Podcasts about tchp

In this episode of the Oncology Brothers podcast, Drs. Rohit and Rahul Gosain welcome Dr. Sarah Sammons from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to discuss the treatment landscape for HER2-positive breast cancer. Building on their previous discussions about triple-negative breast cancer, Drs. Gosain and Sammons dive deep into the treatment algorithms for early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Key topics include: •⁠  ⁠Treatment paradigms for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer, including the APT trial and considerations for neoadjuvant therapy. •⁠  ⁠The standard of care for locally advanced disease with TCHP and managing associated toxicities. •⁠  ⁠Insights into the latest data from the PATINA trial and its implications for metastatic HER2-positive patients. •⁠  ⁠Discussion on the use of T-DXd and other treatment options in the second and third-line settings, especially for patients with brain metastases. Join us for an informative conversation filled with clinical pearls and practical insights that can help guide treatment decisions in HER2-positive breast cancer. Don't forget to like, subscribe, and check out our other episodes in the treatment algorithm series! #OncologyBrothers #HER2Positive #BreastCancer #BreastCancerTreatment #CancerPodcast #DanaFarber YouTube: https://youtu.be/_y0xSxJTptw Follow us on social media: •⁠  ⁠X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/oncbrothers •⁠  ⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/oncbrothers

Lots of recent clinical trial updates to discuss: AQUILA: Daratumumab for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma Checkmate 8HW: Nivo/Ipi for MSI-high/MMRd metastatic colorectal cancer DESTINY-Breast06: T-DXd in HER2-low MBC after hormonal treatment, but without previous chemo for MBC ARMANI: Switch maintenance ramucirumab-paclitaxel in metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer HELEN-006: Neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab vs. TCHP in breast cancer SONIA: finally published!

Featuring perspectives from Dr William J Gradishar, Dr Virginia Kaklamani, Dr Erica Mayer and Dr Seth Wander, including the following topics: Introduction (0:00) Addition of Ovarian Function Suppression (OFS) to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Patients with Hormone Receptor (HR)-Positive Breast Cancer — Dr Gradishar (4:49) Case: A woman in her mid 20s with HR-positive, HER2-positive intraductal carcinoma (IDC) who received ovarian suppression with TAC chemotherapy and concurrent trastuzumab/pertuzumab followed by tamoxifen (30:48) Case: A woman in her late 30s with HR-positive, HER2-negative IDC and no nodal involvement who received postoperative chemoradiation therapy followed by tamoxifen and is considering ovarian suppression (39:31) Role of OFS in Preserving Fertility and/or Ovarian Function in Premenopausal Patients – Dr Mayer (44:55) Case: A woman in her early 30s with HR-positive, HER2-positive (IHC 3+) IDC recommended to receive perioperative TCHP who is interested in fertility preservation (1:11:15) Case: A woman in her mid 30s presenting with ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer during early pregnancy who received preoperative TAC and had pathologic complete response at surgery (1:14:18) Tolerability and Toxicity of OFS – Dr Kaklamani (1:21:21) Case: A woman in her mid 30s, uninterested in fertility preservation, who received chemotherapy and TAC followed by tamoxifen and abemaciclib for ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (1:39:42) Case: A premenopausal woman in her late 40s with a 3.6-cm breast tumor and a Recurrence Score (RS) of 26 who becomes amenorrheic with chemotherapy and TC (1:43:32) Other Practical Considerations in the Application of OFS – Dr Wander (1:46:29) Case: A woman in her early 50s with HR-positive, HER2 IHC 2+ invasive lobular carcinoma and a RS of 15 who declined chemotherapy and opted to stop adjuvant leuprolide after 1 year (1:59:56) Case: A woman in her early 40s with HR-positive, HER2 IHC 1+ breast cancer who has no interest in fertility preservation and significant residual disease at surgery (2:14:06) CME information and select publications

Featuring perspectives from Dr Adam M Brufsky, including the following topics: Review of Local Therapy (0:00) Treatment Advances for HER2 Positive Early-Stage Breast Cancer (18:34) Case: A woman in her early 60s with ER-positive, HER2-positive (IHC 3+) with infiltrating ductal carcinoma who received T-DM1 with an aromatase inhibitor (19:37) Case: A woman in her early 50s with ER-positive, HER2-positive (IHC 3+) who received TCHP followed by a mastectomy (56:36) Beyond the Guidelines Survey and HERRISK (1:02:33) Trials in Progress (1:14:24) CME information and select publications

