POPULARITY
14 episodes with sgo
15 episodes with sgo
9 episodes with sgo
7 episodes with sgo
4 episodes with sgo
5 episodes with sgo
5 episodes with sgo
3 episodes with sgo
3 episodes with sgo
In the second part of this special episode of Onc Now, Jonathan Sackier continues his thrilling conversation with Bradley Monk, a leading gynaecologic oncologist, with an in-depth discussion of the DUO-E trial, Monk's most impactful Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) insights, and the integration of AI into the clinic. Timestamps: 00:00 – Introduction 00:40 – Quickfire questions 06:19 – Inspiration 08:31 – Molecular basis of cancer treatment 12:12 – DUO-E trial design 14:12 – Barriers to 4-drug regimen approval and access 20:01 – Most impactful SGO insights 21:10 – AI integration 24:03 – Three wishes 26:30 – Outro
In this two-part series host Jonathan Sackier is joined by Bradley Monk, a pioneering figure in gynaecologic oncology. In Part 1, they discuss key updates from the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) Congress, including the updated ESGO-ESTRO-ESP endometrial cancer guidelines and the latest results from the KEYLYNK-001 study in ovarian cancer. With reflections from his three-decade career, Monk provides actionable takeaways for clinicians and researchers alike. Stay tuned for Part 2, where they delve into insights from SGO 2025. Timestamps: 00:00 - Quickfire questions 04:55 - Career milestones 07:10 - ESGO 2025 standout sessions 09:52 - KEYLYNK-001 trial & takeaways 13:52 - New endometrial cancer staging
Dr Kathleen Moore, Dr Ritu Salani, Dr Shannon Westin and moderator Dr Angeles Alvarez Secord share their perspectives and summarize recently presented data from the SGO 2025 annual meeting guiding the management of ovarian cancer. CME information and select publications here.
Dr. Ebony Hoskins and Dr. Andreas Obermair discuss the surgical management of gynecologic cancers, including the role of minimally invasive surgery, approaches in fertility preservation, and the nuances of surgical debulking. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast, I'm Dr. Ebony Hoskins. I'm a gynecologic oncologist at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, DC, and your guest host of the ASCO Daily News Podcast. Today we'll be discussing the surgical management of gynecologic cancer, including the role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), approaches in fertility preservation, and the nuances of surgical debulking, timing, and its impact on outcomes. I am delighted to welcome Dr. Andreas Obermair for today's discussion. Dr. Obermair is an internationally renowned gynecologic oncologist, a professor of gynecologic oncology at the University of Queensland, and the head of the Queensland Center for Gynecologic Cancer Research. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode. Dr. Obermair, it's great speaking with you today. Dr. Andreas Obermair: Thank you so much for inviting me to this podcast. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: I am very excited. I looked at your paper and I thought, gosh, is everything surgical? This is everything that I deal with daily in terms of cancer in counseling patients. What prompted this review regarding GYN cancer management? Dr. Andreas Obermair: Yes, our article was published in the ASCO Educational Book; it is volume 44 in 2024. And this article covers some key aspects of targeted precision surgical management principles in endometrial cancer, cervical cancer, and ovarian cancer. While surgery is considered the cornerstone of gynecologic cancer treatment, sometimes research doesn't necessarily reflect that. And so I think ASCO asked us to; so it was not just me, there was a team of colleagues from different parts of the United States and Australia to reflect on surgical aspects of gynecologic cancer care and I feel super passionate about that because I do believe that surgery has a lot to offer. Surgical interventions need to be defined and overall, I see the research that I'm doing as part of my daily job to go towards precision surgery. And I think that is, well, that is something that I'm increasingly passionate for. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Well, I think we should get into it. One thing that comes to mind is the innovation of minimally invasive surgery in endometrial cancer. I always reflect on when I started my fellowship, I guess it's been about 15 years ago, all of our endometrial cancer patients had a midline vertical incision, increased risk of abscess, infections and a long hospital stay. Do you mind commenting on how you see management of endometrial cancer today? Dr. Andreas Obermair: Thank you very much for giving the historical perspective because the generation of gynecologic oncologists today, they may not even know what we dealt with, what problems we had to solve. So like you, when I was a fellow in gynecologic oncology, we did midline or lower crosswise incisions, the length of stay was, five days, seven days, but we had patients in hospital because of complications for 28 days. We took them back to the operating theaters because those are patients with a BMI of 40 plus, 45, 50 and so forth. So we really needed to solve problems. And then I was exposed to a mentor who taught minimal invasive surgery. And in Australia he was one of the first ones who embarked on that. And I can remember, I was mesmerized by this operation, like not only how logical this procedure was, but also we did rounds afterwards. And I saw these women after surgery and I saw them sitting upright, lipstick on, having had a full meal at the end of the day. And I thought, wow, this is the most rewarding experience that I have to round these patients after surgery. And so I was thinking, how could I help to establish this operation as standard? Like a standard that other people would accept this is better. And so I thought we needed to do a trial on this. And then it took a long time. It took a long time to get the support for the [LACE - Laparoscopic Approach to Cancer of the Endometrium] trial. And in this context, I just also wanted to remind us all that there were concerns about minimal invasive surgery in endometrial cancer at the time. So for example, one of the concerns was when I submitted my grant funding applications, people said, “Well, even if we fund you, wouldn't be able to do this trial because there are actually no surgeons who actually do minimally invasive surgery.” And at the time, for example, in Australia, there were maybe five people, a handful of people who were able to do this operation, right? This was about 20 years ago. The other concern people had was they were saying, could minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer, could that cause port side metastasis because there were case reports. So there were a lot of things that we didn't know anyway. We did this trial and I'm super happy we did this trial. We started in 2005, and it took five years to enroll. At the same time, GOG LAP2 was ramping up and the LACE trial and GOG LAP2 then got published and provided the foundations for minimally invasive surgery in endometrial cancer. I'm super happy that we have randomized data about that because now when we go back and now when people have concerns about this, should we do minimally invasive surgery in P53 mutant tumors, I'm saying, well, we actually have data on that. We could go back, we could actually do more research on that if we wanted to, but our treatment recommendations are standing on solid feet. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Well, my patients are thankful. I see patients all the time and they have high risk and morbidly obese, lots of medical issues and actually I send them home most the same day. And I think, you know, I'm very appreciative of that research, because we obviously practice evidence-based and it's certainly a game changer. Let's go along the lines of MIS and cervical cancer. And this is going back to the LACC [Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer] trial. I remember, again, one of these early adopters of use of robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery for radical hysterectomy and thought it was so cool. You know, we can see all the anatomy well and then have the data to show that we actually had a decreased survival. And I even see that most recent updated data just showing it still continued. Can you talk a little bit about why you think there is a difference? I know there's ongoing trials, but still interested in kind of why do you think there's a survival difference? Dr. Andreas Obermair: So Ebony, I hope you don't mind me going back a step. So the LACC study was developed from the LACE trial. So we thought we wanted to reproduce the LACE data/LAP2 data. We wanted to reproduce that in cervix cancer. And people were saying, why do you do that? Like, why would that be different in any way? We recognize that minimally invasive radical hysterectomy is not a standard. We're not going to enroll patients in a randomized trial where we open and do a laparotomy on half the patients. So I think the lesson that really needs to be learned here is that any surgical intervention that we do, we should put on good evidence footing because otherwise we're really running the risk of jeopardizing patients' outcomes. So, that was number one and LACC started two years after LACE started. So LACC started in 2007, and I just wanted to acknowledge the LACC principal investigator, Dr. Pedro Ramirez, who at the time worked at MD Anderson. And we incidentally realized that we had a common interest. The findings came totally unexpected and came as an utter shock to both of us. We did not expect this. We expected to see very similar disease-free and overall survival data as we saw in the endometrial cancer cohort. Now LACC was not designed to check why there was a difference in disease-free survival. So this is very important to understand. We did not expect it. Like, so there was no point checking why that is the case. My personal idea, and I think it is fair enough if we share personal ideas, and this is not even a hypothesis I want to say, this is just a personal idea is that in endometrial cancer, we're dealing with a tumor where most of the time the cancer is surrounded by a myometrial shell. And most of the time the cancer would not get into outside contact with the peritoneal cavity. Whereas in cervix cancer, this is very different because in cervix cancer, we need to manipulate the cervix and the tumor is right at the outside there. So I personally don't use a uterine manipulator. I believe in the United States, uterine manipulators are used all the time. My experience is not in this area, so I can't comment on that. But I would think that the manipulation of the cervix and the contact of the cervix to the free peritoneal cavity could be one of the reasons. But again, this is simply a personal opinion. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Well, I appreciate it. Dr. Andreas Obermair: Ebony at the end of the day, right, medicine is empirical science, and empirical science means that we just make observations, we make observations, we measure them, and we pass them on. And we made an observation. And, and while we're saying that, and yes, you're absolutely right, the final [LACC] reports were published in JCO recently. And I'm very grateful to the JCO editorial team that they accepted the paper, and they communicated the results because this is obviously very important. At the same time, I would like to say that there are now three or four RCTs that challenge the LACC data. These RCTs are ongoing, and a lot of people will be looking forward to having these results available. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Very good. In early-stage cervical cancer, the SHAPE trial looked at simple versus radical hysterectomy in low-risk cervical cancer patients. And as well all know, simple hysterectomy was not inferior to radical hysterectomy with respect to the pelvic recurrence rate and any complications related to surgery such as urinary incontinence and retention. My question for you is have you changed your practice in early-stage cervical cancer, say a patient with stage 1B1 adenocarcinoma with a positive margin on conization, would you still offer this patient a radical hysterectomy or would you consider a simple hysterectomy? Dr. Andreas Obermair: I think this is a very important topic, right? Because I think the challenge of SHAPE is to understand the inclusion criteria. That's the main challenge. And most people simplify it to 2 cm, which is one of the inclusion criteria but there are two others and that includes the depth of invasion. Dr. Marie Plante has been very clear. Marie Plante is the first author of the SHAPE trial that's been published in the New England Journal of Medicine only recently and Marie has been very clear upfront that we need to consider all three inclusion criteria and only then the inclusion criteria of SHAPE apply. So at the end of the day, I think what the SHAPE trial is telling us that small tumors that would strictly fulfill the criteria of a 1B or 1B1 cancer of the cervix can be considered for a standard type 1 or PIVA type 1 or whatever classification we're trying to use will be eligible. And that makes a lot of sense. I personally not only look at the size, I also look at the location of the tumor. I would be very keen that I avoid going through tumor tissue because for example, if you have a tumor that is, you know, located very much in one corner of the cervix and then you do a standard hysterectomy and then you have a positive tumor margin that would be obviously, most people would agree it would be an unwanted outcome. So I'd be very keen checking the location, the size of the tumor, the depths of invasion and maybe then if the tumor for example is on one side of the cervix you can do a standard approach on the contralateral side but maybe do a little bit more of a margin, a parametrial margin on the other side. Or if a tumor is maybe on the posterior cervical lip, then you don't need to worry so much about the anterior cervical margin, maybe take the rectum down and maybe try to get a little bit of a vaginal margin and the margin on the uterus saccals. Just really to make sure that you do have margins because typically if we get it right, survival outcomes of clinical stage 1 early cervix cancer 1B1 1B 2 are actually really good. It is a very important thing that we get the treatment right. In my practice, I use a software to record my treatment outcomes and my margins. And I would encourage all colleagues to be cognizant and to be responsible and accountable to introduce accountable clinical practice, to check on the margins and check on the number on the percentage of patients who require postoperative radiation treatment or chemo radiation. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Very good. I have so many questions for you. I don't know the statistics in Australia, but here, there's increased rising of endometrial cancer and certainly we're seeing it in younger women. And fertility always comes up in terms of kind of what to do. And I look at the guidelines and, see if I can help some of the women if they have early-stage endometrial cancer. Your thoughts on what your practice is on use of someone who may meet criteria, if you will. The criteria I use is grade 1 endometrioid adenocarcinoma. No myometria invasion. I try to get MRI'd and make sure that there's no disease outside the endometrium. And then if they make criteria, I typically would do an IUD. Can you tell me what your practice is and where you've had success? Dr. Andreas Obermair: So, we initiated the feMMe clinical trial that was published in 2021 and it was presented in a Plenary at one of the SGO meetings. I think it was in 2021, and we've shown complete pathological response rates after levonorgestrel intrauterine device treatment. And so in brief, we enrolled patients with endometrial hyperplasia with atypia, but also patients with grade 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma. Patients with endometrial hyperplasia with atypia had, in our series, had an 85 % chance of developing a complete pathological response. And that was defined as the complete absence of any atypia or cancer. So endometrial hyperplasia with atypia responded in about 85%. In endometrial cancer, it was about half, it was about 45, 50%. In my clinical practice, like as you, I see patients, you know, five days a week. So I'm looking after many patients who are now five years down from conservative treatment of endometrial cancer. There are a lot of young women who want to get pregnant, and we had babies, and we celebrate the babies obviously because as gynecologist obstetricians it couldn't get better than that, right, if our cancer patients have babies afterwards. But we're also treating women who are really unfit for surgery and who are frail and where a laparoscopic hysterectomy would be unsafe. So this phase is concluded, and I think that was very successful. At least we're looking to validate our data. So we're having collaborations, we're having collaborations in the United States and outside the United States to validate these data. And the next phase is obviously to identify predictive factors, to identify predictors of response. Because as you can imagine, there is no point treating patients with a levonorgestrel intrauterine joint device where we know in advance that she's not going to respond. So this is a very, very fascinating story and we got our first set of data already, but now we just really need to validate this data. And then once the validation is done, my unit is keen to do a prospective validation trial. And that also needs to involve international collaborators. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Very good. Moving on to ovarian cancer, we see patients with ovarian cancer with, say, at least stage 3C or higher who started neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Now, some of these patients are hearing different things from their medical oncologist versus their gynecologic oncologist regarding the number of cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy after getting diagnosed with ovarian cancer. I know that this can be confusing for our patients coming from a medical oncologist versus a gynecologic oncologist. What do you say to a patient who is asking about the ideal number of chemotherapy cycles prior to surgery? Dr. Andreas Obermair: So this is obviously a very, very important topic to talk about. We won't be able to provide a simple off the shelf answer for that, but I think data are emerging. The ASCO guidelines should also be worthwhile considering because there are actually new ASCO Guidelines [on neoadjuvant chemotherapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer] that just came out a few weeks ago and they would suggest that we should be aiming for R0 in surgery. If we can maybe take that as the pivot point and then go back and say, okay, so what do need to do to get the patient to zero? I'm not an ovarian cancer researcher; I'm obviously a practicing gynecologic oncologist. I think about things a lot and things like that. In my practice, I would want a patient to develop a response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. So, if a patient doesn't have a response after two or three cycles, then I don't see the point for me to offer her an operation. In my circle with the medical oncologists that I work with, I have a very, very good understanding. So, they send the patient to me, I take them to the theater. I take a good chunk of tissue from the peritoneum. We have a histopathologic diagnosis, we have a genomic diagnosis, they go home the same day. So obviously there is no hospital stay involved with that. They can start the chemotherapy after a few days. There is no hold up because the chances of surgical complication in a setting like this is very, very low. So I use laparoscopy to determine whether the patient responds or not. And for many of my patients, it seems to work. It's obviously a bit of an effort and it takes operating time. But I think I'm increasing my chances to make the right decision. So, coming back to your question about whether we should give three or six cycles, I think the current recommendations are three cycles pending the patient's response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy because my aim is to get a patient to R0 or at least minimal residual disease. Surgery is really, in this case, I think surgery is the adjunct to systemic treatment. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Definitely. I think you make a great point, and I think the guideline just came out, like you mentioned, regarding neoadjuvant. And I think the biggest thing that we need to come across is the involvement of a gynecologic oncologist in patients with ovarian cancer. And we know that that survival increases with that involvement. And I think the involvement is the surgery, right? So, maybe we've gotten away from the primary tumor debulking and now using more neoadjuvant, but surgery is still needed. And so, I definitely want to have a take home that GYN oncology is involved in the care of these patients upfront. Dr. Andreas Obermair: I totally support that. This is a very important statement. So when I'm saying surgery is the adjunct to medical treatment, I don't mean that surgery is not important. Surgery is very important. And the timing is important. And that means that the surgeons and the med oncs need to be pulling on the same string. The med oncs just want to get the cytotoxic into the patients, but that's not the point, right? We want to get the cytotoxic into the patients at the right time because if we are working under this precision surgery, precision treatment mantra, it's not only important what we do, but also doing it at the right time. And ideally, I I would like to give surgery after three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, if that makes sense. But sometimes for me as a surgeon, I talk to my med onc colleagues and I say, “Look, she doesn't have a good enough response to her treatment and I want her to receive six cycles and then we re-evaluate or change medical treatment,” because that's an alternative that we can swap out drugs and treat upfront with a different drug and then sometimes they do respond. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: I have maybe one more topic. In the area I'm in, in the Washington D.C. area, we see lots of endometrial cancer and they're not grade 1, right? They're high-risk endometrial cancer and advanced. So a number of patients with stage 3 disease, some just kind of based off staging and then some who come in with disease based off of the CT scan, sometimes omental caking, ascites. And the real question is we have extrapolated the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to endometrial cancer. It's similar, but not the same. So my question is in an advanced endometrial cancer, do you think there's still a role, when I say advanced, I mean, maybe stage 4, a role for surgery? Dr. Andreas Obermair: Most definitely. But the question is when do you want to give this surgery? Similar to ovarian cancer, in my experience, I want to get to R0. What am I trying to achieve here? So, I reckon we should do a trial on this. And I reckon we have, as you say, the number of patients in this setting is increasing, we could do a trial. I think if we collaborate, we would have enough patients to do a proper trial. Obviously, we would start maybe with a feasibility trial and things like that. But I reckon a trial would be needed in this setting because I find that the incidence that you described, that other people would come across, they're becoming more and more common. I totally agree with you, and we have very little data on that. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Very little and we're doing what we can. Dr. Obermair, thank you for sharing your fantastic insights with us today on the ASCO Daily News Podcast and for all the work you do to advance care for patients with gynecologic cancer. Dr. Andreas Obermair: Thank you, Dr. Hoskins, for hosting this and it's been an absolute pleasure speaking with you today. Dr. Ebony Hoskins: Definitely a pleasure and thank you to our listeners for your time today. Again, Dr. Obermair's article is titled, “Controversies in the Surgical Management of Gynecologic Cancer: Balancing the Decision to Operate or Hesitate,” and was published in the 2024 ASCO Educational Book. And you'll find a link to the article in the transcript of this episode. Finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers: Dr. Ebony Hoskins @drebonyhoskins Dr. Andreas Obermair @andreasobermair Follow ASCO on social media: @ASCO on Twitter ASCO on Bluesky ASCO on Facebook ASCO on LinkedIn Disclosures: Dr. Ebony Hoskins: No relationships to disclose. Dr. Andreas Obermair: Leadership: SurgicalPerformance Pty Ltd. Stock and Ownership Interests: SurgicalPerformance Pty Ltd. Honoraria: Baxter Healthcare Consulting or Advisory Role: Stryker/Novadaq Patents, Royalties, and Other Intellectual Property: Shares in SurgicalPerformance Pty Ltd. Travel, Accommodation, Expenses: Stryker
Hello and welcome to PartnershipProject's first Parent Podcast. This year we are focusing on Parental Presence in the form of monthly podcasts and blog posts. These voices will be from current or past parents who have been referred to PartnershipProjects via a local authority or agency to work with our accredited NVR practitioners. Here, they are permitting us to host their stories, their struggles and successes in their own words, using this platform to share their growth and continued practice of the approach. We hope that each podcast highlights the unique differences in which NVR can support change in family settings. This first podcast introduces Sarah an SGO who has been working with our accredited NVR practitioner Dr Tony Meehan https://www.partnershipprojectsuk.com/people/tony-meehan/ Tony has worked with Sarah for 18 months and utilised the NVR principles to support Sarah with her nonverbal autistic grandson, Harley. PartnershipProjects is the UK's leading NVR (Non-Violent Resistance) Training provider for professionals and parent coaching.Our professional Podcasts are hosted by highly qualified trainers and practitioners, including Shila Desai, Jill Lubienski, Dr Peter Jakob, Rachael Aylmer, and influential guests. Listen in as they discuss current events, and relevant topics within the NVR community and beyond. This Podcast supports discussions about NVR and related subjects. The information and other content provided in this Podcast are not intended and should not be construed as professional advice, nor is the information a substitute for professional expertise or treatment. If you or any other person has a concern, you should consult with a professional NVR advisor. Never disregard professional advice or delay in seeking it because of something that you have heard on this Podcast or in any linked materials.The opinions and views expressed on this Podcast are those of the Podcast Presenter and have no relation to those of any academic, health practice or other institution, including those of PartnershipProjects UK Ltd.Parents: https://www.partnershipprojectsuk.com/non-violent-resistance-nvr/parents/ Professionals: https://www.partnershipprojectsuk.com/training-workshops/ ...
