Branch of medicine dealing with cancer
POPULARITY
Categories
We are thrilled to be joined by the co-founder of the Home Edit. She is an Emmy-nominated, NY Times best-selling author, a mom, a wife and a breast cancer survivor - the amazing Clea Shearer. Clea is here to talk about her shocking breast cancer diagnosis at the age of 40, the ongoing reconstruction complications that she has had to endure over the past three years and the unexpected lessons that have come with all of it. Clea's new book is aptly called Cancer is Complicated and she is here to tell us all about how true that statement really is!
Nursing Excellence in Cancer Care - Cancer Nurses Society of Australia Podcast
In Episode 22, we explore the importance of communication with individuals living with cancer. Lisa Sheeran, a Breast Cancer Clinical Nurse Consultant, and Maria Ftanou, the Director of the Psychosocial Oncology Unit at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Melbourne, discuss "Oncology Unscripted: Guiding Patients through Cancer Treatment." They share best-practice examples for helping patients navigate their diagnosis whilst dealing with the complex and diverse emotions that arise during their diagnosis and treatment.
Despite recent scientific progress, society and particularly the media oversimplifies, or sensationalises cancer. The way that cancer is portrayed does not reflect the reality for patients today. We've created a new chapter, ‘The Adventure of the Silent Hiss', to ‘The Return of Sherlock Holmes' collection of short stories, which sees the famous detective navigate a cancer diagnosis while successfully solving another mystery. Written in collaboration with patients and narrated by voice actor and cancer survivor, Brett Harman, the new chapter aims to shift the narrative to better reflect the fact that advances in treatment and detection are helping many people with the disease live better and longer lives. Whether cancer comes at the beginning, middle or end of a person's life, it is never the whole story and does not need to define it. This story, inspired by characters created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, was commissioned and funded by Pfizer Ltd. It takes artistic licence but is informed by insights from people living with cancer. It is intended for the UK general public and is not meant to replace the advice of a qualified health professional. PP-UNP-GBR-13946 / December 2025 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Featuring perspectives from Dr Gottfried E Konecny, moderated by Dr Stephen "Fred" Divers, including the following topics: Updates in Ovarian Cancer (OC) 2025 — Dr Konecny (0:00) Case: A woman in her mid 50s with ovarian cancer and a PALB2 germline mutation — Dr Mulherin (17:15) Case: A woman in her early 60s with Stage IVB fallopian tube carcinoma and a BRCA2 germline mutation — Dr Yannucci (26:27) Case: A woman in her mid 60s with OC and a BRCA2 somatic mutation who develops cytopenias on maintenance olaparib — Dr Lamar (35:47) Case: A woman in her early 70s with HER2 IHC 2+, ER-expressing, FOLR1-positive OC — Dr Warsch (42:54) CE information and select publications
Featuring perspectives from Dr Manish A Shah, moderated by Dr Stephen "Fred" Divers, including the following topics: Highlights and Principles of Management of Metastatic Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma — Dr Shah (0:00) Case: A man in his early 50s with microsatellite instability-high localized esophageal adenocarcinoma — Dr Mulherin (15:24) Case: A woman in her late 60s with HER2-positive (IHC 3+) and HER2 TKD-mutant metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma — Dr Warsch (25:34) Case: A woman in her early 70s with HER2-positive (IHC 3+), PD-L1-negative, CLDN18.2-negative metastatic gastric cancer — Dr Mulherin (28:15) Case: A woman in her early 70s with metastatic gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (PD-L1 CPS 15) who begins treatment with FOLFOX/nivolumab and subsequently is found to have CLDN18.2 overexpression — Dr Lamar (35:23) Case: A man in his mid 40s with CLDN18.2-positive metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma (PD-L1 10%) who receives mFOLFOX6 and zolbetuximab — Dr Yannucci (42:54) CE information and select publications
Dr Manish A Shah from Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York, summarizes the treatment landscape and reviews relevant clinical datasets for patients with gastroesophageal cancers. CME information and select publications here.
Dr Manish A Shah from Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York, summarizes the treatment landscape and reviews relevant clinical datasets for patients with gastroesophageal cancers. CME information and select publications here.
Visit https://longevitybuilders.com/to discover book and The Longevity Builder Health Lab.Episode SummaryFor decades, the standard medical advice for cancer patients was simple: "Rest. Take it easy. Avoid exertion." Today's guest has spent her career proving that advice is not just outdated—it is dangerous.In this episode, Shane Stubbs sits down with Dr. Kathryn Schmitz, the world's leading authority in Exercise Oncology. Dr. Schmitz is the scientist who literally wrote the book on moving through cancer. She spearheaded the "Exercise is Medicine" initiative and has led over $30 million in research funding to prove that exercise changes the biology of cancer.We dive deep into why building a resilient body is your best defense, the specific "Move, Lift, Eat, Sleep, Log" framework, and how resistance training impacts survivorship.PLUS: Stay tuned until the very end for a "Science Spotlight" Bonus Segment. Shane breaks down new research highlighted by Dr. Rhonda Patrick on "Shear Stress"—explaining the physics of how vigorous exercise can mechanically destroy circulating tumor cells and reverse heart aging by 20 years.The Paradigm Shift: Why the old advice to "rest" during cancer treatment is being replaced by a prescription for movement.The Science: Dr. Schmitz's $30M+ research journey and her role in writing the ACSM guidelines for cancer survivors.The Protocol: The "Move, Lift, Eat, Sleep, Log" framework for building a body that can withstand the "Big Four" (Cancer, Heart Disease, Metabolic Dysfunction, Neurodegeneration).Exercise as Medicine: How specific doses of activity can alleviate symptoms, improve chemotherapy tolerance, and boost survival rates.BONUS Segment: The physics of Shear Stress. We discuss Dr. Rhonda Patrick's breakdown of how high-intensity blood flow can kill Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) and scrub your arteries.Dr. Kathryn Schmitz is a Distinguished Professor of Public Health Sciences and a Professor of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. A trailblazer in the field of Exercise Oncology, she served as the President of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and founded the Moving Through Cancer initiative.With a PhD in Exercise Physiology, an MPH in Epidemiology, and over 300 peer-reviewed scientific papers, Dr. Schmitz is the foremost voice on the intersection of movement and malignancy. She is the author of the book Moving Through Cancer.Book: Moving Through Cancer by Dr. Kathryn SchmitzInitiative: Moving Through Cancer (ACSM)Research Spotlight: Dr. Rhonda Patrick on Shear Stress & Circulating Tumor CellsReady to put this science into practice? Don't just listen—execute.Join the Longevity Builder Health Lab to access the protocols, community, and tools you need to build a body that lasts.
Dr Gottfried E Konecny from the University of California, Los Angeles, summarizes the treatment landscape and reviews relevant clinical datasets for patients with ovarian cancer. CME information and select publications here.
In this compassionate and insightful episode of Rob McConnell Interviews, Rob speaks with Dr. Stephen Garrett Marcus, MD, a leading medical expert and author of Complications of Cancer, to shed light on the often overlooked challenges faced by patients and caregivers throughout the cancer journey. Dr. Marcus explains the biological, emotional, and systemic complications that arise not just from the disease itself but also from its treatments, offering a clear understanding of what patients truly endure. From pain management and immune dysfunction to treatment side effects, psychological strain, and quality-of-life concerns, he provides an accessible yet deeply informed perspective that empowers families with knowledge. This thoughtful conversation emphasizes humanity, hope, and the vital role of education in navigating one of life's most difficult battles.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-x-zone-radio-tv-show--1078348/support.Please note that all XZBN radio and/or television shows are Copyright © REL-MAR McConnell Meda Company, Niagara, Ontario, Canada – www.rel-mar.com. For more Episodes of this show and all shows produced, broadcasted and syndicated from REL-MAR McConell Media Company and The 'X' Zone Broadcast Network and the 'X' Zone TV Channell, visit www.xzbn.net. For programming, distribution, and syndication inquiries, email programming@xzbn.net.We are proud to announce the we have launched TWATNews.com, launched in August 2025.TWATNews.com is an independent online news platform dedicated to uncovering the truth about Donald Trump and his ongoing influence in politics, business, and society. Unlike mainstream outlets that often sanitize, soften, or ignore stories that challenge Trump and his allies, TWATNews digs deeper to deliver hard-hitting articles, investigative features, and sharp commentary that mainstream media won't touch.These are stories and articles that you will not read anywhere else.Our mission is simple: to expose corruption, lies, and authoritarian tendencies while giving voice to the perspectives and evidence that are often marginalized or buried by corporate-controlled media
Featuring perspectives from Dr Kerry Rogers, moderated by Dr Stephen "Fred" Divers, including the following topics: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) — Dr Rogers (0:00) Case: A man in his mid 70s with CLL and a history of atrial fibrillation — Dr Lamar (13:08) Case: A fit man in his early 80s with IGHV-unmutated, TP53-mutant symptomatic CLL — Dr Mulherin (21:16) Case: A woman in her mid 80s with IGHV-mutated recurrent CLL who receives pirtobrutinib — Dr Warsch (32:41) Case: A woman in her late 70s with recurrent del(17p) CLL who receives venetoclax/obinutuzumab — Dr Yannucci (44:52) CE information and select publications
Featuring perspectives from Dr Justin F Gainor, Dr Corey J Langer and Dr Misty Dawn Shields, moderated by Dr Stephen "Fred" Divers, including the following topics: Introduction (0:00) Targeted Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) — Dr Gainor, MD (5:32) Case: A woman in her mid 60s with ALK-mutant metastatic adenocarcinoma of the lung (PD-L1 TPS 70%) — Zanetta S Lamar, MD (17:59) Case: A woman in her mid 80s with EGFR exon 19-deleted adenocarcinoma of the lung with recurrence after 4 years of osimertinib — Jennifer Yannucci, MD (27:53) Case: A woman in her late 60s with HER2-mutant metastatic adenocarcinoma of the lung — Brian P Mulherin, MD (39:41) Case: A man in his early 70s with locally recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the lung and a MET exon 14 skipping mutation — Sean Warsch, MD (46:39) Case: A woman in her early 70s with ROS1-mutant metastatic adenocarcinoma of the lung that responds to entrectinib and then to pembrolizumab/carboplatin/pemetrexed administered upon disease progression — Dr Yannucci (52:44) Nontargeted Therapy for NSCLC; Small Cell Lung Cancer — Dr Langer (58:16) Neoadjuvant, Perioperative and Adjuvant Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Antibody-Based Approaches for Patients with Localized NSCLC — Dr Shields (1:14:14) Case: A man in his mid 60s with localized adenocarcinoma of the lung who receives neoadjuvant cisplatin/pemetrexed/pembrolizumab and achieves a pathologic complete response — Dr Mulherin (1:23:19) Case: A man in his early 60s with metastatic mixed adenosquamous NSCLC (PD-L1 TPS 50%) — Sunil Babu, MD (1:30:04) Case: A man in his late 50s diagnosed with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer who receives carboplatin/etoposide/durvalumab — Dr Warsch (1:34:07) CE information and select publications
Dr Kerry A Rogers from The Ohio State University in Columbus summarizes the treatment landscape and reviews relevant clinical datasets for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. CME information and select publications here.
In this episode of the Pediatric and Developmental Pathology, our hosts Dr. Mike Arnold (@MArnold_PedPath) and Dr. Jason Wang speak with Professor Matthew J. Murray of the Department of Pathology and the Department of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology at the University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Consultant Pediatric Pathologist Claire Trayers of the Department of Histopathology at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK; and Consultant Pediatric Oncologist Charlotte Burns of the Department of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK. Hear about how persistence and a serum biomarker for a miRNA helped identify a NUT carcinoma as we talk about their work and their article in Pediatric and Developmental Pathology: Mediastinal NUT Carcinoma With Raised Serum Alpha-Fetoprotein Mimicking a Malignant Germ Cell Tumor: Suspicion Raised Due to Negative Serum miR-371a-3p Levels Featured public domain music: Summer Pride by Loyalty Freak
Dr Justin F Gainor, Dr Corey J Langer and Dr Misty Dawn Shields summarize the treatment landscape and review relevant clinical datasets for patients with lung cancer.CME information and select publications here.
