cancer treatment,” do you know what that actually means?Most people immediately think of chemotherapy. But if you or someone you love is facing a cancer diagnosis, understanding the full range of treatment options could be the difference between feeling overwhelmed and feeling empowered.Dr. Katie Deming sits down with Dr. Jason Konner, a medical oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, to break down the three main types of systemic cancer treatment used today: chemotherapy, targeted therapies, and immunotherapies.Chapters:03:43 – Three Main Types of Cancer Treatment16:34 – Why First-Line Therapies Matter20:48 – Combining Holistic and Conventional Care31:23 – Essential Questions to Ask Your Oncologist43:42 – When and Why to Seek a Second OpinionDr. Konnor shares the insider perspective on second opinions, what those complex drug names really mean, and how to build the kind of relationship with your medical team that leads to better outcomes.You'll learn how some patients unknowingly sabotage their own care and what questions can instantly make you a more informed patient. Listen and learn how to walk into any oncologist's office with confidence, ask the right questions, and truly understand your options.Don't let medical jargon and complex choices keep you in the dark when clear thinking matters most.Reserve Your Spot for the June PSYCH-K® Online Workshop: https://www.katiedeming.com/psych-k-june-2025 Transform your hydration with the system that delivers filtered, mineralized, and structured water all in one. Spring Aqua System: https://springaqua.info/drkatieMORE FROM KATIE DEMING M.D. Download Your Free Webinar & Ultimate Guide to Water Fasting to Heal Cancer and Chronic Illness https://www.katiedeming.com/prolonged-water-fasting/ Work with Dr. Katie: www.katiedeming.comEmail: INFO@KATIEDEMING.COM 6 Pillars of Healing Cancer Workshop Series - Click Here to Enroll Follow Dr. Katie Deming on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/katiedemingmd/ Please Support the Show Share this episode with a friend or family member Give a Review on Spotify Give a Review on Apple Podcast DISCLAIMER: The Born to Heal Podcast is intended for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for seeking professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Individual medical histories are unique; therefore, this episode should not be used to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease without consulting your healthcare provider.

Most AI in healthcare promises superintelligence—but what if that's the wrong goal entirely?In this episode, Michael and Halle speak with Othman Laraki, co-founder and CEO of Color Health, to talk about why real-world care doesn't need a perfect model—it needs a better system. Othman breaks down how Color evolved from a consumer genetics startup into a nationwide virtual cancer clinic, why most diagnostics businesses fail, and how AI can actually support clinicians without trying to replace them.We cover:

On today's episode of "Conversations On Dance", we are joined by Abigail Simon, ballerina, dancer agent, mother, wife and survivor extraordinaire. Abigail takes us on her journey as a baby ballerina at the School Of American Ballet, through to her professional career at American Ballet Theater and the Joffrey, and finally her exploration of musical theater. Her incredible strength and resolve will be on full display at "Dance Against Cancer" this May 19th when she returns to the stage after her own battle against the disease. All performance information for this incredible fundraiser, including programming and ticket information: https://dacny.acsgala.org/. For those who cannot attend but wish to make a donation to one of the organizations mentioned by Abigail, you can find links below.Resources and places to donate in Abigail's Honor:American Cancer Society: https://www.cancer.org/donate.html5 under 40: https://5under40.org/Memorial Sloan Kettering: https://giving.mskcc.org/LINKS:Website: conversationsondancepod.comInstagram: @conversationsondanceMerch: https://bit.ly/cod-merchYouTube: https://bit.ly/youtube-CODJoin our email list: https://bit.ly/COD-email Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Pancreatic cancer is notoriously difficult to treat, and about 90% of diagnosed patients die from the disease. A team at Memorial Sloan Kettering has been working to improve those outcomes by developing a new mRNA vaccine for pancreatic cancer.A few years ago, the team embarked on a small trial to test the vaccine's safety. Sixteen patients with pancreatic cancer received it, and even though it was a small study, the results were promising: Half the participants had an immune response, and in those patients the cancer hadn't relapsed after 18 months.This week, the team released a new study in Nature following those same patients, and found six out of eight who responded to the vaccine in the first study did not have their cancer return more than three years later.Joining host Flora Lichtman to talk about these results, and what they could mean for the future of cancer treatment, is study author and surgeon Dr. Vinod Balachandran, director of The Olayan Center for Cancer Vaccines at Memorial Sloan Kettering, based in New York City.Transcripts for each segment will be available after the show airs on sciencefriday.com.  Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

In this episode, Lisa welcomes with Dr. Nicole Saphier, a radiologist and director of breast cancer imaging at Memorial Sloan Kettering, FOX News Health Expert, and more. The discussion spans key health topics, including the nuanced conversation around vaccines, the resurgence of measles outbreaks due to declining vaccination rates, and the rising incidence of breast cancer among younger women. Dr. Saphier emphasizes the importance of informed, balanced health dialogues and advocates for personal choice in vaccination. She also offers practical health tips, such as engaging in enjoyable physical activities, consuming a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, and minimizing hormone and antibiotic intake. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the CLay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.