Oncology On The Go

In this episode recorded at the 2026 American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS) annual meeting, Daniel C. McFarland, DO, sat down with Kelly Irwin, MD, to address one of the most challenging topics in oncology: suicide risk. The conversation aimed to equip oncologists with the tools and confidence to navigate the emotional complexities of cancer care.Key Discussion Points: Understanding the Risk: Patients with cancer experience more than double the risk of completed suicide compared with the general population. The risk is highest during the first month following a diagnosis—a 12-fold increase in some studies—and remains elevated for the first year. Identifying High-Risk Factors: Beyond a prior suicide attempt (the No.1 risk factor), specific contributors include advanced-stage disease, financial distress, and cancers that impact core identity or physical function, such as head and neck or pancreatic cancers. The Power of Asking: Both experts emphasized that a clinician asking about suicide does not increase the risk. Irwin advises clinicians to trust their instincts and use a continuum of questioning, starting with general feelings of hopelessness and moving toward specific plans and access to "means" (such as firearms or medication). The "Don’t Worry Alone" Rule: Irwin urged clinicians never to handle these concerns in isolation. She recommended involving social workers, nurses, and family members, noting that in life-threatening situations, clinician-patient confidentiality (HIPAA) can be "broken" to ensure safety. Relieving Suffering and Building Connection: The primary goal is to make the "unbearable bearable". Irwin highlighted that even small, non-transactional gestures—like a "thinking of you" message—can significantly decrease suicide risk by reinforcing a patient's sense of belonging and mattering. Available Resources:· National Mental Health Hotline: Call or text 988· Connect with a crisis counselor: Text HOME to 741741· Samaritans Hotline and Website: (877)870-4673; https://samaritanshope.org/our-services/24-7-helpline/McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being a psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®. Irwin is an instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a faculty psychiatrist at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Cancer Center and MGH Schizophrenia Program, where she founded the Cancer Prevention Program.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Julian Hong, MD, MS, discussed considerations for optimizing care among patients with mental health disorders (MHDs) who are undergoing treatment for cancer. He spoke in the context of a study he and coauthors published in Cancer, which showed that patients with cancer and a mental health condition experience an increased risk of all-cause mortality.Specifically, findings from the study demonstrated that early MHDs conferred a heightened all-cause mortality risk in the initial 12 to 35 months of cancer diagnosis (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.47-1.56). This trend diminished over time, with gradually reduced risks observed from 36 to 59 months (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11-1.24) and from 60 to 120 months after that initial period (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.01). Furthermore, the risk of all-cause mortality was even higher for patients with an early MHD and receipt of psychotropic medications at 12 to 36 months (HR, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.52-2.83), 36 to 60 months (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.46), and 60 to 120 months (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.25).“We’re…trying to combine different types of data to identify earlier mental health diagnoses. Even what can feel like small amounts of time—weeks and months—can make a huge difference for people who are going through these conditions,” Hong stated regarding the next steps for research in the field. “It’s one thing to help identify some of these issues and some of these implications of different conditions, but at the end of the day, the goal is to intervene on these things and do a better job of taking care of patients.”Hong is an associate professor of radiation oncology in the Baker Computational Health Sciences Institute at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and head of Artificial Intelligence at UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center.ReferenceGanjouei AA, Zack T, Friesner I, et al. Association of mental health disorders and all-cause mortality for patients with cancer: large-scale analysis of University of California Health System data. Cancer. 2026;132(5):e70254. doi:10.1002/cncr.70254

In this episode of Oncology on The Go, created in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, Daniel C. McFarland, DO, and Ilana M. Braun, MD, dove into the complexities of cannabis use within the oncology landscape. They explored the tension between rising public popularity and the need for rigorous scientific scrutiny in symptom management.Key Discussion Points: The 2024 ASCO Guidelines: Braun highlighted the first-of-its-kind clinical guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, which acknowledge medicinal utility for chemotherapy-induced nausea, vomiting (as an adjunct), and non-cancer pain. Routes of Administration: McFarland and Braun compared oral, combusted, and vaporized methods, noting that while oncologists favor oral routes, they are subject to "first-pass metabolism," which can delay relief. Safety and Clinical Concerns: There are potential negative impacts on outcomes for patients using immune checkpoint inhibitors. Risks may impact patients with a personal or family history of psychosis when using THC-predominant products. There are possible dangers linked to e-cigarette or vaping use-associated lung injury (EVALI) from informally sourced products. Addressing "Cancer-Directed" Claims: The pair addressed the misconception that cannabis treats the cancer itself, noting that ASCO explicitly discourages using it as a replacement for conventional treatments like chemotherapy or surgery. The Future of Research: The discussion concluded with the potential impact of reclassifying cannabis to Schedule III, which could reduce red tape and enable high-quality comparative efficacy trials for sleep, anxiety, and depression. The conversation emphasized a "harm reduction" approach, urging oncologists to provide stigma-free, evidence-based education while respecting patient autonomy.McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Braun is an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and senior physician at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. ReferenceBraun IM, Bohlke K, Abrams DI, et al. Cannabis and cannabinoids in adults with cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(13):1575-1593. doi:10.1200/JCO.23.02596

During a visit to Columbia University Irving Cancer Research Center, experts across hematologic oncology shared their perspectives on key trends and developments in their respective fields. These conversations explored novel therapeutic approaches and translational research that may advance the paradigm across different leukemia, multiple myeloma, and lymphoma populations.First, Nicole Lamanna, MD, an associate clinical professor of medicine in the Hematologic Malignancies Section of the Hematology/Oncology Division at Irving Medical Center, discussed relevant advancements in the management of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). She described how the FDA approval of fixed-duration acalabrutinib (Calquence) plus venetoclax (Venclexta) may affirm a shift away from standard chemoimmunotherapy in the field. Her discussion also emphasized evaluating the adverse effects and benefit/risk profiles of drug classes such as BTK inhibitors and BCL-2 inhibitors during the treatment decision-making process.Next, Rajshekhar Chakraborty, MD, an assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Hematology/Oncology at Irving Medical Center, touched upon critical themes related to the use of bispecific antibodies for patients with multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders. Educating providers on the utility of bispecific antibodies in earlier treatment settings, he noted, is one of the important challenges that the field must address to expand usage of these therapies in community practices. He also highlighted findings from the phase 3 MajesTEC-3 trial (NCT05083169) and how they support the clinical utility of teclistamab-cqyv (Tecvayli) plus daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj (Darzalex Faspro) for patients with relapsed/refractory disease.Finally, Hua-Jay “Jeff” Cherng, MD, an assistant professor of medicine in the Lymphoma Program in the Division of Hematology and Oncology at Irving Medical Center, detailed translational work that may shape clinical practice in the lymphoma space. He spoke about research aiming to move markers like ctDNA and minimal residual disease from “the bench to the bedside” as part of clinical decision-making for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Other future focuses, Cherng said, include leveraging molecular genotyping to improve outcomes for higher-risk subgroups or even replacing chemotherapy with less toxic targeted agents.References CALQUENCE® plus venetoclax approved in the US as first all-oral, fixed-duration combination for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the 1st-line setting. News release. AstraZeneca. February 20, 2026. Accessed March 11, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/38zbx96s Mateos MV, Bahlis N, Perrot A, et al. Phase 3 randomized study of teclistamab plus daratumumab versus investigator’s choice of daratumumab and dexamethasone with either pomalidomide or bortezomib (DPd/DVd) in patients (pts) with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): results of MajesTEC-3. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 2):LBA-6. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-LBA-6