At the 2025 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, Whitney O'Connor, a two-time breast cancer survivor, licensed professional counselor, and founder of the Boobie Queen Company, presented a poster on the mental health tools she developed to help young women address any mental health and body image challenges they may have. Listen to the episode to hear Whitney explain: the phases of cancer survivorship framework she developed how the retreats her company sponsored used the framework to help young women heal emotionally how she plans to integrate healthcare providers into the framework
In this Review Series episode, Blood Associate Editor, Dr. Elisabeth Battinelli discusses the Platelet Heterogeneity with authors Drs. Craig Morrell, Larry Frelinger, and Leo Nicolai. Find the full review series in volume 146 issue 24 of Blood.
Whenever I hear or read news headlines these days, I know that the headlines will be just that for so many people. Headlines. People won't hear or they won't read beyond the headline, and then they'll form their own opinions based on nothing more than 20 words or fewer. I've got numerous examples of that. Even people that I would have thought would understand the media, like journalists, they'll look at a headline and think, "Oh, you know, subscriber only, I'm not going to pay. I'm just going to draw my own conclusions from the headline," which they know is flawed and ridiculous. You have to read the body of the story. If you just go on the headline, then you are going to be misinformed. It's a bit like the cancer diagnosis headline that's in the news today. "Cancer diagnosis numbers set to skyrocket by 50% over the next two decades". As soon as I read that, I could write the text to this show myself. Example: Yeah, have a look at how many of them were vaxed. Join the dots, and variations on that theme. Or I could imagine people thinking, "Oh my god, cancer diagnoses are up. I'm going to die." Or putting my young activist cap on, Māori are around 1.6 times more likely to die from cancer than Pākehā or other ethnicities. So the young activists are like, "Yeah, that's right, man, institutional racism inherent in the system. Yeah. It's colonialism. That's what's causing that." In fact, when you look beyond the headlines, when you read beyond the headlines, there's actually a lot of good news in the story, if you are willing to take the time to read it or listen to the interviews. Since the first state of cancer report five years ago, there has been encouraging progress in key areas of prevention, early detection, and treatment. Cancer diagnoses might be skyrocketing, but that's because they've got better diagnostic tools. We can find it before it does the damage. The chance of surviving cancer has improved over the last 20 years. The five-year net survival for all cancers has improved by 15% in the last 20 years, probably due to the screening and the advances in treatment. And even better is the news that many, many of the cancers that afflict us can be prevented by us. We have the power to reduce our risk of some cancers, as Dr. Chris Jackson, Professor of Oncology at University of Otago and practising medical oncologist, explained to Heather du Plessis-Allan this morning. CJ: 20% of all cancers are related to smoking, 20%. So if you get rid of smoking, you would cut the number of cancers by 20%. So that is undisputed. HDPA: Even though the numbers are so small nowadays? CJ: Yeah, well, it's probably going to, certainly it is going down, but those people who've been smoking are still going to be going through the system for that amount of time. The number the number two cause is obesity. So New Zealand's what, the third most obese country in the world now, I think? And we're seeing a rise in some obesity-related cancers now also, and I think if we could fix that, that would be the other big thing in terms of prevention. The other key thing, which is a very New Zealand thing, is our love affair with the sun. And as we come into summer months, I think we have to reflect on the old slip, slop, slap thing. Australia has done the sun prevention thing better than we have, and our skin cancer rates are now higher than theirs. Absolutely. There are still many, many mysteries around cancers. There are cancer clusters within families, there are rising rates of healthy young people being diagnosed with bowel cancer. There is much work for cancer researchers to do. But they've also done a lot of work in the field of many cancers and have found the cause and effect. Smoking increases your risk of cancer, obesity increases your risk of cancer, ignoring sun warnings increases your risk of cancer. So we need to pay heed, if we want to. Make the changes you need to your lifestyle, you improve your chances of a healthy active life. Don't, get sick. Take advantage of the free buses that will take you to the free screening because early detection is the best prevention, or don't. And you'll pay the ultimate price. I mean, the headline, if you just simply looked at it, you could form your own conclusion. You could absolutely go off onto an interpretive dance of your own misinformation, your own prejudice, your own beliefs. Cancer diagnosis numbers set to skyrocket by 50% over the next two decades. In fact, beyond the headlines, there is so much good news in there. And one of the key messages I think that we need to take from it is the fact that we have a little bit of control and agency over our own lives, that it is not inevitable that we get cancer, we get sick and we die. There is much we can do to prevent it. Early detection is the best prevention. The treatments are good, provided you go along and you get the screenings, and you keep up to date with your health, you pay attention to your body, and you think that you're worth it. When we look at the numbers who are disproportionately affected by cancer, you have to ask how many are helping themselves. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Introducing a brand new podcast from ACCC: Oncology Unscripted. In this inaugural episode, hosts Mark Liu and Deirdre Saulet lay out what listeners can expect from the show, including unfiltered, honest dialogue about the state of cancer care today, the most pressing challenges providers are facing, and how they can move forward with hope amid unpredictable headwinds. Liu and Saulet will approach a variety of topics, from operational to financial to clinical, as they explore how providers can help one another, continue to hold important conversations, and act as agents of change in oncology. "I think about my grandmother who spoke Spanish, Chinese, and English...If she was here, and needed to navigate our health care system with a serious illness or diagnosis of cancer, what would that look like for her? I often put my family members in these scenarios...What would they do? What would I do if I was on the other side?...How can we make a complicated health care system work for everyone?" -- Mark Liu, MHA "We can have all the innovations in the world, but if the people who need them most can't access them, what's the point? What are we doing this for?" -- Deirdre Saulet, PhD Mark Liu, MHA Senior Director of Oncology Strategy Transformation & Analytics Mount Sinai Health System Deirdre Saulet, PhD Chief Strategy Officer Jasper Health
Synopsis: This episode is proudly sponsored by Quartzy. What happens when engineering discipline, business pragmatism, and breakthrough immunology collide? In this episode of Biotech 2050, host Alok Tayi sits down with Jay Hartenbach, President & COO of Diakonos Oncology, to unpack one of the most unconventional—and promising—approaches in cancer immunotherapy today. Jay traces his journey from biomedical engineering into biotech operations, sharing how Diakonos was built outside the traditional venture playbook and why the company chose to tackle two of the most punishing cancers first: glioblastoma and pancreatic cancer. He reveals how Diakonos' dual-loading dendritic cell platform creates an exponentially stronger immune response—essentially tricking the body into launching a viral-level attack against cancer. From capital-efficient clinical execution to nontraditional fundraising and early signs of durable patient responses, this conversation offers a rare, behind-the-scenes look at how bold science, disciplined operations, and relentless persistence can reshape what's possible in oncology. Biography: Jay Hartenbach is a distinguished leader in the biotechnology and wellness sectors, known for his passionate commitment to advancing innovative healthcare solutions and transforming patient outcomes. He currently serves as President and Chief Operating Officer at Diakonos Oncology, where he is leading the team through the development and clinical advancement of pioneering immunotherapies targeting some of the most difficult-to-treat cancers, including glioblastoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Since joining Diakonos Oncology, Jay has been instrumental in achieving significant milestones such as attaining FDA Fast Track and Orphan Drug Designation for the company's lead candidate, DOC1021, securing greater than $30 million in financing, and establishing research collaborations with leading cancer centers to advance the clinical trials of the company's novel dendritic cell vaccine platform. Before his role at Diakonos, Jay co-founded Medterra, a globally recognized wellness company that set industry standards for quality and innovation, and where he continues to serve as Chairman of the Board, shaping high-level strategic direction. He also co-founded Perland Pharmaceuticals, an early-stage biotech firm focused on developing therapies for arthritis conditions, and has held leadership and board advisory roles across several life sciences ventures. Jay holds a degree in biomedical engineering from the University of Miami and a Master of Engineering Management from Duke University, grounding his entrepreneurial leadership with scientific expertise.
How This Is Building Me, hosted by world-renowned oncologist D. Ross Camidge, MD, PhD, is a podcast focused on the highs and lows, ups and downs of all those involved with cancer, cancer medicine, and cancer science across the full spectrum of life's experiences. In this episode, Dr Camidge sat down with Keith Singer, the founder and executive director of Catch It In Time. Camidge and Singer discussed how Singer's background in broadcasting and cable television has led to a career in promoting cancer awareness. Although Singer initially wanted to be an astronaut, a decline in aerospace engineering jobs during the 1970s and a love for the technical side of high school theater led Singer toward television. He left college early and started his career in Cincinnati, first running a boom microphone and later directing newscasts. Singer explained the career hurdles he faced, noting that they led to opportunities for him to hone his skills and exercise creative freedom. In the mid-1980s, a project involving a new pacemaker sparked Singer's interest in using video for health care education. This fascination led him to co-create an innovative platform that broadcast medical programming for physician continuing medical education. Driven by seeing friends and family struggle with cancer, Singer founded the nonprofit Catch It In Time in 2011. His key communication strategy is that cancer should be the supporting actor, not the lead, allowing stories to appeal to targeted audiences based on their hobbies or professions, with cancer awareness as the secondary message. Catch It In Time is currently developing The User's Guide to Oncology, a software-based program that uses gaming technology to guide patients with lung cancer, providing essential information to help them have better conversations with their care teams. Singer stressed the importance of short video content for garnering views for this type of content. Notably, Catch It In Time recently produced a song titled "Breathe Again" by Lilliana De Los Reyes. "Breathe Again" can be found on all major streaming platforms, and all proceeds are dedicated to cancer awareness and research.
What if the biggest gap in cancer care isn't the treatment but what happens before and after? In this episode of ReInvent Healthcare, Dr. Ritamarie Loscalzo is joined by Dr. Nalini Chilkov, founder of the American Institute of Integrative Oncology Research and Education (aiioRE.com), to explore how functional practitioners can fill the urgent void left by conventional oncology.Discover why building a body where cancer cannot thrive is essential, whether your client is recovering from treatment, living with cancer long-term, or wants to prevent recurrence. From terrain restoration and tumor microenvironment to nutrient repletion, blood viscosity, immune modulation, and glycemic control, this episode uncovers clinical strategies every practitioner needs to know to better support cancer patients and survivors.What's Inside This Episode?The distinction between the “disease team” and the “health team” and why both are vitalWhy the tumor microenvironment and terrain may matter more than the tumor itselfThe blood markers that reveal hidden risks that are often missed by oncologistsHow glycemic control and inflammation increase cancer recurrence by up to 40%The often missed danger of fibrin clots in cancer patients (and what to do about it)Why many patients develop autoimmune disease after immunotherapy and how to modulate without overstimulationPractical tips to rebuild the microbiome and blood-brain barrier post-treatmentA new way to think about melatonin, vitamin A, zinc, and omega-3s in cancer supportHow to talk to oncologists and position yourself as an essential part of the care teamWhy terrain restoration and functional support matter most after cancer treatment endsResources and Links:Download our FREE Metabolic Health Guide hereJoin the Next-Level Health Practitioner Facebook group here for free resources and community supportVisit INEMethod.com for advanced practitioner training and tools to elevate your clinical skillsCheck out other podcast episodes hereGuest Resources and LinksVisit OutsmartCancer.com for free recipes, educational tools, and the Outsmart Cancer Roadmap (coming soon)Practitioner training and professional resources at aiioRE.comChilkov Clinic - NaliniChilkov.com Social Media:Facebook: facebook.com/DrNaliniInstagram: instagram.com/drnalinichilkov/LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/nalinichilkovGuest BioDr. Nalini Chilkov is a leading authority and pioneer in the field of Integrative Cancer Care, cancer prevention, and immune enhancement. She is the Founder of the American Institute of Integrative Oncology Research & Education and creator of the OutSmart Cancer System teaching...
