Listen and follow our podcasts on:

This educational programme is supported by an Independent Medical Education Grant from Bayer

Podcast episode 1: lower GI cancer

Dr Jenny Seligmann and Dr Dominik Modest discuss key abstracts on lower GI cancer from ESMO 2022 in Episode 1 of this podcast series. 

Podcast episode 2: upper GI cancer

In Episode 2, Dr Sam Klempner and invited expert Dr Yelena Janjigian discuss the upper GI cancer highlights from the congress.

Presidential session update

Dr Thomas Winder provides his perspectives on data presented at the presidential session  in a short video review.

Access both podcast episodes and the highlights video below


Dr Jenny Seligmann and Dr Dominik Modest discuss key abstracts on lower GI cancer from ESMO 2022 in Episode 1 of this podcast series.  They review:

  • NICHE-2: Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Locally Advanced MMR-deficient Colon Cancer
  • HIPECT4: Adjuvant Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Colon Cancer
  • FRESCO-2: A Global Phase 3 Multiregional Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Fruquintinib in Patients with Refractory Metastatic CRC
  • KRYSTAL-1: Updated Efficacy and Safety of Adagrasib (MRTX849) with or without Cetuximab in Patients with Advanced CRC Harbouring a KRASG12C mutation
  • CodeBreak 101: Sotorasib in Combination with Panitumumab in Refractory KRAS G12C-mutated CRC: Safety and efficacy for phase 1b full expansion cohort

Please note:

GI CONNECT podcasts are designed to be heard. If you are able, we encourage you to listen to the audio, which includes emotion and emphasis that is not so easily understood from the words on the page. Transcripts are edited for readability. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print.

This GI CONNECT programme is supported through an independent educational grant from Bayer and is an initiative of COR2ED.

The views expressed within this podcast are the personal opinions of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the author’s academic institution, or the rest of the GI CONNECT group.

Jenny Seligmann: So hello and welcome to this podcast covering lower GI highlights from ESMO 2022. I'm Dr. Jenny Seligmann and I'm a GI medical oncologist and I'm based in the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom. Today, I'm delighted to be joined on this GI CONNECT podcast by Dominik Modest. Dominik, would you like to introduce yourself?

Dominik Modest: Hello everyone. My name Dominik Modest. I'm a medical oncologist working at the Charité in Berlin, just like Jenny, on specialised treatment of colorectal cancers. I'm happy to join.

Jenny Seligmann: Great. So today we are going to review some of the key colorectal cancer abstracts from this year's ESMO meeting. And I think, Dominik, I think it's pretty fair to say that it was a really good congress for colorectal cancers. Not all congresses are.

Dominik Modest: It was. Truly.

Jenny Seligmann: It was truly a great congress for colorectal cancer. So the main topics that we're going to cover today, so we're going to cover the NICHE-2 trial and give you some context to the new saying ‘the Chalabi plot’. We're also going to look at an interesting abstract using HIPEC in locally advanced colon cancers and also look at FRESCO-2 and the emerging story in KRASG12C mutations. Shall I start with the NICHE-2 data, Dominik?

Dominik Modest: Please go ahead.

Jenny Seligmann: So the NICHE-2 trial was run in the NKI in the Netherlands. And this was building upon the NICHE-1 trial. So the whole purpose of this route of investigation was to look at the role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with locally advanced deficient mismatch repair or MSI high colon cancer - not rectal cancer, so colon cancer. And so the NICHE-1 trial really showed some early encouraging data, not just with safety, but also efficacy. So, the NICHE-2 trial built upon that to see whether the signal that had been seen in NICHE-1, which was just in 30 dMMR patients, actually could be seen in a larger population. So the trial was now over 100 patients and the co-primary endpoints were safety and feasibility and three year disease free survival. And so what was presented in the presidential symposium was safety and feasibility and the secondary endpoint of pathological response.

So number one, in terms of safety and feasibility, I think we could all be quite convinced by that. The treatment was very well tolerated and there was less than 5% grade three events, which led to almost the vast majority of patients having surgery as planned on time within a six-week window. So that was very encouraging. I think the thing that really caught everybody's attention was the waterfall plot on response. This is something that we haven't seen in colon cancer before. So Myriam Chalabi reported a major pathological response rate of over two thirds of patients. And I'm going to use the figure here of 67% of a pCR, which is incredible. Would you not agree, Dominik? I mean, the whole place just burst into a round of applause. It was phenomenal.