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Sagar Lonial, MD, FACP, FASCO, discussed the potential implications of the FDA approving iberdomide plus daratumumab (Darzalex) and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. He spoke in context of the FDA accepting a new drug application for the iberdomide regimen based on data from the phase 3 EXCALIBER-RRMM trial (NCT04975997).Lonial discussed the potential benefits that iberdomide could offer based on its properties as a CELMoD. He noted how the potency, safety profile, and targeting capabilities of this drug class may differentiate it from previous standards such as immunomodulatory drugs.Regarding the supporting findings from the EXCALIBER-RRMM trial, Lonial stated that the study was the “first test case” for using minimal residual disease (MRD) as an early end point for approval. In September 2025, investigators announced that iberdomide-based therapy showed a significant improvement in MRD-negative status vs daratumumab, bortezomib (Velcade), and dexamethasone.The potential approval of iberdomide in this multiple myeloma population, Lonial said, would open the door for using the agent in combination with other immunotherapies. Noting that T-cell engagers are “perfect partners” for the CELMoD class, Lonial emphasized the utility of combination regimens across the field.“Recognizing that we have agents that can reset or augment immunity and partnering them [are important]. People always want to say it's a black and white world; you're either going to use this, or you're going to use this. To me, it's about combination therapy,” Lonial stated. “Having this tool belt with many drugs and putting them together in combinations is how we get to [a] cure.”Lonial is a professor and chair of the Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology and the Anne and Bernard Gray Family Chair in Cancer at Emory University School of Medicine, and the chief medical officer at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University. He is also a member of the International Myeloma Foundation scientific board.References U.S. Food and Drug Administration accepts Bristol Myers Squibb's new drug application for iberdomide in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. News release. Bristol Myers Squibb. February 17, 2026. Accessed March 5, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/4c8mb6ex Bristol Myers Squibb announces phase 3 EXCALIBER-RRMM study evaluating iberdomide in combination with standard therapies demonstrated a significant improvement in minimal residual disease negativity rates in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. News release. Bristol Myers Squibb. September 23, 2025. Accessed March 5, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/5n9768k5

Daniel C. McFarland, DO, and Boris Kiselev, MD, highlighted the need for oncologists to recognize and address depression for patients with cancer. In a new episode of Oncology on the Go created in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, host Daniel C. McFarland, DO, spoke with Boris Kiselev, MD. Together, they explored the complex intersection of oncology and psychiatry. The conversation challenged the oversimplification of “cancer-related sadness” to provide clinicians with a framework for distinguishing between normative grief and clinical Major Depressive Disorder (MDD).The conversation focused on: The Diagnostic Continuum: Depression exists on a spectrum ranging from normative sadness—encompassing a healthy, waxing-and-waning response to trauma—to pathological MDD. Differentiating Grief vs Depression: Grief/Normative Sadness: Often occurs in waves, improves over time, and does not typically affect a patient’s functional ability. It is often a response to the loss of one’s “pre-cancer self”. Clinical Depression: Marked by anhedonia (loss of pleasure), persistent feelings of guilt or worthlessness, and a fundamental change in identity where the patient no longer “feels like themselves”. The “Quantum” Observation Effect: Patients often present differently to oncologists than they do to mental health professionals. In the oncology clinic, patients may unconsciously “shield” their distress to ensure that their treatment plan remains unchanged. The Power of the Story: The experts emphasized that the oncologist-patient relationship is therapeutic. Allowing patients to “tell their story” rather than jumping straight to clinical data builds trust with them and uncovers hidden psychological pressure points. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Kiselev is a consult liaison psychiatrist at Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, an assistant professor in the Psycho-oncology Program in the Department of Supportive Oncology at Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute, and an assistant professor in Internal Medicine.

Sarah Poland, MD, lead author of a recently published article in the journal ONCOLOGY titled Advances in Immunotherapy for Breast Cancer, highlighted key findings from her review in a conversation with CancerNetwork®.1 Throughout the discussion, she spoke about: Shifting Perspectives on Immunogenicity: Historically, breast cancer was considered a “cold,” poorly immunogenic tumor due to low tumor mutational burden (TMB) and few tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). Poland highlighted how clinical research has shifted this perspective, particularly through the study of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), which often exhibits higher PD-L1 expression and immune infiltration.Key Clinical Milestones: The review highlighted foundational data that established immunotherapy as a standard of care: Early-Stage TNBC: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-522 trial (NCT03036488) established pembrolizumab (Keytruda) plus chemotherapy as a standard neoadjuvant treatment for stage II to III TNBC.2 Metastatic TNBC: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 trial (NCT02819518) demonstrated the benefit of pembrolizumab in PD-L1–positive metastatic disease.3 Managing Toxicity and Rechallenge: Poland addressed the feasibility of pembrolizumab rechallenge after an immune-related adverse effect (irAE), emphasizing that while possible, it requires a highly individualized approach based on the severity and timing of the initial toxicity.The Future Landscape: Beyond PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, the discussion covered emerging technologies that are poised to redefine treatment: Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs): Exploration of novel combinations of ADCs with immunotherapy. Emerging Modalities: The potential role of bispecific antibodies and vaccine trials utilizing tumor antigens. Subtype Expansion: Emerging evidence supporting the efficacy of immunotherapy in hormone receptor–positive and HER2-positive subtypes, moving beyond the traditional focus on TNBC. Unmet Educational Needs: Poland emphasized the importance of resources that connect providers and patients, particularly in translating complex trial data into clinical practice and addressing patient concerns regarding the newest therapies and trials.Poland is from the Department of Medicine in the Section of Hematology/Oncology at The University of Chicago.References1. Poland S, de Oliveira Andrade M, Nanda R. Advances in immunotherapy for breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 2026;40(1):8-15. doi:10.46883/2026.259210612. Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, et al. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(9):810-821. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa19105493. Cortes J, Rugo HS, Cescon DW, et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2022;387(3):217-226. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2202809