Drs. Allison Zibelli and Arielle Heeke discuss the NATALEE trial's novel approach to high-risk HR+ breast cancer, the potential of delaying CDK4/6 inhibitors in HR+, HER2-negative mBC to decrease toxicities and costs in the SONIA trial, and de-escalation strategies in HER2+ early-stage breast cancer. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Allison Zibelli: Hello. I'm Dr. Allison Zibelli, your guest host for the ASCO Daily News Podcast today. I'm an associate professor of medicine and a breast medical oncologist at the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Jefferson Health in Philadelphia. My guest today is Dr. Arielle Heeke, a breast medical oncologist at the Levine Cancer Institute at Atrium Health in North Carolina.  Today, we'll be discussing practice-changing studies and other key advances in breast cancer that were featured at the 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting.   Our full disclosures are available in the show notes and disclosures of all guests on the podcast can be found on our transcripts at asco.org/DNpod.   Arielle, it's great to speak with you today.   Dr. Arielle Heeke: Thank you so much for having me.  Dr. Allison Zibelli: Let's start with LBA500. This was the NATALEE trial of ribociclib and endocrine therapy as adjuvant treatment in patients with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative early breast cancer. What are your key takeaways from the study, and how do you think this changes our approach to high-risk ER-positive breast cancer?  Dr. Arielle Heeke: Yeah, this was definitely the study for which many of us were waiting to see the results. It was exciting to see the results come through so quickly. As you mentioned, the NATALEE trial was a phase 3 study that evaluated three years of adjuvant ribociclib at a dose of 400 milligrams, which is a little different than what we're used to in the metastatic space at 600 milligrams. But essentially, it randomized patients to receive this 400-milligram dose with their adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy versus just the standard of care adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients that are high risk with early-stage breast cancer.   What made NATALEE somewhat unique is they defined high risk a little bit more broadly than we've seen in previous studies, such as monarchE. So, what I mean by that is NATALEE enrolled patients with stage 2 and 3 early-stage breast cancer. And notably, they allowed for patients that were lymph node-negative but had some other high-risk features, such as a grade 3 tumor or a grade 2 tumor with high-risk genomics, such as oncotype or a high Ki-67. So, by broadening who was eligible, NATALEE captured more patients at risk for recurrence. Of course, we know that recurrence is not specific for patients with lymph node-positive disease. We can see recurrence even with stage 1, but certainly, we start to see more recurrence risk as patients drift into stage 2 and stage 3.   In the NATALEE study, the majority of these patients did receive prior chemotherapy, which I also think is interesting. We've kind of seen in the metastatic space that sometimes chemotherapy can augment patients' responsiveness to CDK4/6 inhibitors. But specifically in NATALEE, 88% of patients had received prior chemotherapy, and ultimately, about a third of the patients were lymph node-negative.   So, diving into some of the results with this first analysis that we saw at ASCO, with the median follow-up for invasive disease-free survival of just 27.7 months, they were able to show that the risk for invasive disease was reduced by 25.2% with the addition of ribociclib plus endocrine therapy compared to endocrine therapy alone. And this three-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 90.4% for the combination therapy compared to 87.1% for endocrine therapy alone, which is an absolute difference of 3.3%. Additionally, patients treated with ribociclib and endocrine therapy had a 26.1% reduced risk for distant disease-free survival compared with endocrine therapy alone, and this was a rate of 90.8% for ribociclib with endocrine therapy compared to 88.6% with endocrine therapy alone, which correlates to an absolute benefit of 2.2%.    They did show results for overall survival as well, but again, follow-up was just a median of 27.7 months. So, data was essentially immature to show any true overall survival benefit from this approach. And in fact, only 20% of patients had completed three years of ribociclib at this data cutoff. And as a reminder, again, NATALEE involved ribociclib for three years compared to two years, which we've seen with other studies in this space.   Also, what was encouraging from NATALEE were the readouts for toxicities. Neutropenia is definitely a concern with this class of medication, and they were able to show that rates of neutropenia were overall lower than what we've seen in the pooled data in the metastatic space. And also that problematic QTc prolongation for which we have to get EKGs baseline two weeks and four weeks. They also showed that the likelihood of having QTc prolongation on this therapy was significantly less at that 400-milligram dose compared to 600.   I think the key takeaway is yes, this drug is effective as adjuvant therapy, which is perhaps not surprising since we've seen such promising results in the metastatic space, but numerically not as striking as what we have at this point with adjuvant abemaciclib, but of course, this is a newer study. We hope to see that continued separation of the curves as we were fortunate enough to see with the abemaciclib data, but obviously we'll be looking for additional analyses from NATALEE.    And then how this will change practice, of course, we'll have to wait to see if the therapy is approved for use in the adjuvant setting for early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, but it certainly will be a nice option for patients that struggle with GI toxicity kind of at baseline. But also, if they were previously on abemaciclib and were not able to tolerate due to the GI toxicity, this would be an option for them. Also, as mentioned, it's a broader patient population, so we can consider this perhaps for a patient with lymph node-negative disease.   Although we will have to ask ourselves that just because someone meets eligibility for the NATALEE  study, and if the therapy is ultimately approved, is it appropriate to give it to all those patients? Or do we need to still kind of think of this in the setting of the highest-risk patient, not just any patient with stage 2 plus disease? There was a lot of talk at the meeting, certainly about biomarkers and potentially using ctDNA to try to find these predictors of benefit from CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy, but obviously, still a long way to go before we can use that type of technology in this space.  Dr. Allison Zibelli: Thank you. Staying on the topic of CDK4/6 inhibitors, everybody was excited about the SONIA trial, which was LBA1000, and this trial was asking if we can delay using CDK4/6 inhibitors for newly diagnosed ER-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer as a way to decrease both toxicity and cost. Tell us about this study.  Dr. Arielle Heeke: The SONIA trial was such a cool study to see, and the presenter reported findings in such a thought-provoking way. Really great to see this sort of work being done because I think we all wonder deep down in our gut, if more is more, or if we do need to kind of be a little bit more thoughtful about how we introduce these therapies certainly from a patient perspective. Patients that participate at ASCO [meetings] have been saying for years how important it is to consider the toxicities in terms of side effects, but also, of course, financial toxicities. So, it was great to see the SONIA trial at center stage.   