Dominik Modest: Really. Yeah. Never experienced something like that. And colorectal cancer. I mean, we're used to these scenarios in melanoma or other breakthrough immunologic indications, but not in colon cancer. So it was really great to see this. And also that the patients who did not have a pCR, nearly all of them still had a major pathological response. And I think the key thing about it was only three weeks of treatment. If we just imagine the time from start of this study until timely surgery was considerably short. I think during COVID we had these time intervals, maybe in the routine care without having trial therapy, and they managed to integrate that into the short term interval. So basically, it's really, really tough to find any aspects of concern to discuss on that trial, which is a really hard job for us in this podcast! I may pull up one…  Jenny, you've been heavily involved in the FOXTROT trial and I think we've been discussing the concept – or the emerging concept – of having neoadjuvant therapy in colon cancer, just like in rectal cancers over the last years. And I think one of the major issues and also aspects that were criticised heavily from surgical and also radiological societies was that pre staging is really hard in colon cancer. It's not an MRI of the pelvic region. It's hard to stage these. And I remember that the point of concern was especially MSI tumours. So having that in mind, how do you interpret the patient selection? Have they all had a tumour that was truly T4. Can we control on that? Was everybody in need of immunotherapy despite this unprecedented efficacy?

Jenny Seligmann: Yeah, I think that's some of the key questions that would come out of that. So in terms of the radiological staging, you're right, it seems to be more the nodal disease where the problem is and in MSI-high tumours. So we know that it's almost like tossing a coin in terms of calling nodes. So I'm not sure how confident you would be in their baseline radiological assessments, particularly with the N2 stage, I don't think we'll ever know the answer to that. And I think that there's a lot of work to be done in radiological staging in colon cancer. But I don’t think that that would stop delivering the whole story. I think this is going to emerge alongside the development of this whole new field, which is neoadjuvant colon cancer. And I think everyone's starting to understand that this is a field in colon cancer that we're now going to start moving to. And we need to improve the radiological staging as we're going, rather than stopping everything in its tracks because of the radiological staging. This could be done in parallel, of course Dominik, you need to then balance the risk of the treatment that you're giving versus the risk of uncertainty. And please just remember our position with adjuvant chemotherapy. We've been giving adjuvant chemotherapy - for how many years? - to a lot of patients that didn't require it. And here we've seen beautifully that this treatment is safe. So I think in turn, this is a conversation to have with the patient, but absolutely no way should that be a barrier into the progression of this extremely exciting field. So question back to you, Dominik. What would stop this being based upon the data that we have at the moment? Would you want to see disease-free survival? I mean, what do we tell our patients in clinic? Where are we going next?

Dominik Modest: Basically, I was just trying to give you a hard time in terms of finding perspectives! I think we're pretty much agreed. I think the DFS will be a challenge because as it was reported orally, there hasn't been a record of relapse yet. So I think they are on their way to have a quite convincing three year DFS rate. So basically I'm not sure whether this will change. And the median follow up, which was clearly better than the data that we had in rectal cancers at ASCO with the six months of dostarlimab, was longer than a year in contrast to 6.8 months with dostarlimab. I think the questions are quite clear. How much immunotherapy is needed for maybe those that have not reached a pCR? And the key question, of course, somehow emerging is, is that a curative therapy in itself? We cannot answer that now. I think we need the long-term follow-up data as they are now and see whether there is distant relapse. I think we are pretty much confident maybe with the rectal cancer trial to have a local control assessment and maybe extrapolate that to a certain extent to the colon where we find it increasingly difficult to monitor. So we are getting in the uncertainties here.

Jenny Seligmann: You see it as an uncertainty. I see it as opportunity. I think, number one, we can't completely extrapolate rectal to colon. I think you're right. I think we could be looking at cure in some patients, but we need to be confident that we can have a monitoring of response in the way that it's taken 20 years to get to organ preservation protocols in rectal cancer. There are none in colon cancer. Colonoscopy, of course, is going to be more difficult. Some of the flexures, you're just not going to be able to get good pictures. So yes, absolutely. But I think the next cure. Absolutely. But we need to find ways that feel safe and good ways to monitor the patients and monitor response. So I think this is, again, just opening a whole new era for personalised medicine and colon cancer, which is super exciting.