In the final hour, What the Bleep returns, featuring crazy audio from a number of press conferences around the NFL, the guys down a rabbit hole talking about watching sports in the nude, the Stro Show focuses on Sgo tro's desire to workout with the guys, they preview the night in sports, they read funny texts & more See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
SEQ band SGO shine with their second album which was released in November 2024, and they give us a song-by-song run down of their tracks – we include 2 here, and it is absolutely delicious! What a delight… we had to wrap this up with other Aussie bands to present it to you as a pre-holiday treat. You will be all kinds of impressed and can check out the full album run-down on demand. Also included -> Pyrex, Lone Seagull, Hyla, Hey Calamity, Sacred Hearts, blue diner., Paint, Sorry,Dave, and Total Tommy. Looking down is looking up!For more info and tracklisting, visit: https://thefaceradio.com/shoegrazzzeTune into new broadcasts of ShoegraZZZE, Mondays from 11 PM - 1 AM EST / 4 - 5 AM GMT (Tuesday)//Dig this show? Please consider supporting The Face Radio: http://support.thefaceradio.com Support The Face Radio with PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/thefaceradio. Join the family at https://plus.acast.com/s/thefaceradio. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
This conversation explores the role of the Institute for Quality Education (IQE) and its Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO) in providing educational opportunities for families in Indiana. The discussion highlights the importance of Giving Tuesday, the impact of SGOs on school choice, and personal stories that illustrate the program's significance. Both Mary and Lori share insights on how families can access scholarships and how donors can contribute to support education. Key Takeaways SGOs help families afford the school of their choice. Giving Tuesday has been a successful fundraising initiative for IQE. SGOs cover various educational costs beyond tuition. The SGO program can help cover pre-k education funding. The SGO creates opportunities for families with financial needs. Did you find this episode informative? Help us out! Leave a review Share it with your friends Give us a 5 Star rating on your podcatcher of choice Learn more about IQE and MySchoolOptions: https://www.i4qed.org
A great mix of releases from Australia and America – some new, some familiar. Brisbane bands such as SGO, Nice Biscuit, Vinted Vineer and Mr Finn with their new releases, and Brooklyn and Buffalo (NY) are represented by Punchlove and red Sun 1981. Sydney band Lorelei and LA Bands O D D N E S S E, Crystales and No Swoon all make an appearance as well. Looking down is looking up!For more info and tracklisting, visit: https://thefaceradio.com/shoegrazzzeTune into new broadcasts of ShoegraZZZE, Mondays from 11 PM - 1 AM EST / 4 - 5 AM GMT (Tuesday)//Dig this show? Please consider supporting The Face Radio: http://support.thefaceradio.com Support The Face Radio with PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/thefaceradio. Join the family at https://plus.acast.com/s/thefaceradio. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Listen to ASCO's Journal of Clinical Oncology Art of Oncology article, "Humor Me” by Dr. Stacey Hubay, who is a Medical Oncologist at the Grand River Regional Cancer Center. The essay is followed by an interview with Hubay and host Dr. Lidia Schapira. Dr Hubay share how even though cancer isn't funny, a cancer clinic can sometimes be a surprisingly funny place. TRANSCRIPT Narrator: Just Humor Me, by Stacey A. Hubay, MD, MHSc Most of the people who read this journal will know the feeling. You are lurking at the back of a school function or perhaps you are making small talk with your dental hygienist when the dreaded question comes up—“So what kind of work do you do?” I usually give a vague answer along the lines of “I work at the hospital” to avoid the more specific response, which is that I am an oncologist. I have found this information to be a surefire conversational grenade, which typically elicits some sort of variation on “wow, that must be so depressing” although one time I did get the response “Great! I'm a lawyer and a hypochondriac, mind if I ask you some questions?” After I recently dodged the question yet again, I found myself wondering why I am so reticent about telling people what I do. While discussing work with strangers in our hard earned free time is something many people wish to avoid, I think for me a significant motive for this urge to hide is that I do not actually find the cancer clinic to be an overwhelmingly depressing place. Admitting this to others who are not engaged in this work can lead to at the very least bafflement and at worst offense to those who believe that laughing while looking after cancer patients is a sign of callousness. I am an oncologist who laughs in my clinic every day. Of course, the oncology clinic is sometimes a bleak place to work. Cancer has earned its reputation as a fearsome foe, and the patients I see in my clinic are often paying a heavy toll, both physically and emotionally. Many are grappling with their own mortality, and even those with potentially curable cancers face months of challenging treatment and the torture of uncertainty. Yet somehow, perhaps inevitably, the cancer clinic is not just a place of sadness and tears but also a place of hope and laughter. Although most of us recognize humor and use it to varying degrees, few of us consider it as an academic subject. A few lucky souls in academia have taken on the task of developing theories of humor, which attempt to explain what humor is, what purpose it has, and what social function it serves. Although there are almost as many theories of humor as there are aspiring comedians, most explanations fall into one of three categories: relief theory, superiority theory, and incongruous juxtaposition theory.1 Relief theory holds that people laugh to relieve psychological tension caused by fear or nervousness. I suspect this is the most common type of humor seen in a cancer clinic given the weight of fear and nervousness in such a fraught environment. The second category, people being what we are, asserts that sometimes we laugh out of a feeling of superiority to others. It goes without saying that this sort of humor has no place in the clinician patient interaction. Finally, we laugh at absurdity, or as Kant put it, at “the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing.”2 This last category is also surprisingly fruitful in the oncology setting. Laughter in the cancer clinic is still to some extent considered taboo. Near the start of my oncology training, I remember laughing until my stomach hurt with my attending staff in the clinic workspace between seeing patients. What we were laughing about escapes me now, but what I do clearly recall is an administrator in a buttoned-up suit striding over to us in high dudgeon. “Don't you people realize this is a cancer clinic?” she admonished us. “This is not a place for laughter!,” she added before striding off, no doubt to a management meeting or some other place where the policy on laughter is more liberal. At this point, my attending and I looked at each other for a beat and then burst into helpless gales of laughter. We do not tend to think all that much about why we are laughing at something, but looking back now, I think at least part of the reason was the absurdity of a person so unfamiliar with the culture of the cancer clinic presuming that physicians and nurses somehow park their sense of humor when they arrive at work and turn into a herd of gloomy Eeyores. We oncologists are starting to come clean about the fact that we laugh in the clinic and there is now a modest amount of work in the medical literature addressing the use of humor in oncology. One survey of patients undergoing radiotherapy in Ottawa found that a stunning 86% of patients felt that laughter was somewhat or very important to their care, whereas 79% felt that humor decreased their level of anxiety about their diagnosis.3 If we had a drug that decreased anxiety levels in 79% of patients, had minimal to no side effects when used correctly, and cost the health care system zero dollars, should not we be using it? Sometimes, it is the patient or their family member who introduces an element of humor into an interaction as on one occasion when my patient was filling out a pain survey which included a diagram of the body on which he was asked to circle any areas where he was having pain. As his wife ran through a detailed list of his bowel habits over the past few days, the patient circled the gluteal area on the diagram he was holding, pointed to his wife and said “I've been suffering from a pain in my ass doctor.” His wife looked at him pointedly for a moment before the two of them started laughing and I joined in. Sometimes, a patient's use of humor serves to level the playing field. Patients with Cancer are vulnerable, and the physician is an authority figure, meting out judgments from on high. My patient from a few years ago was having none of that. I met him when he was referred to me with widely metastatic lung cancer, a diagnosis typically associated with a dismal prognosis. The patient, however, was not buying into any of the usual gloom and doom that is customary for these interactions. As his daughter translated the information I was providing, he tilted his chin down, fixed his gaze on me, and proceeded to smile at me in a disarmingly friendly way while simultaneously waggling his generous eyebrows up and down throughout the interview. Over the course of 45 min, I became increasingly disconcerted by his behavior until eventually, I was unable to finish a sentence without sputtering with laughter. If you think you would have done better, then you have clearly never been on the losing end of a staring contest. By the end of the interview, all three of us had happily abandoned any hope of behaving with more decorum. Laughter and the use of humor require a certain letting down of one's guard, and the fact that all three of us were able to laugh together in this interview took me down from any pedestal onto which I might have inadvertently clambered. One study from the Netherlands noted that patients used humor to broach difficult topics and downplay challenges they faced and concluded that “Hierarchy as usually experienced between healthcare professionals and patients/relatives seemed to disappear when using laughter. If applied appropriately, adding shared laughter may help optimize shared decision-making.”4 Although it could be a coincidence, it is worth noting that several years after meeting this patient, I discharged him from my practice because he had somehow been cured of lung cancer. Perhaps laughter really is the best medicine. On other occasions, it might be the physician who takes the plunge and uses humor during a clinical encounter. The same Dutch study by Buiting et al noted that 97% of all specialists used humor in their interactions and all reported laughing during consultations at least occasionally. One of my colleagues, a generally serious sort whose smiles in clinic are as rare as a total eclipse albeit not as predictable, managed to win over his patient with a rare outburst of humor. During their first meeting, the patient listed off the numerous ailments he had experienced in the past including his fourth bout with cancer which had prompted this appointment. As he finished reciting his epic medical history, my colleague looked at him somberly over the rim of his glasses for a moment and asked “Sir, I must ask—who on earth did you piss off?” The patient was so tickled by this interaction that he recounted it to me when I saw him a few weeks later while filling in for my colleague. Although humor is a powerful tool in the clinic, it is of course not something that comes naturally to all of us. Attempts at humor by a clinician at the wrong time or with the wrong patient do not just fall flat but can even be damaging to the physician-patient relationship. Even if a physician uses humor with the best of intentions, there is always the possibility that they will be perceived by the patient as making light of their situation. As Proyer and Rodden5 point out, tact is essential and humor and laughter are not always enjoyable to all people, or to borrow a phrase frequently used by one of my patients, “about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit.” Socalled gelotophobes have a heightened fear of being laughed at, and with them, humor and especially laughter must be wielded with great care if at all. All I can say in response to the legitimate concern about the use of humor being misconstrued is that as with any other powerful tool physicians learn to use, one improves with time. As far as PubMed knows, there are no courses in medical faculties devoted to the fine art of the pun or the knock-knock joke. But even if we physicians cannot all reliably be funny on command, perhaps there is something to be said for occasionally being a little less self-serious. One must also be mindful of patients with whom one is not directly interacting—to a patient who has just received bad news, overhearing the sound of laughter in the clinic corridor has the potential to come across as insensitive. Moments of levity are therefore best confined to a private space such as the examination room in which physicians and patients can indulge in anything from a giggle to a guffaw without running the risk of distressing others. The final reason I submit in support of laughing in a cancer clinic is admittedly a selfish one. While humor has been shown to have the potential to reduce burnout,6 the real reason I laugh with patients in my clinic is because it brings me joy. The people at parties who think my job must be depressing are not entirely wrong. I have noticed that when I have a positive interaction with a patient based on humor or laugh with a colleague about something during a meeting, I feel better. Surprise! As it turns out, this is not just an anecdotal observation. In 2022, a study was published whose title was “Adaptive and maladaptive humor styles are closely associated with burnout and professional fulfillment in members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.”7 The SGO has not to my knowledge been widely recognized up to this point for their sense of humor, but I have a feeling that might change. Humor is an essential part of the way I approach many situations, and given that I spend the majority of my waking hours at work, it is neither possible nor I would argue desirable for me to leave that part of myself at the entrance to the cancer center. So to the administrator who admonished my mentor and me to cease and desist laughing in the cancer clinic, I respectfully decline. My patients, my colleagues, and I will continue to laugh together at any opportunity we get. Joy in one's work is the ultimate defense against burnout, and I for one intend to take full advantage of it. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Hello, and welcome to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology, which features essays and personal reflections from authors exploring their experience in the field of oncology. I'm your host, Dr. Lidia Schapira, Professor of Medicine at Stanford University. Today we're joined by Dr. Stacey Hubay, Medical Oncologist at the Grand River Regional Cancer Center. In this episode, we will be discussing her Art of Oncology article, “Just Humor Me.” Our guest disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Stacey, welcome to our podcast, and thank you for joining us. Dr. Stacey Hubay: Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be here. Dr. Lidia Schapira: It is our pleasure. So let's start by chatting a little bit about what humor means to you and what led you to write this piece and share it with your colleagues. Dr. Stacey Hubay: I didn't realize how important humor was to me until recently. I just finished a Masters in Bioethics, which was 20 years in the making, and this was the first time I'd been writing anything that wasn't a case report for many, many years. And there was actually specifically a course called “Writing in Bioethics,” and this was the first thing that came to my mind. And I realized sort of how much humor there is in my day to day work life, which, because none of the other people in this bioethics class of 10 or 14 people were working in oncology, they were surprised. So I thought it would be interesting to write about that. And then when I started thinking about it, I realized how integral it is to most of, I guess not just my practice life, but the way I deal with life. And then I could see a thread going back all the way to the beginning of my practice in oncology, and I'm like, “I should write about this.” And I don't think it's unique to me either. I think it's probably many of us in this field. Dr. Lidia Schapira: It is. So let's talk a little bit about humor in the practice of such a serious specialty as we tend to think, or people tend to think of, as in oncology. You talk about humor also connecting you with joy and practice, can you tell us a little bit more about that? Dr. Stacey Hubay: I'm just as surprised, probably as anybody, at least when I first went into this field, which is now more than 20 years ago, how much happiness I found in the field. I meant what I said in the beginning of this essay. When I run into people or strangers, you're getting your hair cut or you're at your kid's volleyball practice, and people always say, “Oh, so what do you do?” And I always say, “I'm in healthcare.” And if they start drilling down, eventually I have to admit what I do. And I say, “I'm an oncologist.” And immediately the long faces and people say, “That must be so terrible.” And I'm like, “Well, it can be, but it's not as bad as you might think.” And they're like, “Oh, it must be very difficult.” And I know that avenue of conversation is closed once or twice. I think I did try saying, “You know what? I have a surprising amount of fun in my clinic with my patients.” And they were aghast, I think is the word I would use. And it made me realize sort of what a taboo it is for many people, including maybe some of us in the field, to admit that we sometimes enjoy ourselves with our patients in our clinics. Dr. Lidia Schapira: So let's talk about that. Let's talk about joy, and then from there to laugh. I think the reason why laughter seems sort of stranger than joy is laughter assumes that we see some levity, humor. And some people would say, there's really nothing funny about having humor. And yet you seem to see it and find it and share it with your patients. So take us into your exam rooms and