Essentially, as you mentioned, it was a study that randomized patients in the first-line setting with metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer to receive either first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy or second-line CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy. So basically, there was a mandated crossover, so patients that received the CDK4/6 inhibitor first-line did not receive a second line and vice versa. Patients that were randomized to receive their endocrine therapy as monotherapy first line went on to receive CDK4/6 inhibitor at second-line. And the second-line endocrine therapy was fulvestrant in both of those situations.    We kind of run into this problem with patients now where we have so many therapies available to us that we don't typically run out of treatment options, but rather we run up against treatment toxicity or ultimate failure of the human body to keep up with the demands of ongoing therapy. So, again, while it's maybe somewhat attractive to start treatments earlier using things first-line rather than second-line or longer, just kind of post-CDK4/6 inhibitor progression, you know using this CDK4/6 inhibitor again with a different endocrine therapy backbone is probably not offering a meaningful benefit to that many patients. So this type of study is so necessary to really try to help us frame who needs those therapies sooner and longer or perhaps is there a substantial portion of patients that we don't need to put them through that sort of toxicity.   So that's the SONIA trial. Some things to note about the patient population, these patients were a bit older than what we've seen in some of our metastatic CDK4/6 inhibitor trials. There was a median age of 64 and 87% were postmenopausal. Additionally, just 40% had received prior chemotherapy. And as is true for most of our studies, 91% have received palbociclib on study with just 8% receiving ribociclib. And the choice of the CDK4/6 inhibitor was per the treating provider, and at the time of the of study globally, palbociclib was the more commonly prescribed CDK4/6 inhibitor. But over the last year or so, data has certainly emerged favoring ribociclib in the metastatic setting.   On the SONIA trial, patients were monitored for a median of 37.3 months. And looking at the primary endpoint of the second progression-free survival, which is defined as the time for random assignment to the second objective disease progression or death, for those patients who received first-line CDK4/6 inhibition, had a PFS2 of 31 months compared to 26.8 months with second-line CDK4/6 inhibitor use. And this slight difference was non-statistically significant. So the conclusion was that time to second progression was not impacted by whether or not a patient received first-line CDK4/6  inhibition or second-line CDK4/6 inhibition. Additionally, there were no differences in overall survival between the 2 arms with a median overall survival of 45.9 months with first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor use versus 53.7 months in second-line CDK4/6 inhibitor use.  And that actually equates to significant differences in time on drug. The median duration of CDK4/6 inhibitor use with first-line therapy was 24.6 months compared to 8.1 months with second-line use. And by being on therapy for an additional 16.5 months if you use CDK4/6 inhibitor first-line, this, of course, leads to increased toxicity and certainly increased financial burden. And it was estimated that for each patient that receives this therapy first-line, there is an additional $200,000 spent on getting them the CDK4/6 inhibitor first-line, whereas the results from SONIA suggested that whether you use it first-line or second-line, the outcomes are essentially exactly the same.   And then specific for the SONIA trial, by conducting the study, they saved approximately €25 million on drug expenditure during the conduct of the trial. It's just amazing when you take it to that scale. And then lastly just to mention, they looked at quality of life assessments as well and there were no differences in the two arms whether they got first-line or second-line CDK4/6 inhibition.  Dr. Allison Zibelli: I thought this study was remarkable, and it got a long ovation when it was presented at the meeting. I'm certainly going to use this strategy and prioritize who needs upfront CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy.  I think that we have to think of not just drug toxicity for our patients, but financial toxicity. A lot of these drugs have very high copays and the number one cause of bankruptcy in the United States is medical costs. So that's something we really have to keep in mind. I also thought it was very interesting that the study was designed in cooperation with the patient advocacy group and patients themselves were very enthusiastic about this study and helped design it and helped recruit to it. So all in all, I thought this was a remarkable study.    So moving on, LBA1013 was the TORCHLIGHT study of toripalimab versus placebo in combination with nab-paclitaxel for patients with metastatic or recurrent triple-negative breast cancer. Many of us are not familiar with toripalimab. Can you tell us about the drug and how it was used in this study?  Dr. Arielle Heeke: Yes, toripalimab is essentially an immunotherapy agent. It's an IgG4K monoclonal antibody that targets PD-1. In this study, TORCHLIGHT, patients were randomized to receive toripalimab versus placebo in combination with nab-paclitaxel in newly metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. The patients on study were randomized two to one to receive drug or placebo. The drug is given on day 1 of a 3-week cycle at 240 milligrams and then patients of course also receive nab-paclitaxel on a day 1 and day 8 schedule of a 21-day cycle. They did look at outcomes on the study based on PD-L1 positivity status and they assessed for PD-L1 with an IHC assay JS311 antibody that ultimately generated a combined positive score. And PD-L1 positivity was defined as a CPS of greater than or equal to one based off of this assay. In the study population, about a third of patients were- patients' tumors were CPS negative, a third had a CPS of 1 to 10 and about a quarter had a CPS of greater than or equal to 10. And then approximately 7% of the tumors had an unknown status.   And then getting right into the results, we were provided results in the PD-L1 positive subgroup as well as the whole patient population. Looking at the primary endpoint of PFS, there were significant improvements seen in median PFS with the addition of toripalimab to nab-paclitaxel, again in the first line setting with a median PFS of 8.4 months with the addition of the immunotherapy agent versus 5.6 months with placebo. And this was statistically significant.  And then in the intent to treat population, there were some numeric improvements, in median, progression-free survival at 8.4 months with the addition of toripalimab versus 6.9 months with placebo.   We also got some results with overall survival that were quite intriguing, although this initial analysis was not designed to necessarily prove statistically significant differences in overall survival. But again, there were some promising trends. Looking first at the PD-L1 positive subgroup, the median overall survival was 32.8 months with the addition of toripalimab versus 19.5 months with placebo. Breaking it down a little bit further based on CPS values, for a CPS of 1 to 10, median overall survival was 32.8 months versus 19.5 months. And then for those very high CPS or greater than or equal to ten, median overall survival was not reached in this group versus 18.3 months with placebo. Also, looking in the intent-to-treat population, there were also improvements in overall survival with the addition of toripalimab with a median overall survival of 33.1 months with the addition of immunotherapy versus 23.5 months with nab-paclitaxel alone. So potentially, depending on next steps of this study, we would potentially have an option to add immunotherapy that is not biomarker specific, meaning we can potentially provide toripalimab to all patients regardless of their PD-L1 status.  