At the 2026 Tandem Meetings, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of experts who presented on key developments and advancements across hematologic oncology. As part of different oral presentations and poster sessions, researchers and clinicians shared updated findings that may influence the management of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), leukemia, lymphoma, and other blood cancer types.First, Fernando Duarte, head of the Bone Marrow Transplant Service at Walter Cantídio University Hospital (HUWC), hematologist and professor at the Federal University of Ceará, and president of the Brazilian Society of Cell Therapy and Bone Marrow Transplant, highlighted his presentation analyzing trends associated with allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) among patients with MDS or myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and other types of MDS. Data from the Brazillian SBTMO and CIBMTR registry revealed that patients receiving allo-HCT for MDS/MPN were typically older with worse performance statuses. Additionally, MDS/MPN independently predicted worse overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival outcomes.Next, Alfonso Molina, MD, MPH, a third-year Hematology and Medical Oncology fellow at Stanford University, detailed results from a phase 1 trial (NCT05507827) assessing Orca-T, an investigational allogeneic T-cell immunotherapy, among those with high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). Treatment with Orca-T yielded disease-free survival and OS in all (100%) 18 evaluable patients after a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 3-35), which occurred without graft failure, significant graft-versus-host-disease, or severe CAR-mediated toxicity.Finally, Irtiza N. Sheikh, DO, an assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics - Patient Care, Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Section of the Division of Pediatrics at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discussed his presentation exploring differences in outcomes with lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi; liso-cel) across various treatment settings and patient populations with large B-cell lymphoma. Data demonstrated that among patients younger than 50 years old, liso-cel produced enduring responses across real-world and clinical trial settings, which were comparable to outcomes in overall populations. References Duarte FB, Garcia YDO, Hamerschlak N, et al. Comparative outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms and other myelodysplastic syndromes: Brazilian Sbtmo/CIBMTR registry analysis. Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Presentation 63. Molina A, Shiraz A, Kanegai A, et al. Mature outcomes from the phase I trial of Orca-T and allogeneic CD19/CD22 CAR-T cells for adults with high-risk B-ALL. Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Presentation 31. Sheikh IN, Patel K, Perales MA, et al. Clinical outcomes of lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) in YOUNGER PATIENTS (Pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Presented at: 2026 Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings of ASTCT and CIBMTR; February 4-7, 2026; Salt Lake City, UT. Poster 210.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Manoj Bhasin, PhD, MS, spoke about findings from a study in which he and colleagues developed a single-cell atlas characterizing the dysregulation of the bone marrow immune microenvironment in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Findings published in Nature Cancer showed that the immune system has a broad, treatment-independent influence on outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.Bhasin began by detailing the background and methodology of his study, in which an Immune Atlas of multiple myeloma helped generate profiles of 1,397,272 single cells from the bone marrow of 337 patients with newly diagnosed disease to characterize immune and hematopoietic cell populations. He also broke down specific analyses of certain aspects of the immune microenvironment, such as signaling evaluations demonstrating active intercellular communication involving a proliferation-inducing ligand and B cell maturation antigen potentially associated with tumor growth and survival.Looking ahead, Bhasin described a need to research additional factors, including those beyond the bone marrow, which may help clinicians further optimize therapeutic strategies for patients with multiple myeloma.“Maybe the biggest thing we want to say from this study is that the immune system is a critical player in the outcome of multiple myeloma, its emergence, and its therapeutic response. It is not a byproduct; it is a major driver of the outcomes,” Bhasin stated. “[Not] all high-risk multiple myeloma lesions are the same. We should look at the immune imprints of them, further comprehensively study them, and then help in designing immune therapies that fix the immune dysregulation that is associated with each cytogenetic alteration [instead of] thinking that all high-risk cytogenetic lesions of myeloma are all the same.”Bhasin is a professor in the Department of Pediatrics and in the Department of Biomedical Informatics at Emory University School of Medicine, and director of Genomics, Proteomics, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology and the Aflac Director of the Single Cell Biology Program at Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta.ReferencePilcher WC, Yao L, Gonzalez-Kozlova E, et al. A single-cell atlas characterizes dysregulation of the bone marrow immune microenvironment associated with outcomes in multiple myeloma. Nat Cancer. 2026;7:224-246. doi:10.1038/s43018-025-01072-4

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Ram Prakash Thirugnanasambandam, MBBS, discussed the evolving roles that artificial intelligence (AI)–based tools may play in palliative care and the management of different hematologic malignancies. He spoke in the context of a publication he authored, The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Palliative Oncology: Zeroing in on Hematologic Malignancies,which was featured in the November/December 2025 issue of the journal ONCOLOGY®.Thirugnanasambandam, a fellow of Internal Medicine, Hospice and Palliative Medicine, and Geriatric Medicine at the University of Miami, outlined the paper’s aim to explore how AI can assist with patient-centric goals of care like symptom management as well as decision-making support among clinicians. In the context of palliative medicine, AI has demonstrated utility as a supportive tool that can help with marking patients who may benefit from a palliative care conversation. Such tools have also assisted with identifying symptoms such as pain, dyspnea, anxiety, or psychosocial distress, allowing providers to form a more proactive approach to patient care.According to Thirugnanasambandam, implementing AI into one’s workflow may help accurately predict disease subtypes and burdens among patients with leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma. He noted that predictive analytic capabilities may also facilitate effective management of cytopenias, transplant-related needs, infections, and other treatment-related toxicities.Thirugnanasambandam also discussed some of the ethical considerations surrounding the growth of AI-based tools, highlighting information privacy concerns and potentially biased datasets as notable issues with these platforms. Although AI may assist with decision-making, Thirugnanasambandam stated that it ultimately cannot replace a human’s nuanced clinical judgment and empathy.“I want readers to take away a sense of balance,” Thirugnanasambandam said regarding his publication. “We’ve done the article to help clinicians be more comfortable in engaging with AI. We need to apply it critically, not as replacing judgment or decision-making skills, but more as an adjunct.”

Emphasizing the evidence-based nature of medicine, Nathan Goodyear, MD, explained that integrative oncology uses many of the same parameters and key clinical thresholds among patients undergoing treatment for a diagnosis of cancer that his conventional oncologist colleagues use.In this episode of Oncology on the Go, Goodyear, an integrative medicine physician at the Williams Cancer Institute, discussed key clinical efficacy and safety thresholds that integrative oncologists use for flagship integrative therapies, emerging localized and combinatory immunotherapy options in this clinical landscape, and a focus on reestablishing trust through patient-doctor relationships.Regarding clinical thresholds, he explained that integrative care uses guidelines such as the CTCAE to follow adverse effects (AEs). RECIST criteria are also employed to ascertain clinical outcomes and utilize imaging to gauge responses in a way that is not arbitrary but translatable.Next, Goodyear discussed combinatory regimens with immunotherapy backbones, such as pulsed electric fields (PEF) with intratumoral immunotherapy, as well as anti-CD40/CpG immunotherapies, to help generate an intratumoral response prior to resection, particularly in “immune desert” tumors. He noted how these strategies may also mitigate the possibility of postoperative recurrence.Finally, he touched upon the evolving role of doctors as collaborators with their patients as opposed to a paternalistic and authoritative role over the course of their treatment. Driven by growing demands for a greater desire to preserve quality of life during care, Goodyear explained that his institution aims to “innovate, elevate, and empower” by bringing emergent innovative strategies to patients, elevating their immune system through immune responses, and empowering patients to undergo the healing process in tandem with a reduction of AEs.Goodyear concluded by reiterating the importance of patient-centric care, particularly as it pertains to the restoration of trust in medicine, as well as a return to a doctor’s intended rule as a healer.For more expert-level discussions across the oncology paradigm, check out the newest podcast series on CancerNetwork®, RadOnc on the Run. Join host and ONCOLOGY® editor-at-large Brandon Mancini, MD, MBA, FACRO, as he speaks with colleagues about the latest advancements and hottest research in the radiation oncology space.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Kandace P. McGuire, MD, and Paschalia Mountziaris, MD, PhD, highlighted the use of L-Dex bioimpedance spectroscopy as a method for detecting lymphedema earlier in patients who undergo surgery for breast cancer. The experts discussed seamlessly integrating this novel modality into standard vitals workflows and detailed other considerations for improving long-term survivorship outcomes via proactive lymphatic care.McGuire began by breaking down why detection of lymphedema typically occurs later after its development, describing how a sentinel lymph node biopsy and additive radiation can cause lymphatic damage and obstruction that correspond with symptoms months to years down the road. At her institution, bioimpedance spectroscopy, the use of a small electrical signal measuring “bioimpedance”, is employed at various points before and after breast cancer surgery to easily determine the likelihood of developing lymphedema through a nursing visit. According to Mountziaris, having a noninvasive method like this provides a “valuable tool” for informing patients of their risks of experiencing lymphedema.The experts also discussed a need to develop a more nuanced method for detecting potential lymphedema among patients with a higher body mass index and spoke about fostering communication across the breast surgery oncology team, the plastic/reconstructive team, and physical rehabilitation specialists to monitor abnormal fluid changes in patients. Looking ahead, they emphasized making bioimpedance spectroscopy more accessible as a key goal in lymphedema care.“We are privileged that McGuire and I have a great team and that I have the equipment that we’re able to provide these things for our patients. From my standpoint, some of these patients appear—to me, by measurements, and everything else—to have been cured of their lymphedema after these interventions,” Mountziaris stated. “Getting an L-Dex score on them is just another way to demonstrate that we did bring them to stage 0 or no lymphedema.”McGuire is professor of surgery and chief of breast surgery at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Massey Cancer Center. Mountziaris is assistant professor of surgery in the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at VCU Massey Cancer Center.ReferenceVCU Massey now offers new technology for early detection of lymphedema. News release. December 8, 2025. Accessed January 14, 2026. https://tinyurl.com/2ktfzf5k