tell us a little bit more about your process. Dr. Stacey Hubay: It's funny, when I think about the humor in my clinics, I don't see myself as the one who's necessarily sort of starting it, although maybe sometimes I do. I think perhaps it's just that I'm more open to it. And I think it's frequently the patients who bring it in with them. Obviously, we know patients in the oncology clinic, they're often very nervous. It's a very anxious time for them. And we are in a position of power compared to our patients, they're very vulnerable. And so sometimes the patient makes a joke, sometimes I wonder if it's a way of testing if that kind of relationship will work with you. They're kind of testing you to see if you will respond to that. And it's also a way of them relieving their own anxiety, because one of the theories about humor is just a way of alleviating tension. It makes sense that oncology is a place where humor would be welcome, because it's one of the most tense places, I think, in medical practice, although I'm not sure it's present in other places like at the ICU. So the patient often brings it in, and then you respond to it, and if you're on the same wavelength, it sort of immediately establishes this kind of trust between you and the patient. It's not something you can do with everybody. Sometimes some people will not be open to that at any time. And some patients, you have to get to know them quite a bit before that starts to come into the mix. But I find with most people, if you follow them for long enough and you have a good working, therapeutic relationship with them, just like you would the people you like, your friends, your family, that comes into a relationship almost unavoidably. And I used to think, “Oh, I'm not supposed to do that,” when I first came into practice. I'm a serious oncologist, which I am, and I can be a serious oncologist. And I also just didn't have the bandwidth for it. I think I was so kind of focused on, I have to know what I'm doing. Early in my practice, I didn't have the mental energy to devote to that. And then as that part became easier, I became kind of more open, I think, to that, coming into the interactions with my patients. And over time, I started realizing that was probably what I enjoyed the most about my working day. At the end of the day, I'd come home and tell stories, and my kids would be like, “It sounds like you have fun at work.” And I go, “You know? I really do. Surprisingly I do.” Dr. Lidia Schapira: That's so very cool. I think there's so much wisdom in what you just told us, which is that at the beginning, especially when in the first few years of your practice, you really are so focused on being clinically competent that you may be just very nervous about trying anything. And then as you relax, you actually say in your essay that for some people, this may bring relief and may level the playing field. So if there is an opportunity and you're loose enough to find it, you may be able to keep that conversation going. It made me wonder, I don't know if you've had any experience yourself as a patient or accompanying a family member as a caregiver to a medical visit. Have you used humor when you are the patient or when you're accompanying the patient? Dr. Stacey Hubay: That's an interesting question. I haven't been a patient apart from my routine family medicine visits for quite a long time. But when I was much younger, I was a teenager, I did have that experience. I was maybe 15 or 16. I had some parathyroid issues. And I remember seeing these specialists in Toronto, and they were very serious people. I remember thinking, if I want to become a physician, because it was at the back of my mind at that time, I'm going to be a lot more fun than these people. I'm going to enjoy myself a lot more. And little did I realize how difficult that actually was at the time. But I found them kind of very serious and a little bit intimidating as a 15-year-old kid. I hadn't reflected on that before. I'm not sure if that's something that I'm deliberately pushing back against. I think now if I see a physician as a patient, I probably am much more willing to bring that in if the physician is open to it. But you can usually tell many physicians, you meet them and you're like, “You're not going to even try that kind of thing.” But if they're open to it, I think it would bring me much more fun as a patient as well. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Yeah. Do you teach your students or trainees or members of your team to use humor? Dr. Stacey Hubay: That's a very interesting question. How do you do that? So I mentioned, I just finished this Masters of Bioethics, and one of the excellent courses in it was how to teach bioethics, which really was a course about how to teach anything. And most of us who are in medicine, we've spent a lot of time teaching without being taught how to teach. In my own practice of teaching, we mostly use one on one with people coming into our clinics and seeing patients with us. And I think mostly some of it's through observation. I will say to people who work with me that we all have to find our own style. It's important, no matter what your style is, to try and connect with patients, because you're trying to create a therapeutic alliance. You're on the same side. The way that works for me is you don't laugh with people you don't trust. When you're trying to make a plan with people in these difficult situations, I think if you've already formed this alliance where they realize you're with them, they're more likely to believe you and trust your recommendations. I tell trainees, I'd say, “This is my way of doing it. And if it works for you, that's wonderful.” But I can see that for some people it's difficult. Although even the most serious clinicians, one of my very good friends and colleagues who I mentioned in my essay and I talked about, he doesn't make a lot of jokes with his patients, which is perfectly reasonable, but the occasional time he does, the patients were so struck by it because they knew him as such a serious person. They bring it up, “Remember that time my doctor said this,” and they thought it was a wonderful thing. So it's difficult to teach. It's just how would the Marx Brothers teach someone else to be the Marx Brothers? It can't be done. Only the Marx Brothers are the Marx Brothers. Not that I'm comparing myself to the Marx Brothers by any means, but I think you find your own style. Maybe what I'd like to show trainees who come through with me is that it's okay to enjoy the patients, even in a very serious discussion. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Yeah, I would almost say that it speaks to the fact that you're very comfortable with your clinical persona in that you can allow yourself to be totally human with them. And if human means that you can both sort of align around seeing some humor or cracking a joke, that is perfectly fine. I have a question for you, and that is that a lot of my patients in my practice, and maybe some of our other listeners come from completely different cultural backgrounds, and many don't speak the same language as I do. So for me, thinking about humor in those situations is impossible just because I just don't even know what we can both accept as funny. And I don't want to be misunderstood. Tell me a little bit about how to think of humor in those situations. Dr. Stacey Hubay: That's a good point you make. It makes me think about how when I read Shakespeare's plays, we all think his tragedies are fantastic. And when I read his comedies, I'm like, “This isn't very funny.” Or if even when you watch sort of silent movies from the 1920s, I'm like, “Did people really laugh at this?” So you're right. Humor is very much of its time and place and its culture. And even people from the same time and place might not share the same sense of humor. That being said, somehow it still works with the people who are open to it. Somehow it's not necessary, because you've made a very witty joke, or vice versa, that we all understood all its complexities. It's more the sense that we're laughing together. And I talk about a gentleman that I met in my practice in this essay, and he didn't speak English, so his daughter was translating for us. And nobody was making any kind of verbal jokes or humor. And this was the first time I was meeting him in consultation, and he just kept making funny faces at me the whole time I was talking, and I didn't know what to do. I was completely bamboozled by this interaction. And it actually ended up being sort of one of the funniest visits I'd had with a patient. By the end of it, I could barely get a sentence out. And I thought, this is absurd. This is a very serious situation. This poor gentleman has stage 4 lung cancer, brain metastasis, but he just wouldn't let me be serious. So I think that humor can transcend cultural, linguistic boundaries amazingly enough. Again, if the person was open to it, this person was almost determined that he was going to make me laugh. It was like he'd set out that by the end of his visit, he was going to make sure that we were having a good time. And I was just, “I'm helpless against this. We're going to have a good time.” I remember coming out of the room, the nurses I was working with, they're like, “What was going on in that room? Is he doing well?”I'm like, “Well, in a way, yes, he is doing well.” At the end of this visit, we were all in a very good mood. But I'll sometimes use sign language, or I'll make some stab at French or whatever it is that the patient speaks, and then they just laugh at me, which is also fine, because they can kind of see that you've made yourself vulnerable by saying, “You know, it's okay if I can't speak your language.” And they just smile and laugh with me. So it's not that it's a joke so much, it's more that they just feel comfortable with you. But you're right, it is more challenging. It's something I wouldn't usually do in such a situation unless I had gotten to know the patient, their family, reasonably well. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Let's talk for a moment about wellness and joy in practice. What gives you the greatest joy in practice? Dr. Stacey Hubay: Undoubtedly the people that I see and I work with. When you go into medicine and you train, we all train in academic settings. And I had excellent mentors and academic mentors, and the expectation, because you're trained by people who are good at that kind of work and succeeded, is that you might want to pursue that, too. And it took me a while to realize that that's not where I get most of my joy. I like being involved with research and I appreciate that people are doing that work and I love applying that knowledge to my practice. But I get my joy out of actually seeing patients. That wasn't modeled a lot necessarily to us in the academic setting. It's taken me quite a long time to realize that it's okay to lean into that. If that's what I like about my practice and that's what I can bring to the interaction, then that's what I'm going to do. And I started looking back, it would have been nice to realize, it's okay. It's okay to be a clinician who really enjoys seeing patients and wants to do a lot of that. Again, different kinds of people become physicians, but a lot of the people we had as mentors, they had chosen academic careers because, not that they didn't like patients, they often did, but they really wanted to pursue the research aspect of it. And they would try to cut down on their clinical work and say, “It's nice if you don't have two clinics, you can focus on the research.” And I think to myself, but I like doing the clinics and I like seeing the patients, and it would be a shame to me if I didn't have that. It's not just the patients, but my colleagues as well, who are also great fun to have around, the nurses we work with. Really, it's the interactions with people. Of course, we get joy from all kinds of other things. In oncology, it's good to see patients do well. It's wonderful to apply new knowledge and you have a breakthrough coming from immunotherapy to lung cancer, melanoma. That sort of thing is fantastic, and it gives me joy, too. But I have the feeling that when I retire at the end of my career, I'm going to look back and go, “Remember that interaction with that patient?” Even now, when I think of when I started in clinical settings as a medical student, I remember, I think it was my first or second patient, I was assigned to look after an elderly woman. She had a history of cirrhosis, and she was admitted with hepatic encephalopathy and a fractured humerus after a fall. I didn't know what I was doing at all, but I was rounding every day. And I went to see her on the third day, she was usually confused, and I said, “How are you doing?” She looked at her arm and she said, “Well, they call this bone the humerus, but I don't see anything particularly funny about it.” I thought, “Oh, she's better.” That's actually one of the earliest things I remember about seeing patients. Or the next year when I didn't realize I was going to pursue oncology. And I was rotating through with an excellent oncologist, Dr. Ellen Warner at Sunnybrook, who does breast cancer. We were debriefing after the clinic, and she said, “Someday, Stacey, I'm going to publish a big book of breast cancer humor.” And I thought, “I wonder what would be in that book.” And that's when I got this inkling that maybe oncology had just as much humor in as every other part of medicine. And that proved to be true. Dr. Lidia Schapira: What was it, Stacey, that led you to bioethics? Tell us what you learned from your bioethics work. Dr. Stacey Hubay: I think it's because basically I'm a person who leads towards the humanities, and for me, bioethics is the application of philosophy and moral ethics to a clinical situation. And I think medicine, thankfully, has room for all kinds of people. Of course, you have to be good at different things to be a physician. But I always imagined myself, when I went to school, that after a class, you'd sit around a pub drinking beer and discuss the great meaning of life. And I thought, this is my chance to pursue that. And I was hoping to kind of– I didn't think of it as that I was going to this because I was interested in humor and joy in oncology, although I obviously am. I was thinking that I would be able to make a difference in terms of resource allocation and priority setting, and I still want to pursue those things. Things often lead you down a side road. And bioethics, for me, has sort of reminded me of what I like about this work. And because I was surrounded by many people who are not doing that kind of work, who were surprised how much I liked it, it made me think very carefully about what is it that I like about this. So the bioethics degree, it's finally allowed me to be that person who sits around in pubs drinking beer, discussing Immanual Kant and Utilitarianism and whatever moral theory is of flavor that particular day. Dr. Lidia Schapira: What led you to write this particular story and put it in front of your medical oncology colleagues? Is it your wish to sort of let people sort of loosen up and be their authentic selves and find more joy in the clinic? Dr. Stacey Hubay: That's a good question! The most immediate impetus was I had an assignment for my degree, and I thought, I have to write something. But I'd been writing down these sort of snippets of things I found funny. Occasionally, I just write them down because they were interesting to me. And because we often relate stories to people, “What did you do today? What was your day like?” And because you tell these stories over and over, they develop some kind of oral, mythical quality. You're like, “Here's what I remember that was funny that happened, and it might have been many years ago now.” And I think I'd been thinking a long time about writing it down and sort of organizing it that way. And I guess having to produce something as part of this degree program was an impetus for me. But I'd always wanted to do it. And I think the main thing was I wanted to make it clear to myself what it is I like about it. It's actually made it, for me, much more clear. It was sort of a nebulous thing that I like my work and what is it like about it. And this is what I like. I like the joy I get from patient interactions. And then a secondary goal is I hope that other people, if they were to read this, they realize it's okay for us to have joy in our work as oncologists. And there is a lot of doom and gloom in the world and in our practices, but there's always, always a chink that lets the light in, there's always some humor in what we do. And so I hope that if other people can find that, too, that they enjoy their practice and they last a long time and ultimately help patients through this difficult journey. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Are you somebody who likes to read stories? And if so, what stories have you read recently that you want to recommend to our listeners? Dr. Stacey Hubay: Oh, I am reading The Master and Margarita because three different people recommended this novel to me over the last three years. When a third person did, I thought, “That's it. Got to read it.” It's a Russian novel from the 1930s that was banned until, I think, the ‘60s or ‘70s. It's like a satire of Russian society in the ‘30s. And actually, what I like about it, I haven't finished it. I'm a third of the way through, as I think it's one of the so-called classic novels, people tell me, but that's funny. A lot of the classic novels are kind of tragedies or romances, and this one is sort of absurd black humor in the face of a difficult situation, which I guess is related to oncology, again. So this sort of oppressive, difficult society, the 1930s and Soviet Union, how do you deal with that? With humor. So I'm quite enjoying it, actually. So I recommend that one. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Well, you're an amazing storyteller, and I really enjoyed our conversation. Is there any final message that you want to convey to our listeners? Dr. Stacey Hubay: If you have a chance to become an oncologist, you should do it. It's just the best career I can imagine. Dr. Lidia Schapira: Well, with your laughter and with that wonderful wisdom, let me say, until next time, to our listeners, thank you for listening to JCO's Cancer Stories: The Art of Oncology. Don't forget to give us a rating or review, and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all of the ASCO shows at asco.org/podcast. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Show Notes: Like, share and subscribe so you never miss an episode and leave a rating or review. Guest Bio: Dr. Stacey Hubay is a Medical Oncologist at the Grand River Regional Cancer Center.