Good morning from Pharma Daily: the podcast that brings you the most important developments in the pharmaceutical and biotech world. Today, we dive into a series of transformative events shaping the future of drug development, patient care, and global healthcare strategies.**Johnson & Johnson's Multiple Myeloma Advances** Johnson & Johnson has made significant strides in the treatment of multiple myeloma with their bispecific antibody, Tecvayli. In recent trials, Tecvayli has shown remarkable promise when used in combination therapies as a second-line treatment. This development is noteworthy as it could potentially challenge the dominance of CAR-T cell therapies like J&J's Carvykti by offering a more accessible and less complex alternative. For patients, this means potentially fewer logistical hurdles and a more straightforward therapeutic option, which could drastically improve patient care standards.**Regulatory Scrutiny on RSV Vaccines** Turning to regulatory news, the U.S. FDA has intensified its scrutiny of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccines developed by pharmaceutical giants such as Merck, AstraZeneca, and Sanofi for infants. This increased oversight follows reports linking some COVID-19 vaccines to adverse effects in children. The FDA's actions highlight the ongoing necessity for vigilant safety monitoring in vaccine development, especially for vulnerable populations like infants. This is a crucial step in ensuring that vaccines designed for our youngest population are both safe and effective.**Eli Lilly's Strategic Moves in Oncology and Beyond** Eli Lilly is making waves in oncology with its BTK inhibitor, Jaypirca. Despite strong phase 3 results that support its use as a first-line treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), Lilly is focusing on its application as a second-line therapy. This strategic choice reflects an astute understanding of market dynamics and therapeutic niches where Jaypirca can provide substantial benefits despite competition from established first-line treatments. Additionally, Eli Lilly continues to leverage its financial success from its weight loss drug Tirzepatide to position itself as a central player in global pharmaceutical innovation. The company's strategic investments are likely to catalyze advancements across various therapeutic areas, reinforcing its role as a key contributor to medical breakthroughs.**Legislative Impact on Biopharma** In legislative news, the Biosecure Act's incorporation into the U.S. National Defense Authorization Act marks a strategic shift towards tightening regulations on Chinese biopharma entities regarding federal contracts by 2026. This move could have profound implications for international collaborations and competition within biotechnology innovation and drug development sectors. It signals a broader trend of increased scrutiny on foreign entities in sensitive industries like biopharmaceuticals.**China's Healthcare Transformation** China's healthcare landscape is undergoing significant transformation with the inclusion of drugs from companies like Pfizer, Lilly, and J&J into its first private insurance formulary. This development could enhance access to innovative medications within China, potentially improving health outcomes and influencing global pricing strategies in the pharmaceutical industry.**Gamida Cell's Milestone in Cell Therapies** In a major milestone for cell therapies, Gamida Cell has secured a second FDA approval for its stem cell therapy Omisirge. Initially approved to reduce infection risk during hematopoietic stem cell transplantations in blood cancer patients, Omisirge's expanded indication to treat severe aplastic anemia underscores the potential of cell therapies in addressing diverse hematologic conditions.**CSL Seqirus' New Facility in Australia** In Australia, CSL Seqirus has opened a $1 billion facility dedicated to producing cell-baSupport the show
There are concerns our health system isn't keeping pace with our accelerating cancer rates. The Cancer Control Agency's latest State of Cancer Report has found more New Zealanders are being diagnosed with cancer, but they're surviving cancer for longer. It's projecting diagnoses will increase by 50% over the next two decades. Otago University Medical Oncologist Dr Chris Jackson told Heather du Plessis-Allan this means fewer people getting scans, surgeries, and procedures. He says funding is increasing, but outcomes aren't improving at the same rate. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Send us a textWelcome to The Oncology Journal Club Podcast Series 3Hosted by Professor Craig Underhill, Dr Kate Clarke & Professor Christopher Jackson | Proudly produced by The Oncology NetworkWelcome back to The Oncology Journal Club podcast, your essential dose of the latest oncology research, expert analysis and our trademark blend of healthy scepticism and bad jokes.Hosted by Professor Craig Underhill, Dr Kate Clarke and Professor Christopher Jackson.This week's episode really does contain multitudes, with an incredibly eclectic mix of papers.Craig looks at the effectiveness of cancer control measures and optimising drug dosages.Kate talks us through interactions between solid neoplasms and the microbiome and shares a curious paper on extra virgin olive oil.CJ tackles a sobering paper on substandard anticancer medications and what lessons can be learnt from KEYNOTE-585 and Matterhorn in gastric cancer.We've a great selection of Quick Bites and a heartfelt discussion about taboo thoughts and the challenges carers of people with brain cancer face.To learn more about The Oncology Network, subscribe to our free weekly Newsletter and listen to other fantastic podcasts, visit our website: www.oncologynetwork.com.au. You'll also find the Show Notes on the website with links to papers, a transcript and bios of our hosts.
Dr. MaryAnn Wilbur trained her whole life to care for patients, then left medicine behind when it became a machine that punished empathy and rewarded throughput. She didn't burn out. She got out. A gynecologic oncologist, public health researcher, and no-bullshit single mom, MaryAnn walked straight off the cliff her career breadcrumbed her to—and lived to write the book.In this episode, we talk about what happens when doctors are forced to choose between their ethics and their employment, why medicine now operates like a low-resource war zone, and how the system breaks the very people it claims to elevate. We cover moral injury, medical gaslighting, and why she refused to lie on surgical charts just to boost hospital revenue.Her escape plan? Tell the truth, organize the exodus, and build something that actually works. If you've ever wondered why your doctor disappeared, this is your answer. If you're a clinician hiding your own suffering, this is your permission slip.RELATED LINKSMaryAnn Wilbur on LinkedInMedicine ForwardClinician Burnout FoundationThe Doctor Is No Longer In (Book)Suck It Up, Buttercup (Documentary)FEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Shefali Kakar, Global Head of PK Sciences and Oncology at Novartis, returns to the AI in Business podcast to discuss how AI is reshaping the earliest and most critical phases of drug development—where strategic investment decisions are made long before a clinical trial begins. Together with Emerj Editorial Director Matthew DeMello, Shefali explores how advanced modeling, in silico design, and patient data are creating a clearer picture of risk and return across R&D portfolios. She explains how pharmaceutical organizations are leveraging multi-factorial models to simulate safety, efficacy, and market potential—down to the molecular level. Want to share your AI adoption story with executive peers? Click emerj.com/expert2 for more information and to be a potential future guest on the 'AI in Business' podcast!
Changing the Oncology Prior Authorization Story with Exact Sciences This Office Hours will highlight Liz Durkin, Manager of Revenue Cycle as she tells the story of Exact Sciences' journey, from pain points to progress, and provide takeaways for other oncology organizations seeking to change the narrative on prior authorization. Find all of our network podcasts on your favorite podcast platforms and be sure to subscribe and like us. Learn more at www.healthcarenowradio.com/listen
Listen to JCO's Art of Oncology article, "Smell," by Dr. Alice Cusick, who is a Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan Division of Hematology and Oncology. The article is followed by an interview with Cusick and host Dr. Mikkael Sekeres. Dr Cusick shares a connection to a cancer patient manifested as a scent. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Smell, by Alice Cusick, MD Dr. 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. Joining us today is Alice Cusick, Hematology Section Chief at the Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan, Division of Hematology and Oncology, to discuss her Journal of Clinical Oncology article, "Smell." Alice, thank you for contributing to Journal of Clinical Oncology and for joining us to discuss your article. Dr. Alice Cusick: Thank you so much for having me, Mikkael. I appreciate it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's really a pleasure, and as usual, Alice and I discussed this beforehand and agreed to call each other by first names. I always love to hear your story first. Can you tell us about yourself? Where are you from, and walk us through your career, if you could. Dr. Alice Cusick: I'm a Midwesterner. I grew up in Iowa and Illinois and went to a small college in Illinois, played basketball, Division lll, and was an English Literature major. I took one science class and was going to be an English professor. And then my father's a physician. My senior year, I realized I don't think I could spend all my time in a library. I didn't feel like I was helping anyone. And so I talked to my dad, and he said, "Yeah, I think you could be a doctor." So I thought I would help people by being a physician. So I moved to Iowa City and spent two years working in a lab and doing science classes and took the MCAT, which was the first year they had the essay on there, and I rocked that. That was my highest score. I got into the University of Iowa and then went on to residency and fellowship at the University of Wisconsin, just in hematology. I didn't do solid tumors. And then went on, spent a couple years there, worked in Pennsylvania in more of a group practice, and then came back to academics at the University of Michigan about 10 years ago. And then five years ago, I became the Hematology Section Chief at the VA in Ann Arbor. So I work there full time now. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I love that story. I served on the admissions committee at Cleveland Clinic and Case Western when I was also a Midwesterner for 18 years. And I always wondered if instead of searching for science majors, we should be searching for English majors because I think there's a core element of medicine that is actually storytelling. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. My father was a country doctor for many, many years in rural Iowa in the fifties and sixties. So he did house calls, and he talked about how you really got to know people by going to their house. And I'll never forget the first time that I did a full history and physical, I think I was maybe a second-year medical student, and I was telling him, "Oh, I'm so excited. I'm going to do my first history and physical." And he said, "Alice, don't talk to them about medicine right away or about their problems right away. Talk to them about something else. Get to know them because you know about sports, talk about sports." I said, "Dad, that's called establishing rapport." You know, that's what they had taught us. But it was intuitive to him. I'll never forget that he just said their story is important and how they live and where they live and who they live with is so important. It really helps you figure out their medical issues as well. And I've always tried to carry that through. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's funny what we glean from our parents. My dad was a journalist for the Providence Journal-Bulletin. He was a reporter for a couple of decades, and I almost feel like some of what I'm doing is acting as a reporter. It's my job to get the story and get the story right and solicit enough details from a patient that I really have a sense that I'm with them on the journey of their illness, so I can understand it completely. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. And that's one of the things I really harp about with the fellows because sometimes I remember more of the social history than I do sometimes the medical history when I'm seeing a patient. I remind them, you need to know who they live with and how they live. It helps you take care of them. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Well, and that must be particularly germane with your patient population. When I was a medical student, my first rotation on internal medicine was at the Philadelphia VA, and it's actually what convinced me to specialize within internal medicine. What is it like caring for veterans? Dr. Alice Cusick: This is the best job I've ever had in my life. And I think because it speaks to my sense of duty that I got from my parents, particularly from my father, and I really feel I got back to my original focus, which is helping people. So that sense of duty and serving those who served, which is our core mission, this job is the most rewarding I've ever had because you really feel like you're helping people. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: How much do you learn about your patients' military history when you first interact with them? Dr. Alice Cusick: It can come up in conversation. It sort of depends on what the context is and how much you ask and how much of that is incorporated into what's going on with their medical history. It comes up a lot in terms of, particularly cancer, because a lot of cancers that veterans develop can be related to their military exposures. So it can come up certainly in that context. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: You write about how your patient and his wife brought in photographs of his younger self. Can you describe some of those photos? Dr. Alice Cusick: So a lot of it was about the sports he was doing at the time. He was kind of almost like a bodybuilder and doing like martial arts. So there were some pictures of him in his shirt and shorts, showing how healthy he was. He was much younger, but it was such a contrast to how he was at that time as he was nearing death. But it really rounded out my understanding of him because, as we all know, when we meet people, we see them when they're at that particular age, and we may not have that context of what they were 20, 30 years ago. But that still informs how they think about themselves. I mean, I still think of myself as an athlete even though I'm much older. So that's important to understand how the patient thinks about himself or herself. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: You know, it's funny you mentioned those two photographs. I- immediately flashed into my mind, I had a patient who also was a martial arts expert, and I remember he was in his early seventies and hospitalized, but he made sure to put up that photo of him when he was in his prime, in his martial arts outfit in a pose. And I've had another patient who was a boxer, and all he wanted to talk about whenever he saw me was his first experience boxing in Madison Square Garden and what that moment felt like of climbing into the ring, squeezing in between the ropes, and facing off in front of what must have been some massive crowd. Dr. Alice Cusick: Yeah. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Why do you think it was important to them to bring in those photos to show you? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think it was to help me understand what he had been. I think it was important for him, and because we had a relationship, it wasn't just transactional in terms of his medical problems. It was really conversations every day about what he was doing and how his life was going. And I think he really wanted me to understand what he had been. And so I felt really honored because I think that was important. It told me that his relationship with me was very important to him. I found that very, very humbling. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Yeah, I find it fascinating the details that patients offer to us about themselves as opposed to the ones that we solicit. I think it speaks to also the closeness of the relationship we have with patients when they want to share that aspect of them. They want to show you who they were before they were ill. And it's not a point of bragging. It's not flexing for them. I think it's really to remind themselves and us of the vitality of the person who's sitting in front of us or lying in front of us in the hospital johnny or sitting on an exam table. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. And I've experienced that even with my own parents as they got older and were in the medical system. I remember vividly, my father had had a stroke, and the people taking care of him didn't understand what he had been. They didn't understand that his voice was very different. We kept asking, you know, "His voice is different." They had no concept of him beforehand. So that also really hit home to me how important it is to understand patients in the whole context of their lives. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: And as a family member, do you think it's equally important to share that story of who somebody was before they were ill as a reminder to yourself and to the people taking care of a relative? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. I think it's very helpful because it also makes you feel like you're supporting the loved one as well by, if they can't speak for themselves, particularly when they're very ill, to help people understand, it may help the physicians or any provider understand their illness better, especially if there's a diagnostic dilemma, thinking about going home, what are they going to need at home, those sorts of things. I think it's always important to try to provide that context. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Patients will often talk about their deaths or transitions to hospice as an abstract future. Do you think they rely on us to make the decision about a concrete transition to hospice, or do you think they know it's time and are looking for us to verbalize it for their family and friends? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think it depends on how much groundwork you've done beforehand. So when you talk about end of life with people well before that transition it's almost mandatory, I think it's very important. It makes the transition much smoother because then they understand what hospice is, and they can prepare themselves. When they're not prepared, I think it's much more of a very clear transition. So it's almost like you're shutting one door, disease treatment, and moving on to, "I'm just going home to die," versus when you're laying the groundwork and you make sure that it's about how you live. I always try to emphasize, it's how you want to spend your time. It's how you want to live. Hospice is helping people live the best they can for as long as they can. And if you haven't prepared people, I think then they think much more you're closing the door and you're just sending me home to die. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's tricky though, isn't it? Because as an oncologist or hematologist-oncologist, in our case, people look to us for that hope that there's still something to do and there's still life ahead of them. But at a certain point, we all realize that we need to transition our focus. But once we say that out loud, do you ever feel like it almost shuts a door for our patients? Dr. Alice Cusick: Again, it depends on the situation, and it depends on the support they have. It's different when you're dealing with somebody who's out in an outpatient world who has good family support and you've developed a relationship versus the patient who's taken a very sudden turn for the worse, and maybe is in the hospital, and things are more chaotic, and maybe they've been on very active treatment beforehand, but suddenly things have changed. So in my mind, it depends on the context that you're dealing with and what the relationship you have prior to. Maybe you're covering for your colleague, and you don't have a relationship with that particular family or that particular patient, but yet you have to talk to them. Somebody gets transferred from another hospital and you have a very brief relationship. And so I think the relationship kind of dictates sometimes how patients feel. But as long as you can help people understand the process of end of life as best as you can, I think that sometimes helps the transition. Some people are going to be angry no matter what. And that's totally understandable, angry about their family member dying, angry about what's happening to them if they're the patient. I think that's always part of the process, but it's hard to make things smooth all of the time. We do the best we can. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: I was going to ask, has anyone ever been shocked when you start to talk about palliative care or hospice and never really did see it coming? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, of course. I think, especially if you've been doing this for a while, you sometimes see the future. You know what's, well, I mean, not exactly, but you have a good sense of what's going to happen. And there can be times when you start talking about end of life and palliative care or hospice and people are shocked, particularly family members, family members who may not be there all the time, who may not have seen their loved one frequently and haven't just understood what the disease course has been. And that certainly can be shocking. And again, totally understandable, but it's my responsibility to try to smooth that over and help people understand what's going on and make it a conversation. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's a nice description of what we do. We make it a conversation. When talking about what you smelled that day when you saw your patient, you write, "Did I suddenly have a gift? Could I float through the hospital wards and smell the future? Or maybe I could only smell inevitability." It's a beautiful sentence. "Could I only smell inevitability?" What do you think it was that led you to know that his time had come? And I wonder, was it a distinct odor or what I refer to as a Malcolm Gladwell "blink" moment, you know, in which your 25 years of experience allowed you to synthesize a hundred different sensory and cognitive inputs in a split second to realize this was the time? Dr. Alice Cusick: I think I knew it was time because I had been seeing him so frequently and I knew him very well. The smell was very real to me. My husband and I disagree because I've talked to my husband about this. He thinks it was a real smell and that I did smell something. I think it was more that amalgamation of my experience and, as I said in the piece, a scent took the place of a thought. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Huh. Dr. Alice Cusick: But it bothered me so much, and that's when I talk about, "Did I have a gift?" You know, there are people who can smell diseases. There's a report of a woman who could smell Parkinson's disease. I thought, "Have I suddenly developed some sort of gift?" But in my mind, I thought, "You know, it was inevitability." I mean, it was inevitable that this gentleman was going to die of this disease. So that was my thought. I don't think I had a gift. I think it was smelling the inevitability that I understood through experience and knowing this patient so well. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: Why do you think that smell haunted you so much afterwards? I mean, you really think about it and really dwell on it. I think in a way that any one of us would. Dr. Alice Cusick: I think because I thought there was something wrong with me. As I said in the piece, I thought it made my experience of that patient, my memory of that visit in particular and the whole relationship with him, I was thinking more about myself instead of thinking about him and his experience and his family's experience. And you know, you always grieve for patients, and it was interfering with my normal process. And so it really bothered me. In the end, it was more, "What was wrong with me?" This was weird, and it just sort of played with my usual understanding of how these things were supposed to go. And that's what really bothered me. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It is true. We really feel acutely our patients' loss, and it's so much more, I don't know if "acute" is the right word, or so much more meaningful when it's someone we've gotten to know over years, isn't it? Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, very much so. You grieve for them, you miss them. At the same time, you also, you know, especially with this patient, his death was how he wanted it. So helping someone with the, quote unquote, "good death", the death surrounded by family, the death where there is no suffering or as minimal suffering as possible, you do find that helps with the grief, I think, instead of thinking, "Oh, what did I do wrong? What did I miss?" You can make it somewhat helpful in processing the grief. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: It's perhaps one of the more exquisite aspects of the art of medicine is helping people with that transition in their final days and sharing in the emotions of that. It has been such a pleasure to have Alice Cusick, who is Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan, Division of Hematology and Oncology to discuss "Smell." Alice, thank you so much for submitting your article and for joining us today. Dr. Alice Cusick: Oh, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Dr. Mikkael Sekeres: If you've enjoyed this episode, consider sharing it with a friend or colleague or leave us a review. Your feedback and support helps us continue to have these important conversations. If you're looking for more episodes and context, follow our show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen and explore more from ASCO at asco.org/podcasts. Until next time, this has been Mikkael Sekeres for Cancer Stories. 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 Alice Cusick is Hematology Section Chief at Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health System and Assistant Professor at the University of Michigan Division of Hematology and Oncology.
JCO Editor-in-Chief Dr. Jonathan Friedberg is joined by colleagues Dr. Jennifer Woyach, Dr. Wojciech Jurczak, and Dr. Matthew Davids to discuss simultaneous publications presented at ASH 2025 on pertibrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. TRANSCRIPT The disclosures for guests on this podcast can be found in the show notes. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I'm Jonathan Friedberg, editor of Journal of Clinical Oncology, and welcome to JCO After Hours, where we are covering two manuscripts that were presented at the American Society of Hematology meeting 2025 in Orlando, Florida. I am delighted to be joined by colleagues on this call to discuss these pivotal manuscripts which cover the topic of pirtobrutinib, a new upfront treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. I will first just introduce our guests, Dr. Woyach. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Hi, my name is Jennifer Woyach. I am from the Ohio State University. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Hello, I am Wojciech Jurczak, working at the National Research Institute of Oncology in Krakow, Poland. Dr. Matthew Davids: Hi, I am Matthew Davids from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: We are going to start by just learning a little bit about these two trials that were both large, randomized phase 3 studies that I think answered some definitive questions. We will start with your study, Jennifer. If you could just describe the design of your study and the patient population. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Absolutely. So this is the BRUIN CLL-314 study, and this is a phase 3 randomized trial of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib in patients with CLL or SLL who had not previously been treated with a covalent BTK inhibitor. The patients were both treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory, about one-third of the patients treatment-naive, the rest relapsed/refractory, and they were stratified based upon 17p deletion and the number of prior lines of therapy. The primary objective was looking at non-inferiority of overall response rate over the entire treated population as well as the relapsed/refractory patient population. Key secondary objectives included progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat and the smaller relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And just comment a little bit on the risk of the patients. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: This study was fairly typical of this cohort of patients. Within the relapsed/refractory patient population, there was a median of one prior line of therapy in each of the groups, up to nine prior lines of therapy in the patients included on the study. For the overall cohort, about two-thirds of the patients were IGHV unmutated, about 15% had 17p deletion, 30% had TP53 mutations, and about 35% to 40% had a complex karyotype, which is three or more abnormalities. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And what were your findings? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Regarding the primary outcome, which is the focus of the publication, we did find that pirtobrutinib was indeed non-inferior and actually superior to ibrutinib for overall response rate throughout the entire patient population and in both the relapsed/refractory and treatment-naive cohorts. PFS is a little bit immature at this time but is trending towards also being significantly better in pirtobrutinib-treated patients compared with ibrutinib-treated patients. Probably most significantly, we found this to be the case in the treatment-naive cohort where there was a striking trend to an advantage of pirtobrutinib versus ibrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And the follow-up that you have on that progression-free survival? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: So we have about 18 months follow-up on progression-free survival. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: The second study, Wojciech, can you just go through the design and patient population that you treated? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Thank you, Dr. Friedberg, for this question. So the BRUIN CLL-313 study was, in fact, the first phase 3 study with pirtobrutinib in exclusively untreated CLL patients. It was a randomized study where we challenged pirtobrutinib versus bendamustine-rituximab. At the time we designed the protocol, bendamustine-rituximab was an option as a standard of care, and Bruton tyrosine kinase monotherapy was used far more commonly than nowadays. The primary target of the study was progression-free survival. We took all untreated patients except for those with 17p deletions. Therefore, it is a good representation for intermediate risk. We had about 60% of the population, 56 to be precise, which was unmutated, evenly distributed into two treatment arms. 17p deleted cases were excluded, but we had about 7% and 8% of TP53 mutated patients as well as about 11% and 7%, respectively, in the pirtobrutinib and bendamustine-rituximab arm of patients with complex karyotype. The progression-free survival was in favor of pirtobrutinib and was assessed by an independent review committee. What is important is that the progression-free survival of the bendamustine-rituximab arm was actually similar to the other studies addressing the same questions, like the comparison with ibrutinib in the ALLIANCE study or zanubrutinib in the SEQUOIA study. What was different was the hazard ratio. In our study, it was 0.20. It was one of the longest effect sizes noted in the frontline BTK study. It represented an 80% reduction in progression-free survival or death. If we compare it to ibrutinib or zanubrutinib, it was 0.39 and 0.42 respectively. Presumably, this great effect contributed towards a trend of overall survival difference. Although survival data are not mature enough, there is a clear trend represented by three patients we lost in the pirtobrutinib arm versus 10 patients lost in the bendamustine-rituximab arm. This trend in overall survival is becoming statistically significant despite the fact that there was a possibility of crossover, and effectively 52.9 patients, which means 18 out of 34 patients relapsing in the bendamustine-rituximab arm, were treated by pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I am going to turn it over to Matt. The question is: why study pirtobrutinib in this patient population? And then with these two studies, how do you find the patients that were treated, are they representative of people who you see? And do you see this maybe being approved and more widely available? Dr. Matthew Davids: I think in terms of the first question, why study this in a frontline population, we have seen very impressive data with pirtobrutinib in a very difficult-to-treat population of CLL patients. This was from the original BRUIN phase 1/2 study where most of the patients had at least two or three lines of therapy, often both a covalent BTK inhibitor and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax, and yet they were still responding to pirtobrutinib. The drug was also very well tolerated in that early phase experience. And actually, we have seen phase 3 data from the BRUIN 321 study comparing pirtobrutinib to bendamustine and rituximab in a relapse population as well. So I think that really motivated these studies to look at pirtobrutinib as a first therapy. You know, often in other cancers of course, we want to use our best therapy first, and I think these studies are an initial step at looking at that. In terms of the second question around the patient population, these are pretty representative patient populations, I would say, for most frontline CLL studies. We see patients who are a bit younger and fitter than sort of the general population of CLL patients who are treated in clinical practice, and I think that is true here as well. Median age in the sort of mid-60s here is a bit younger than the typical patients we are treating in practice. But that is not different from other CLL frontline studies that we have seen recently, so I think it makes it a little bit easier as we kind of think across studies to feel comfortable that these are relatively similar populations. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: How do you see this either getting regulatory approval or potentially being used compared to current standard of care options? Dr. Matthew Davids: So my understanding is that both of these trials were designed with registrational intent in the frontline setting, and they are both positive studies. That is certainly very encouraging in terms of the potential for an approval here. We have seen in terms of the FDA recently some concerns around the proportion of patients who are coming from North America, and my understanding is that is relatively low on these two studies. But nonetheless, the datasets are very impressive, and so I think it is certainly supportive of regulatory approval for frontline pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: I will ask Jennifer a question. The control arm in your study was ibrutinib, and I think many in the audience may recognize that newer, second-generation BTK inhibitors like acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib are more frequently used now if monotherapy is decided. How do you respond to that, and how would you put your results in your pirtobrutinib arm in context with what has been observed with those agents? Dr. Jennifer Woyach: Yeah, that is a great question. Even though in the United States we are predominantly using acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib when choosing a monotherapy BTK inhibitor, this is actually not the case throughout the entire world where ibrutinib is still used very frequently. The head-to-head studies of both acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib compared to ibrutinib have shown us pretty well what the safety profile and efficacy profile of the second-generation BTK inhibitors is. So even though we do not have a head-to-head study of acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib versus pirtobrutinib, I think, given the entirety of data that we have with all of the covalent BTK inhibitors, I think we can safely look at the pirtobrutinib arm here, how the ibrutinib arm compares or performs in context with those other clinical trials. And though we really can not say anything about pirtobrutinib versus acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib, I think we can still get a good idea of what might be the clinical scenarios in which you might want to choose pirtobrutinib. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And Wojciech, do you agree with that? Obviously, I think you have acknowledged that chemoimmunotherapy is rarely used anymore as part of upfront treatment for CLL. So, I guess a similar question. If you were to put the pirtobrutinib result in your study in context with, I guess, more contemporary type controls, would you agree that it is competitive? Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Well, I think that that was the last study ever where bendamustine-rituximab was used as a comparator arm. So we should notice that smashing difference. Because if we look at the progression-free survival at two years, we have 93.4% in pirtobrutinib arm versus 70.7% in bendamustine-rituximab arm. Bendamustine-rituximab arm did the same as in the other trials, like ALLIANCE or SEQUOIA. Pirtobrutinib did exceptionally well, as pirto is not just the very best BTK inhibitor overcoming the resistance, but perhaps even more important for the first line, it is very well tolerated and is a very selective drug. Now, if we look at treatment-related adverse events, the discontinuation rate, they were hardly ever seen. If we compared the adverse events in exposure-adjusted incidence, literally all adverse events were two or three times higher in bendamustine-rituximab arm except for the bleeding tendency, which however was predominantly in CTCAE grade 1 and 2 with just 0.7% of grade 3 hemorrhage. Therefore, I think that we should actually put the best and the safest drugs upfront if we may, and pirtobrutinib is, or should be, the first choice if we choose monotherapy. Now, I understand that we are not presenting you the data of pirtobrutinib in combination with anti-CD20 or with BCL2 inhibitors, but that is to come. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Matt, how would you envision, were regulatory approval granted and this were an option, using this in the upfront patient population? Is there anybody who you would preferentially use this or start on this treatment? Or would this be something that you would tend to reserve for second line? Dr. Matthew Davids: So I would say that in general for most of my patients who would want to start with a continuous BTK inhibitor, I would still use a covalent BTK inhibitor, and I say that for a couple of reasons despite the very promising data from these studies. The first is that the follow-up for both of these phase 3 trials is still quite short, in the range of a median 18 to 24 months. And we know that CLL is a marathon, not a sprint, and these patients are going to probably be living for a very long time. And we do have much longer follow-up from the covalent BTK inhibitors, median of 10-year follow-up with ibrutinib and five to six years with zanubrutinib and acalabrutinib respectively. And you know, I do not think that the pirtobrutinib is going to fall off a cliff after two years, but on the other hand, I think there is a lot of value to long-term data in this disease, and that is why I think for most of my patients I would stick with covalent BTK inhibitors. But the other important factor that we need to consider is patients who are younger and may have many different CLL treatments over the years. We have to be very careful, I think, about how we sequence these drugs. We know right now that we can start with covalent BTK inhibitors and then subsequently patients will respond well to the non-covalent inhibitor pirtobrutinib in later lines of therapy. But right now we do not have prospective data the other way around. So how will the patients on these studies who progress on pirtobrutinib respond to covalent BTK inhibitors? We do not know yet. There have not been a lot of progression events, which is great, but we would like to see some data in that respect to feel more comfortable with that sequence. Now, I do think that particularly for older patients and those who have significant cardiovascular comorbidities, if they wanted to go on a continuous BTK inhibitor, I do think these data really strongly support using pirtobrutinib as the BTK inhibitor of choice in that population. In particular, the cardiovascular risks with pirtobrutinib seem to be quite low. I was very struck in the comparison with BR that the rate of AFib was equivalent between the two arms of the study. And that is really the first time we have seen that with any of these BTK inhibitors, no elevated risk of AFib in a randomized study. I think that is the population where it will get the most traction first, is the upfront, sort of older patient with significant cardiovascular comorbidities. And as the data from these studies mature, I think that we will start to see more widespread use of pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: Jennifer, I am just curious if you have any personal experience or heard anecdotally about after progression on pirtobrutinib the use of other BTK inhibitors and whether there is a growing experience there. Dr. Jennifer Woyach: I do not think that there is much clinical experience, you know, as Matt alluded to, it certainly has not been tested yet. There has been some data in relapsed CLL suggesting that in people who have resistance mutations to covalent BTK inhibitors after treatment with pirtobrutinib, sometimes those mutations go away. I think most of us are concerned that they are probably not actually gone but maybe in compartments that we just have not sampled, suggesting that sort of approach where you might sequence a covalent inhibitor after a non-covalent in somebody who had already been resistant probably would not work that well. But, you know, in this setting where people had never been exposed to a covalent BTK inhibitor before, we really have no idea what the resistance patterns are going to be like. We assume they will be the same as what we have seen in relapsed CLL, but I think we just need some longer follow-up to know for sure. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: If I may confront Dr. Davids about the use of covalent BTK inhibitors upfront, well, I think that we should abandon the idea of using the first and the second and the third generation, at least if we don't have medical lines. If we endlessly block the same pathway, it is not going to be effective. So if pirtobrutinib gets approval in first, second line, we do not necessarily have to use it in the first line. I am not here in a position to defend that we should treat patients with pirtobrutinib upfront and not BCL2 time-limited regimen. However, the way I look at CLL patients when choosing therapy is not just how should I treat them now, but what would be the best regimen in 5, 10 years if I have to re-treat them. And in some instances, the idea may be that in this setting we would like to have a BTK inhibitor upfront to have a BCL2 inhibitor later to make it time-limited. Although I understand and I agree with Matthew that if we have an elderly, fragile population, then the charm of having a drug taken once a day in a tablet with literally few cardiovascular adverse events might be an option. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: And I will give Matt the last word whether he wants to respond to that, and also just as a forward-looking issue, I know both investigators have implied that there will be future studies looking at combinations with pirtobrutinib, and if you have any sense as to what you would be looking for there. Dr. Matthew Davids: The field really is heading toward time-limited therapy for most patients, I would say. There is a bit of a discrepancy right now in the field between sort of what we are doing in academic practice and what is done sort of more widely in community practice. And so right now we are going to see evolving datasets comparing these approaches. We are already seeing data now from the CLL17 study with ibrutinib comparing continuous to time-limited venetoclax-based therapy, and we are seeing similar efficacy benefits from these time-limited therapies without the need for continuous treatment. And so that is where I think some of the future studies with pirtobrutinib combining it with venetoclax and other partners are so important. Fortunately, several of these studies are already ongoing, including a phase 3 trial called CLL18, which is looking at pirtobrutinib with venetoclax, comparing that to venetoclax and obinutuzumab. So I am optimistic that we are going to be developing these very robust datasets where we can actually use pirtobrutinib in the frontline setting as a time-limited therapy as a component of a multi-drug regimen. So far, those early data are very promising. Dr. Wojciech Jurczak: Perhaps last but not least, in a single center we have treated over 300 patients with pirtobrutinib. So eventually some of them relapsed. And I must say that our experience on BCL2 inhibitors, not just venetoclax but including sonrotoclax, are appealingly good. Therefore, by using pirtobrutinib even earlier, we do not block the efficacy of other compounds. Dr. Jonathan Friedberg: All right. Well, I want to thank all of our speakers. I also want to congratulate our two guests who presented these very influential papers at the ASH Annual Meeting, and chose to publish them in JCO, so we thank you for that, and Dr. Davids for your commentary - really appreciated. That is this episode of JCO After Hours. Thank you for your attention. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Disclosures Dr. Wojciech Jurczak Consulting or Advisory Role: BeiGene, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech, Takeda, Roche, AstraZeneca Research Funding: Roche, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Abbvie/Genentech Dr. Jennifer Woyach Consulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Loxo, Newave Pharmaceutical, Genentech, Abbvie, Merck Research Funding: Company name: Janssen, Schrodinger, beone, Abbvie, Merck, Loxo/Lilly Dr. Matthew Davids Honoraria: Curio Science, Aptitude Health, Bio Ascend, PlatformQ Health, Plexus Consulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Janssen, Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Ascentage Pharma, BeiGene, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Merck, MEI Pharma, Nuvalent, Inc., Galapagos NV, Schroedinger Research Funding: Ascentage Pharma, Novartis, MEI Pharma, AstraZeneca
Children can be one of life's greatest blessings. Breast cancer survivors Alex Miles-Stiffler and Sara Galher-Barlow long for larger families but their diagnoses put those dreams farther and farther out of reach. Alex struggled to start a family before her diagnosis. The heart ache she felt after two miscarriages was unbearable at times, and her fertility challenges only grew after breast cancer treatment, but she wasn't giving up on the family she dreamed of having. Sara always knew she wanted several children. She was blessed with a precious daughter prior to being diagnosed, but her cancer was aggressive and treatment couldn't wait. She had to forego egg preservation, and the uncertainty of fertility along with the cost of fertility treatments will make it harder to grow her family.