Dominik Modest: Agreeing on that, I would try to put a bit of context to emerging or maybe old stories which have a certain overlap with the NICHE trial. So I'll take a hard turn and introduce the HIPECT4 that we've also seen at ESMO. This was an oral presentation and it comes up with a quite somehow intuitive but maybe difficult question. The question of the HIPECT4 trial was in CT4 patients, so clinically T4 patients with colon carcinoma, it was randomised to do upfront surgery and adjuvant systemic therapy versus surgery plus a HIPEC with mitomycin C,  30mg per square metre over 60 minutes (to the community these details are absolutely important and this is why we mention them) followed also by adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of the trial was local relapse or local control, which was clearly demonstrated to the surprise of many colleagues. I think we can say that after many, many negative trials of HIPEC that were tested in colorectal cancer of any kind of stage and treatment situation, we also had DFS and OS, and I think it's fair to say that the initial local effect did not translate into DFS or maybe also with a small trend and absolutely not into overall survival. So basically from my point of view, we have one of the most convincing demonstrations that HIPEC does something. So there is a local effect at least on the peritoneal relapse rate. However, this is also an adjuvant therapy and I think although this is coming a bit out of the corner, I think we have to put that trial into perspective with the just discussed NICHE-2 data or what's your perspective Jenny?

Jenny Seligmann: Yeah, no, I agree. I think for these really locally advanced tumours, I mean I personally would have given them upfront systemic treatment in that situation and particularly now considering a lot of those tumours as you said were dMMR or MSI high, going straight to surgery with HIPEC is clearly not going to be the best approach. But complete kudos to the investigators. These trials are very hard to run and when the trial was set up, certainly upfront systemic treatment would not have been in their minds. But Dominik, how relevant is local control? I mean, when you think about all of the steps you need to go through to have an approved treatment in early colon cancer, should this change anyone's practice? Should we be doing this for any patients? Were there any groups that benefited more than others, do you think?

Dominik Modest: So, from today's perspective, the answer, at least my answer is clearly no. I think we miss a lot of data of that trial that we should urgently get. Most of it is dMMR or pMMR. We have not seen the data. So the key question is which proportion would have been eligible for concepts like investigated in NICHE-2. We do not have any other molecular pathology except for mucinous and signet ring cell carcinoma which I find difficult to understand why these were evaluated and MSI/MSS was not, so I think many details of that trial are still unclear and it shouldn't change our clinical practice, but it might change to some extent our perspective on HIPEC because honestly spoken when I was coming to ESMO, I did not expect this trial to show anything at all. After the experience we had with the PRODIGE trial in metastatic colorectal cancer and cytoreductive surgery, which was super negative, there was not even a small signal of anything. So basically, it does not change my clinical practice, but I think it changes my perspective on HIPEC and maybe if we are able to understand who are the like absolute 10 to 12% patients that did not relapse in the peritoneum, this may open up opportunities for the future to better select these patients. And I think we will clearly and quickly agree that this will be an MSS population or needs to be an MSS population because all the other patients also...

Jenny Seligmann: I think the other question we need to ask is can we be looking at other intraperitoneal therapies? So in ovarian cancer they do other different things. You know, there's more, rather than just one dose of HIPEC there's other methods of delivering intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Maybe if we're not seeing spectacular results with HIPEC maybe we should be continuing to think about local treatments, but maybe thinking about alternative approaches.

Dominik Modest: Okay, so we agree this does not change clinical practice. But Jenny, is there another trial that may change clinical perspective?

Jenny Seligmann: Well, I suppose the data that was most likely, I suppose, to routinely impact patient care would be the FRESCO-2 trial. So as you know, regorafenib is the only TKI which is approved in metastatic colorectal cancer. So the FRESCO trial was looking at fruquintinib, which is oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGF receptors 1, 2 and 3 and FRESCO-2 follows on from FRESCO-1, which had been run in China, which was testing fruquintinib in heavily pre-treated patients versus placebo but the need for another trial was felt that the standard of care in China in terms of a pre-treated patient was different from international practice. So hence the FRESCO-2 trial took place. So again, patients were heavily pre-treated and had to have had either regorafenib or TAS-102 and patients were randomised between fruquintinib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care given the stage of the patient journey at that point. So overall survival was the primary endpoint and there was, as you can see, there was a significant improvement in overall survival, which was modest but arguably clinically significant within this population. The data are quite similar to what we had seen in other agents in this disease setting. There was a significant improvement of progression-free survival as well of around two months. The safety profile I thought looked reasonable. The main grade three toxicities were hand-foot syndrome and hypertension, less hand-foot arguably than regorafenib. So I think it was generally felt to be well-tolerated. So Dominik, what were your views? Does this now represent a new standard of care?