In this episode of the IJGC podcast, Editor-in-Chief Dr. Pedro Ramirez is joined by Dr. Robert Coleman to discuss overall survival of SORAYA trial. Dr. Coleman completed his Obstetrics & Gynecology residency at Northwestern University Medical Center in Chicago, Illinois, and completed his fellowship at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in 1993. From 1993-1996, he served as Assistant Professor at Creighton University followed by service as Vice-Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center. Dr. Coleman joined as Faculty at MD Anderson Cancer center in 2004 and served as Professor and Executive Director for Cancer Network Research, holding the Ann Rife Cox Chair in Gynecology. In March 2020, he joined US Oncology Research (USOR) as Chief Scientific Officer and served briefly as Chief Medical Officer for Sarah Cannon Research Institute (SCRI). He currently serves as Chief Medical officer for Vaniam Group. Dr. Coleman has authored or coauthored over 750 scientific publications, including over 450 peer-reviewed articles, along with numerous book chapters, monographs, invited articles, and textbooks. He was the 2019 APGO-CREOG awardee for Excellence in Teaching. He serves as Vice President of GOG-Foundation, Inc. He served as President of SGO (2015-2016) and is the immediate Past-President of IGCS. He was recently inducted into MJH Life Sciences™ 2020 class of “Giants in Cancer Care®.” Highlights: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) is a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate comprising an FRα-binding antibody, cleavable linker, and maytansinoid DM4, a potent tubulin-targeting agent Early clinical data suggested efficacy in recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) prompting a larger trial to confirm both safety and efficacy in patients with PROC In this SORAYA trial MIRV demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity in patients with FRα-high platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with an ORR: 32.4% and a median DOR: 6.9 months Remarkably the median OS was 15 months; 37% patients alive at 24 months Efficacy of MIRV was further evaluated with respect to when it was administered (as first treatment for PROC) and in patients receiving prior bevacizumab. An ORR of 34.8% was documented in the formers, and 31.5% in the latter. The ocular toxicity was new for many treating physicians when the drug first became available. However with mitigating strategies as used in the study the events were predictable, low-grade, and rarely (n=1 patient) led to treatment discontinuation Now with MIRASOL confirming these data and demonstrating efficacy over standard of care for response, PFS, and unprecedently, OS, the agent is a staple of contemporary management.
In this episode, listen to Floor J. Backes, MD, and Angeles Alvarez Secord, MD, MHSc, share their clinical insights and takeaways on new data presented for endometrial, ovarian, and cervical cancers presented at the 2024 annual meetings of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology and American Society of Clinical Oncology including:RUBY Part 1 Subgroup Analyses by MRR Status: Addition of dostarlimab to platinum-based therapy followed by dostarlimab maintenance in advanced endometrial cancerRUBY Part 2: Survival outcomes with addition of dostarlimab to platinum-based therapy followed by dostarlimab plus niraparib maintenance in advanced endometrial cancerSurvival Analyses From Phase III NRG GY018: Carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without pembrolizumab as frontline treatment for patients with advanced endometrial cancerDUO-E: First-line therapy with carboplatin plus paclitaxel plus bevacizumab and durvalumab followed by maintenance with bevacizumab, durvalumab, and olaparib in newly diagnosed endometrial cancerLong-term Follow-up From SIENDO: PFS in TP53 wild-type and preliminary survival by molecular subgroups in patients with endometrial cancer and complete or partial response after ≥12 weeks of first line taxane/carboplatinSubgroup Analyses From the Randomized Phase III MIRASOL: Mirvetuximab soravtansine vs investigator's choice of chemotherapy in FR
John Elcesser, the executive director of Indiana Non-Public Education Association (INPEA), discusses his background in non-public education and the importance of school choice advocacy. He highlights the impact of non-public schools in Indiana and the need for diverse educational options. Elcesser emphasizes the role of advocacy in protecting and expanding school choice programs, and the importance of grassroots support. He shares his favorite moments of successful advocacy efforts and the growth of enrollment in non-public schools. Elcesser also looks ahead to the goal of universal school choice in Indiana by 2025. The future of school choice is moving towards universal access, with the goal of providing choice to all families. However, there is a concern about regulatory creep, where more regulations are being imposed on non-public and choice schools, dampening their excitement. Advocacy is crucial to ensure the expansion of school choice and address barriers such as transportation and athletic eligibility. Capital-related issues, like limited access to outside funding, also pose challenges for non-public schools. The SGO program has been instrumental in making high school education affordable, and there is a need to keep it viable and explore ways to enhance it. It is essential for individuals to be involved, engaged, and informed in the political process to support school choice initiatives. Takeaways Non-public schools in Indiana have made significant contributions to the educational landscape and have produced many leaders in the state. Advocacy is crucial for protecting and expanding school choice programs, and grassroots support plays a vital role in influencing legislators. The impact of school choice legislation can be seen in increased enrollment and growth of non-public schools. The goal of universal school choice in Indiana by 2025 is achievable with continued advocacy and engagement. The future of school choice is focused on achieving universal access for all families. Regulatory creep, with increasing regulations on non-public and choice schools, is a concern that dampens schools' excitement. The current system creates an awkward environment in schools where only a small percentage of families are eligible for choice programs. Advocacy is crucial to expand school choice and address barriers such as transportation and athletic eligibility. Capital-related issues, like limited access to outside funding, pose challenges for non-public schools. The SGO program has been instrumental in making high school education affordable and needs to be kept viable and enhanced. Individuals need to be involved, engaged, and informed in the political process to support school choice initiatives. Did you find this episode informative? Help us out! Leave a review Share it with your friends Give us a 5 Star rating on your podcatcher of choice
Doctors James Ferriss, Linda Duska, and Jayanthi Lea discuss the promise and the challenges of targeting the immune system with immune checkpoint inhibitors, or ICIs, in cervical and endometrial cancers. They also examine emerging data that support the use of ICIs in recurrent cervical cancer, the potential for curing some patients with advanced endometrial cancer, and molecular factors that make cervical cancer a good target for immunotherapy. TRANSCRIPT Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Hello, and welcome to the ASCO Daily News Podcast. I'm Dr. James Stuart Ferriss, your guest host of the ASCO Daily News Podcast today. I'm an associate professor of gynecology and obstetrics and the Gynecologic Oncology Fellowship Program Director at Johns Hopkins Medicine. In today's episode, we'll be discussing the use of immunotherapy in cervical and endometrial cancers to advance the treatment of these malignancies. I'm delighted to be joined by two acclaimed experts in this space, Dr. Linda Duska and Dr. Jaya Lea. Dr. Duska is a professor of obstetrics and gynecology and serves as the associate dean for clinical research at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. Dr. Lea is a professor of obstetrics and gynecology and chief of gynecologic oncology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Our full disclosures are available in the transcript of this episode, and disclosures related to all episodes of the podcast are available at asco.org/DNpod. Drs. Duska and Dr. Lea, it's great to have you on the podcast today. Dr. Linda Duska: Thanks, Dr. Ferriss. Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Thanks, Dr. Ferriss. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, let's get started. In recent years, we've had a revolution in the treatment of advanced endometrial and cervical cancers with improved outcomes for patients treated with immunotherapy. And when we say immunotherapy, we're specifically talking about immune checkpoint inhibitors today. A few of these agents have actually been approved in the United States for the management of these diseases. In our discussion, I'd like to review the promise and challenges of targeting the immune system in patients with advanced endometrial and cervical cancers, as well as review the most recent evidence we have in these spaces. Let's start with cervix. We've had a lot of improvements in outcomes here, Dr. Lea, and with cervical cancer, we've seen improved overall survival with the incorporation of immunotherapy along with chemotherapy and anti-angiogenic therapy for advanced and recurrent disease. Can you remind us why cervical cancer is a good target for immunotherapy? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Yes, Dr. Ferriss. Immunotherapy for cervical cancer is supported by several molecular factors. And I think first and foremost, it's so important to remember that the majority of cervical cancers are HPV-positive. And HPV-positive cancers can induce a high level of inflammation, but this high level of inflammation actually contributes to evasion of immune surveillance. What it also does is that it's responsible for the induction of PD-L1. And we've seen several studies that have shown that cervical cancers express PD-L1 anywhere from 50 to 90 percent of cases. Other pertinent factors to consider are that cervical cancer can be considered a tumor with a high tumor mutational burden. So, the number of somatic mutations that we see in the DNA can be considered as a proxy for neoantigens. And so the higher the level of neoantigens, the more immunogenic the tumor. And then lastly, about 1 in 10 cervical cancers present with microsatellite instability, which is an already established key biomarker for the response team in care. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, thinking about targeting PD-L1, what clinical evidence do we have that supports the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in recurrent cervical cancer? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: We now have several studies that have shown a benefit for immune checkpoint inhibitors. For example, KEYNOTE-158 was a phase 2 basket [trial] that investigated the antitumor activity of pembrolizumab, which is a PD-1 inhibitor, in multiple cancer types. And specifically for patients with previously treated advanced cervical cancer, we were able to see an overall response rate of about 15% in those patients who had PD-L1 positive. And similarly, the EMPOWER CERVICAL-1 study, which was a phase 3 randomized trial that investigated the efficacy of cemiplimab, which is another PD-1 inhibitor, versus investigator's choice of single agent chemotherapy, showed a significant difference in median overall survival and progression-free survival in the cemiplimab group. There are several other studies that have investigated the efficacy of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in cervical cancer. One specific PD-1 inhibitor is nivolumab. In CHECKMATE-358, nivolumab was associated with an overall response rate of 26% in women who had recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Dr. Duska, do you have any thoughts? Dr. Linda Duska: I'm really interested in PD-L1 as a biomarker because in the KEYNOTE-A18 study, which we're going to get to, 95% of patients were PD-L1 positive by CPS, which is the scoring system that we use in cervix cancer. And some of the studies that you already mentioned, including BEATcc, which we're also going to talk about, reported results where PD-L1 wasn't even considered. And so it begs the question, since PD-L1 is actually – again, depending on when in the course of disease you look at it, but more recent studies suggest 95% of cervical cancers express PD-L1, and – agnostic is the word I was looking for – it seems at least in BEATcc and similar trials that PD-L1 is agnostic, but I wonder if PD-L1 is really a good biomarker for response to checkpoint inhibitor therapy and I wonder what your thoughts are. Dr. Jayanthi Lea: I think that's an excellent question. To your point, that's correct that we saw in KETYNOTE-A18 that more than 90% of the patients had PD-L1 positivity and the result is sort of generalizable to all comers. That's still a matter of debate as to how we see PD-L1 as a biomarker to incorporate checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of patients. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, let's talk about the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the frontline setting. Until recently, we haven't seen much improvement in overall survival since the introduction of anti-angiogenic therapy to the chemotherapy backbone, and that was in GOG 240. Let's talk about the changes that have recently occurred in this space. Dr. Jayanthi Lea: So, we've had some very exciting data specifically from initially KEYNOTE-826 and its primary metastatic or first line salvage settings. So, KEYNOTE-826, which was a phase 3 randomized, controlled trial was very practice-changing for us because it showed that incorporation of pembrolizumab to the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer, really changed the landscape for treatment in this group of patients. So, keep in mind that prior to the study, the standard of care was carboplatin, or cisplatin with paclitaxel plus or minus bevacizumab, which yielded a median overall survival range in anywhere from 13 to 17 months depending on whether you use bevacizumab or not. And then adding pembrolizumab to that regimen, increase the median overall survival to 24 months, which is very promising. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: If I remember correctly, KEYNOTE-826 allowed investigators choice, use of bevacizumab, and initially we were unsure about which regimen was best. Has there been additional data since? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: There has been additional data since. And another study that was done in the same vein was the BEATcc trial, which also looked at the different checkpoint inhibitors, atezolizumab in combination now with bevacizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy. And the control arm for this study was the GOG 240 regimen, which included bevacizumab. And this study showed both a progression-free and overall survival difference. The median overall survival in this study was 32 months with the incorporation of the checkpoint inhibitor to the bevacizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy. So, the way that I look at it is that the BEATcc trial basically confirmed the findings of KEYNOTE-826 and highlights that it is important for us to incorporate checkpoint inhibition with immunotherapy along with bevacizumab when we're treating patients with a recurrence. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Also, folks with primary advanced treatment for cervical cancer, this would be a great regimen, is that right? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Absolutely. Primary advance, we would want to use the same regimen for that. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Okay. What about locally advanced in primary treatment? What advances have we seen? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: So we've had some major changes in that field as well, especially with the recent KEYNOTE-A18 data where pembrolizumab was administered in combination with external beam radiation and concurrent chemotherapy. And this study showed that there was significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival compared to chemoradiation alone. Specifically, the progression-free survival at 24 months using pembrolizumab with chemoradiation was 68%, and 57% when in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for disease progression was 0.7 and no new safety signals were observed, which is fantastic, especially given the 0.7 hazard ratio that received PFS. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Yeah, absolutely. These patients with locally advanced cervical cancer often are quite symptomatic, and the prospect of adding chemo, radiation, and now immunotherapy on top of that is really encouraging to see that it was such a well-tolerated regimen. I believe that there were patient-reported outcomes recently reported at SGO. Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Absolutely. So, the safety profile of pembrolizumab and chemoradiation was consistent with the known profile of the individual treatment components. And no new safety signals emerged in the pembrolizumab chemoradiation arm. So, you're right. It was very well tolerated. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: What would you say are the takeaways for folks who are seeing these patients in the community? These locally advanced cervical cancer patients that are now adding immunotherapy in a space that we have not used routinely in the past in terms of combining it with chemo radiation in gynecologic cancer. What are some things they should be looking out for? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Well, I think that with the hazard ratio of 0.7 and the patient-reported outcomes showing no new signal, I think we can say that there is a positive benefit-to-risk profile of adding pembrolizumab in combination with chemoradiation, and that we should feel comfortable using this regimen. Now, of course, we have individualized patient care, and be able to know when to use bevacizumab, when to use immunotherapy. So, taking the whole patient into consideration becomes important. But for those individuals who are able to receive these drugs who don't have concrete issues to not receive these drugs [then I'd say we could] incorporate them since the safety profile is set. Dr. Linda Duska: I would add to that, Dr. Ferriss, that right now we only have FDA approval in the U.S. for stage 3-4A disease, and that's 2014 staging. Mind you, we are now in 2018, so we should be very careful in and follow the correct FIGO staging. But the FDA only gave approval for stage 3-4A disease, even though the study included patients with earlier stage disease and positive nodes. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: That's a great point, thank you. So, Dr. Duska, thinking about endometrial cancer and advanced endometrial cancer, we have seen a similar revolution in the care of patients over the past few years, with major shifts in our approach. Can you remind us how we got here? Dr. Linda Duska: Yes, I would say in the ‘90s and before, and maybe even in the early 2000s, we used a lot of radiation for endometrial cancer as adjuvant therapy following surgery. The general consensus and what we were all taught was that this was a chemotherapy-resistant disease. And then we learned from a variety of GOG at the time, Gynecologic Oncology Group trials, that this disease is actually chemosensitive. And we went through a series of chemotherapy drugs, ranging from adriamycin cisplatin to taxel adriamycin cisplatin, and finally to taxel and carboplatin, demonstrating that this disease is actually quite chemosensitive. With this realization came the idea that maybe it would be important to combine chemotherapy and radiation particularly in high-risk endometrial cancer cases, so those with positive nodes or patients with high-risk histology such as clear cell or serous cancers. So two very important trials were done, one of them was PORTEC-3 and the other was GOG-258, which looked at combining chemo and radiation together to see if we could do better than one or the other alone. And they were very different trials, and they looked at different populations of patients and they looked at different things. For example, PORTEC-3 randomized patients to receive chemotherapy and radiation versus radiation alone, while 258 looked at chemotherapy and radiation versus chemotherapy alone. Without going into a great amount of detail, I think what we learned from both of those studies, and I think surprised many of us, that the arms that included chemotherapy, those patients did better. In fact, the results of GOG-258 can be interpreted – and this is somewhat controversial – but can be interpreted that many of these high-risk patients don't need radiation at all, or perhaps need tumor-directed radiation. For example, chemotherapy followed by tumor-directed radiation either to the vaginal cuff, because the vaginal cuff is at risk for recurrence, or perhaps to an area of concern, maybe the cervix if there were cervical involvement or if there is a particular concern for local recurrence in a particular patient. So, I think the pendulum has swung from almost always using radiation alone to, in more modern day, using chemotherapy and using radiation much more sparingly, and then comes immunotherapy. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, update us on the results of NRG-GY018 and RUBY? Dr. Linda Duska: So, we've already talked about the KEYNOTE basket trials, which really contributed a lot to our understanding of the importance of MMR deficiency and microsatellite unstable disease. The KEYNOTE-158 study and the GARNET study showed us how important it was for women with MMRd and MSI endometrial cancer to receive checkpoint inhibition, and actually with remarkable response rates to women who had already been pretreated. But we also learned from the GARNET trial, which included MMRp patients, that the response rates in MMRp were not that great. And that led to KEYNOTE-775, which looked to combine pembrolizumab with a VEGF inhibitor, lenvantinib, to see if we could make the cold tumor hot. And indeed, we could. And not only could we improve the response rate in patients with MMRp tumors, but we could also improve the response rate in patients with MMRd tumors. They did better with the combination than they did with pembro alone. That led to the idea of combining checkpoint inhibitors with chemo upfront. The idea there was we were going to take paclitaxel and carboplatin, which were our backbone for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, and add immunotherapy to that. And to your point, GY018 and RUBY trials did just that. And they allowed MMRd and MMRp patients and combined paclitaxel and carboplatin, either with dostarlimab in the case of RUBY, or pembrolizumab in the case of GY018. These studies, both of which were reported and published in the New England Journal of Medicine last year, showed remarkable findings in the upfront setting and potentially in the curable setting. And the OS data for RUBY were presented at SGO this year and were remarkable for MMRd patients. In the whole population, in the whole group in RUBY, there was a 16.4-month improvement in overall survival with the addition of dostarlimab which is just huge. When you look at the MMRd group, I think Dr. Powell described the overall survival improvement as unprecedented. I believe that was the word that he used. Also, he called it very robust, with a hazard ratio of 0.32 for the group that got dostarlimab, and a median OS that was not reached. So really remarkable. In addition, in the MMRp group, there was a seven-month improvement in OS that was significant. So that's really amazing in the RUBY trial. It's also of note that the RUBY trial allowed carcinosarcomas, whereas the GY018 study did not. So, I think it's fair to say that these results apply to carcinosarcomas. It's also really important to note that many of the patients in the immunotherapy group who received placebo, 41% of them got IO in a later treatment line, and these OS data still stand. So that's really interesting and hypothesis-generating. For GY018, we don't have mature OS data yet, so we can't talk about OS. But we saw a similar improvement in PFS in both arms, in the d and the pMMR, with an OS trend in both arms that was also reported at SGO. GY018 was a little bit different though, because they unblinded at the time of the PFS reporting last year, and so those patients were unblinded a lot earlier than the RUBY patients were. So, to interpret the data in that vein, the OS data is not mature, but we anticipate looking at the PFS curves and the preliminary OS curves, that the OS data will also be statistically significantly improved in core pembrolizumab in GY018. What's also really interesting, and we haven't talked about molecular subtypes, is that when we look at the molecular subtypes in RUBY, and I'm sure we're going to see data on the molecular subtypes in GY018 coming up, different molecular subtypes of endometrial cancer respond differently to IO. And so, there's going to be lots of really interesting data coming our way soon that we're really excited to see, and that will help us triage patients appropriately into treatment regimens. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Dr. Lea, did you have a thought? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Yeah, I just wanted to comment that looking at the dMMR survival curve in the file that was presented recently, one thing that really strikes me is the importance of adding the IO at the time of initial treatment. The separation of the curves persists. And, like you just mentioned, Dr. Duska, I mean, some of those patients who received placebo then later on went to get an IO treatment, but at the same time, we still see a vast separation of those curves. So, I think it's really important to note that immunotherapy should be used upfront, especially in dMMR. Dr. Linda Duska: Yeah, I completely agree with that. And I think that might be– I mean, this is just a hypothesis, but I think that that might be why we saw a difference with the addition of immunotherapy in the MMRp group, because it's possible that the chemotherapy created an immune environment that made the checkpoint inhibitor work more successfully than it would have otherwise. So, a really good point. You definitely need to include dostarlimab or pembrolizumab with the chemotherapy and then as maintenance therapy after. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, you mentioned, we're increasingly thinking about endometrial cancer in smaller and smaller buckets of patients with very prescribed molecular profiles. We don't yet have enough information to specifically tailor treatment. How are you approaching that today in patients that you see in clinic? Dr. Linda Duska: Well, the MMR, and I'm interested in what you both are doing also, it's easy with the MMRd and MSI high patients. Those patients all should receive a checkpoint inhibitor, no question. The patients that are p53 mut, I test them for HER2, because we do have data to suggest that atezolizumab or TDX-d might be useful in those individuals, HER2 positive. And then the remaining patients, also called the NSMPs. That's a difficult group. I'm interested to know how you all manage them. I think that's the group where more clinical research is really needed to determine what the best treatment regimen for them is. But I'm interested in both of your thoughts on that. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Dr. Lea? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: I would have to say that I do exactly like you do, Dr. Duska. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: And I would say our approach is very similar. And we have a robust discussion always about the use of immunotherapy with chemotherapy and in patients who are proficient MMR. But I think that most of us believe that the PFS data is certainly compelling. And now the OS data from RUBY, very compelling in both groups. And so, we are routinely recommending the use of immunotherapy along with chemotherapy in these advanced patients. Dr. Linda Duska: I've heard the argument made that GY018 required measurable disease, and so does not necessarily apply to patients without measurable disease. I'm not sure that I agree with that. I think there were clinical trial reasons why that was a requirement rather than biologic reasons. In addition, as we already discussed, RUBY included carcinosarcomas and GY018 did not. I don't think there's a reason to only use dostarlimab for carcinosarcomas, but that said, I don't know that pembrolizumab has an indication for carcinosarcomas. The devil's in the details, don't get too lost in the weeds. I think the take-home message here is that it's really important to use IO, particularly for the MMRd patients with endometrial cancer, upfront. And based on the OS that we saw in both RUBY and preliminarily in GY018, we may be curing some people with this regimen, and I think we should focus on that. The overall survival for advanced endometrial cancer is not great, and if we can improve that and potentially cure some people, that's a huge advance for our patients. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Do you envision a day that we might even ask the question, “Do we need to do surgery?” Dr. Linda Duska: So, the rectal data would support that assertion. I'm not sure that endometrial cancer and rectal cancer are the same thing. And I think that taking out a postmenopausal woman's uterus is a lot less morbid than potentially radiating or taking out somebody's rectum. I think a different question would be, is there a day when we would stop doing no dissection? We could definitely debate that, but I don't see that happening. Do you see that happening anytime soon? A stopping of hysterectomy for endometrial cancer? Dr. Jayanthi Lea: I don't see that happening anytime soon. And I think, as you said, taking out the uterus, tubes, and ovaries, it does provide us with some information about whether you're even dealing with a secondary primary. But also, it's from a quality-of-life standpoint. If a woman has a large uterus, that's uncomfortable. Postmenopausal bleeding, avoiding bleeding during the course of treatment, so many reasons why I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to want to not do surgery for these patients. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: So, we'll put a plug in for our fellow gynecologic oncologists that we still have a role to play in the incorporation of treatment regimens for patients with advanced uterine cancer. So it's not just medicine, there's still a role for surgery. Dr. Linda Duska: I think that's very fair, yeah. Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Okay. I think that's all the time we have for today. I want to thank our listeners for their time, and you'll find the links to all the studies we've discussed today in the transcript of this episode. And finally, if you value the insights that you hear on the ASCO Daily News Podcast, please take a moment to rate, review, and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you. Dr. Linda Duska: Thank you. Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Thank you. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care, and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Find out more about today's speakers: Dr. James Stuart Ferriss Dr. Linda Duska @LDuska Dr. Jayanthi Lea Follow ASCO on social media: @ASCO on Twitter ASCO on Facebook ASCO on LinkedIn Disclosures: Dr. James Stuart Ferriss: Honoraria: National Board of Medical Examiners Dr. Linda Duska: Consulting or Advisory Role: Regeneron, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Ellipses Pharma Researching Funding (Inst): GlaxoSmithKline, Millenium, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Aeterna Zentaris, Novartis, Abbvie, Tesaro, Cerulean Pharma, Aduro Biotech, Advaxis, Syndax, Pfizer, Merck, Genentech/Roche, Cerulean Pharma, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Leap Therapeutics Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: UpToDate, Editor, British Journal of Ob/Gyn Dr. Jayanthi Lea: Consulting or Advisory Role: Roche
Alle Ministeries, de grote uitvoeringsorganisaties en vele gewichtige adviesrapporten vragen erom: vereenvoudiging van onze overheid. Maar kan onze overheid minder complex? Een echt Studio Tegengif onderwerp dat al in tientallen uitzendingen van Studio Tegengif terugkwam. De complexiteit van de overheid die we in Nederland met elkaar gecreëerd hebben. We gaan net wat dieper in op de roep om een minder complexe overheid. We gaan eerst in op wie er allemaal roepen om een minder complexe overheid? Vervolgens behandelen we waar deze complexiteit nou echt in zit en wat dat veroorzaakt. Tot slot komen we bij de belangrijkste vraag: wat zijn de opties om onze overheid te vereenvoudigen? Als gekte van de week bespreken we de nareis op nareis leugen. Deze aflevering werd gemaakt met ondersteuning van Wim Brons van remotepodcast.nl. Een aanrader voor als je op afstand een podcast wil maken met fantastische geluidskwaliteit. Wil je ons steunen? Dat kan: je kunt vriend van de show worden: https://vriendvandeshow.nl/studio-tegengif ***SHOWNOTES*** NRC, ‘Zo nu eerst een belastingvoordeel' https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2024/02/08/zo-nu-eerst-een-belastingvoordeel-hoe-de-bavaria-familie-het-uitstekend-voor-zichzelf-regelde-a4189371 SGO brief formatie 2024 https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/brieven/2024/01/15/sgo-brief-15-januari-2024/sgo-brief-2024.pdf NRC, ‘Uitvoerders zijn het zat' https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2024/02/19/uitvoerders-zijn-het-zat-politiek-moet-einde-maken-aan-complexe-wetten-en-regels-kijk-eerst-wat-je-simpeler-kunt-maken-a4190630 WRR, ‘Toekomstgericht beleid (2024) - specifiek aanbeveling p. 32 ‘Maak het doenlijk voor burgers' https://www.wrr.nl/binaries/wrr/documenten/publicaties/2024/01/18/toekomstgericht-beleid.-perspectieven-en-agendas/Toekomstgericht+beleid.+Perspectieven+en+agendas_18jan2024.pdf WRR, ‘Grip: het maatschappelijk belang van persoonlijke controle' https://www.wrr.nl/publicaties/rapporten/2023/11/30/grip Staat van de Uitvoering, ‘Belastingdienst vraagt om minder complexe fiscale regelingen' https://staatvandeuitvoering.nl/nieuwsbericht/belastingdienst-slaat-harder-op-trom-over-ingewikkeld-fiscaal-stelsel/ De Correspondent, ‘Laat Yesilgöz niet wegkomen met haar schaamteloze leugens over nareis op nareis' https://decorrespondent.nl/15143/laat-yesilgoz-niet-wegkomen-met-haar-schaamteloze-leugens-over-nareis-op-nareis/7eb9dcd2-cf1d-0e3f-2c51-31e8a825ae14
Mary Eaker, the executive director of the Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO) program at IQE, shares her school choice journey and the evolution of the SGO program. She discusses the impact of school choice on students and families, as well as the challenges and misconceptions surrounding the concept. Mary emphasizes the importance of equitable access to quality education and the role of advocacy in achieving this goal. She also highlights the community-building aspect of the SGO program and the dedication of donors to supporting education options for students. Mary's passion and motivation stem from witnessing the success stories of students who have benefited from school choice. In this conversation, Mary and Sarah discuss the Indiana Tax Credit Scholarship Program and the role of Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs) in providing scholarships to students. They also touch on the eligibility criteria and the impact of the program on Indiana families. Additionally, they talk about the history of the Institute for Quality Education as an SGO and its mission to provide scholarships to students across the state. Did you find this episode informative? Help us out! Leave a review Share it with your friends Give us a 5 Star rating on your podcatcher of choice
Join Dr. Robert Neff as he interviews Drs. Kathleen Moore and Charles Leath, III to discuss the latest NRG Oncology updates on upcoming studies, research, and trials. The focus for the podcast is to bridge the gaps between SGO members and NRG Oncology. Some questions covered during the interview: Since NRG just celebrated its 10-year anniversary during the Summer Meeting, what is the vision for NRG in the next 10 years?What are some of the successes within the past year for the Ovary Subcommittee?What were the most important highlights from the Cervix and Vulvar Subcommittee?Are there opportunities for new members to be involved? This episode was created by Dr. Robert Neff, 2023-2024 member of the SGO Education Committee's Clinical Trials Management/Concepts Subcommittee. Thanks to Drs. Moore and Leath, III for your contribution to this episode.Moderator:Robert Neff, MDSpeakers:Kathleen Moore, MDCharles Leath, III, MD Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Do you notice a decline in wild turkey populations across Nebraska or other areas across the United States? Two females on the University of Nebraska Lincoln team shares how a wild turkey research project aims to provide Nebraska Game and Parks with actionable science to inform management decisions in an effort to reserve the current decline in turkey populations. Very cool stuff! The SGO team nerded out on this topic.... join us! ***Correction in the interview: Coop Fish & Wildlife research to be included in the study, but not USGS
Sam and Wealthquest President David Kern continue their insightful dialogue on giving and generosity in this episode. They delve into tax-deductible methods of giving, highlighting the benefits of donating appreciated shares to avoid capital gains taxes. The conversation also explores the types of shares that may not be ideal for donation. Furthermore, they discuss the advantages of donor-advised funds, combining charitable giving with effective tax strategies. This episode emphasizes the importance of integrating generosity with a comprehensive financial plan, ensuring flexibility and tax benefits in your philanthropic efforts. Episode Highlights: [02:55] We're now shifting gears to gifting to nonprofits or charities. This would be any 5013c that doesn't pay income tax. [03:11] You can be charitable and benefit these organizations and get a tax benefit in the process. [03:26] Gifting shares or assets to charities. If you sell a stock that has increased in value, you'll have to pay income tax on it. If you gift that stock to a charity, neither of you pay taxes on it. [04:00] You can also record this on your Schedule A to see if it works for you this tax year. [05:08] You don't want to donate shares that have lost value. You want to donate shares with the lowest cost basis or the greatest amount of appreciation. [06:27] Think of a donor-advised fund like a holding pen for charitable donors. This fund can also receive appreciated securities. [09:53] Bunching is two years worth of giving in one year. [12:27] Qualified charitable distributions or QCDs. Required minimum distributions RMDs. [14:19] If you're already charitably inclined and you're going to give a certain amount, use a QCD instead of paying taxes on your required minimum distributions. [17:25] You can also make charities the beneficiaries of your accounts. If you leave an IRA to a charity, they won't have to pay taxes on that. [18:47] Bonus: Specific to Ohio. Scholarship granting organization SGO is a new Ohio based tax scholarship program. It receives contributions from donors and grants scholarships to eligible students. [20:11] Giving to an SGO will reduce state tax liability. Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) owns the CFP® certification mark, the CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ certification mark, and the CFP® certification mark (with plaque design) logo in the United States, which it authorizes use of by individuals who successfully complete CFP Board's initial and ongoing certification requirements. Resources & Links Related to this Episode Wealthquest Get Started Living a Rich Life: The No-Regrets Guide to Building and Spending Wealth David Kern The Power of Strategic Giving to Individuals - Part 2 What Motivates Generosity? - Part 1 Ohio SGO
The season of gift giving is here! Need a special gift for the outdoor enthusiast in your life? The SGO team shares their lists (nudge nudge to their husbands), plus they recommend a variety of outdoor experiences and goods that will be enjoyed by your loved ones.