Prof Giuseppe Curigliano from the European Institute of Oncology in Milan, Italy, and Dr Priyanka Sharma from the University of Kansas Cancer Center in Westwood, Kansas, discuss the implications of clinical findings in breast cancer recently presented at the 2025 ESMO Annual Meeting. CME information and select publications here.
Dr. Pedro Barata and Dr. Ravin Garg discuss strategies to increase trial representation, including leveraging trial navigators and prioritizing pragmatic trial models, as featured in the ASCO Educational Book article, "Practical Guide to Clinical Trial Accessibility: Making Trial Participation a Standard of Care." TRANSCRIPT Dr. Pedro Barata: Hello, and welcome to By the Book, a podcast from ASCO featuring compelling perspectives from authors and editors of the ASCO Educational Book. I'm Dr. Pedro Barata. I am a medical oncologist at University Hospital Seidman Cancer Center and an associate professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. I am also the associate editor of the ASCO Educational Book. We know that in recent years, the oncology community has increasingly prioritized the need to modernize clinical trial eligibility, reduce patient burden, and enhance diversity in trial participation. On that note, today we will be speaking about ways to enhance access to clinical trials with Dr. Ravin Garg. He is a hematologist oncologist at Maryland Oncology Hematology and also an assistant professor of oncology at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. Dr. Garg is also the co-author of a fantastic paper in the ASCO Educational Book titled, "Practical Guide to Clinical Trial Accessibility: Making Trial Participation a Standard of Care." Dr. Garg, welcome. Thanks for being here, and congrats on your paper. Dr. Ravin Garg: Thank you for having me, Pedro. I am excited to be here. Dr. Pedro Barata: [KI1] Your paper is a wonderful, multidisciplinary piece that actually features perspectives from the different stakeholders, right? The patient advocacy, industry, community practice, and academia about these challenges in making trials more available. This podcast is a wonderful platform. It reaches out to a lot of folks within our community. So, I will start by asking you the obvious. Why do you think it is a must read for our community, for our listeners? Dr. Ravin Garg: So Pedro, thanks again for inviting me. You do a great job with these podcasts. So, I think first and foremost, oncologists right now are under a lot of stress, just in terms of clinical volume. There is concern for research money, and how we get the best care for our patients. So I think this article is very important because it helps bring together, as you had mentioned, the stakeholders throughout academic to community practice and everywhere in between, and try to find how, as a team with different oncologists who partake in different aspects of oncology, can come together to streamline the process to try to get our patients on trials, or certainly have them have availability of trials, just if they are interested in going on them. Being in practice, we have had several challenges that we can talk about throughout this podcast, but I think it is a very important paper because it recognizes that at the end of the day, it takes a team effort for all of us in academics, community, industry, and pharmaceuticals to really come together as a team to really help put forth the trials for our patients. Dr. Pedro Barata: So, from the perspective of a community oncologist, how do you put together, or maybe you can describe some of the challenges that you see to increase trial participation in the community? Dr. Ravin Garg: Yes, Pedro, that is a great question, and it is something that I keep on thinking about and trying to find ways to be better at it myself. But I will say some of the challenges as a community doctor that I have seen for myself and talking to other colleagues. Number one, I do think there is a lot of stress on doctors in the community in general, Pedro. Oftentimes we are tasked to see a wide smorgasbord of patients, so we may not have the luxury of being a specialist in any particular tumor subtype. Like oftentimes, we will have to see lung cancer, the next one will be breast cancer, the next one could be CML, the next one could be thrombocytopenia. And as you know better than I do, Pedro, the field in each one of these disciplines is changing so rapidly: molecular genomics, radioligand treatments, different imaging tests, MRD testing for some of our hematologic malignancies. And I think one challenge we have in community is just keeping up with the basics of Oncology 101. In the process of doing that, it can be very difficult to sometimes remember that we have very exciting trials available for our patients. So, I think a lot of it is the day in and day out of being an oncologist is so taxing at times that oftentimes a research trial is not the first thing in our head space when we see a patient. I think number two, Pedro, at least in the community, and perhaps this is with academics too, is that we are bombarded, I would say, by a lot of messaging these days. We have in-baskets to go through, labs to go through, things of that nature. And in the process of a patient visit, seeing them, doing an exam, taking a history, trying to go over the NCCN guidelines on best practice for how to manage their care, at least for me at times, it is very hard to remember, "Hey, there might be a great trial available, whether within our network or maybe partnering with an academic center." So getting through a day can be fraught with a lot of peril and just difficulties, I would say. And I would say number three, Pedro, at least as, you know, I am in a private practice where I do see a wide range of benign and malignant hematology and solid tumors, so I would not call myself a specialist. And I think the challenge with that, at least for trials, Pedro, is that when you are a specialist or perhaps you are focusing on a couple of disease subtypes, you become more of an authoritative voice in those types of tumors, and you might be more aware of the trials within your network or perhaps in proxy with an academic center that you can offer your patient. So I think when sometimes we spread ourselves too thin, it can be very hard to be a thought leader, if you will, in a particular subtype of a malignancy, let's say, and maybe not be aware of a trial that could be really well-suited for your patient. In terms of ideas that myself and colleagues have had in terms of helping mitigate against some of these, I would say, setbacks or issues in the practice for trial enrollment, some of the things we have talked about, Pedro, is, number one, is we do partner with academic centers. So we live here in Maryland. We have several really fantastic academic centers. So, you know, oftentimes, not just within our practice of Maryland Oncology Hematology, we have a lot of great trials available here too, for certain, but in addition to that, we will often times work with doctors at Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, and Maryland if they have a compelling trial that we do not have within our network. It is really of the patient's interest, Pedro, to reach out to them in a collaborative manner to see if they have a trial that might be really compelling for your patient. So I do find myself collaborating a lot with colleagues in, like talented like yourself in academics. You know, I think you do a lot of GU malignancies. So as an example, like partnering with colleagues who are GU experts and say, "Hey, we have a patient with stage IV renal cell. These are the standard options I know, but are there any trials that you might have available?" I think the other thing that has been very helpful for us is having navigators within research, Pedro. Like as an example, what has really helped the uptake of trial enrollment for our center in Annapolis is having a research navigator because often times what they can do is, a priori, Pedro, before you see the patient and you are kind of formulating a standard of care treatment plan perhaps, they might tug you on the shirt and say, "Hey, we have a great trial here through Sarah Cannon, or there might be something else out there." And being aware of that when you go into a patient's room really provides a nice arena, if you will, to go and say, "The standard of care is here, but hey, we have a trial option that might be well suited for you, maybe perhaps even better, that we can talk about, too." So having research support in the community is really a huge boon, I think, Pedro, for us to really increase our enrollment for patients onto trials. Dr. Pedro Barata: Yes, I really love that, Ravin. So, let me switch gears a bit. I would love for you to talk a little bit about patient advocacy because they do play a huge role in cancer, and they address many barriers. How do you think we should leverage the patient advocacy groups to reduce patient burden and maybe have them really leverage patient advocacies to improve representation in clinical trials? What do we think we can do more? Dr. Ravin Garg: Oh, Pedro, I think they are very critically important. As a clinical oncologist now, and I would say this is for anyone in the field of medicine, you are exactly right. I think patients are bombarded by information. There are a lot of things online, whether it be TikTok, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and people really just have a lot of information given to them. And some of it is fact driven, and some of it is not, Pedro. And oftentimes, I do think there can be at times a mistrust with some medical personnel. I think we are in an era where we are seeing that to some degree with some attributes of medicine. And I think of it as an opportunity for education for the patient and for myself as a physician. And I think patient advocates, to your point, which was well taken, serve as a bridge to both. And what I mean is that, you know, patient advocates are wonderful. They are, I think, outstanding communicators. They almost are a neutral party, Pedro, where many patients feel that they are an independent source of information that is free of bias, if you will. They are there to provide support, emotional support, scientific support for patients so they can make an informed decision. So, in terms of our practice right now, patient advocates is something that we are evolving in that capacity, I would say, Pedro. I think now more than ever, having more people as bridges of communication with care providers along with patients is of critical importance. And I would venture a guess, and I think this has been published, where patient advocates really can help tremendously in familiarizing patients with trials and what they are all about and maybe clear up some misconceptions of what trials, what the mission of trials are. Because I do think some patients, at least I have had a few over the years, where when they hear the term trial, they almost think they are being experimented upon, when, in point of fact, they could really help advance their care. That messaging along the way for some can may be mixed up a little bit. And so I think patient advocates is a really great way to offer more information for patients with a source they find very independent and trustworthy, if you will. And it can really help expedite, and I think make a more fruitful conversation for care providers, whether academic or community, and they might be more open-minded in terms of enrolling onto a trial. Dr. Pedro Barata: Wonderful. Yes, I agree. I agree with you completely. So let's focus a little bit now on the folks designing the studies. We usually call them the sponsors. It might be an academic sponsorship, if you will, but we can also have pharma being the sponsor of a study. The angle from an academic design, it is not necessarily the same as what happens when we have pharma. And from that angle, how do you think a more inclusive research can be promoted? Dr. Ravin Garg: Oftentimes with trials, I think keeping them simple, as simple as we can. And what I mean by that is, often times for trials, Pedro, even for care providers who are enrolling, it can be daunting when there are a lot of different things involved, particularly, let's say, for investigator sponsored, which are incredibly brilliant science, incredible, but it can be a little bit daunting for patients and even the referring physician to talk about getting translational specimens, imaging, traveling to certain centers to get scans and biopsies and even different diagnostic testing like PSMA testing for, you know, prostate cancer. And it can, I think, be very intimidating for patients in terms of what might be required of him or her to enter onto a trial. Like, "This is not what I signed up for. This is laborious. This is a full time job for me. Do I have to pay for parking to go to a city? Do I have to pay for these imaging tests? And do I have to stay in a place for my family to enroll onto a trial?" So I think keeping trials as simple as possible, but yet cull the data we need as investigators where we can really advance the care, hopefully get approval for a drug, but also learn more about the medication and how it works for our patients. So I think simplifying language for trial is very important. I know when I have gone over studies for patients, Pedro, if it is a voluminous amount of information, they can right away get very intimidated. "Like, oh my goodness, this is like a term paper for college again," you know? I am joking, but you know, keeping language simplified is very important, I think, number one. And I feel that sometimes when they are asked to do a lot of different diagnostic testing, which is very important for translational work, I 100% understand, but I do think sometimes patients can get a little bit off put, if you will, and frustrated with the whole process of doing it. The second thing for our patients, Pedro, that they have mentioned to us when we put them on trials, not just within our own site but elsewhere, is that it takes a lot of time in terms of collecting information, perhaps a washout period from their last standard of treatment prior to enrollment onto a study. Many patients, Pedro, as you know better than I do, are in maybe crisis in terms of their health and their cancer might be growing, promulgating out of control, and they worry about not being able to expeditiously start onto a treatment, onto a trial. So that can lead to a lot of frustration. And one thing that you brought up, which was outstanding for me, is the enrollment criterion for some of our patients is felt to be somewhat strict. We have had some patients who