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Nathan Goodyear, MD, provided an overview of how to implement integrative modalities that may effectively supplement standard-of-care oncologic therapies. Beyond the use of intravenous vitamin C and other flagship strategies at his institution, Goodyear addressed potential misconceptions and biases surrounding integrative oncology and discussed how to re-engage patients back into evidence-based care.Goodyear, an integrative oncologist at the Williams Cancer Institute, described how conventional modalities like surgery and radiotherapy may damage the immune system during cancer treatment, and how integrative strategies aim to re-engage and stimulate areas like the gut microbiome to safeguard patient quality of life. He touched upon how practices such as fecal transplantation, fasting, and intratumoral pulsed electric field (PEF) therapy can convert unresponsive diseases into “hot” tumors that immunologically react to treatment.Looking across the medical field entirely, Goodyear described how certain “camps” may perceive integrative oncology as an “alternative” form of medicine. Citing an article published in JAMA Network Open showing how patient trust in US hospitals decreased from 71.5% in 2020 to 40.1% in 2024, Goodyear noted how such divisiveness among healthcare providers may have played a role in losing the support of patients. As part of mitigating the prejudicial, marginalizing attitudes towards integrative care as well as the infighting among physicians, Goodyear emphasized building bridges across holistic care, conventional oncology, and other fields to properly advance the treatment of patients. Having an open dialogue and debating the science behind new integrative modalities, he explained, will help in advocating for patients and establishing trust in their care teams.“We must re-engage with [patients] through the science, through public debate and discourse with other doctors; that will re-engage the patient,” Goodyear stated. “More importantly, I think that will re-engage the patient’s trust in doctors. When we restore a doctor-patient relationship, medicine is going to get better, and patients are going to get better.”ReferencePerlis RH, Ognyanova K, Uslu A, et al. Trust in physicians and hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic in a 50-state survey of US adults. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(7):e2424984. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.24984

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Jose G. Trevino, II, MD, FACS, spoke about the current state of the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) paradigm as well as next steps for improving the prognosis of patients who present with this disease. Throughout the discussion, Trevino outlined the roles that surgical oncologists can play in disease management, the different demographic and socioeconomic drivers of disparate patient outcomes, and translational research focusing on factors like the tumor microenvironment.Trevino stressed the idea of pancreatic cancer care as a “team science,” rejecting a “silo mentality” that involves handing off a patient from one department to the next. Because surgical approaches by themselves have remained “limited” in pancreatic cancer for the past 20 to 30 years, he emphasized continued collaboration with medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and translational scientists to enhance patient quality of life. Regarding disparities, Trevino noted the importance of recognizing various barriers to treatment access among those in rural communities as well as unequal outcomes across different racial and ethnic groups of patients, including worse survival among Black populations. Additionally, in the face of continuously rising PDAC incidence, he stressed additional training across the board on how to detect the red flags associated with disease.“…There has to be a ton of education for our patients and our physicians who see patients on a primary level to know what those red flags are when a patient comes to their clinic. Early detection of early lesions that could eventually turn into pancreatic adenocarcinoma is going to be the key to survival, ultimately. [If we] catch it before it becomes a cancer, we solve a huge problem,” Trevino stated. “Early detection of early lesions is key.”Trevino is chair of the Division of Surgical Oncology and an associate professor in the Department of Surgery at VCU School of Medicine as well as surgeon-in-chief and Walter Lawrence, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Oncology at VCU Massey Cancer Center.

After the 2025 American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting had passed, the data were out, and the hematologist/oncologists of the world had time to digest the practice changes that awaited them upon their returns home. Rahul Banerjee, MD, FACP, and Brooke Adams, PharmD, BCOP, took part in an X Spaces discussion hosted by CancerNetwork® in collaboration with The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT) to highlight these potential changes.Adams and Banerjee discussed abstracts from the meeting, including the phase 3 MajesTEC-3 trial (NCT05083169), which evaluated teclistamab-cqyv (Tecvayli) plus daratumumab (Darzalex) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who progressed on at least 1 prior line of therapy.1 A significant progression-free survival benefit was observed with the experimental combination compared with standard of care in this population.They also discussed data from cohort A of the phase 2 IFM2021-01 trial (NCT05572229), which evaluated subcutaneous teclistamab in combination with subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Results demonstrated that the combination was effective and safe in the frontline treatment of patients who were ineligible for transplant.2The discussion also covered the broader treatment landscape, as the experts compared the use of bispecific antibodies with BCMA-directed CAR T-cell therapies. Frontline bispecific strategies for transplant-ineligible populations were also topics of conversation, as well as post-transplant consolidation with bispecifics. Ultimately, they stated that multiple myeloma care is undergoing a paradigm shift toward deeper minimal residual disease negativity, possible treatment de‑escalation, and even serious use of the word “cure” for the disease.Banerjee is an assistant professor in the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and Adams is a clinical pharmacist in the Department of Stem Cell Transplant and Cellular Therapy and coordinator of the PGY-2 Oncology Residency at Orlando Health. Both are also members of the ASTCT content committee.References Mateos M-V, Bahlis N, Perrot A, et al. Phase 3 randomized study of teclistamab plus daratumumab versus investigator’s choice of daratumumab and dexamethasone with either pomalidomide or Bortezomib (DPd/DVd) in patients (Pts) with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): Results of majestec-3. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 2):LBA-6. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-LBA-6 Manier S, Lambert J, Marco M, et al. A phase 2 study of teclistamab in combination with daratumumab in elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: the IFM2021-01 teclille trial, cohort A. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):367. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-367

This episode of the collaborative podcast between Oncology on the Go and the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), hosted by Daniel C. McFarland, DO, features Michelle B. Riba, MD, and focuses on integrating psychosocial care into oncology for clinicians. The discussion emphasizes that psychosocial issues profoundly impact both quality of life and cancer-related outcomes, making their assessment an integral part of care, not merely ancillary. The distress thermometer was developed by the NCCN in the late 1990s as a 0-to-10 scale, dubbed the "fifth vital sign". The term "distress" was chosen over psychiatric labels to capture the wide array of patient concerns, including pain, fatigue, sleep, spiritual, practical, and family issues. Distress screening is now mandated at regular appointments in all cancer centers in the US. Clinicians are encouraged to screen for more specific issues like depression (linked to poor adherence and survival), anxiety (which can impede treatment adherence), and substance use. Oncologists are the doctors most able to consider a patient's totality of symptoms, and their role is integral to supporting psychosocial referrals. To address the practical delivery of care, the collaborative care model is being advocated as a public health, population-based approach. Key components include: Use of a standardized screening tool. Management by a dedicated care manager. Weekly consultation between the care manager and a consultant psychiatrist for triage and treatment advice. The model allows oncologists to bill for care and learn more about these issues while ensuring patients receive evidence-based treatments. The clinicians concluded that fundamentally, mental health needs to be aligned alongside cancer care. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Riba is director of the PsychOncology Program, a clinical professor, and the associate chair for Integrated Medical and Psychiatric Services in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, and psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY.