Featuring an interview with Dr Debra Richardson, including the following topics: Efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2-expressing solid tumors (0:00) Activity, safety and ongoing investigation of tumor treating fields in combination with chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer (5:12) ASCO and SGO guidance on the nationwide shortages of carboplatin and cisplatin (9:21) Investigating mechanisms of resistance to PARP inhibitors; potential use of circulating tumor DNA as an investigational tool (14:13) CME information and select publications
Exploring the most important developments in the field of endometrial cancer, this podcast episode features two highly esteemed guests: Bradley Monk, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Tucson, USA, and Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, Nebraska, USA; and Robert Coleman, Chief Medical Officer, Vaniam Group, Chicago, Illinois, USA. The experts offer their perspectives on recent information presented at the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meetings. Discussing the most common gynaecological malignancy in developed countries, this episode investigates the challenges associated with disease diagnosis, staging, stratification, and treatment. The discussions in this podcast cover the complexities of endometrial cancer, standard of care biomarkers, and efforts to personalise treatment. The experts also deliver an update on the important ongoing clinical trials that created a real buzz at both congresses. This podcast was funded by a medical educational grant from GSK, with the purpose of enhancing the fundamental understanding of oncology specialists of key data and the latest advancements in endometrial cancer care.
Welcome to our Summer Shorts Series where each week Mimi + I (Jackie + I) talk off the cuff about a single idea, quote, concept, inspiration or current event. There is something invigorating and exciting about doing something different. Maybe it's something you used to do, something you've wanted to do or something brand new.When we hit midlife, it could feel like every day is the same. How do you break out of that feeling? We're here to talk about the 7 Things To Do In Your 50s.Introducing GEN neXt, the magazine shining a light on the forgotten generation. Download your FREE copy of GEN neXt magazine. https://moderngenxwoman.com/magazineIn this episode we're talking some silly things to do in your 50s: Jump in a pool naked - go skinny-dipping like you're in your 20'sGo on a scary roller coaster - Cyclone anyone?Take yourself out to dinner solo - enjoy yourself and the quiet of your mindTake up a new sport - be like a kid and explore new team thingsDo a cartwheel or a headstand (even if it doesn't look pretty)Get messy with arts and crafts — pull out the finger paints Wear a bright color, break out of your style rutMentioned in this episode: One Girl Travel Want to connect with other Modern Gen X Women? Join our Facebook community Modern Gen X Woman created by Gen X Women for Gen X Women. Be a part of the conversation and get support on your career, business, and life.Subscribe: Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcast / StitcherGet your free copy of our digital magazine, GEN neXt, The Voice of the Modern Gen X Woman. www.moderngenxwoman.com/gennext GEN NeXt is a collection of insights from incredible organizations, women, and industry experts who have dedicated themselves to the same cause—turning up the volume of women 40+. We're not just Gen X we're GEN neXt
Let's face it, wellness is an ever-evolving concept. Listen in as we celebrate aspects of wellness throughout the SGO community. These are 10–20-minute quarterly snippets to highlight the authentic voices from SGO and beyond. Stay connected and foster community in between SGO meetings. You can find these episodes anywhere you get your SGO on the Go podcasts.To view the SGO Wellness Curriculum, click here.
Join Dr. Kathryn Mills as she interviews Drs. Jubilee Brown, Ann Klopp, Joyce Lui, and Jyoti Mayadev to discuss the latest NRG Oncology updates on upcoming studies, research, and trials. The focus for the podcast is to bridge the gaps between SGO members and NRG Oncology. Some questions covered during the interview:What are some of the upcoming trials in your disease site that you are most excited about?What advice would you give sites considering opening some of the trials that are available?How can sites get more efficient at screening and enrollment?How can sites increase enrollment of minorities?This episode was created by Dr. Kathryn Mills, a former 2022-2023 member of the SGO Education Committee's Clinical Trials Management/Concepts Subcommittee. Thanks to Drs. Jubilee Brown, Ann Klopp, Joyce Lui, and Jyoti Mayadev for your contribution to this episode. Moderator: Kathryn Mills, MDSpeakers:Jubilee Brown, MDAnn Klopp, MD, PhDJoyce Lui, MD, MPHJyoti Mayadev, MD Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Hosted by: David E. Cohn, MD, MBA, FACHE, Editor-in-Chief of Gynecologic Oncology Featuring: Stephanie V. Blank, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Warner K. Huh, MD, FACOG, FACS, University of Alabama Birmingham Editor's Choice Papers: Doubling down on the future of gynecologic oncology: The SGO future of the profession summit report
Editor's Choice Papers: Doubling down on the future of gynecologic oncology: The SGO future of the profession summit report Editorial: “The times they are a-changin'” – And how are we managing?Hosted by:David E. Cohn, MD, MBA, FACHE, Editor-in-Chief of Gynecologic Oncology Featuring: Stephanie V. Blank,MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiWarner K. Huh, MD, FACOG, FACS, University of Alabama Birmingham
The Yuma Desert Doves Program, coordinated by Catherine Thompson, Yuma community, and the Arizona Game and Fish, is teaching females how to hunt through a real infield experience. A unique opportunities taking newcomers from the dove field to hunting Havelinas. SGO guest, Catherine Thompson tells all about the safe and fun ladies program happening in Arizona.
May the Fourth and Carrie Fisher's Hollywood Star [00:01:32] Felicia and Rachel discuss the significance of May the Fourth and Carrie Fisher getting her Hollywood star.Introduction to a Special Episode [00:02:08] Felicia introduces a special episode where SGO facilitators talk about how facilitation seeps into their everyday lives and the emotional labor it takes to do this work.Strategies to Avoid Burnout [00:03:01] The SGO facilitators discuss strategies on how to turn off facilitator mode and continue to do this important work without burning out.Introduction [00:03:14] The three SGO facilitators, Fatima, Rachel, and Kaya, introduce themselves and talk about their excitement to take over the podcast.Defining Facilitation [00:05:19] Fatima defines facilitation as a skill that involves guiding or directing a group of individuals towards a common goal or objective. Rachel and Kaya add that facilitation is about taking people on a learning journey and helping them get to their end goal.Emotional Labor [00:07:49] The speakers discuss the emotional labor that comes with facilitating difficult conversations and how it affects them as individuals with marginalized identities.Self-Awareness [00:09:35] The importance of self-awareness for facilitators is highlighted, as it helps them navigate triggering situations and hold space for others. They also mention a Twitter page called "ish" that pokes fun at common facilitator sayings.Political Landscape [00:07:49] The political landscape is mentioned as a factor that adds to the emotional labor of facilitation, as it feels like the work is being attacked. The speakers also touch on the difficulty of being palatable for others while still being true to oneself.Emotional Labor [00:10:33] The speakers discuss the emotional labor that comes with facilitation, including the need to take breaks and support oneself before, during, and after workshops.Potatoing [00:12:36] The speakers talk about the concept of "potatoing" as a form of self-care after facilitation, which involves taking time to rest and ground oneself in emotions.May the Fourth and Carrie Fisher [not mentioned in the timestamps] The speakers briefly mention Star Wars Day (May the Fourth) and Carrie Fisher getting her Hollywood star.Potato Wing [00:13:23] Facilitation strategies to improve reactions and presentation skills, and the emotional labor involved in in-person workshops.Self-Care for Facilitators [00:14:27] The emotional and intellectual expenditure of facilitation, and the importance of self-care and taking breaks.Passionate Facilitation [00:15:22] The importance of naming and making real the impacts of oppressive systems, and the need for breaks and self-care during passionate facilitation.Taking Breaks in Facilitation [00:16:07] The speakers discuss the importance of taking breaks in facilitation and teaching to avoid cognitive dizziness and burnout.Normalizing Human Experiences [00:18:02] The speakers talk about the need to prioritize and normalize human experiences and breaks in all spaces, including facilitation and personal lives.Discussing Anger as an Emotion [00:18:49] The speakers briefly mention a personal experience of discussing whether anger is a negative emotion in a gym setting.Facilitating Conversations in the Gym [00:19:52] Speaker 3 shares a story about facilitating a conversation in the gym about whether anger is a negative emotion.Facilitating Friend Conversations [00:21:27] Speaker 4 talks about how she finds herself facilitating conversations with friends and family, and how it can be emotionally taxing.Difficulties of Facilitating Conversations Outside of Work [00:22:16] Speaker 4 discusses the challenges of facilitating conversations outside of work, including navigating difficult topics with friends who don't share similar identities.Suppressing Anger [00:23:08] The speakers discuss how they have learned to suppress their anger as a child and how it affects their facilitation work and personal relationships.Controlling Emotions [00:24:59] The speakers talk about how their culture and religion have been used to control emotions, particularly anger, and how they have learned to hold space for their anger and use it as a force for change.Facilitating Anger [00:26:34] The speakers discuss how they deal with their own anger while in the facilitator role and whether they process it in the moment or talk to their therapist about it later.Facilitation and Anger Management [00:26:57] The speaker talks about how she channels her anger during workshops and how it is easier to have conversations about isms with strangers than with family and friends.Personal Space and Boundaries [00:29:26] The speaker talks about the importance of establishing boundaries in personal relationships and how it can be tricky to have tough conversations with people you care about.Facilitation in Personal Life [00:30:25] The speakers discuss how they navigate difficult conversations with family and friends, and the challenges of applying facilitation skills in personal life.Challenges of Facilitating in Private Life [00:30:50] The speakers talk about the difficulties of facilitating conversations in private life, where people may not have the same language and tools for communication.Strategies for Facilitating in Personal Life [00:32:23] The speakers discuss the emotional labor of facilitating conversations with family and friends, and the need to balance holding space for others while also taking care of oneself.Facilitation as Emotional Labor [00:32:53] The team discusses the emotional labor involved in facilitation and how it seeps into their everyday lives, making it difficult to turn off.Involving a Third Party [00:32:53-00:34:10] The team talks about involving a third party, such as a therapist or a skilled friend, to hold space during difficult conversations and prevent burnout.Family Meetings and Cultural Interpretations [00:35:01] The team member shares her experience with family meetings and how cultural interpretations can affect the dynamics of the conversation.Boundaries and Language [00:37:37] The difficulty of translating the concept of boundaries to immigrant families and the importance of giving people the language they need to love and hold space for each other.Facilitation Strategies for Family Meetings [00:35:53] The speaker shares their experience of using facilitation tools and strategies to improve family meetings, including creating an agenda and checking in on emotions before jumping into business.Emotional Labor and Relationships [00:38:22] The speaker discusses the emotional labor involved in maintaining relationships with family members and the importance of understanding and communication in these relationships.Facilitation in everyday life [00:39:06] The team discusses how facilitation strategies seep into everyday life, such as humanizing conversations and putting oneself in someone else's shoes.Importance of boundaries [00:40:57] The team emphasizes the importance of setting boundaries and naming what one needs, especially in a facilitator, teacher, or coach capacity.Grief and setting boundaries [00:40:57] The team briefly touches on the emotional labor and grief that comes with setting boundaries, which is an important aspect of facilitation work.Setting Boundaries [00:41:55] The speakers discuss the challenges of setting boundaries and accepting the frustration that comes with it, as well as the difficulty of making peace with not being understood.Grieving Unmet Needs [00:43:11] The speakers talk about the emotional labor of naming their needs and how it feels when those needs are not met, including the need to grieve the loss of connection with the person who cannot meet those needs.Using Boundaries Mindfully [00:43:55] The speakers discuss the potential harm of using concepts like boundaries and naming in a negative way, and the importance of continuing the conversation with loved ones after setting boundaries while also respecting oneself.Facilitation and Boundaries [00:45:16] The speakers discuss how boundaries can be taken too far and the importance of evaluating if they are doing too much. They also talk about the continuous work of relationships and the need to humanize each other.Healing Journey and Pendulum [00:47:46] The speakers talk about the pendulum effect in healing journeys and how people swing from one extreme to the other. They also mention therapy language and the importance of setting boundaries without being toxic.TikTok and Social Media [00:46:54] The speakers briefly mention TikTok and how it can be overwhelming. They also talk about the great things on the platform and how they prefer to have someone send them recommendations.Facilitation and Therapy Talking Points [00:48:35] The speakers discuss the difficulty of communicating with others about unhealthy relationships and suggest that therapists could provide talking points to help.Boundaries and Toxicity [00:49:28] The speakers talk about how setting boundaries does not make someone toxic and how it is important to respect others' boundaries.Wrap Up and Podcast Plugs [00:51:12] The hosts thank the guests for their insights on facilitation and plug some upcoming events.Upcoming Webinars [00:51:36] Felicia talks about the upcoming webinars on DEI work that their team does, including one on pronouns in May and one on anti-Asian sentiment in June.10th Anniversary Party [00:52:15] Rachel announces the 10th anniversary party of their first event in June 2013, which will be held at Yvonne's in Boston, and encourages people to sign up for it.Leading DEI Conversations [00:53:03] Rachel and Felicia mention the upcoming round of Leading DEI Conversations, a public program happening in the summer, and encourage people to sign up for their newsletter to stay updated. Visit us at shegeeksout.com to stay up to date on all the ways you can make the workplace work for everyone!