Dominik Modest: Yeah, I think so. At least a new potential standard of care. I think what I found a bit amazing in cross trial comparison is that the disease control rates, at least from my point of view, for the first time, was higher than 50% in that situation. We've never seen this with TAS-102 (trifluridine and tipiracil) however you call it and regorafenib, they never made it across this kind of landmark. So this was clearly better with fruquintinib. This is, I think, one aspect. The other aspect was the absolute gain in overall survival was, I think, a lucky measurement. So the hazard ratio and the gain in benefit I think is pretty much comparable to what we've seen with trifluridine and tipiracil. So that's basically, I would say, the same class of effects on the overall survival. With the toxicity I think you've summed it up nicely. However, it's a TKI, it's not so far away in terms of how the molecule is built from regorafenib, and I think we will figure out when we treat patients regularly on that drug. I expect a bit more side effects as we see with trifluridine and tipiracil and maybe a bit less as with regorafenib. And it might be somewhere in between these two drugs. And yeah, I think that's all set, it’s a new drug on the horizon. That's good news.

Jenny Seligmann: Yeah. I mean it's just one of those things, as we know, that's diminishing returns with each line of treatment. And so the number of patients that make it then to the position, if it moves forward in the patients who have had to have been treated with either TAS-102 or regorafenib if it's in that post progression population, I suppose the concern is there's fewer patients that are actually going to make it to that treatment line. So it'll be interesting to see where it is positioned eventually.

Dominik Modest: Yeah, I agree. I think if it needs now further development, I think to have trials in the third line setting are what is asked for, in the fifth line setting or sixth line setting as it was developed now because that was the patient population, I think the overall benefit for the whole population, I think we easily agree on this is considerably small. However, I think in that setting, going to third line, second line and also pre-treated patients, I think there's quite a lot of development. 

Also at ESMO and I think it might get into certain clash with another kind of strategy that was emerging and I'd like to introduce at this point, which is the KRASG12C mutant metastatic colorectal cancer story. We sum up two abstracts which are basically exploring the same strategy, which is the combined inhibition of the EGFR receptor with either cetuximab or panitumumab in combination with the G12C inhibitor, which was in the one trial adagrasib  and the other one sotorasib, so we have two active combinations, both were tested in pre-treated patients, heavily pre-treated patients as well, and I think the overall message was pretty simple, at least from my point of view. These combinations do work. We have a very good disease control rate, which is the vast majority of patients, above 90% in one cohort, and also objective response rates, which is beyond 30% at least, I think we can estimate from these small numbers might be even above 40% in the end. I think we have to see more patients and larger cohort to really estimate where we are. However, I think the region of objective response rate exceeds everything that we have seen as last line options, so I think there will be further development. And I think the key question, and Jenny you may comment on this, how to proceed with these combinations in the future. Where is the story leading us?

Jenny Seligmann: Sure. I mean, I think the one thing to point out is this does represent a small population of the metastatic colorectal cancer population. Excuse me if I'm wrong, off the top of my head, about 2%?

Dominik Modest: I think 3 to 4. Be a bit optimistic!

Jenny Seligmann: You're ever optimistic. Okay. So even by that, the very nature of the rare alteration does impact on the type of study design and the level of evidence that's going to be needed. I mean, it's been really nice following the story, which reminds you back to the BRAF story of the evolution of how it went. And now where we have an approved drug. Interestingly, in that setting, when we think back to the BEACON study where things have gone. So we started in the second, third line and now the interest is moving in to the first line in combination with chemotherapy. I'm very excited about seeing those patients being treated in the first line. I think you should be giving patients your most effective treatment upfront. I think we've got very good evidence that shows that depth of response to your first-line treatment has impacts all the way through. However, I suspect what we're going to end up with is a larger study again in patients who have had at least one or two lines of therapy. And it's going to really need an international effort to identify these patients and get them enrolled. And, of course, ask what the best control arm is for this group as well.