At the 2025 American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting & Exposition (ASH), CancerNetwork® sat down with a variety of researchers and clinicians to discuss potential advancements across hematologic oncology care. These experts shared their findings related to investigational therapeutic regimens and strategies that may prove impactful across different multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and leukemia populations. First, Krina K. Patel, MD, MSc, highlighted findings from the phase 2 iMMagine-1 study (NCT05396885) assessing treatment with anitocabtagene autoleucel (anito-cel) among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. According to Patel, an associate professor in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, the novel cellular therapy elicited an overall response rate (ORR) of 96% and a stringent complete response or CR rate of 74% among the evaluable patients. She also discussed how anito-cel’s unique mechanism of action may show efficiency compared with other cellular therapy products while reducing the risk of cytokine release syndrome and other delayed toxicities. Next, Manali Kamdar, MD, spoke about data from a long-term follow-up phase 2/3 study (NCT03435796) based on the phase 3 TRANSFORM trial (NCT03575351) evaluating lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel; Breyanzi) vs standard-of-care therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Long-term follow-up showed that liso-cel continued to elicit improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival across this population. Kamdar, the clinical director of Lymphoma Services at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine, touched upon the patient subpopulations who are most suitable to receive liso-cel while emphasizing the agent’s curative potential in the second-line setting. Finally, Wei Ying Jen, BM BCh, MA, MMed, MRCP, FRCPath, detailed results from the phase 1/2 SAVE trial (NCT05360160), which showed responses with an all-oral combination of revumenib (Revuforj), decitabine/cedazuridine (Inqovi), and venetoclax (Venclexta) for patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Jen, an assistant professor in the Department of Leukemia in the Division of Cancer Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, noted how an all-oral regimen may offer an “advantage” compared with standard intensive chemotherapy, which requires patients to travel to the hospital to undergo an infusion. References Patel K, Dhakal B, Kaur G, et al. Phase 2 registrational study of anitocabtagene autoleucel for the treatment of patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: updated results from iMMagine-1. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):256. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-256 Kamdar M, Solomon S, Arnason J, et al. Lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) versus standard of care (SOC) for second-line relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL): First Results from long-term follow-up of TRANSFORM. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):3710. doi.10.1182/blood-2025-3710 Jen WY, DiNardo CD, Short NJ, et al. Phase II study of the all-oral combination of revumenib (SNDX-5613) with decitabine/cedazuridine (ASTX727) and venetoclax (SAVE) in newly diagnosed AML. Blood. 2025;146(suppl 1):47. doi:10.1182/blood-2025-47

In the most recent ONCOLOGY On the Go hosted in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, Daniel C. McFarland, DO, spoke with Charles S. Kamen, PhD, MPH, about health equity for sexual and gender minority groups in oncology. Sexual and gender minority groups, who constitute approximately 9.3% of the US population, experience significant and preventable disparities across all stages of the cancer care continuum, according to Kamen.1 He detailed how these inequities are largely driven by minority stress: the chronic psychological and emotional burden resulting from anticipated and experienced prejudice, discrimination, and stigma within health care settings.2 McFarland and Kamen highlighted that a lack of comprehensive sexual and gender minority training in medical education often leaves clinicians feeling unprepared, compounding the patient’s anxiety and mistrust. The path to correcting these disparities requires a fundamental shift to cultural humility: the readiness to acknowledge one’s own lack of knowledge and learn directly from the patient’s lived experience. The most critical, actionable step discussed was the systematic, safe, and affirmative collection of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) data.3 Kamen emphasized that SOGI data is a clinical tool, not just a demographic marker. When collected routinely—ideally non-verbally via intake forms—SOGI data are used to: Ensure Biologically Appropriate Surveillance: Confirming that all necessary cancer screenings are offered based on the patient’s existing organs, regardless of current gender identity. Facilitate Relationship-Centered Care: Appropriately recognizing and engaging the patient’s partners and chosen family; a critical component of sexual and gender minority support networks. Tailored Psychosocial Navigation: Moving beyond a general "disparities mindset" to an "equity mindset" by using SOGI data to connect patients with LGBTQ-specific psychosocial resources that directly address discrimination-related distress drivers. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Kamen is an associate professor in the Department of Surgery, Cancer Control (SMD) and holds joint appointments as an associate professor at the Center for Community Health and Prevention and the Department of Psychiatry (SMD) at the University of Rochester Medical Center. References 1. Jones JM. LGBTQ+ identification in U.S. rises to 9.3%. News release. Gallup. February 20, 2025. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/48n8j8bd 2. Minority stress. American Psychological Association. Updated November 15, 2023. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/5n888ynr Learning resources — collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. Accessed December 3, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/4btrn5y3

As part of a visit to Georgia Cancer Center in Augusta, Georgia, CancerNetwork spoke with a variety of experts and faculty members regarding ongoing research and future initiatives dedicated to improving outcomes across different patient populations. These conversations touched upon potential developments in diseases including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), multiple myeloma, and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). First, Girindra Raval, MD, an associate professor in the Department of Medicine: Hematology and Oncology of the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, discussed current studies at his institution that may help optimize treatment for patients with lung cancer. This research ranged from retrospective trials analyzing how demographic features may influence outcomes to biomarker-based assessments intended to augment the efficacy of immunotherapy. Looking towards the future, Raval stated that determining how to sequence and de-escalate treatment amidst several available therapeutic options will be a key concern in the field. Additionally, Amany Keruakous, MD, director of Myeloma Research at Georgia Cancer Center and assistant professor in the Department of Medicine: Hematology and Oncology at the Medical College of Georgia of Augusta University, detailed strategies for mitigating current challenges in multiple myeloma care. She emphasized fostering collaborative relationships between colleagues in community settings and academic institutions to help reduce barriers to treatment access among patients. Furthermore, she noted the importance of conducting additional clinical trials at community centers. Finally, Daniel Peters, MD, an assistant professor at the Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University and bone marrow transplant & cellular therapy faculty member at Georgia Cancer Center, focused on key developments across the AML space. At his institution, Peters and colleagues are evaluating potential drivers of immune dysfunction, which may inform less intensive cellular therapy approaches or determine who is suitable to receive autologous types of treatment. Peters also discussed how additional research set for presentation at meetings like the 2025 American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting and Exposition (ASH) may affirm a shift away from 7+3 intensive chemotherapy for patients who are younger and fit with newly diagnosed AML.