Dr. Allison Zibelli: Very interesting new drug to look forward to. So, one of the major themes of this year's meeting was de-escalation strategies. For example, LBA506 reported the three-year invasive disease-free survival of the PHERGain trial, which looked at eliminating chemotherapy for HER2-positive patients getting neoadjuvant therapy. Tell us about the design of this study and how will it impact the care of these patients?   Dr. Arielle Heeke: The design was very complicated. I had to look at it a few times to really make sure I got my head around it. But I think once you do figure it out, you can see how there might be a path forward in clinical practice. Although I think for all of this work, it's maybe not ready yet for primetime, but certainly thought-provoking. But the PHERGain clinical trial, I feel like we've heard about this study for a little while and this concept of de-escalation really kind of started in the HER2-positive space. But this study was a randomized study of chemotherapy de-escalation and early HER2-positive breast cancer using PET/CT as a marker of response to therapies that don't involve chemotherapy.   Patients were eligible for the study if they had stage 1 to 3a HER2-positive breast cancer with no prior therapy for breast cancer, and ultimately 356 patients were enrolled in a 1 to 4 randomization scheme with the majority of patients ultimately enrolled into the experimental group, which is called Group B. So, to break down Group A and Group B, Group A essentially were patients that receive typical standard of care, which at this point is TCHP for six cycles, neoadjuvantly or prior to surgery. Once they complete those cycles they move into surgery and then Herceptin-PERJETA adjuvantly for additional twelve cycles.  I should also note that this study was conducted prior to results of the KATHERINE trial that showed benefit of switching to adjuvant T-DM1 if there's residual disease. So, patients in Group A as well as Group B did not receive T-DM1 at any point. So, again, Group A is kind of your standard of care. Group B was the “experimental arm.” And so, what they did in this arm to assess potential de-escalation strategies, patients first received Herceptin-PERJETA alone for two cycles with or without endocrine therapy, if they were also hormone receptor-positive. But after those two cycles, they underwent a PET/CT, and then if a response was garnered, they would continue with Herceptin-PERJETA and again plus or minus endocrine therapy to complete six cycles total before proceeding on with surgery. Then if they were fortunate enough to achieve complete response at the time of surgery, then they just continued with Herceptin-PERJETA maintenance, whereas if they did not achieve a complete response at the time of surgery, then they actually received TCHP 6 times adjuvantly. So, the chemotherapy was introduced after surgery.   And then going back to that PET/CT time point, if patients did not achieve a response at that check-in point, after 2 cycles of Herceptin-PERJETA, at that point they were transitioned to chemotherapy with TCHP, again, for six cycles. So, either they could kind of ride all the way through if they got that complete response at the time of surgery with Herceptin-PERJETA only, or if at surgery there was residual disease, they went on to receive TCHP after surgery, or if they did not have a response on that interim PET/CT after 2 cycles of HP then they would go on to receive TCHP neoadjuvantly.    So, looking at the results, they actually had 2 primary endpoints. The first primary endpoint was rates of a complete response at the time of surgery in patients that had a PET response. So, PET responses were actually seen in nearly 80% of all the patients treated with Herceptin-PERJETA without chemotherapy. And in those PET responders, a complete response rate at the time of surgery was seen in approximately 38% of patients. So, 37.9% of PET responders actually achieved a complete response when they went to surgery after receiving Herceptin-PERJETA alone, which is pretty amazing. I mean, we're used to seeing higher complete response rates with neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive disease, but again, this is a chemo-free regimen so that is encouraging for that 38% of patients that really didn't need chemotherapy.   And then the second primary endpoint, and this was what we saw basically for the first time with the 2023 ASCO Meeting, was results for the 3-year invasive disease-free survival in Group B or this experimental de-escalation group. And ultimately it was shown that the three-year invasive disease-free survival and the intent to treat group B population was 95.4%, which met its statistical endpoint, or, basically the null hypothesis was rejected. They just needed some sort of outcome that was not worse in terms of the 3-year invasive disease-free survival of 89%.   And then looking actually at the patients that kind of did the best. So, the patients that were PET responders and achieved a complete response at the time of surgery and therefore really only ever received Herceptin-PERJETA, their three-year invasive disease-free survival was 98.8%. So, really very good. Additional endpoints they looked at in Group A and Group B were favorable in terms of three-year invasive disease-free survival in Group A, and then three-year distant disease-free survival and three-year overall survival in both groups, all approximately 98%. So, very favorable.   So, ultimately, these findings reflect a potential role for a chemotherapy-free treatment approach for some patients with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. And this particular study, they used PET/CT to influence chemotherapy decision-making, which potentially identified 1 in 3 patients who can omit chemotherapy. With that, 80% of patients receiving the response with a PET/CT, and then of that, 80%, again, 38% actually having that complete response. And ongoing work is also being done to look at other mechanisms to assess for an opportunity to de-escalate with MRI imaging or HER2DX testing to again try to identify patients who can potentially defer chemotherapy in this setting. I did not see from the results what proportion of patients were hormone receptor-positive, which I think is also interesting when thinking about chemotherapy de-escalation, can you lean a little bit more heavily on endocrine therapy? Perhaps we'll get that data in the future.   Dr. Allison Zibelli: That's a very important point.  I would like to thank you, Dr. Heeke, for coming on the podcast today and sharing your valuable insights with us. We really appreciate it.  Dr. Arielle Heeke: Absolutely. It was a great meeting to dive into. It's always exciting to see what comes out of ASCO in the breast space. We're usually well represented there, and I hope that these studies will lead to further exploration.   Dr. Allison Zibelli: And thank you to our listeners for joining us today. You'll find links to all abstracts discussed today 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.  Follow today's speakers:   Dr. Allison Zibelli   Dr. Arielle Heeke  @HeekeMD     Follow ASCO on social media:    @ASCO on Twitter   ASCO on Facebook   ASCO on LinkedIn      Disclosures:    Dr. Allison Zibelli:    None Disclosed   Dr. Arielle Heeke:   Honoraria: Merck  Consulting or Advisory Role: Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Caris Life Sciences, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Menarini, Genome Insight  Speakers' Bureau: Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca      