Dominik Modest: Yeah. So basically a lot of work to do. I think as you've pointed out, I think one of the major takeaways that we have is that the combined inhibition of a MAP kinase alteration together with the EGFR receptor is needed. And I would be surprised if the story would change if we get other KRAS specific inhibitors like G12D which are on the horizon. So I think for the overall strategy, how to combine drugs to find synergies, block escape mechanisms, these two abstracts were really helping us. Considering further development, I think we have to acknowledge that this is true for the BEACON as well as the now presented abstracts on G12C the efficacy of these targeted combinations is superb in terms of short term. We have super response rates and in the vast majority of patients, however, durations of response are limited. There’s evolution in the tumours ongoing and therefore I think the effort will not only be internationally in terms of how many centres that we need to recruit these patients. I also think that combinations maybe with classical chemotherapy, if you move to the first line, are needed to achieve the mentioned depth of response. Or do you have another perspective?

Jenny Seligmann: I completely agree with that. And I think unfortunately it sounds very simple, but I think even now Scott Kopetz presented more data from BEACON, again, just demonstrating the complexity with the targeted treatment. So it's not just as simple as targeting this pathway and targeting that pathway. And I think we'd be naive to go into future development thinking it's going to be quite as simple as that. So exciting times. So I think we'll sum up there. I hope you agree that this has been a really exciting time for colorectal cancer. It's been a really good conference. Thank you, Dominik, for sharing your perspectives and I hope everyone has enjoyed this GI CONNECT podcast.

Dominik Modest: Thanks a lot, Jenny. It was a pleasure.

Dr Jenny Seligmann gained her MBChB and BMedSci at the University of Aberdeen in 2005 then gained her PhD in 2015 from the University of Leeds on Biomarkers of Prognosis and Prediction of Response in Colorectal Cancer. She was appointed a Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Fellow in 2015, then a University Academic Fellow and Consultant in Medical Oncology in Leeds in 2017. Her research interests are in clinical trials and biomarkers of prediction of response in colorectal cancer. She is involved in several ongoing clinical trials, including the FOCUS-4 trial and has an ongoing lab-based programme of research. She has been involved in several national and international committees, including the UK Colorectal Clinical Studies Group and is currently the EORTC GI Group Young Investigator. She has received several awards including an ASCO Merit Award in 2013.

Prof. Jenny Seligmann has received financial support/sponsorship for research support, consultation, or speaker fees from the following companies:

Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre and Roche Diagnostics. 

Prof. Dr Dominik Modest studied medicine at the Charité in Berlin, Germany and at the University of Bern, Switzerland. Currently, after 10 years at the LMU in Munich, Germany, he is a physician at the Charité Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Germany. His research activities focus on metastatic colorectal cancer and include the concept and coordination of trials for the FIRE study group and the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO). Prof. Dr Modest also coordinates the translational research components of these trials, aiming to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers of metastatic colorectal cancer. His research has been published in several papers in scientific journals. In 2015, he received a postdoctoral qualification on factors for personalisation of metastatic colorectal cancer therapy and a full professorship in 2020.  Prof. Dr Modest is an active member of several national and international cancer associations and served as spokesman for the Young Medical Oncologists of the AIO until 2014.

Dr Dominik Modest has received financial support/sponsorship for research support, consultation, or speaker fees from the following companies:

Amgen, Merck, Servier, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Lilly, Onkowissen, AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Seagen and GSK

Dr Thomas Winder is board certified for haematology and medical oncology. Since January 2020 he has been Head of the Department for Haematology and Oncology at the University Teaching Hospital Feldkirch, Austria. In addition, since 2017 he has been President of the Swiss Tumor Molecular Institute in Zürich Switzerland. Dr Winder’s research focuses on molecular markers to individualize medical treatment of cancer patients. He achieved his expertise in internationally renowned laboratories at University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles and University Hospital Zürich, Switzerland. His research activity has been honoured by several national and international awards and high impact publications.

Dr Samuel J. Klempner is a GI medical oncologist with research and clinical focus on esophagogastric cancers and cancer genomics. Dr Klempner completed his residency in internal medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School, followed by a combined hematology-oncology fellowship at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School. While at Harvard, Dr Klempner studied the mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies in tumor cells in the lab of Dr Lewis Cantley, PhD. Dr Klempner is board certified in medical oncology, hematology, and internal medicine. Prior to joining The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute Dr Klempner served as an Assistant Clinical Professor in the division of Hematology-Oncology at the University of California Irvine. Dr Klempner’s research interests include the intersection of genomics and immunotherapies, oncogene-driven tumors, acquired resistance, and experimental therapeutics. Dr Klempner is involved in professional societies including the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO).

Dr Samuel J Klempner has received financial support/sponsorship for research support, consultation, or speaker fees from the following companies:

Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Coherus, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Nuvalent Therapuetics and Sanofi.