In a collaborative podcast with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society hosted by Daniel C. McFarland, DO, guests Louis P. Voigt, MD, and Yesne Alici, MD, discussed the ethical and clinical complexities of assessing decision-making capacity (DMC) in oncology, emphasizing its role as the ethical core of person-centered care. The discussion began by dissecting modern medicine’s need for formal DMC assessment. Voigt framed DMC as a fundamental issue of patient rights and respect, asserting that every human being has absolute rights and that the integrity of a person requires honoring their self-determination. He advocated for clinicians to act as professionals, earn trust, customize their approach based on individual needs through precision medicine, and demonstrate humility by re-explaining information when a patient cannot summarize their understanding.Alici provided a detailed clinical framework for DMC, defining it as a person’s ability to decide on the specific issue at hand while appreciating the foreseeable consequences. She outlined the 4 key elements, or pillars, of the assessment: the patient’s ability to understand the information, to appreciate the risks and benefits, to provide a rationalization for the decision to ensure no delusional thinking interferes, and to communicate a consistent choice. She clarified that DMC is decision-specific and time-dependent, emphasizing that conditions like dementia, schizophrenia, major depression, or even a central nervous system malignancy do not automatically mean a patient lacks capacity; it must be assessed for each situation and may be restored if cases like delirium are reversible. She cautioned that clinicians must be mindful of potential mislabeling when patients with aphasia interact, as simple gestures may not fully represent informed consent.Finally, the experts addressed the crucial implications that follow an assessment of incapacity. Voigt highlighted that a lack of DMC is not a "stop sign"; decisions must still be made, requiring the health care team to look to a designated proxy or the patient’s next-of-kin. He stressed the need for hospitals to establish system-wide processes and workflows to prepare all stakeholders for these contingencies and help patients become familiar with advanced directives, thereby reducing the immense emotional burden placed on surrogates who must perform substituted judgment. McFarland concluded that being aware of DMC elevates the quality of care, reinforces an ethical climate, and enhances the entire organization.McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being a psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY. Voigt is an intensivist and chair of the Ethics Committee at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). Alici is vice chair of Clinical Operations in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, clinical director, associate attending psychiatrist, and medical director of the Biobehavioral Health Clinic at MSKCC.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Michael Barish, PhD, spoke about an investigational CAR T-cell therapy that he and colleagues are developing as a treatment for patients with glioblastoma. He and his team designed the agent to harness chlorotoxin, an amino acid peptide toxin component of scorpion venom, as a vehicle for intratumoral delivery of therapy for this patient population. Barish, a chair in the Department of Neurosciences/Developmental & Stem Cell Biology at City of Hope, discussed the background and mechanisms surrounding this novel compound, which he and colleagues evaluated as part of a phase 1 trial (NCT04214392). Early findings published in Cell Reports Medicine showed that among 4 patients with recurrent glioblastoma, 3 (75%) achieved a best response of stable disease. Additionally, the chlorotoxin-directed cellular therapy was found to be well-tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities. Although responses were not as strong as Barish and colleagues had hoped, he described how the study nevertheless demonstrated the safety and feasibility of this CAR T-cell therapy formulation. After establishing the safety of the novel agent in patients with recurrent glioblastoma, Barish highlighted how next steps for research included engineering different versions of the chlorotoxin and modifying the T cells that express the chimeric receptor. He stated these reconfigurations may help yield additional power and efficacy of the cellular therapy in future studies. Overall, Barish noted how the potential therapeutic application of the neurotoxin represented a “proof of principle.” “[V]enoms of many invertebrates are, in fact, very powerful biologically. In a sense, evolution has honed them to be relatively specific. Neurobiology is very much driven by the specificity of different toxins for different ion channels,” Barish stated. “This idea—that one could use biological products efficiently this way for something as heterogeneous as glioblastoma—might be an example of how it could be more efficacious for other solid tumors as well.” Reference Barish ME, Aftabizadeh M, Hibbard J, et al. Chlorotoxin-directed CAR T cell therapy for recurrent glioblastoma: interim clinical experience demonstrating feasibility and safety. Cell Rep Med. 2025;6(8):102302. doi:10.1016/j.xcrm.2025.102302.

The latest episode of Oncology On the Go focused on survivorship and supportive care. Stemming from conversations with leading clinicians in the field, the compilation highlights gaps and educational insights into multiple areas. Covering topics like nutrition, oncodermatology, body image, sexual health, and mortality, these conversations explored how to truly optimize multidisciplinary cancer care. Declan Walsh, MD, chair of the Department of Supportive Oncology at Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute:1:01-2:44: What is the importance of developing and managing supportive care at major oncology centers, and how can it be adapted across the US?2:45-4:19: Supportive care is one piece of the multidisciplinary team. How can clinicians work with supportive care specialists to ensure that patients are receiving all the help that they need?Denise Reynolds, RD, of Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute:4:20-5:46: Some adverse effects (AEs) include severe nausea and vomiting. What nutritional strategies do you recommend to ensure adequate intake?5:47-7:29: Taste and smell changes are common AEs. What advice do you give to patients to help cope and combat them?Adam Friedman, MD, FAAD, professor and chair of dermatology, director of the Residency Program, and director of translational research at George Washington Medical Faculty Associates in Washington, DC:7:30-9:24: Your study found that a significant proportion of respondents, including those who have been previously treated for cancer, would decline anti-cancer therapies due to dermatologic AEs like hair loss. What are some crucial communication strategies oncologists should employ to address this?9:25-11:37: What should all oncology clinicians know about how to manage mild to moderate dermatologic AEs?11:38-24:54: Daniel C. McFarland, DO, the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center; a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer; and the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®, spoke with different psycho-oncology colleagues regarding topics like body image, sexual health, and mortality.These colleagues included Michelle Fingeret, PhD, founder of Fingeret Psychology Services; Christian J. Nelson, PhD, chief of Psychiatry Service, attending psychologist, and codirector of the Psycho-Oncology of Care and Aging Program at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center; and William S. Breitbart, MD, attending physician and the Jimmie C. Holland Chair in Psycho-Oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.All psycho-oncology episodes are now available on our website. ReferenceMenta N, Vidal SI, Whiting C, Azim SA, Desai S, Friedman A. Perceptions and knowledge of dermatologic side effects of anti-cancer therapies: a pilot survey. J Drugs Dermatol. 2025;24(8):e57-e58.