We're catching up with the Tri-City Health Partnership and all their upcoming events and fundraisers! Check out our talk with the TCHP Executive Director Kim Lamansky and learn about all the amazing things the TCHP does for the St. Charles community.

The SPY traded more than $9.7B in 2022 which accounted for 21% of record U.S. ETF volume, says Todd Rosenbluth. He discusses how the SPY ETF turns 30. He goes over the numerous ETF offspring of the SPY, highlighting FLV and TCHP. Tune in to find out more about the stock market today.

Featuring perspectives from Drs Erika Hamilton, Sara Hurvitz, Ian Krop, Shanu Modi and Sara Tolaney, including the following topics: Optimizing the Management of Localized HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Introduction (0:00) Case: A woman in her mid 60s with pulmonary hypertension and triple-positive, node-positive infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) after neoadjuvant TCHP and clinical complete remission — Susmitha Apuri, MD (4:31) Case: A woman in her early 60s with a 1.7-cm, triple-positive, clinically node-negative IDC — Ranju Gupta, MD (10:05) Dr Tolaney presentation (18:44) Current Considerations in the Treatment of HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer (mBC) Case: A woman in her early 60s with an 8-cm, ER-negative, PR-positive, HER2-positive IDC and positive nodes bilaterally after neoadjuvant TCHP and bilateral mastectomies with no residual disease — Henna Malik, MD (31:12) Case: A woman in her late 50s with Stage IIIA, ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive, node-positive IDC with residual disease after neoadjuvant TCHP and mastectomy — Laila Agrawal, MD ()35:29 Dr Krop presentation (42:56) Management of HER2-Positive Breast Cancer with CNS Metastases Case: A woman in her early 90s with “mild” dementia and ER/PR-negative, HER2 IHC 1+ IDC with symptomatic chest wall recurrence after neoadjuvant paclitaxel/trastuzumab and lumpectomy — Alan B Astrow, MD (54:54) Case: A woman in her late 40s with a triple-positive multifocal IDC with a gBRCA2 mutation and HER2-negative axillary nodes after neoadjuvant TCHP and bilateral mastectomies with significant response in the breast but 49 positive nodes — Zanetta S Lamar, MD (1:00:01) Dr Hamilton presentation (1:06:51) Recent Appreciation of HER2 Low as a Unique Disease Subset; Future Directions in the Management of HER2-Positive and HER2-Low Breast Cancer Cases: A premenopausal woman in her late 30s with a triple-positive IDC who develops brain metastases while receiving THP; A woman in her late 60s with an ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive IDC who develops brain metastases after first-line THP and second-line T-DM1 — Kelly Yap, MD & Rohit Gosain, MD (1:20:46) Case: A woman in her mid 60s with ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive mBC treated with paclitaxel/trastuzumab, then T-DXd on progression — Joanna Metzner-Sadurski, MD (1:29:40) Dr Modi presentation (1:40:51) Incidence and Management of Adverse Events Associated with HER2-Targeted Therapy Case: A woman in her early 60s with recurrent triple-positive mBC whose disease converts to HER2-negative, PIK3CA-positive at the time of progression — Dhatri Kodali, MD (2:01:10) Dr Hurvitz presentation (2:05:08) CME information and select publications

Featuring perspectives from Dr Mark Pegram, including the following topics: Introduction: Journal Club with Dr Pegram (0:00) Case: A woman in her mid 60s with ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer after multiple lines of HER2-directed therapy with no evidence of disease after 8 years of pertuzumab/trastuzumab — Raman Sood, MD (22:35) Case: A woman in her early 60s with a 1.8-cm triple-positive invasive ductal carcinoma after partial mastectomy/axillary lymph node dissection (9 N+) receives adjuvant TCHP x 6 — Shaachi Gupta, MD, MPH (27:30) Case: A woman in her early 70s with de novo ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer develops asymptomatic, bilateral brain metastases on TCHP — Chris Prakash, MD (36:02) Case: A woman in her early 30s with ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide -> paclitaxel and bilateral mastectomy, now with HER2-positive disease on repeat testing — Zanetta S Lamar, MD (46:08) Case: A woman in her mid 40s with triple-negative breast cancer at biopsy declines neoadjuvant therapy and at surgery has a 3.2-cm node-negative, HER2-positive tumor — Alan B Astrow, MD (53:20) CME information and select publications

Featuring perspectives from Dr Mark D Pegram on the following topics: Case presentations and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS®) review of locally advanced and high-risk HER2-positive breast cancer Introduction (0:00) Case: A 49-year-old woman who received neoadjuvant TCHP, currently awaiting surgery — Estelamari Rodriguez, MD, MPH (5:12) Case: A 55-year-old woman with Stage I HER2-positive breast cancer — Kelly Yap, MD (23:46) Case: A 45-year-old woman who received postoperative T-DM1 after neoadjuvant TCHP — Philip Glynn, MD (26:30) Case: A 39-year-old woman with localized disease and a positive cervical node on PET scan — Dr Rodriguez (32:00) Case presentations and SABCS review of metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer Case: A 70-year-old woman with a 10-cm Grade III, ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive infiltrating ductal carcinoma and pleural metastases — Alan B Astrow, MD (38:24) Case: An 87-year-old woman with pretreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer now with negative (low) HER2 — Yanjun Ma, MD (43:25) Case: A 60-year-old woman with malignant pericardial effusion — Dr Glynn (50:23) Case: A 43-year-old woman who develops brain metastases after prior TCHP — Dr Yap (53:09) CME information and select publications

Setelah terakhir mengudara tanggal 24 November 2019, akhirnya POV, eh bukan.... TCHP, eh bukan juga.... YAUDALAH DENGERIN AJA YA!

Raj & Drew get a little high and get into Jones v Reyes, having children, Plan B, darkness retreats, Spotify taking over, the new weed compound TCHP, and more!! Enjoy!