may have had a remote history of a stage I malignancy that was by all accounts in remission, you know, let's say 4 or 5 years in the past, and the risk of recurrence at this point would be incredibly low, but they may not be able to enter onto a study because of some stringent criterion put forth. And that can be a little bit frustrating. In fact, I have had one or two patients who, as an example, with kidney issues, but the GFR was about 60, like right near a cutoff that oftentimes, as you know, we use where you can get into trial or not. And you know, if they are at 58, as an example, and otherwise they are a picture of health, a great candidate for a trial that will likely advance their care, and if the entry criterion is too stringent, that might be a lost opportunity for all parties involved, all stakeholders, if you will. I do appreciate the criterion for entry onto studies cannot be too liberalized. You have to have a certain baseline, but there is a little bit of a gray area and tension, of sorts, if you will, where the patient has a comorbid illness that is a disqualifying offense, but in practicality, perhaps it shouldn't be, especially if they are motivated and there is an opportunity to really advance their care. We have run into, not often, but sometimes in the past, I should say, where patients have been very off put because we try to get them onto a study and there may have been a particular feature or attribute in their underlying care that they couldn't get onto it. So I think having a little bit more thoughtfulness, perhaps, in terms of entry criterion and practicality, if you will, I think would really help enrollment onto studies. Dr. Pedro Barata: Really well said. Is there anything else that you would like to tell our listeners before we wrap up the podcast today? Dr. Ravin Garg: I would say just macroscopically speaking, it is really an honor to be an oncologist. I think I speak for both of us. Anyone listening who is thinking about the field, it is tremendous. Just the research, the bravery of our patients, and the thoughtfulness of our scientists like Pedro and translationalists and clinical trialists is really awe inspiring. So I have really loved this field. I will say from a trial perspective, we really need to enter as many patients as we can onto trials because the science is so brilliant now, the genomic underpinnings of the tumor, we are making great strides as a team of clinicians and scientists, translationalists. So the more that we can get people onto trials and get approved drugs, it is going to help them out in the end. So I think it is such an important time for all of us to come together as a community, find the best way to help our patients out. And clinical trials have to be at the forefront of how we can continue to advance care for our patients. Dr. Pedro Barata: Yeah, no Ravin, I really agree with you. We really need to increase access to clinical studies, and actually your paper is a great step in that direction by raising awareness, bringing up solutions, and again, collaboration, collaboration, collaboration is really a multidisciplinary effort to accomplish that. Thank you so much for sharing your fantastic thoughts and insights with us. Dr. Ravin Garg: Thank you, Pedro. I am- you do a wonderful job with these podcasts. I am really honored to meet you and to be part of this. Dr. Pedro Barata: And thank you to our listeners for your time today. I encourage you to check out Dr. Garg's article in the 2025 ASCO Educational Book. We will post a link to the paper in our show notes. And please join us again next month on By the Book for more insights on key advances and innovations that are shaping modern oncology. Thank you for your attention. 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. Ravin Garg Follow ASCO on social media: @ASCO on X 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. Ravin Garg: Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Creator, editor, and writer of hemeoncquestions.com
Iowa's cancer rates are among the highest in the country, and they are rising. In this episode of Rounding@Iowa, Dr. Gerry Clancy and guest experts Dr. Mary Charlton and Dr. Mark Burkard discuss the data, risk factors, and prevention strategies clinicians can use to make a difference. CME Credit Available: https://uiowa.cloud-cme.com/course/courseoverview?P=0&EID=81274 Host: Gerard Clancy, MD Senior Associate Dean for External Affairs Professor of Psychiatry and Emergency Medicine University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine Guests: Mark E. Burkard, MD, PhD Professor of Internal Medicine-Hematology, Oncology, and Blood and Marrow Transplantation University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine Director, University of Iowa Health Care Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center Mary Charlton, PhD Professor of Epidemiology Director, Iowa Cancer Registry Iowa College of Public Health Financial Disclosures: Dr. Clancy, Dr. Burkard, Dr. Charlton, and Rounding@IOWA planning committee members have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Nurse: The University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine designates this activity for a maximum of 0.75 ANCC contact hour. Pharmacist and Pharmacy Tech: The University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine designates this knowledge-based activity for a maximum of 0.75 ACPE contact hours. Credit will be uploaded to the NABP CPE Monitor within 60 days after the activity completion. Pharmacists must provide their NABP ID and DOB (MMDD) to receive credit. UAN: JA0000310-0000-25-090-H99 Physician: The University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine designates this enduring material for a maximum of 0.75 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Other Health Care Providers: A certificate of completion will be available after successful completion of the course. (It is the responsibility of licensees to determine if this continuing education activity meets the requirements of their professional licensure board.) References/Resources: Iowa Cancer Plan
In the most recent ONCOLOGY On the Go hosted in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, Daniel C. McFarland, DO, spoke with Charles S. Kamen, PhD, MPH, about health equity for sexual and gender minority groups in oncology. Sexual and gender minority groups, who constitute approximately 9.3% of the US population, experience significant and preventable disparities across all stages of the cancer care continuum, according to Kamen.1 He detailed how these inequities are largely driven by minority stress: the chronic psychological and emotional burden resulting from anticipated and experienced prejudice, discrimination, and stigma within health care settings.2 McFarland and Kamen highlighted that a lack of comprehensive sexual and gender minority training in medical education often leaves clinicians feeling unprepared, compounding the patient's anxiety and mistrust. The path to correcting these disparities requires a fundamental shift to cultural humility: the readiness to acknowledge one's own lack of knowledge and learn directly from the patient's lived experience. The most critical, actionable step discussed was the systematic, safe, and affirmative collection of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) data.3 Kamen emphasized that SOGI data is a clinical tool, not just a demographic marker. When collected routinely—ideally non-verbally via intake forms—SOGI data are used to: Ensure Biologically Appropriate Surveillance: Confirming that all necessary cancer screenings are offered based on the patient's existing organs, regardless of current gender identity. Facilitate Relationship-Centered Care: Appropriately recognizing and engaging the patient's partners and chosen family; a critical component of sexual and gender minority support networks. Tailored Psychosocial Navigation: Moving beyond a general "disparities mindset" to an "equity mindset" by using SOGI data to connect patients with LGBTQ-specific psychosocial resources that directly address discrimination-related distress drivers. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Kamen is an associate professor in the Department of Surgery, Cancer Control (SMD) and holds joint appointments as an associate professor at the Center for Community Health and Prevention and the Department of Psychiatry (SMD) at the University of Rochester Medical Center. References 1. Jones JM. LGBTQ+ identification in U.S. rises to 9.3%. News release. Gallup. February 20, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/48n8j8bd 2. Minority stress. American Psychological Association. Updated November 15, 2023. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/5n888ynr Learning resources — collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/4btrn5y3
Drug resistance derails even the most advanced cancer treatments, but what if we could restore sensitivity to existing therapies instead of starting over? Neil Bhowmick, chief scientific officer at Kairos Pharma, joins In Vivo to discuss how his company is tackling resistance in oncology. We explore the company's lead asset, ENV-105, which is showing over 13 months of progression-free survival in Phase II prostate cancer trials by resensitizing tumors to hormone therapy, with significantly lower toxicity than standard alternatives like chemotherapy or radiopharmaceuticals. Bhowmick explains the complex biology behind different resistance mechanisms, shares early data on GITR-modulating therapies designed to expand T cell populations for immunotherapy, and discusses their approach to developing companion biomarkers for patient selection. We also dive into the clinical and commercial rationale for combination approaches and what milestones to watch in the coming year.
In this special episode, Blood editor Dr. Laura Michaelis interviews Dr. Arielle Langer and Blood Associate editor Dr. Marc Blondon for this special Maternal Health episode. In honor of the second Maternal Health compendium, both discuss their papers featured in this special collection. Featured Articles: β-Thalassemia minor is associated with high rates of worsening anemia in pregnancyLongitudinal profile of estrogen-related thrombotic biomarkers after cessation of combined hormonal contraceptivesSee the entire Maternal Health Compendium Second Edition
Continuous monitoring is reshaping oncology. CEO of AION Biosystems, Sam Barend, joins Dr. Sanjay Juneja, Dr. Douglas Flora, and Dr. David Penberthy to explore how long‑term physiologic tracking, AI‑driven insights, and clinically validated wearables are improving outcomes for patients at high risk of complications. The conversation highlights FDA pathways, reimbursement realities, and the promise of simpler, signal‑focused monitoring that detects patterns earlier and supports safer treatment continuity.
Episode 5 of Standard Deviation with Oliver Bogler on the Out of Patients podcast feed pulls you straight into the story of Dr Ethan Moitra, a psychologist who fights for LGBTQ mental health while the system throws every obstacle it can find at him.Ethan built a study that tracked how COVID 19 tore through an already vulnerable community. He secured an NIH grant. He built a team. He reached 180 participants. Then he opened an email on a Saturday and learned that Washington had erased his work with one sentence about taxpayer priorities. The funding vanished. The timeline collapsed. His team scattered. Participants who trusted him sat in limbo.A federal court eventually forced the government to reinstate the grant, but the damage stayed baked into the process. Ethan had to push through months of paperwork while his university kept the original deadline as if the shutdown had not happened. The system handed him a win that felt like a warning.I brought Ethan on because his story shows how politics reaches into science and punishes the people who serve communities already carrying too much trauma. His honesty lands hard because he names the fear now spreading across academia and how young scientists question whether they can afford to care about the wrong population.You will hear what this ordeal did to him, what it cost his team, and why he refuses to walk away.RELATED LINKSFaculty PageNIH Grant DetailsScientific PresentationBoston Globe CoverageFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this week's episode, Blood editor Dr. James Griffin speaks with Drs. Emanuele Zucca and Sandra Pinho about their latest articles published in Blood. Dr. Zucca discusses his second analysis of the IELSG37 trial, where findings suggested that R-CHOP21 rituximab, cyclophosphamide,doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone, administered every 21 days) may be a suboptimal frontline regimen for PMBCL. Dr. Pinho discusses the aging megakaryocytic niche and its influence on the age-associated decline in HSC and progenitor cell function. The authors demonstrate that remodeling of the megakaryocytic niche and associated platelet factor 4 (PF4) downregulation are central mechanisms driving HSC aging.Featured Articles: Impact of immunochemotherapy regimens on outcomes of patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma in the IELSG37 trial Platelet Factor 4 (PF4) Regulates Hematopoietic Stem Cell Aging
Send us a textWe're starting our Top 5 Episodes of 2025 with an interview that showed up in your downloads all year long. It's earned the #5 spot, and today we're bringing it back for another listen. Enjoy! Too often, people living with and beyond cancer are sidelined from fitness—not because they can't exercise, but because programs aren't designed with their unique needs in mind. In this episode, Elise talks with Dr. Kaci and Dr. Reed Handlery, PTs, about building inclusive, sustainable community-based programs for people with mobility challenges—including those living with and beyond cancer. From the CSM stage to real-world community impact, Kaci and Reed share how they're creating inclusive, adaptable programs that meet patients where they are—and empower them to go further. We covered:The role of seated, high-intensity movement for oncology patientsHow to adapt exercise creatively for mobility impairments and other barriersWhat it takes to build and sustain inclusive fitness programs in your communityHow to identify and empower community champions to keep patients engagedAnd best of all: you'll be inspired to rethink what's possible in your exercise prescription—inside and outside the clinic.Listen now to discover how you can bring this innovative, adaptable approach to your oncology patients!Follow TheOncoPT on Instagram.Follow TheOncoPT on LinkedIn.
