Martin Dietrich, MD, PhD

Subcutaneous cancer therapy cuts chair time and IV needs, but brings site reactions, volume limits, and policy hurdles clinics must solve.

Subcutaneous cancer therapy trims chair time and costs, but volume limits and reactions matter—learn how clinics streamline workflows.

Experts decode NSCLC PD‑L1 trials, when immunotherapy alone works, why crossover matters, and who still benefits from adding chemotherapy.

Clinicians weigh dual immunotherapy vs monotherapy in metastatic NSCLC, comparing CheckMate 227 and POSEIDON efficacy, PD‑L1 subsets, and toxicity.

Experts explain stage IV lung cancer goals, PD‑L1-driven therapy choices, and when to intensify with chemo plus dual immunotherapy.

Experts explain stage IV lung cancer goals, PD‑L1-driven therapy choices, and when to intensify with chemo plus dual immunotherapy.

Experts weigh neoadjuvant vs adjuvant immunotherapy in resectable lung cancer, balancing PD‑L1, pCR, surgery timing, and toxicity.

Experts weigh lung cancer perioperative immunotherapy trials, debating adjuvant nivolumab, ctDNA guidance, and chemo choices versus pembrolizumab data.

How EGFR, ALK and PD-L1 biomarker results shape neoadjuvant lung cancer therapy—and what CheckMate-816 means for survival.

Experts discuss the evolving role of PD-L1 in guiding perioperative treatment decisions for resectable NSCLC and review the pivotal CheckMate 816 trial, which established neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy as a standard-of-care option based on improved pathologic response and event-free survival outcomes.

Experts discuss how treatment strategies for NSCLC differ between resectable and metastatic disease, emphasizing a multimodal, curative approach in early-stage cancer versus personalized systemic therapy focused on disease control and survival in advanced stages.

The approval of subcutaneous amivantamab allows physicians flexibility in offering treatment for non–small cell lung cancer.

Intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC) formulations each play important roles in modern oncology care, with distinct strengths and limitations. IV administration offers established dosing precision, flexibility for complex regimens, and familiarity across oncology practices, but it is often associated with longer chair time, higher staffing demands, and increased use of infusion resources. In contrast, SC injections provide a more streamlined approach, with shorter administration times and reduced need for infusion infrastructure. Emerging evidence suggests that SC formulations can meaningfully decrease health care utilization, improve clinic efficiency, and enhance patient convenience without compromising clinical outcomes. For patients, SC delivery may translate into less time in the clinic and a more favorable treatment experience, while practices may benefit from improved throughput and optimized resource allocation. Together, these considerations highlight the growing value of SC formulations in evolving oncology care models.

The approval of subcutaneous amivantamab can offer a more accessible means of treatment for patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Panelists discuss how promising ongoing and upcoming clinical trials may reshape sequencing strategies in ALK+ non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Panelists discuss how to approach patient education after progression on an ALK inhibitor, address real-world challenges during therapy transitions, and determine best options for patients progressing on lorlatinib.

Panelists discuss how alectinib use in the adjuvant setting might shift sequencing strategies in metastatic ALK+ non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and how resistance mutations influence post-frontline therapy selection.

Panelists discuss how to overcome barriers to comprehensive molecular testing and how to prioritize treatment when ALK+ non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) coexists with other actionable biomarkers.

Panelists discuss how proactive patient education, lipid-lowering interventions, and monitoring tools can help patients stay on ALK inhibitor therapy to realize long-term benefits.

Panelists discuss how lorlatinib’s unique adverse event (AE) profile, including cognitive effects, hypercholesterolemia, and peripheral neuropathy, impacts treatment selection and patient management.

Panelists discuss how ALK inhibitors compare in terms of tolerability and best practices for managing associated toxicities.

Panelists discuss how currently available ALK inhibitors compare in terms of efficacy, durability of response, and central nervous system (CNS) penetration for metastatic non–small cell lung cancer treatment.

Panelists discuss how clinical trial outcomes like CROWN and eXalt3 reflect real-world patient experiences and how these collective data have changed perspectives on frontline therapies for ALK+ non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Panelists discuss how matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) of ALK inhibitors and the FDA approval of ensartinib in December 2024 influence frontline treatment selection for ALK+ non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Panelists discuss how the 5-year CROWN trial data for lorlatinib have shaped the treatment paradigm for ALK+ metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly regarding long-term survival, durability of response, and management of brain metastases.

Panelists discuss how they will explore optimizing care for patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (ALK+ NSCLC) through treatment selection, sequencing strategies, and interpretation of emerging clinical data.