Proceedings from a satellite symposium during the 42nd annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Featuring perspectives from Drs Adam M Brufsky, Lisa A Carey, Sara Hurvitz and Martine J Piccart-Gebhart. Introduction Program Overview: Dr Love (00:00) Considerations in the Care of Patients with Localized HER2-Positive Breast Cancer (BC) Receiving Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy Case (Dr Brufsky): A woman in her mid-30s with an ER-positive, HER2-positive, node-negative IDC receives neoadjuvant TCHP and at surgery is found to have residual disease in the breast (10:40) Case (Dr Carey): A woman in her mid-80s with a large ER-positive, HER2-positive, node-positive IDC has difficulty tolerating neoadjuvant therapy and has a small amount of residual disease in the breast at surgery (13:10) Faculty Presentation: Dr Carey (16:53) Adjuvant and Extended-Adjuvant Therapy for Patients with Localized HER2-Positive BC Case (Dr Brufsky): A woman in her early 60s with a 1.5-cm, ER-positive, HER2-positive IDC and 3 positive sentinel nodes (30:51) Case (Dr Carey): A woman in her mid-40s with ER-negative, HER2-positive, node-negative BC receives adjuvant T-DM1 on the ATTEMPT trial (36:54) Faculty Presentation: Dr Piccart-Gebhart (42:11) Available Therapeutic Options for the Management of HER2-Positive Metastatic BC (mBC) Case (Dr Hurvitz): A woman in her early 60s with HER2-positive mBC to the liver achieves a complete response to THP → HP but develops CNS metastases 3 years later (52:43) Case (Dr Piccart-Gebhart): A woman in her late 30s with heavily pretreated ER-positive, HER2-positive mBC receives neratinib/letrozole (55:07) Faculty Presentation: Dr Brufsky (57:51) Novel Agents and Strategies Under Evaluation for Patients with HER2-Positive mBC Case (Dr Hurvitz): A woman in her late 40s with ER-positive, HER2-positive mBC receives trastuzumab deruxtecan on a clinical trial after disease progression on multiple lines of therapy (1:09:56) Case (Dr Piccart-Gebhart): A woman in her late 20s receives multiple lines of local and systemic therapy for ER-positive, HER2-positive mBC (1:11:29) Faculty Presentation: Dr Hurvitz (1:13:41) CME information and select publications

Downtown St. Charles is lucky to be home to so many incredible businesses and organizations that work to make this community and the lives of the people in it better. One such organization is the Tri-City Health Partnership, a non-for-profit organization that is dedicated to helping out individuals who may not be able to afford dental or medical services get the treatment they need. We talked with TCHP Executive Director Kim Lamansky on the amazing services the TCHP provide for not only the St. Charles community, but for the Tri-City community and their upcoming fundraiser, the Casino Royale. Also, if you are inspired and would like to attend their event, use the code Business Alliance for 20% off your ticket! You won't want to miss this episode of What's Up... Downtown!

Breast Cancer Update, Issue 2, 2019 — Part 1: Our interview with Dr Krop highlights the following topics as well as cases from his practice: Case: A patient in her late 40s with ER-positive, HER2-positive, node-positive breast cancer experiences a near complete response after treatment with neoadjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (AC-THP) (00:00) Choice of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (01:43) Pertuzumab toxicity with or without chemotherapy (05:25) Management of the axilla in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer who achieve a pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (07:42) Design and results from the Phase III KATHERINE study evaluating adjuvant T-DM1 versus trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment (09:46) Perspective on the benefits and risks of T-DM1/pertuzumab versus T-DM1 alone as adjuvant therapy (13:04) Benefit of T-DM1 compared to trastuzumab irrespective of the extent of residual disease at surgery in the KATHERINE trial (14:45) Clinical implications of the KATHERINE trial results (17:48) Results from the Phase III KRISTINE study evaluating neoadjuvant docetaxel, carboplatin, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (TCHP) versus T-DM1 and pertuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (19:42) Use of cold caps to reduce the risk of alopecia with chemotherapy (23:53) Side-effect profile of T-DM1 in the adjuvant KATHERINE trial (25:27) Perspective on the use of neratinib in the post-(neo)adjuvant and metastatic settings (29:42) APHINITY: Phase III study evaluating adjuvant pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and chemotherapy for HER2-positive early breast cancer (34:08) Biomarker analysis of the APHINITY trial: Genomic correlates of response to adjuvant pertuzumab with trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (36:15) Emerging data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in combination with HER2-targeted therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer (40:22) HER2 heterogeneity as a predictor of response to neoadjuvant T-DM1 and pertuzumab: Results from a prospective clinical trial (42:09) Changes in HER2 status during disease progression (45:50) Case: A woman in her early 60s with de novo ER-positive, HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) experiences disease progression in the brain during treatment with T-DM1 (47:35) Activity of T-DM1 in patients with brain metastases (48:58) Efficacy and tolerability of tucatinib for HER2-positive mBC; ongoing Phase II HER2CLIMB study evaluating tucatinib versus placebo, each in combination with capecitabine and trastuzumab (52:41) Emerging data with neratinib and capecitabine for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and brain metastases (55:23) Response to CDK4/6 inhibitors in patients with ER-positive, HER2-positive mBC (58:38) Case: A woman in her early 30s with HER2-positive mBC receives trastuzumab deruxtecan on a clinical trial after experiencing disease progression on multiple lines of therapy (1:02:42) Results of a Phase I trial of trastuzumab deruxtecan for patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer previously treated with T-DM1 (1:05:20) Benefits and risks of trastuzumab deruxtecan for advanced HER2-positive breast cancer (1:06:31) Response to trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with breast cancer and low HER2 expression (1:09:03) Other novel agents and approaches under evaluation for HER2-positive breast cancer (1:13:15) CME information and select publications