Following a fruitful European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2025 for gastrointestinal malignancies, CancerNetwork® organized an X Spaces discussion hosted by 3 experts. They were Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, an assistant professor at the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine of Hofstra University and Northwell Health; Timothy Brown, MD, an assistant professor in the Department of Internal Medicine and the associate program director of the Hematology & Oncology Fellowship at UT Southwestern Medical Center; and Udhayvir S. Grewal, MD, an assistant professor in the Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology at Emory University School of Medicine.Each doctor focused on a specific disease type, highlighting the most important abstracts in colorectal cancer, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and upper gastrointestinal cancers.The Phase 3 MATTERHORN Trial (NCT04592913)Results from MATTERHORN demonstrated that adding durvalumab (Imfinzi) to 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin (folinic acid), oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (FLOT) improved overall survival (OS) compared with FLOT plus placebo in patients with resectable gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, regardless of pathological status.1In the intention-to-treat population, the median OS was not reached in either arm, and the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.63-0.96; P = .021). Notably, the improvement was observed regardless of PD-L1 status; in patients with PD-L1–positive disease, the HR was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.63-0.99), and in patients with PD-L1–negative disease, the HR was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.41-1.50).“This, I believe, will seal durvalumab plus FLOT as the standard of care for resectable [gastric/GEJ] cancers,” said Brown.The Observational ASPEN Study (NCT03084770)The ASPEN study showed that active surveillance was a safe approach for patients with low-grade, asymptomatic, nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) fewer than 2 centimeters in size.2Of the 1000 patients enrolled in the trial, 20 patients died, of whom 18 underwent active surveillance and 2 underwent surgery. Nineteen of the deaths were unrelated to pancreatic NETs; 1 death in the surgery arm was related to a pancreatic NET. After surgery, 5 patients had disease relapse or progression. With a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR, 25-60), the OS analysis showed a P value of 0.530. “This really settles the debate on whether or not to surgically operate on patients with a [pancreatic NET] size of [fewer] than 2 centimeters and shows that active surveillance is a safe option for these patients with pancreatic NETs [fewer] than 2 centimeters in size and non-functional NETs,” said Grewal. Data From the Phase 2/3 FOxTROT (NCT00647530) and Phase 2 NICHE-2 (NCT03026140) TrialsNeoadjuvant nivolumab (Opdivo) plus ipilimumab (Yervoy) achieved a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in long-term outcomes, including responses and survival, compared with chemotherapy strategies in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) locally advanced colon cancer.3In NICHE-2, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab achieved a 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of 100% compared with 80% (95% CI, 73%-85%) with all chemotherapy strategies in FOxTROT (P <.001). Nivolumab plus ipilimumab maintained a 100% DFS rate in patients with clinical stage T3 and T4 disease in NICHE-2, whereas FOxTROT achieved DFS rates of 84% (95% CI, 76%-90%) and 70% (95% CI, 58%-80%), respectively (P <.001).Additionally, nivolumab plus ipilimumab achieved a pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of 72.3%, with a pathologic partial response (pPR) rate of 25.5% and no response in 1.1%. Chemotherapy achieved a pCR rate of 4.3%, a pathologic pPR rate of 2.6%, and a mild to no response rate of 91.4%.“Overnight, this should change the standard of care, even if the FDA hasn’t caught on yet, at least from my perspective. If I find out about a [patient with] MSI-H disease before they go to the [operating room], I’m probably running [to give them ipilimumab plus nivolumab],” said Hornstein.ReferencesTabernero J, Al-Batran S-E, Wainberg ZA, et al. Final overall survival (OS) and the association of pathological outcomes with event-free survival (EFS) in MATTERHORN: a randomised, phase III study of durvalumab (D) plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT) in resectable gastric / gastroesophageal junction (G / GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Presented at: ESMO 2025 Congress; October 17–21, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA81.2. Partelli S, Andreasi V, Zerbi A, et al. Management of asymptomatic sporadic nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms ≤2 cm: a prospective international observational multicentric cohort study ASPEN study. Presented at: ESMO 2025 Congress; October 17–21, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA36.3. Seligmann J, van den Dungen LDW, Balduzzi S, et al. Comparison of outcomes in clinical trials of

As part of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2025, CancerNetwork® spoke with a variety of experts about key takeaways from different late-breaking abstracts, oral presentations, and other sessions focused on potential advancements across cancer care. Presenting investigators highlighted updated results from clinical trials evaluating novel therapeutic strategies across different cancer populations, including breast cancer and lung cancer. Phase 3 VIKTORIA-1 Trial Sara A. Hurvitz, MD, FACP, the Smith Family Endowed Chair in Women’s Health and senior vice president and director of the Clinical Research Division at the Fred Hutch Cancer Center, and tumor chair in breast oncology for the ONCOLOGY® editorial advisory board, first discussed findings from the phase 3 VIKTORIA-1 trial (NCT05501886). Her presentation highlighted how VIKTORIA-1 was “the first study to demonstrate a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival [PFS] with PAM inhibition” for patients with PIK3CA wild-type advanced breast cancer. Data from the trial showed that gedatolisib plus fulvestrant (Faslodex) and palbociclib (Ibrance) produced a median PFS of 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.2-16.6) vs 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-2.3) with fulvestrant alone (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.17-0.35; P <.0001). Additionally, gedatolisib plus fulvestrant yielded a median PFS of 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.5-9.9), reducing the risk of progression or death by 67% vs fulvestrant monotherapy (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.24-0.48; P <.0001). Phase 1/2 SOHO-01 Trial Next, Xiuning Le, MD, PhD, spoke about her presentation on data from the phase 1/2 SOHO-01 trial (NCT05099172). In her presentation, Le, an associate professor in the Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology of the Division of Internal Medicine at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, described sevabertinib as a “potential new targeted therapy for patients with HER2-mutant non–small cell lung cancer [NSCLC].” Among 81 patients with previously treated HER2-mutated advanced NSCLC who received sevabertinib in cohort D, the study treatment produced an overall response rate (ORR) of 64% (95% CI, 53%-75%) and a median duration of response (DOR) of 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.3-13.5). Among 55 patients who received prior HER2 antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) in cohort E, the ORR was 38% (95% CI, 25%-52%), and the median DOR was 8.5 months (95% CI, 5.6-16.4). Moreover, regarding 73 patients with treatment-naive disease in cohort F, these respective values were 71% (95% CI, 59%-81%) and 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.1-not evaluable). Phase 3 evERA Trial Finally, Erica Mayer, MD, MPH, director of breast cancer research at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and associate professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, detailed results from the phase 3 evERA trial (NCT05306340). In her presentation, Mayer stated that giredestrant plus everolimus (Afinitor) may “represent a new, effective, all-oral treatment option in the post-CDK 4/6 inhibitor setting” for those with estrogen receptor (ER)–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Across the intent-to-treat population, data revealed a median PFS of 8.77 months (95% CI, 6.60-9.59) with giredestrant plus everolimus vs 5.49 months (95% CI, 4.01-5.59) with standard endocrine therapy plus everolimus (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44-0.71; P <.0001). Among patients with ESR1-mutated disease, the median PFS was 9.99 months (95% CI, 8.08-12.94) vs 5.45 months (95% CI, 3.75-5.62) in each respective arm (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27-0.54; P <.0001). References Hurvitz SA, Layman RM, Curigliano G, et al. Gedatolisib plus fulvestrant, with & without palbociclib, vs fulvestrant in patients with HR+/HER2-/PIK3CA wild-type advanced breast cancer: first results from VIKTORIA-1. Presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2025; October 17-21, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA17. Le X, Kim TM, Dong X, et al. Sevabertinib (BAY 2927088) in advanced HER2-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): results from the SOHO-01 study. Presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2025; October 17-21, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA75. Mayer E, Tolaney SM, Martin M, et al. Giredestrant (GIRE), an oral selective oestrogen receptor (ER) antagonist and degrader, + everolimus (E) in patients (pts) with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ER+, HER2– aBC) previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor (i): Primary results of the phase III evERA BC trial. Presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2025; October 17-21, 2025; Berlin, Germany. Abstract LBA16.

In a discussion with CancerNetwork®, Anne Chiang, MD, PhD, spoke about the current treatment landscape for those with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) as well as next steps for elevating the quality of care among patients. She began by outlining the evolution of therapeutic standards in the field, with atezolizumab (Tecentriq)- and durvalumab (Imfinzi)-based regimens emerging as key frontline strategies and lurbinectedin (Zepzelca) and tarlatamab-dlle (Imdelltra) demonstrating utility as second-line therapies. Regarding novel treatments that may hold promise in the SCLC field, Chiang, an associate professor of medicine in the Section of Medical Oncology at Yale School of Medicine, highlighted her work on the phase 2 SWOG S2409 PRISM trial (NCT06769126). Here, Chiang and colleagues plan to collect tissue from more than 800 patients undergoing frontline induction therapy with chemoimmunotherapy to inform subsequent biomarker-directed treatment, which may help elucidate factors of disease heterogeneity in the process. The conversation also focused on considerations for improving the care of those with lung cancer in community-based settings, as Chiang emphasized spreading knowledge of therapeutic advances to a broader patient population. She noted that there is “still a bit of nihilism about the prognosis” of patients with SCLC, describing a need to further leverage the field’s understanding of biology to impart the benefits of immunotherapy to more patients. Chiang also detailed the importance of employing patient-reported outcomes to hear directly from the patient, which may ensure their inclusion in the shared decision-making process and optimize strategies for mitigating potential adverse effects during treatment. “Understanding and leveraging the biology is important. We are going to need to understand how to sequence therapies, and that involves understanding which patients are at higher risk,” Chiang stated regarding future initiatives in the field. “We need to look at high-risk populations—for example, patients with brain metastases—and understand which therapies are especially useful for them.”