In this episode, David Scott Miller, MD, FACOG, FACS, and Linda Duska, MD, MPH, provide expert insights on practice-changing data and other new findings presented at SGO 2023 in endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancers, including:NRG GY018: randomized phase III study evaluating standard of care of carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without pembrolizumab as frontline treatment for patients with endometrial cancerENGOT-EN6/GOG-3031/RUBY: randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study of dostarlimab plus standard-of-care chemotherapy in primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancerPhase I NRG-GY017 study of priming-dose atezolizumab before or concurrently with chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced high-risk cervical cancerRandomized phase II study of chemoradiation plus pembrolizumab immunotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancerGOG 3026: phase II trial of letrozole plus ribociclib in women with recurrent low-grade serous ovarian cancerPresenters:David Scott Miller, MD, FACOG, FACSAmy and Vernon E. Faulconer Distinguished Chair in Medical ScienceDirector and Dallas Foundation Chair in Gynecologic OncologyProfessor of Obstetrics & GynecologyFred F. Florence Bioinformation CenterUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterMedical Director of Gynecologic Oncology Chair, Cancer CommitteeParkland Health & Hospital SystemDallas, TexasLinda Duska, MD, MPHGynecologic OncologistDepartment of OB GYN/Gynecologic OncologyUniversity of Virginia School of MedicineCharlottesville, VirginiaContent supported by educational grants from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, Novocure Inc., and Seagen Inc.Link to full program: bit.ly/424E3Uq
0:00 - FOXF 1:44 - SGO 3:12 - ATS 4:25 - FTCH 6:01 - WEG 7:06 - ALFEN 8:22 - KRNT - 8:40 - #212 - Palabras vacías -- Para unirse al canal: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLn4iPNX7eSx9_r2BKRTmew/join
Join Scott Richard, MD, co-chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, Yasmin Lyons, DO and Lisa Rauh, MD discuss the best cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancer when preparing for the ABOG oral board exam. This podcast episode addresses important resources and questions regarding study preparation, reviewing case list and joining a study group, visiting the SGO ConnectEd, meeting with your local radiation oncologist to discuss radiation in general and your individual patients managed, knowing landmark trials for prognostic factors (GOG 36), surgery for early-stage vulvar cancer, and more. The taskforce will offer six informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO Collaboration during the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting During the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL, representatives from The American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process, so please keep an eye for the following 2-hour session and three-day roundtable discussions when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting and be sure to sign up if interested in participating. 2-hour ABOG and Stats Session and Three-day Roundtable DiscussionsFriday, March 24, 2023 | 1:00 – 4:00 pm | Special Interest Session III: Resident, Fellow, Candidate SessionBecoming an Expert: Board Certification Support Series: Present the partnership between the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) to demystify the logistics of the gynecologic oncology subspecialty certifying exam and the assessment and scoring process. Overview with ABOGStatistics Overview Three-day SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support Roundtable Discussions – Part 1-3 | (7:15-8:15am)Target Audience: Candidates Taking Boards in April 2023The three-day roundtable will include discussions from taskforce facilitators covering hypothetical cases and case reviews with candidates that are in line with the sections of the certifying exam.Saturday March 25, 2023: Ovarian, Peritoneal, Fallopian Tube Cancer (including Chemotherapy)]Sunday March 26, 2023: Uterine Malignancies: Endometrial Cancer, Sarcoma, GTD, otherMonday March 27, 2023: Cervical, Vulvar and Vaginal Cancer and Radiation TherapyResourcesClick here to access SGO ConnectEd to review additional resources on Cervical, Vulvar and Vaginal Cancer.NCCN guidelines, UpToDate, and GYOEDU.ORG.Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Moderator: Kari Hacker, MD, PhD, Gynecologic Oncologist, New York University Langone Health Speakers: Christine Walsh, MD, MS, Gynecologic Oncologist, University of Colorado Carolyn McCourt, MD, Gynecologic Oncologist, Washington University School of Medicine Kari Hacker, MD, PhD, is joined by Christine Walsh, MD, MS, and Carolyn McCourt, MD, to review basic molecular classification as well as more complex biomarkers in endometrial cancer. They discuss how testing can be utilized to inform patient prognosis and to guide second line systemic treatment decisions. They also highlight several ongoing trials investigating treatment strategies based on molecular features, the results of which will help clinicians make better therapeutic decisions, resulting in better outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer. This podcast was developed by the Society of Gynecologic Oncology for Gynecologic Oncology. Additional Resources: Molecular testing for endometrial cancer: An SGO clinical practice statement
Join Scott Richard, MD, co-chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, Anna Beavis, MD and Robert Neff, MD discuss the best ovarian cancer resources on surgical considerations, chemotherapy, and genetic testing when preparing for the ABOG oral board exam. This podcast episode addresses important resources and questions regarding study preparation, reviewing case list and grouping your cases to see their similarities/differences, management of toxicities of common targeted therapies for gynecologic cancers, the benefits of joining a study group, attending the SGO Annual Meeting sessions to gain insight, knowing the FDA indications, and more. The taskforce will offer six informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO Collaboration during the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting During the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL, representatives from The American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process, so please keep an eye for the following 2-hour session and three-day roundtable discussions when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting.2-hour ABOG and Stats Session and Three-day Roundtable DiscussionsSpecial Interest Session III: Resident, Fellow, Candidate SessionFriday, March 24, 2023 | 1:00 – 4:00 pm Becoming an Expert: Board Certification Support Series: Present the partnership between the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) to demystify the logistics of the gynecologic oncology subspecialty certifying exam and the assessment and scoring process. Overview with ABOG: 1 hour and 30 minutesStatistics Overview: 30 minutes Three-day SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support Roundtable Discussions – Part 1-3 | (7:15-8:15am)Target Audience: Candidates Taking Boards in April 2023The three-day roundtable will include discussions from taskforce facilitators covering hypothetical cases and case reviews with candidates that are in line with the sections of the certifying exam.Saturday March 25, 2023: Ovarian, Peritoneal, Fallopian Tube Cancer (including Chemotherapy)]Sunday March 26, 2023: Uterine Malignancies: Endometrial Cancer, Sarcoma, GTD, otherMonday March 27, 2023: Cervical, Vulvar and Vaginal Cancer and Radiation TherapyResourcesClick here to access SGO ConnectEd to review additional resources on Ovarian Cancer.Review NCCN guidelines, UpToDate, and GYOEDU.ORG.Listen to Key Concepts of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. ERAS–Why Do We Do It? There are SGO ConnectEd chemo flash cards that are high yield when it comes to toxicities. Special thanks to Drs. Beavis and Neff for your contribution to this episode.Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Listen to Tracilyn Hall, MD, co-chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, interview Claire Hoppenot, MD and Alexander Melamed, MD discussing the best resources for Uterine Malignancies and GTD Considerations when preparing for the ABOG oral board exam. This podcast episode addresses important resources and questions regarding reviewing for the ABOG Gynecology Oncology Certifying Exam. They will help you reference the ABOG bulletin, resources on the SGO ConnectEd website, as well as relevant studies. In addition to this podcast, the taskforce will offer other informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO Collaboration during the SGO 2023 Annual MeetingDuring the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL, representatives from The American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process, so please keep an eye for the following 2-hour session and three-day roundtable discussions when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting.2-hour ABOG and Stats Session and Three-day Roundtable DiscussionsSpecial Interest Session III: Resident, Fellow, Candidate SessionFriday, March 24, 2023 | 1:00 – 4:00 pmBecoming an Expert: Board Certification Support Series: Present the partnership between the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) to demystify the logistics of the gynecologic oncology subspecialty certifying exam and the assessment and scoring process. Overview with ABOG: 1 hour and 30 minutesStatistics Overview: 30 minutes Three-day SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support Roundtable Discussions – Part 1-3 | (7:15-8:15am)Target Audience: Candidates Taking Boards in April 2023The three-day roundtable will include discussions from taskforce facilitators covering hypothetical cases and case reviews with candidates that are in line with the sections of the certifying exam.Saturday March 25, 2023: Ovarian, Peritoneal, Fallopian Tube Cancer (including Chemotherapy)]Sunday March 26, 2023: Uterine Malignancies: Endometrial Cancer, Sarcoma, GTD, otherMonday March 27, 2023: Cervical, Vulvar and Vaginal Cancer and Radiation TherapyResourcesClick here to access SGO ConnectEd to review additional resources on Uterine Malignancies and GTD Considerations.The ABOG Gynecology Oncology Exam bulletin, which has a comprehensive list of possible topics. As for some just general good places to focus as it gets closer to the time of the exam think about NCCN guidelines, UpToDate, and GYOEDU.ORG.Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Hosted by: Gregg Nelson, MD, PhD, Social Media Editor of Gynecologic Oncology Featuring:Brittany A. Davidson, MD, Duke UniversityDavid M. Kushner, MD, UW School of Medicine and Public Health Article: SGO and the elephant that is still in the room: Wellness, burnout and gynecologic oncology
Listen to Tracilyn Hall, MD, co-chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, interview Gillian Hsieh, MD and Lavanya H. Palavalli Parsons, MD discussing the best resources for ICU and Perioperative Considerations when preparing for the ABOG oral board exam. This podcast episode addresses important resources and questions regarding reviewing your anatomy textbooks and case list to see what co-morbidities your patients have, visiting the SGO ConnectEd for perioperative care topics, knowing what technology and protocol you have at your institution as well as published data, studying bowel injuries, and having tumor board discussions to guide interventions, and more. The taskforce will offer six informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO Collaboration During the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL, a representative from The American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process. Keep an eye for this session opportunity when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting and be sure to sign up if interested in participating. We will also have three roundtable discussions where participants will meet in small groups with a taskforce facilitator to discuss hypothetical cases and have an opportunity to discuss some of their own cases. ResourcesClick here to access SGO ConnectEd to review additional resources on ICU and Perioperative Considerations.Listen to Key Concepts of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery. ERAS–Why Do We Do It?There are quick one-page SGO ConnectEd chemo flash cards that are high yield when it comes to toxicities. Read “Principles and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology” and “Gynecologic Oncology Handbook,” which provides some good quick sections on ICU topics.American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) is another organization that has great guidelines that can easily be accessed here. Special thanks to Drs. Hsieh and Parsons for your contribution to this episode. Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Still looking for the perfect gift for the special outdoor enthusiast in your life? Or need to burn money or gift card on yourself? Your favorite SGO hosts list their top gift ideas. Also hear what the SGO Facebook followers want from Santa!
Well, aren't you in for a treat! We spoke with the incomparable Dr. Erika Powell, a wonderful friend of SGO's, personally and professionally. We weAlso, some quick news! We're going on a pod break until the new year. If you miss us, you can always find us hanging out in the Rise Together community or on LinkedIn!re a little silly, and within that silliness, some brilliant gems of knowledge were shared. If you enjoy this half as much as we did recording it, you're golden. Don't miss it!Also, some quick news! We're going on a pod break until the new year. If you miss us, you can always find us hanging out in the Rise Together community or on LinkedIn! Visit us at shegeeksout.com to stay up to date on all the ways you can make the workplace work for everyone!
On this episode of the NTEB Prophecy News Podcast, last week was a busy week, a very busy week in regards to end times political activity, culminating with Emmanuel Macron at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Bangkok. What was he there to do? Not much, just talked about taking the power away from the United States and China, and creating a single global order where neither of those countries are controlling things. And who, pray tell, might be in charge of the nascent Single Global Order, or SGO? I'm pretty sure he's wanting to nominate himself, in fact, I'm positive. What might this single global order look like? Like exactly what the prophets and Revelation tell you it'll look like. All this and more on this edition of the Prophecy News Podcast. The APEC Summit opened on Friday in Thailand, the last of three world summits hosted in the region this month. Chinese leader Xi Jinping called for stability, peace and the development of a “more just world order.” French President Emmanuel Macron spoke at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Bangkok. This was despite the fact that France is not a member of the APEC nations. Macron said 'Are you on the US or the Chinese side? Because now, progressively, a lot of people would like to see that there are two orders in this world. This is a huge mistake. Even for both the US and China. We need a single global order.' Welcome to Day 980 of 15 Days To Flatten The Curve.
Join us as Scott Richard, MD, co-chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, interviews Janelle Darby, MD and Kathryn Mills, MD to discuss best resources for radiation oncology when preparing for the ABOG oral board exam. This podcast episode addresses important resources and questions regarding study preparation, radiation prevention strategies, the benefits of joining a study group, reviewing treatment and management of the patients on your case list, knowing the principles of radiation and how it is administered, discussing treatment decisions with your local radiation oncologist, and more. The taskforce will offer six informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO CollaborationThe American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process during the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL. Keep an eye for this session opportunity when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting and be sure to sign up if interested in participating. We will also have several meetings where participants will meet in small groups with a taskforce facilitator to discuss hypothetical cases and have an opportunity to discuss some of their own cases. ResourcesClick here to access SGO ConnectEd to review additional resources on radiation oncology. Radiation Planning Principles for Gynecologic Oncology (part of the Fellow Core Lecture Series) – Hour long lecture from Anuja Jhingran, MD at MD Anderson that reviews radiation fields, IMRT, specific organ dose limits, vaginal brachytherapy delivery to name a few. This is a good overview of radiation basics and treatment for the different disease sites. SGO Fellows Bootcamp – Another introductory lecture on radiation oncology that was created for new fellows and provides a nice overview.Click here to access the full-text guideline titled, “Radiation Therapy for Cervical Cancer: An ASTRO Clinical Practice Guideline,” which provides recommendations on the use of radiation therapy to treat adult women with cervical cancer. Special thanks to Drs. Darby and Mills for your contribution to this episode.Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Join Dr. Hall, Co-Chair of the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support, as she interviews Drs. Mallen and Zeligs, who recently took the ABOG board exam, addressing several different approaches to case list preparation. As part of the taskforce, we have recognized several SGO members who had taken the ABOG board exam have different approaches to their case list preparation, and we wanted to make sure we provide effective resources for all of those candidates coming up this year on what we were able to be successful with our case list. Some questions covered during the interview:What is the timeline for case list creation and submission?How many cases do I need?What cases do I need to include on my list?What about the ABOG approved abbreviations?When should I have the required affidavits signed?The taskforce will also offer other informative podcasts focused on high yield topics and best preparation practices. ABOG and SGO Collaboration During the SGO 2023 Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer in Tampa, FL, a representative from The American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) will join the SGO Taskforce for Board Certification Support to discuss logistics of the certifying exam as well as the assessment and scoring process. Keep an eye for this session opportunity when registering for the upcoming SGO 2023 Annual Meeting and be sure to sign up if interested in participating. We will also have several meetings where participants will meet in small groups with a taskforce facilitator to discuss hypothetical cases and have an opportunity to discuss some of their own cases.Special thanks to Drs. Mallen and Zeligs for your contribution to this episode.Moderator: Tracilyn Hall, MD Speakers:Adrianne Mallen, MDKristen Zeligs, MDSound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
What has Rachel been doing? What kept her away from the microphone? Fall fun frenzy has hit us all. Pumpkins, ghosts and family fun displayed at Nebraska State Parks for everyone to enjoy! And a bombshell is dropped as we explain the reason for last and final SGO subscription box.
Looking for more support in having uncomfortable conversations? Join us for our upcoming program on Leading DEI Conversations!Welcome to She+ Geeks Out, the podcast bringing you the voices of women+ from all walks of life to share with you what they geek out about-- their passions, talents, struggles, and successes. In each episode, hosts Rachel Murray and Felicia Jadczak will feature different guests and discussions about topics including health, psychology, art, music, learning, and more. Episodes are fun, engaging, and provide some nuggets of information that you can take away. Oh, and yeah, they might be awkward sometimes. That's just how we roll.This season of She+ Geeks Out is unlike any other so far. Together, we will be unpacking what the future of work looks like for different groups of people in terms of diversity, equity and inclusion. In addition to our special guests, listeners will also get to hear snippets from our facilitation team on what DEI really looks like in the workplace from a practical, actionable standpoint.Last week we talked about what it looks like to build a DEI program in an organization, and this week we'll look at what it looks like when these initiatives are up and running. The truth is, in many cases, it's going to mean more open dialogue and the potential for having uncomfortable conversations. To begin, DEI and Leadership Consultant and Coach Dr. Erika Powell talks about performative DEI. When someone is accused of this, it usually means that they are not engaging with psychological safety. Often, it is the silence of those of uncommon identities that we should be paying attention to. Somatics starts to help people to have difficult conversations. Dr. Victoria Verlezza, DEI Facilitator at SGO, joins to tell us more. Difficult conversations, she believes, stem from 2 places: wanting to have them but not knowing how, or being fearful of having them. However, it is important to think about identity and realizing that is more than being offensive, but being harmful. Research suggests that people don't feel confident having harder conversations at work in an open setting.Next, we talk to Becca Shanksy, Associate Professor of Psychology at Northeastern University, about the conversations she is having to move beyond biases in academia. Translation neuroscience, she explains, is really about understanding what the brain is capable of translated to people of any gender or sex. Anna Whitlock, Director of People Strategy & Culture at LabCentral, joins to discuss the lack of awareness across the board that, for most, DEI practices are a learning experience. We are all just trying to do the right thing while accommodating everybody's life experiences, but we aren't always going to get it perfectly right. This work is a daily struggle and she hopes other people find comfort in her vulnerability.We hear again from Dr. Victoria Verlezza on the key of talking across differences. We all have either dominant or oppressed identity that inevitably plays out in the workplace. When thinking of how to be inclusive leaders, it comes down to how we show up in these types of conversations. So much of professional life has been traditionally set up for people to put aside what makes them unique, but we need to feel comfortable embracing our identities and acknowledging the injustices which exist in our world. Then, she shares her usual reaction items when witnessing someone in the workplace express bias, unconscious or not. Next, SGO facilitator Fatima Dainkeh shares what it means to be an ally. Language supports us in our actions and behaviors and helps us in our mindset. However, it is possible to co-opt certain terminology based on how we perceive them. For her, the term ally means practicing something in your day to day life to support someone else who may not have the same social power you do. She explains the difference in calling in vs. calling out when giving feedback to colleagues who might say something inappropriate. When it comes to topics related to DEI, it is very important to know how to give effective feedback. She also notes that we should consider our relationship to a person before giving feedback to them. Part of doing this work is giving grace to everybody.We also talked to Melanie Ho, author of Beyond Leaning In and Naomi Seddon, author of Milk and Margaritas, about the conversations they're taking part in. Weaponizing competence is a popular topic that has just recently gotten traction in the last year. For Melanie, she is noticing much more of a shift towards having these difficult discussions with others rather than brushing things under the rug. Naomi adds that this is not just an issue relevant to the workplace, but something we need to be practicing within our homes as well. Conversations without male family members should be taking place about how to better support the women in their lives and workplaces. DEI Facilitator Kia Rivera believes that these conversations can't be had without acknowledging power, privilege and marginalization.Thanks so much for listening. Please don't forget to rate, share, subscribe and tune in next week when we talk about recruiting and hiring inclusive teams.Timestamps:1:35 - Introducing today's episode.2:13 - Dr. Erika Powell on performative DEI, somatics and psychological safety.13:44 - Dr. Victoria Verlezza on how to have difficult conversations.18:10 - Dr. Becca Shanksy on moving beyond biases in academia.23:55 - The role of sex and gender in translation neuroscience.25:25 - Anna Whitlock on the shared learning experience of DEI. 31:21 - Dr. Victoria Verlezza on talking across difference and acknowledging identity as a strong leader.43:05 - Fatima Dainkeh unpacks allyship and giving feedback.53:57 - Melanie Ho and Naomi Seddon the conversations they're taking part in.58:41 - Kia Rivera on acknowledging power, privilege and marginalization.1:01:54 - Thanks for joining us for today's episode!Contributors to this episode are:Anna Whitlock, People Strategy & Culture at LabCentralBecca Shansky, Associate Professor of Psychology at Northeastern UniversityDr. Erika Powell, DEI and Leadership Consultant and CoachDr. Victoria Verlezza, DEI Facilitator at She+ Geeks OutFatima Dainkeh, Staff DEI Programs & Training Manager at She+ Geeks OutKia Rivera, DEI Facilitator at She+ Geeks OutMelanie Ho, Author, Speaker and FacilitatorNaomi Seddon, Author and International Lawyer Visit us at shegeeksout.com to stay up to date on all the ways you can make the workplace work for everyone!