Yelena Y. Janjigian MD, is Associate Professor and Chief of Gastrointestinal (GI) Oncology Service in the Department of Medicine at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK). Her research career and clinical practice are focused on improving treatment outcomes for patients with GI malignancies. She is an international expert in the management of cancers of oesophagus and stomach and lead several seminal studies that changed practice and set the standard of care for these diseases. She produced high impact publications describing the genomic basis for oesophagogastric cancer pathogenesis and secure federal grants to fund future studies. Her research is focused on developing new treatments, with a special emphasis on defining the therapeutically relevant molecular characteristics of tumors in the GI tract, with 120 peer-reviewed publications to date.

Dr Janjigian received her BS from the University of California, San Diego and her MD from the New York University School of Medicine. She did her internal medicine residency at New York School of Medicine/Bellevue Hospital and her haematology/oncology fellowship training at MSKCC. She joined the MSK faculty in 2009 as a member of the GI Oncology Service.

Dr Janjigian is an active member of American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) holding an array of leadership positions. As Chief of the GI Oncology Service, Dr Janjigian’s mission is to foster research and innovation that transform the future of GI oncology to help patients worldwide. 

Dr Yelena Janjigian has received financial support/sponsorship for research support, consultation, or speaker fees from the following companies:

Research Funding: Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cycle for Survival, Department of Defense, Eli Lilly, Fred’s Team, Genentech/Roche, Merck, NCI, RGENIX

Advisory Boards/Consulting: Amerisource Bergen, Arcus Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Basilea Pharmaceutica, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Geneos Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Imedex, Imugene, Lynx Health, Merck, Merck Serono, Michael J. Hennessy Associates, Paradigm Medical Communications, PeerView Institute, Pfizer, Research to Practice, RGENIX, Seagen, Silverback Therapeutics, Zymeworks Inc.

Other: RGENIX (stock options)

 

Programme summary
Listen to the podcast now
Other episodes in this series
GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

Episode 1: Lower GI cancer highlights

Current Episode
GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

Episode 2: Upper GI cancer highlights

GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

GI CONNECT Update from ESMO 2022

Episode 3: Presidential session

Share this programme
This educational programme is supported by an Independent Medical Education Grant from Bayer
I agree that this educational programme:

Was valuable to me

1/4
Brought to you by
GI CONNECT

GI CONNECT is an initiative of COR2ED, supported by Independent Medical Educational Grants from Bayer and BeiGene Europe.

Meet the experts

Other programmes of interest

Conference update
Oncology 
Oncogene-addicted NSCLC: Highlights from ASCO 2024

The latest non-small cell lung cancer data presented at ASCO

Experts
Prof. Nicolas Girard
  • download Downloadable
    Resources
  • clock 3 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024

Educational programme supported by an Independent Medical Education grant from Bayer.
Upper lower GI cancer update ASCO 2024 Conference update
Oncology 
Upper and lower GI cancer update from ASCO 2024

GI oncologists review the latest data presented at ASCO 2024

Experts
Dr Samuel J Klempner, Dr Elizabeth Smyth, Prof. Jenny Seligmann, Dr Dominik Modest
  • clock 8 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024

Educational programme supported by an Independent Medical Education grant from Bayer.
Experts Knowledge Share Video
Oncology Hemato-oncology 
Optimising the management of multiple myeloma in the early relapsed/refractory setting (RRMM)

Medical experts discuss the latest learnings from clinical practice

Experts
Prof. Aurore Perrot, Prof. Hermann Einsele, Assoc. Prof. Karthik Ramasamy, Assoc. Prof. Joshua Richter
  • download Downloadable
    Resources
  • clock 76 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024

Educational programme supported by an Independent Medical Education grant from Menarini Stemline Oncology.
Conference update

Episode

1

of 4

episode
Oncology 
ASCO 2024 lung cancer highlights

A conference update on lung cancer clinical trial data from ASCO

Experts
Prof. Mark Socinski
  • clock 4 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024

Conference update

Episode

2

of 4

episode
Oncology 
ASCO 2024 breast cancer highlights

How could the data impact clinical practice?

Experts
Prof. Shaheenah Dawood
  • clock 3 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024

Conference update

Episode

3

of 4

episode
Oncology 
ASCO 2024 HCC highlights

How could the latest clinical trial data impact the management of hepatocellular carcinoma?

Experts
Prof. Dr Peter R. Galle
  • clock 1 MIN
  • calendar Jun 2024