Breast Cancer Update, Issue 2, 2019 — Part 1: Our interview with Dr Hurvitz highlights the following topics as well as cases from her practice: Optimal duration of adjuvant trastuzumab; analysis of the results from the Phase III PERSEPHONE and PHARE studies (00:00) Perspective on the role of trastuzumab biosimilar agents in the management of HER2-positive breast cancer (04:43) Benefits and risks of anthracycline-containing and anthracycline-free neoadjuvant regimens for patients with HER2-positive disease (08:03) Comparison of paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab to TCHP in the neoadjuvant setting (11:17) Activity of pertuzumab in combination with T-DM1 in the (neo)adjuvant and metastatic settings (13:21) Case: A woman in her mid-40s with ER-positive, HER2-positive breast cancer attains a good response to neoadjuvant T-DM1/pertuzumab on the KRISTINE study (16:15) KRISTINE: A Phase III study of neoadjuvant TCHP versus T-DM1/pertuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (19:05) Primary analysis of SOPHIA: A Phase III study of the novel anti-HER2 antibody margetuximab and chemotherapy versus trastuzumab and chemotherapy for pretreated HER2-positive mBC (22:58) Case: A woman in her late 40s with HER2-positive mBC receives trastuzumab deruxtecan on a clinical trial after experiencing disease progression on tucatinib (27:17) Ongoing Phase II HER2CLIMB study investigating tucatinib with capecitabine and trastuzumab for advanced HER2-positive breast cancer (31:06) Emerging data with trastuzumab deruxtecan for patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer who received prior treatment with T-DM1 (33:32) Potential clinical role of trastuzumab deruxtecan (37:10) Preemptive measures to mitigate nausea and the risk of pneumonitis associated with trastuzumab deruxtecan (38:45) Case: A woman in her early 40s with HER2-positive mBC experiences a prolonged remission with trastuzumab and lapatinib in combination with chemotherapy (41:22) Predictors of benefit with HER2-targeted therapy; risk of recurrence for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (47:05) Role of CDK4/6 inhibitors for patients with ER-positive, HER2-positive mBC; activity of PI3K inhibitors in patients with PIK3CA mutations (50:30) Neratinib and capecitabine versus lapatinib and capecitabine for HER2-positive mBC previously treated with HER2-directed therapy: Findings from the Phase III NALA trial (52:40) CME information and select publications

Proceedings from a CME symposium held at the 2019 ASCO Annual Meeting. Featuring perspectives from Prof Fabrice André and Drs Virginia Kaklamani, Mark D Pegram, Hope S Rugo, Sara M Tolaney and Tiffany A Traina: Introduction Program overview: Dr Love (00:00) Available and Emerging Data Sets Shaping the Management of Localized HER2-Positive Breast Cancer (BC) Case (Dr Rugo): A woman in her mid-40s with ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive BC who received neoadjuvant TCHP and experienced a pathologic complete response (3:57) Case (Dr Rugo): A woman in her mid-50s with an ER-positive, HER2-positive infiltrating lobular carcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy/anti-HER2 therapy, had residual disease at surgery and initiated treatment with T-DM1 (6:39) Case (Dr Rugo): A woman in her early 40s with an ER-positive, HER2-positive IDC who received postadjuvant neratinib (11:42) Faculty Presentation: Dr Rugo (14:18) Use of Genomic Classifiers in Clinical Decision-Making for Patients with ER-Positive Early BC Case (Dr Kaklamani): A postmenopausal woman in her late 50s with an ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative IDC and a 21-gene Recurrence Score® of 24 (38:46) Case (Dr Kaklamani): A postmenopausal woman in her mid-50s with an ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative IDC with 2 positive nodes and a 21-gene Recurrence Score of 21 (41:47) Faculty Presentation: Dr Kaklamani (48:39) Selection and Sequence of Therapy for ER-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic BC (mBC); Novel Agents and Strategies Under Evaluation in ER-Positive Disease Case (Prof André): A postmenopausal woman in her mid-50s who presented with ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative mBC approximately 2 years after the completion of adjuvant letrozole (1:07:13) Case (Prof André): A woman in her mid-70s with de novo ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative mBC with extensive liver involvement who received palbociclib/letrozole (1:10:03) Faculty Presentation: Prof André (1:11:05) Immunotherapy as a Rational Therapeutic Strategy in BC Case (Dr Tolaney): A woman in her early 60s with metastatic triple-negative BC (TNBC) who received atezolizumab/nab paclitaxel and remains NED 4 years later (1:28:14) Case (Dr Tolaney): A woman in her mid-60s with heavily pretreated TNBC who experienced a complete response to pembrolizumab but developed treatment-related diabetes and hypothyroidism (1:31:00) Faculty Presentation: Dr Tolaney (1:32:49) Protocol and Off-Protocol Decision-Making for Patients with HER2-Positive mBC Case (Dr Pegram): A woman in her mid-60s with widespread ER-negative, HER2-positive mBC who received tucatinib/capecitabine/trastuzumab on a clinical trial (1:46:01) Faculty Presentation: Dr Pegram (1:47:28) Role of PARP Inhibitors, Novel Agents in mBC; Male Breast Cancer Case (Dr Traina): A woman in her early 60s with metastatic TNBC and a germline BRCA2 mutation who received olaparib monotherapy and achieved a complete response (2:11:31) Case (Dr Traina): A woman in her early 70s with metastatic androgen receptor-positive TNBC who received an investigational antiandrogen on a clinical trial (2:13:12) Case (Dr Traina): A man in his early 60s with ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative mBC and a germline BRCA2 mutation (2:16:16) Faculty Presentation: Dr Traina (2:18:32) Select publications