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Jorge Cortes, MD, explored the evolution of the chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) landscape. Specifically, he highlighted how the development of ibrutinib (Gleevec) paved the way for other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and described where research must go next in terms of implementing fixed-duration therapy and targeting genetic abnormalities.Cortes, the director, and Cecil F. Whitaker Jr., GRA Eminent Scholar Chair in Cancer at the Georgia Cancer Center, began by detailing the standards of care that existed before the development of imatinib. He noted that many patients did “not have great options,” as neither interferon nor transplant was associated with “good” outcomes. Following its approval for patients with CML in 2001, imatinib became what Cortes described as a “groundbreaker” in the field. He explained how imatinib’s newfound status as a standard of care in CML would signal the advancement of a second generation of TKIs, which included agents like dasatinib (Sprycel), nilotinib (Tasigna), and bosutinib (Bosulif). Even with the subsequent development of third-generation TKIs, Cortes stated that researchers are continuing to improve and innovate to help provide patients with enhanced quality of life.Looking towards the future, Cortes observed 2 major goals to achieve in CML research. The first objective is to stop therapy more effectively and give a greater portion of patients a more precisely defined duration of treatment. He noted that approximately 25% to 30% of patients today can effectively discontinue therapy without having to resume treatment, which wasn’t even considered a possibility in the field 20 years ago. Moreover, he emphasized that finding the therapeutic options that work best in a subset of patients with recently discovered genetic abnormalities may yield a breakthrough.“In terms of whether we are getting closer to a cure, I think we are. We can stop therapy effectively in some patients, which is equivalent to a cure,” Cortes said. “If [a patient has] done well, and you can stop therapy and the disease doesn't come back, that's essentially what we think about as a cure. We are there, just not on as many patients as we want.”ReferenceCenter for Drug Evaluation and Research: Application Number: NDA 21-335. FDA. May 10, 2001. Accessed October 6, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/44xh2u9j

In a special co-branded episode between Oncology On the Go, hosted by CancerNetwork®, and the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT)’s program, ASTCT Talks, for American Pharmacists Month, a panel of oncology pharmacists discussed optimal strategies for using cellular therapies as treatment for patients with solid tumors. The panel included Brooke Adams, PharmD, BCOP, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy at the Orlando Health Cancer Institute in Orlando, Florida; Natalie Brumwell, PharmD, BCOP, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in cellular therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, New York; and Bryant A. Clemons, PharmD, a board-certified oncology pharmacist specializing in hematology, blood and marrow transplantation, and cellular therapy at the University of Kentucky’s Markey Cancer Center in Lexington, Kentucky.The discussion focused on the use of the first commercially available tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) for patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma, lifileucel (Amtagvi), which the FDA granted accelerated approval status to in February 2024.1 The panelists first reviewed supporting data from the phase 2 C-144-01 trial (NCT02360579), in which lifileucel demonstrated an objective response rate of 31.5% (95% CI, 21.1%-43.4%), and a median duration of response that was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 4.1 months-NR) at the time of the approval. Additionally, the group highlighted considerations for dosing interleukin-2 (IL-2), including management of toxicities and when to hold or discontinue further doses. Following a thorough breakdown of the proper conditions for using lifileucel in melanoma, the panelists concluded by discussing how to build upon an “exciting time for cellular therapy in solid tumors.” As part of optimizing the dosing of lifileucel and other cellular therapies in these patient populations, the experts exchanged ideas on how practices can collaborate across institutions and departments to expand access to novel treatments while helping providers develop comfort in administering these agents.ReferenceFDA grants accelerated approval to lifileucel for unresectable or metastatic melanoma. News release. FDA. February 16, 2024. Accessed September 30, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/2kweca6x

In a conversation with CancerNetwork® following the FDA approval of the gemcitabine intravesical system (Inlexzo; formerly TAR-200) for patients with high-risk, Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)–unresponsive non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), Gary Steinberg, MD, discussed how this regulatory decision may impact the treatment paradigm.Steinberg, a professor in the Department of Urology at Rush University, highlighted an unmet need for those with BCG-unresponsive, high-grade NMIBC. With a different mechanism of action compared with prior therapeutic choices in the field, he stated that the gemcitabine intravesical system may allow patients and physicians to benefit tremendously. Based on supporting data from the phase 2 SunRISe-1 trial (NCT04640623), he described how the gemcitabine intravesical system may replace prior standards such as intravesical gemcitabine plus docetaxel.The conversation also touched upon considerations for preventing the risk of progression to metastatic disease with delayed cystectomy, as Steinberg emphasized following up with patients via cystoscopies, urinary cytologies, CT scans, or MRI imaging after treatment with the intravesical system. Steinberg also detailed strategies for mitigating urinary frequency, dysuria, and other toxicities associated with the therapy. He noted a “fine line” regarding bladder medication administration to older patient populations, as these practices may cause adverse effects such as dry mouth, constipation, and blurry vision.Looking ahead, Steinberg illustrated a need to clarify the immunologic effects of regimens like the gemcitabine intravesical system, which can inform the use of additional therapeutic combinations down the road. He highlighted how other novel agents like cretostimogene grenadenorepvec (CG0070) may further improve outcomes in the NMIBC landscape.“One of the key questions that we all need to ask with all our treatments is not about the patients who respond, but about the patients who do not respond,” Steingerg stated regarding the potential next steps for research. “We can begin to understand mechanisms of resistance so that we can target those mechanisms of resistance and treat them better.”ReferenceU.S. FDA approval of INLEXZO (gemcitabine intravesical system) set to transform how certain bladder cancers are treated. News release. Johnson & Johnson. September 9, 2025. Accessed September 22, 2025. https://tinyurl.com/4zjz22z7

In the recent episode of Oncology-on-the-Go, in collaboration with the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), Daniel C. McFarland, DO, welcomes William S. Breitbart, MD, to discuss how clinicians can address patients’ existential concerns. While oncologists often focus on treatment and the drive for life, the core concern for many patients remains mortality. Breitbart’s work in meaning-centered therapy provides a framework for these difficult conversations. Breitbart emphasizes that patients grappling with fear, uncertainty, and depression may not always express it directly. The goal of meaning-centered therapy is to help patients find a sense of purpose and peace, even as they face a terminal illness. This approach is not about eliminating suffering, but about helping patients find meaning in their experiences. The conversation covers the practical application of these principles, including how to bring up topics of death and dying, and the importance of validating a patient's fears without resorting to platitudes. The discussion also touches on the concept of “existential guilt,” which Breitbart links to the human awareness of one’s own existence and mortality. He notes that many clinicians are drawn to oncology or psycho-oncology because of their own personal experiences with death and illness. Overall, the episode is a reminder for oncologists and their multidisciplinary team members to look beyond the treatment and its clinical outcomes, and engage in human conversations that can significantly improve a patient’s quality of life, emotional support, and overall well-being. McFarland is the director of the Psycho-Oncology Program at Wilmot Cancer Center and a medical oncologist who specializes in head, neck, and lung cancer, in addition to being the psycho-oncology editorial advisory board member for the journal ONCOLOGY®; Breitbart is an attending physician and the Jimmie C. Holland Chair in Psycho-Oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.