Welcome to She+ Geeks Out, the podcast bringing you the voices of women+ from all walks of life to share with you what they geek out about-- their passions, talents, struggles, and successes. In each episode, hosts Rachel Murray and Felicia Jadczak will feature different guests and discussions about topics including health, psychology, art, music, learning, and more. Episodes are fun, engaging, and provide some nuggets of information that you can take away. Oh, and yeah, they might be awkward sometimes. That's just how we roll.This season of She+ Geeks Out is unlike any other so far. Together, we will be unpacking what the future of work looks like for different groups of people in terms of diversity, equity and inclusion. In addition to our special guests, listeners will also get to hear snippets from our facilitation team on what DEI really looks like in the workplace from a practical, actionable standpoint.When organizations are building out their initiatives around DE&I, the biggest mistake is when companies view it as a check the box approach. DEI work is deep, lifelong work which is most impactful when it is built into every aspect of an organization as early as possible. This week, we'll take notes from leaders who have successfully brought intentional and fully integrated DEI programs into their organizations. We begin by talking to CA Webb, Former President of Kendall Square Association, about how she worked with She+ Geeks Out to build the organizations' new DEI program which ended up becoming Diversity Drives Inclusion. They began with a learning journey, out of which came the realization that there was a huge need for a different approach to DEI education in companies. She also shares her observation that while many people now claim to be anti-racist, they don't actually know how to put it in practice. Next, we hear from Fatima Dainkeh, SGO staff DEI programs and training manager, about doing the work. When facilitating workshops, Fatima always repeatedly reminds participants that the work is not the workshop. While having a workshop can be great for organizations to plant the seed of DEI, it is important that the workshop is part of a bigger plan to pursue DEI goals. Afterwards, Jason Fook, Senior Director of Learning and Development at Essex Property & Trust, talks about taking a DEI leadership committee to the next level. He shares that Essex had actually been thinking about launching their own DEI committee before the pandemic. Now, they are at the point of questioning how they can make the initiative even bigger and take it to the next level. Though Jason was nervous that nobody would come, their classes have actually begun to sell out.To further discuss the role of formal training and workshops is Dr. Erika Powell, a DEI and Leadership Consultant and Coach. When facilitating a class or an experience, she says that each one is a flight because participants go higher and wider in their consciousness. She also shares about her shifting views of unconscious bias in the workplace. We also hear from Amaia Arruabarrena, Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at ezCater, about the need for organizations to define what DEI means to them. It is important to hold each of the 3 pillars of DEI to the same importance to be successful at making people feel welcome and included. After defining what DEI meant to them, the team then worked out a dedicated budget for the efforts. Every organization will face their own unique challenges based on size, age, location, budget, and resources. Elisa Campos-Prato, Sr. Recruiter at Scott's Cheap Flights, elaborates on approaching efforts creatively. She also touches on the fact that money is not a necessity, but rather a pathway for DEI. Anna Whitlock, Director of People, Strategy, and Culture at LabCentral, shares about the company's various DEI initiatives. Biotech is not traditionally a space where most people of color feel welcomed to, but LabCentral is doing everything they can to change that. Elba Lizardi, site director at BASF, shares how she initially got involved in the DEI space via a DEI task force. Prior to being nominated, Elba isn't sure she was really being loud enough about DEI issues. Before reaching out to customers and suppliers, the organization funded an employee research group. Then, Naomi Seddon talks about a few of the initiatives at Megaport where she sits on the board. Their focus was to hear about diverse employee experiences and figure out a way to be accommodating for everybody. Finally, CA Webb returns to unpack the idea that you can't drive change alone.Thanks so much for listening. Please don't forget to rate, share, subscribe and tune in next week when we talk about building inclusive cultures.Timestamps:1:35 - Introducing today's episode.2:45 - CA Webb shares about partnering with She+ Geeks Out in her company's new DEI program.14:26 - The importance of establishing a concise action plan.18:18 - Fatima Dainkeh shares more thoughts on doing the work.21:15 - Jason Fook talks about taking a DEI leadership committee to the next level.29:43 - Dr. Erika Powell discusses the role of formal training and workshops.31:37 - How Erika views biases at work and how these views have shifted over time.39:44 - Amaia Arruabarrena on the need for companies to define what DEI means for them.44:05 - Elisa Campos-Prato on approaching DEI efforts creatively.48:53 - Anna Whitlock on LabCentral's DEI initiatives.58:18 - Elba Lizard shares how she got involved in the DEI space1:00:26 - Naomi Seddon on Megaport's initiatives.1:01:59 - CA Webb on driving change as a community-wide effort. Contributors to this episode are:Anna Whitlock, People Strategy & Culture at LabCentralAmaia Arrubarrena, Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at ezCaterCA Webb, Former President of Kendall Square AssociationDr. Erika Powell, DEI and Leadership Consultant and CoachFatima Dainkeh, Staff DEI Programs & Training Manager at She+ Geeks OutDr. Victoria Verlezza, DEI Facilitator at She+ Geeks OutMelanie Ho, Author, Speaker and FacilitatorNaomi Seddon, Author and International LawyerElba Lizardi, Site Director at BASFElisa Campos-Praetor, Sr. Recruiter at Scott's Cheap FlightsJason Fooks, Senior Director of Learning and Development at Essex Property & TrustRhonda Vonshay Sharpe, Founder and President of Women's Institute for Science, Equity and Race Visit us at shegeeksout.com to stay up to date on all the ways you can make the workplace work for everyone!
Welcome to She+ Geeks Out, the podcast bringing you the voices of women+ from all walks of life to share with you what they geek out about-- their passions, talents, struggles, and successes. In each episode, hosts Rachel Murray and Felicia Jadczak will feature different guests and discussions about topics including health, psychology, art, music, learning, and more. Episodes are fun, engaging, and provide some nuggets of information that you can take away. Oh, and yeah, they might be awkward sometimes. That's just how we roll.This season of She+ Geeks Out is unlike any other so far. Together, we will be unpacking what the future of work looks like for different groups of people in terms of diversity, equity and inclusion. In addition to our special guests, listeners will also get to hear snippets from our facilitation team on what DEI really looks like in the workplace from a practical, actionable standpoint. When we think about work and the current hustle culture climate, it's easy to feel overwhelmed. Today, we spoke with some of our favorite experts, leaders and facilitators about workplace trauma, psychological safety, somatics and emotional intelligence. To begin, we hear from Belma McCaffrey, Founder and CEO of Workbigger, about what it looks like to work from a healthy place. She shares that finding our sense of purpose within ourselves is key to feeling clarity and satisfaction in our jobs. Additionally, we should recognize that we have the power to decide what work should fulfill for ourselves rather than letting society make the decision for us. She also breaks down the concept of the 3 selves: the healthy, wounded and survivor self. SGO's Fatima Dainkeh defines somatics as a technique, theory, movement or method which helps us think about our body and the things we may be processing internally but are unaware of. The idea that things like trauma, joy and pain live within our bodies is traditional among ancient cultures. Then, SGO's Rachel Sadler defines psychological safety as the belief that you will not be punished for speaking up. It is an important component of employee satisfaction and retention, and can help ensure that people are willing to take the intellectual steps necessary for innovation. We live in a fear-based society to the point that a resting state feels unnatural for many people. Dr. Huong Diep elaborates on the concept of intergenerational trauma and offers advice for how we can show up to work in a supportive and authentic way. Next, we hear from Dr. Becca Shanksy, Associate Professor of Psychology at Northeastern University, about the research her team is working on at the university's Laboratory of Neuroanatomy and Behavior. The research focuses on what happens to the brain when a person experiences a traumatic event. They are also aiming to understand the neural circuits that cause darting to happen in certain subsects of female animals. Then, Karina Becerra, Director of Customer Advocacy at Podium, shares about modeling healthy team boundaries and supporting individuals with different backgrounds from her own. She finds that when people are happy and maintain work and life balance, it shows in the work that they do. We also hear from Melanie Ho, author of Beyond Leaning In, on the common psychological and emotional abuse which frequently occurs in the workplace. This is also what has driven much of the great resignation. As we see more young people entering the workforce, we need to be sure that we do not continue to perpetuate these behaviors. If there are no people in power who will hear these concerns and respond with empathy, then an organization will never really make progress in this area. Naomi Seddon joins to share about work life boundaries for women and how she began to implement them for herself. She acknowledges that we all do hold certain biases whether we realize it or not. The first step is to recognize these biases, and then start to work on implementing change on how we perceive others. Dr. Victoria Verlezza, DEI Facilitator at SGO, speaks about how we can show up to support a healthy work environment. When we're supporting a healthy work environment, we want to consider how the systems (ableism, sexism, racism, etc) are playing into our daily interactions and how we think of productivity. As leaders, we need to embrace flexibility and model that same behavior ourselves to show the people we're supervising that it's okay to take time off. In closing, we hear from Elisa Campos-Pratorof Scott's Cheap Flights about addressing psychological safety during the onboarding process of hiring. It is top of mind for everything to be documented and communication to happen asynchronously. It is a major priority of hers to allow new employees to showcase their own style of working rather than giving them specific guidelines to adhere to. Thanks so much for listening. Please don't forget to rate, share, subscribe and tune in next week when we talk about building out a DEI program!Timestamps: 1:38 - Introducing today's episode. 2:01 - Belma McCaffrey shares her perspective on what working from a healthy place looks like. 9:22 - Helping people address workplace trauma. 13:40 - Discussing somatics with SGO's Fatima Dainkeh. 17:44 - Discussing psychological safety. 24:22 - The shifting discussion around the body experience from Dr, . 27:15 - Advice for people struggling to show up to work in a supportive and authentic way. 29:37 - Dr. Becca Shansky on the research being conducted in the Laboratory of Neuroanatomy and Behavior at Northeastern University. 32:19 - Karina Becerra on modeling healthy team boundaries and supporting people from different backgrounds. 39:00 - The difficulty in leaving abusive job situations. 42:02 - Naomi Seddon speaks against the mindset of “pushing through”. 58:55 - Elisa Campos-Prator on supporting new team members. 1:02:12 - Thanks for joining us for this episode of She+ Geeks Out. Contributors to this episode are:Belma McCaffrey, CEO & Founder at WorkBiggerBecca Shansky, Associate Professor of Psychology at Northeastern UniversityFatima Dainkeh, Staff DEI Programs & Training Manager at She+ Geeks OutDr. Huong Diep, Psychologist and AuthorDr. Victoria Verlezza, DEI Facilitator at She+ Geeks OutElisa Campos-Praetor, Sr. Recruiter at Scott's Cheap FlightsKarina Becerra, Director, Customer Advocacy at PodiumMelanie Ho, Author, Speaker and FacilitatorNaomi Seddon, Author and International LawyerRachel Sadler, DEI Facilitator at She+ Geeks Out Visit us at shegeeksout.com to stay up to date on all the ways you can make the workplace work for everyone!
Join Dr. Kathryn Mills as she interviews Drs. Allan Covens, Charles Leath, Kathleen Moore, and Matt Powell to discuss the latest NRG Oncology updates on upcoming studies, research, and trials. The focus for the podcast is to bridge the gaps between SGO members and NRG Oncology. This episode was created by Kathryn Mills, MD, a member of the SGO Education Committee's Clinical Trials Management/Concepts Subcommittee. Thanks to Drs. Covens, Leath, Moore, and Powell for your contribution to this episode. Moderator: Kathryn Mills, MD Speakers:Allan Covens, MD, FRCSC Charles Leath, MD Kathleen Moore, MD Matt Powell, MDSound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Sexual problems and dysfunctions are commonly encountered by gynecologic oncologists, dealing both with cancer patients and patients with complex benign conditions. We are offering a two-part series, brought to you by gynecologist Mary Jane Minkin, who discusses these issues. In the first talk, Dr. Minkin talks about the diagnosis of sexual problems routinely encountered by gynecologic oncologists, and in the second talk she discusses therapies for these sexual problems, and advice on referral for patients who need further interventions. Dr. Minkin is the Co-Director of the Sexuality, Intimacy and Menopause Clinic for Cancer Survivors at the Smilow Cancer Center, Yale-New Haven Hospital, and Clinical Professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at Yale Medical School.SGO thanks Dr. Mary Jane Minkin for her generosity in providing this education. Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Sexual problems and dysfunctions are commonly encountered by gynecologic oncologists, dealing both with cancer patients and patients with complex benign conditions. We are offering a two-part series, brought to you by gynecologist Mary Jane Minkin, who discusses these issues. In the first talk, Dr. Minkin talks about the diagnosis of sexual problems routinely encountered by gynecologic oncologists, and in the second talk she discusses therapies for these sexual problems, and advice on referral for patients who need further interventions. Dr. Minkin is the Co-Director of the Sexuality, Intimacy and Menopause Clinic for Cancer Survivors at the Smilow Cancer Center, Yale-New Haven Hospital, and Clinical Professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at Yale Medical School.SGO thanks Dr. Mary Jane Minkin for her generosity in providing this education. Sound engineered and produced by Betheon Whyte on behalf of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.
Every once in a while, The Spiritual Geek Out Podcast incorporates renowned health experts in their respective fields to bring forth important and cutting-edge information to support your healing journey. Dr Sanda Moldovan is no exception. She is an award-winning periodontist, internationally recognized speaker, author of the book: Heal Up: Seven Ways to Faster Healing and Optimum Health, and the go-to consultant for the Emmy award-winning, syndicated television series, "The Doctors". Many people are not aware that the mouth is the gateway to our health. Dr. Sanda breaks down for us all just how and why this is. In this eye opening and information rich talk, we cover a wide array of topics such as: root canals and their correlation with many disease states, the usage of titanium as it relates to meridians and conductivity, mercury in the mouth and autoimmunity, how every tooth is a living organ, the miracle of ozone and why you should know about it if you have any dental or health issues, specific bacterias found in periodontal disease, and much much more. Dr Sanda Moldovan is offering a generous 20 percent discount in her online shop for all SGO podcast listeners. You can purchase many of the things mentioned in our talk from the ozone tumbler generator, enzymes, oral probiotics, and more at: https://www.beverlyhillsdentalhealth.com Go to: SHOP and type in the code: DIANE20 to receive 20% off your entire order.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