Oncology Today with Dr Neil Love: Breast Cancer Edition — A virtual roundtable discussion with noted investigators Charles Geyer and Sara Tolaney for a review of recent innovations in breast cancer medicine: Design and results of the Phase III KATHERINE study investigating adjuvant T-DM1 versus trastuzumab for patients with residual invasive HER2-positive early breast cancer (0:00) Side effects and tolerability of T-DM1 compared to trastuzumab (3:00) Clinical implications of the KATHERINE trial (7:27) Case (Dr Geyer): A 53-year-old woman with a locally advanced ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive, ulcerated infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) experiences neuropathy after 6 cycles of neoadjuvant TCHP (docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab/pertuzumab) (12:52) Management of the axilla in patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (15:36) Case (Dr Tolaney): A 56-year-old woman with a 3.7-cm ER/PR-negative, HER2-positive IDC receives neoadjuvant THP (paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab) and adjuvant AC followed by trastuzumab/pertuzumab (20:01) Selection of (neo)adjuvant treatment for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (22:14) Optimal treatment for early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (28:05) Role of the recently FDA-approved subcutaneous formulation of trastuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy for patients with HER2-positive BC (32:01) Final results from the OlympiAD trial of olaparib versus standard chemotherapy; results from the EMBRACA trial comparing talazoparib to standard therapy for patients with germline BRCA mutations (34:52) Case (Dr Geyer): A 31-year-old woman with metastatic ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer receives ovarian suppression, fulvestrant and abemaciclib (39:45) Use of PARP inhibitors for patients with metastatic breast cancer and BRCA mutations (41:51) Case (Dr Tolaney): A 59-year-old woman with ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and a BRCA2 mutation receives olaparib as second-line therapy (45:18) Sequencing of PARP inhibitors for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and BRCA mutations (49:52) Ongoing PARTNER/PARTNERING studies evaluating olaparib with platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy or as a part of novel combination approaches; investigation of neoadjuvant talazoparib for patients with TNBC and a germline BRCA mutation (51:49) Ongoing Phase III OlympiA trial evaluating olaparib as adjuvant treatment for high-risk, HER2-negative breast cancer with a germline BRCA mutation (54:33) Efficacy and safety of atezolizumab with nab paclitaxel for advanced TNBC in the Phase III IMpassion130 trial (56:57) Choice of chemotherapy for patients with metastatic TNBC (59:49) Perspective on overall survival for patients with advanced TNBC and PD-L1-positive tumors treated with atezolizumab and nab paclitaxel (1:4:42) Case (Dr Tolaney): A 52-year-old woman develops pneumonitis while receiving pembrolizumab and eribulin for metastatic TNBC (1:7:09) Endocrine toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (1:9:26) Ongoing Phase III NSABP-B-59/GBG-96-GeparDouze trial evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy with atezolizumab followed by adjuvant atezolizumab (1:10:34) Ongoing Phase III ALEXANDRA/IMpassion030 study evaluating standard adjuvant chemotherapy with or without atezolizumab for early TNBC (1:13:10) Emerging data with the HER2-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor tucatinib for advanced HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (1:14:48) Comparison of the activity and tolerability of tucatinib to that of lapatinib and neratinib (1:19:15) Efficacy and safety of the novel antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan for HER2-positive breast cancer (1:21:46) Results of the Phase III SOLAR-1 trial evaluating the PI3 kinase inhibitor alpelisib with fulvestrant for ER-positive advanced breast cancer (1:27:4) NEO-ORB: A randomized Phase II study of neoadjuvant letrozole with alpelisib for HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (1:31:47) Select publications  

January 8th will always be a day to celebrate from now on in my life. It is the day that I finished my 6th round of TCHP. The day I finished chemo and got to ring that bell. But no one really tells you how to live life after treatment. How to manage the anxiety that comes with not being monitored by your doctor's on a weekly basis. This is how I feel one year later.

In this episode, I am talking about my last three rounds of chemo. Just when I thought I had experienced the worst of my side effects, I was thrown for a loop. I feel like my last three rounds of chemo really tested me mentally and physically. As a family, we really had to rally together and make it to the end of chemo treatments without possibly losing our minds.

Living Podcariously Episode 75 Show Notes - Jacob (Bacon) from the Burn It Down Podcast joins us this week - Keith Gee, the Executive Director from the Children's Hunger Project guests for the first segment this week. - Living Podcariously presents Keith with TCHP a check from proceeds raised at our listener event back in July - Andrea Joy bring us the 'Guy-a-ry' segment with special guest Bacon - Jay 'Unleashes the Shenaniganry' - We talk about Tach making dating profiles on apps - Is Magic Johnson HIV free? - Andrea Joy brings us the differences between men and women - We tell stories about how we were punished in school The Children's Hunger Project Phone: 321-610-1900 Website https://thechildrenshungerproject.org/  FaceBook https://www.facebook.com/thechildrenshungerproject/    *The opinions and views heard on Living Podcariously or any Dichotomy Media, L.L.C. podcast are those of the hosts, guests and callers and do not reflect the opinions of the sponsors, Libsyn or the employers of the hosts. *   You're listening to Living Podcariously! Bringing real men's perspectives; unfiltered, unapologetic. Recorded live in the Living Podcariously studio in World Famous Cocoa Beach, FL. Hosted by Tach, Adam, Andrea and Jay! This podcast may contain vulgar, explicit content to include conversations about sex or sexual references,  drug and alcohol references, and general things men are interested in.  Boobs, games, sports, boobs, strippers, boobs, drinks, bars, bands, boobs, perverted news,  etc.  You get the idea. https://FaceBook.com/LivingPodcariously  Music Provided by DJ Constant DJ Gil Lugo BenSound http://www.bensound.com Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ 

Dr Rimawi speaks with ecancertv at SABCS 2016 about the results of a trial in which neoadjuvant TCHP chemotherapy was administered alongside oestrogen deprivation therapy in HR/HER positive breast cancer patients. He considers comments that the chemotherapy regimen seems to blunt the clinical benefit of anti-oestrogens, which may in turn be attributable to the sheer success of chemotherapy, or be influenced by the timing and dosage of the regimens.

Dr Rimawi presents data at SABCS 2016 about the influence of added oestrogen deprivation to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to with HR/HER2 positive breast cancer patients. Overall, he describes additional therapy as not producing clinically significant results, which could be attributed to the chemotherapy regimen 'blunting' the clinical benefit of anti-oestrogens. For more from this trial, Dr Rimawi spoke with ecancer, with a video interview coming soon.

The Christ Hospital Physicians recently had more than 90 percent of its Primary Care practices selected to participate in the Comprehensive Primary Care Plus (CPC+) initiative, a partnership between payor partners from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), state Medicaid agencies, commercial health plans, self-insured businesses, and primary care providers. Listen in as Joe Bateman, MD explains how TCHP is leveraging the CMS investment to develop a pcp infrastructure to transition to a new model of care and succeed in the changing environment.