Chelsea J. Smith walks into a studio and suddenly I feel like a smurf. She's six-foot-three of sharp humor, dancer's poise, and radioactive charm. A working actor and thyroid cancer survivor, Chelsea is the kind of guest who laughs while dropping truth bombs about what it means to be told you're “lucky” to have the “good cancer.” We talk about turning trauma into art, how Shakespeare saved her sanity during the pandemic, and why bartending might be the best acting class money can't buy. She drops the polite bullshit, dismantles survivor guilt with punchline precision, and reminds every listener that grace and rage can live in the same body. If you've ever been told to “walk it off” while your body betrayed you, this one hits close.RELATED LINKS• Chelsea J. Smith Website• Chelsea on Instagram• Chelsea on Backstage• Chelsea on YouTube• Cancer Hope Network• Artichokes and Grace – Book by Chelsea's motherFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
In this episode, Antonia and Andrew discuss the December 3, 2025 issue of JBJS, along with an added dose of entertainment and pop culture. Listen at the gym, on your commute, or whenever your case is on hold! Link: JBJS website: https://jbjs.org/issue.php Sponsor: This episode is brought to you by JBJS Clinical Classroom. Subspecialties: Shoulder, Hip, Trauma, Knee, Spine, Oncology, Education & Training, Orthopaedic Essentials Chapters (00:00:03) - JBJS: Cases on Hold(00:01:14) - JBJS CME Miller Review Course: Episode 95(00:02:52) - 2018 COVID A Lead and Highlights(00:04:16) - Helical Blade vs Lag Screw Fixation in Geriatric Hip Fract(00:11:22) - PLC and PCL reconstruction in isolated PCL injuries(00:18:57) - Debridement of unstable chondral lesions during arthrosc(00:21:52) - The Chondral Outcomes Study(00:26:35) - The Latter J procedure restores glenohumeral joint kinem(00:27:47) - Importance of traditional bone setting in the UK(00:30:43) - Case On Hold
Knowledge is power, and when it comes to breast cancer, having access to accurate, up-to-date information can make all the difference. That's why Susan G. Komen is committed to providing trusted educational resources that empower patients, caregivers and families to make informed decisions about their care. Today we are joined by Jessica Thompson, who is both a survivor and health communication scientist, to walk us through where the breast cancer community can turn to find comprehensive, unbiased information, what they will find there and the vigorous review process that Komen uses to create its content, starting with their long standing partnership with Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center.
On this episode, Cory Jones, System AVP of Oncology Services at Banner Health joins the podcast to discuss how targeted therapies are reshaping the oncology landscape. He also shares strategies for improving access to care by leveraging imaging capabilities, reflects on key responsibilities in his leadership role, and highlights what's ahead in cancer care innovation.
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Mesothelioma from the Oncology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
Top Stories for November 29th Publish Date: November 29th PRE-ROLL: SUGAR HILL ICE SKATING From the BG AD Group Studio Welcome to the Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast. Today is Saturday, November 29th and Happy Birthday to Vin Scully I’m Peyton Spurlock and here are your top stories presented by Gwinnett KIA Mall of Georgia. Piedmont Oncology Opens Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, First of Its Kind in Georgia You can now use a digital driver’s license to buy beer, cigarettes in Georgia Musical events, attractions to get into the magical spirit of the holiday season All of this and more is coming up on the Gwinnett Daily Post podcast, and if you are looking for community news, we encourage you to listen daily and subscribe! Break 1: Kia Mall of Georgia STORY 1: Piedmont Oncology Opens Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, First of Its Kind in Georgia Piedmont Oncology just opened Georgia’s first Early Detection Pancreatic Cancer Clinic, and honestly, it’s a big deal. Pancreatic cancer is brutal—13% five-year survival rate, no screening test, vague symptoms that sneak up on you. But this clinic? It’s here to change that. Dr. Andrew Page, the clinic’s medical director, says early detection is everything. “Education about risk factors is critical,” he explained. The clinic will focus on genetic counseling, research collaborations with NIH and Mayo Clinic, and, hopefully, developing a much-needed screening test. None of this would’ve happened without donors like Purple Pansies. Their support is saving lives. STORY 2: You can now use a digital driver’s license to buy beer, cigarettes in Georgia Big news for Georgians: you can now use a digital driver’s license to buy alcohol, tobacco, and other age-restricted items. Yep, your phone just got even more useful. The Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) announced the update Monday, calling it a “major step forward” in modernizing IDs. But here’s the catch: it’s up to individual businesses to accept them. No guarantees. Oh, and don’t try using a screenshot—doesn’t count. Retailers need a special mDL reader to scan the license, and staff still have to verify your age. Progress? Sure. Perfect? Not quite yet. STORY 3: Musical events, attractions to get into the magical spirit of the holiday season It’s that time again—holiday magic is everywhere, and Atlanta’s got no shortage of ways to celebrate. From concerts to tree lightings, here’s what’s happening: Holiday Shows at the FOX Theatre: Lauren Daigle’s Behold Christmas Tour (Dec. 4): Grammy-winning magic. Christmas Together (Dec. 6): Amy Grant, Cece Winans, and Michael W. Smith. A Drummer Boy Christmas (Dec. 8): for King + Country’s festive storytelling. Elf the Musical (Dec. 16–20): Buddy’s heartwarming journey. Nutcracker! Magical Christmas Ballet (Dec. 23–24): Ballet meets acrobatics. Festive Attractions: Stone Mountain’s Flight to the North Pole (Nov. 8–Jan. 4): Help Santa save Christmas. Garden of Lights (Nov. 15–Jan. 11): Stroll through dazzling displays. Georgia Aquarium Holidays (Nov. 14–Jan. 2): Twinkling lights, Santa, and sea life. Don’t miss these great events! We have opportunities for sponsors to get great engagement on these shows. Call 770.874.3200 for more info. We’ll be right back Break 2: Ingles Markets - DTL HOLIDAY STORY 4: Student loan change could drain nurse pipeline, Ga. dean warns Nursing is no longer considered a “professional degree” by the U.S. Department of Education, and nurses are, understandably, furious. The change, tied to the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, means nursing students can’t access the $200,000 loan cap reserved for professional programs. Instead, they’re stuck with a $100,000 limit—less than what many need to cover tuition. Linda McCauley, dean of Emory’s Nursing School, didn’t hold back: “In a time when we desperately need more nurses, why make it harder? It feels like they didn’t think this through.” The fallout? Fewer nurses, more debt, and a lot of frustration. STORY 5: Flight delays: Here are your rights when flying over the holidays in 2025 Stuck at the airport? Here’s a tip: if your flight’s delayed more than three hours (domestic) or six hours (international), you’ve got rights. Travel expert Katy Nastro says airlines must offer a refund or rebook you—your choice. But here’s the catch: no double-dipping. You can’t get both. And meal vouchers? Only if the delay’s the airline’s fault, like staffing or mechanical issues. Hotels? Depends on the airline. The Department of Transportation even published a guide for what airlines owe you. Pro tip: screenshots of your license don’t count for ID. Break 3: BUFORD HOLIDAY FESTIVAL STORY 6: Forsyth school board approves use of same alarm system in place at Apalachee High School Forsyth County schools are stepping up safety with a $2.4 million Centegix alarm system, approved by the Board of Education this week. You’ve probably heard of these “panic alarms”—they’re the same system credited with the quick response during the tragic Apalachee High School shooting last year. Teachers and staff wear a button they can press in emergencies, instantly alerting law enforcement without fumbling for a phone. The system also includes color-coded strobe lights for visual alerts, ensuring ADA compliance. The first year’s cost? $420,000, with the rest spread over five years. Safety, it seems, is getting an upgrade. STORY 7: Recall alert: Honda recalls 256K vehicles for loss of power software error Honda’s recalling over 256,000 vehicles—specifically 2023–2025 Accord Hybrids—because of a software glitch that could cause the car to lose power mid-drive. Not ideal, right? The issue? The integrated control module’s CPU might reset itself while you’re cruising along. Dealers will fix it for free, though, so there’s that. Honda says owners will get a heads-up by mail starting Jan. 5, but if you’re the impatient type (or just worried), you can call them at 888-234-2138. Oh, and if you’re curious, the recall number is TN2. Stay safe out there! We’ll have closing comments after this Break 4: THE SUGAR HILL HOLIDAY Signoff – Thanks again for hanging out with us on today’s Gwinnett Daily Post Podcast. If you enjoy these shows, we encourage you to check out our other offerings, like the Cherokee Tribune Ledger podcast, the Marietta Daily Journal, or the Community Podcast for Rockdale Newton and Morgan Counties. Read more about all our stories and get other great content at www.gwinnettdailypost.com Did you know over 50% of Americans listen to podcasts weekly? Giving you important news about our community and telling great stories are what we do. Make sure you join us for our next episode and be sure to share this podcast on social media with your friends and family. Add us to your Alexa Flash Briefing or your Google Home Briefing and be sure to like, follow, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Produced by the BG Podcast Network Show Sponsors: www.ingles-markets.com www.kiamallofga.com 2025 Buford Holiday Festival & Parade All-In-One Flyer Holiday Celebration 2025 – City of Sugar Hill Ice Rink – Downtown Sugar Hill NewsPodcast, CurrentEvents, TopHeadlines, BreakingNews, PodcastDiscussion, PodcastNews, InDepthAnalysis, NewsAnalysis, PodcastTrending, WorldNews, LocalNews, GlobalNews, PodcastInsights, NewsBrief, PodcastUpdate, NewsRoundup, WeeklyNews, DailyNews, PodcastInterviews, HotTopics, PodcastOpinions, InvestigativeJournalism, BehindTheHeadlines, PodcastMedia, NewsStories, PodcastReports, JournalismMatters, PodcastPerspectives, NewsCommentary, PodcastListeners, NewsPodcastCommunity, NewsSource, PodcastCuration, WorldAffairs, PodcastUpdates, AudioNews, PodcastJournalism, EmergingStories, NewsFlash, PodcastConversations See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In this episode, we review the high-yield topic of Esophageal Cancer from the Oncology section.Follow Medbullets on social media:Facebook: www.facebook.com/medbulletsInstagram: www.instagram.com/medbulletsofficialTwitter: www.twitter.com/medbullets
When Julia Stalder heard the words ductal carcinoma in situ, she was told she had the “best kind of breast cancer.” Which is like saying you got hit by the nicest bus. Julia's a lawyer turned mediator who now runs DCIS Understood, a new nonprofit born out of her own diagnosis. Instead of panicking and letting the system chew her up, she asked questions the industry would rather avoid. Why do women lose breasts for conditions that may never become invasive? Why is prostate cancer allowed patience while breast cancer gets the knife? We talked about doctors' fear of uncertainty, the epidemic of overtreatment, and what happens when you build a movement while still in the waiting room. Funny, fierce, unfiltered—this one sticks.RELATED LINKS• DCIS Understood• Stalder Mediation• Julia's story in CURE Today• PreludeDx DCISionRT feature• Julia on LinkedInFEEDBACKLike this episode? Rate and review Out of Patients on your favorite podcast platform. For guest suggestions or sponsorship email podcasts@matthewzachary.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Twenty years ago, a young oncologist started journaling to process his experience treating cancer patients. That cathartic act became the Pulitzer Prize-winning book The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer.Fifteen years after the book was published, how has our understanding of preventing and treating cancer changed? Host Flora Lichtman is joined by author Siddhartha Mukherjee to talk about what we now understand about screening, environmental risks, and rising cancer rates in young people.Read an excerpt of the new chapters added to The Emperor of Maladies on the 15th anniversary of the book's publication. This headline has been corrected from "Multi-Headed" to "Many-Headed" to accurately reflect Siddhartha Mukherjee's statement.Guest: Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee is a cancer physician and an associate professor of medicine at Columbia University.Transcripts for each episode are available within 1-3 days at sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.