What: 72nd Society of Surgical Oncology Annual Cancer Symposium
When: March 27 to 30, 2019
Where: San Diego Convention Center, San Diego, Calif.
Background: More than 1,700 academic and community-based cancer surgeons and oncology health care professionals from around the globe will gather for education, networking and discussion on the latest research in surgical oncology.
What’s happening at SSO 2019?
Human Library: The SSO Human Library is a new concept that provides opportunities for SSO ACT and ACT INT members the chance to talk with experts from around the country. Ten-minute slots are arranged during Thursday, March 28 or Friday, March 29 and take place in the exhibit hall. Topic areas may include breast, colorectal, endocrine, gastrointestinal, melanoma and sarcoma. SSO members. Media interested in learning more about these discussions, should contact the SSO 2019 media relations representative.
Highlights of SSO 2019 include:
Concise disease-specific tracks on breast, colorectal, gastrointestinal, melanoma, sarcoma and colorectal cancer are tailored to specific needs of specialists to provide an option for those who want to focus on one or more specific areas. There is also a cross disciplinary track being offered.
Great Debates—Dynamic panels of leading surgeons will engage in thoughtful debate on four impactful topics:
Friday, March 29th:
- Should a Patient with a 2-centimeter HER2+/TNBC Clinically Node Negative Receive Neoadjuvant Therapy?
- Should We Stop Offering HIPEC for Colorectal Cancer?
Saturday, March 30th
- Primary Approach to Resectable Desmoid Tumor: Operate or Not Operate?
- Small (<2cm) Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Pancreas: Resect or Observe?
Featured Lectures—Top scientific leaders will address crucial issues in oncology:
James Ewing Lecture
“Immunological Principles of Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Cancer Therapy”
Lieping Chen, MD, PhD, Yale University School of Medicine
New Haven, Conn.
John Wayne Clinical Research Lecture
“Clinical Research: Thinking Outside the Box”
Monica Morrow, MD, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
New York City
SSO Presidential Address
“Serendipity and Strategy on the Path of Progress”
Armando E. Giuliano, MD, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
American Cancer Society/SSO Basic Science Lecture
“The SERM Saga, Something from Nothing”
- Craig Jordan, OBE, PhD, DSc, FMedSci
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Exhibit Hall—Attendees will see the latest products, services and solutions that medical device, equipment and technology exhibitors as well as pharmaceutical companies offer—all with the goal of enhancing the ability of cancer surgeons to treat and care for patients with solid tumor cancers.
For more information about SSO 2019, including access to the full Symposium schedule and registration, visit SSO2019.org. For complimentary media registration, contact Chris Martin at email@example.com. To review media registration guidelines, visit: https://bit.ly/2GzGZlV.
About the Society of Surgical Oncology
The Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) is the premier organization for surgeons and health care providers dedicated to advancing and promoting the science and treatment of cancer. The Society’s focus on all solid-tumor disease sites is reflected in its Annual Cancer Symposium, monthly scientific journal (Annals of Surgical Oncology), educational initiatives, and committee structure. The Society’s mission is to improve multidisciplinary patient care by advancing the science, education, and practice of cancer surgery worldwide.
Author: SSO Staff
Date: Oct 30, 2017
The Society of Surgical Oncology announces Kelly M. McMasters, MD, PhD as the new Editor-in-Chief of Annals of Surgical Oncology (ASO) effective March 2018. Dr. McMasters becomes only the second Editor in the journal’s nearly 25-year history to assume the role. He will oversee the print and online editions of ASO and with Mark Roh, MD, Executive Editor, will lead a prestigious editor roster of expert leaders in surgical oncology, including more than 20 section editors and associate section editors from around the world, as well as U.S.-based associate and deputy editors. Dr. McMasters begins his position on March 23, 2018 in conjunction with the journal’s 25th anniversary and the retirement of Charles M. Balch, MD, who established the prominence of the publication in the field of surgical oncology. Dr. McMasters will report directly to the SSO Executive Council and will carry out editorial responsibilities from his office in Louisville, KY. SSO President-Elect Armando E. Giuliano, MD, FACS said, “I am very pleased to confirm the appointment of Dr. Kelly McMasters by the SSO Executive Council as the Editor-in-Chief for Annals of Surgical Oncology. Dr. McMasters has demonstrated extraordinary leadership, scholarship and commitment to the SSO and the Annals of Surgical Oncology. His tenure and contributions as a Deputy Editor for the journal makes him an excellent choice to develop and implement a strategic vision for the future of the publication.”
Dr. McMasters is the Ben A. Reid, Sr., MD, Professor and Chair of the Hiram C. Polk, Jr., MD Department of Surgery at the University of Louisville School of Medicine, where he also serves as Director of the Multidisciplinary Melanoma Clinic and Associate Director of the James Graham Brown Cancer Center. His laboratory has focused on cancer gene therapy and melanoma biomarkers and has been funded by the American Cancer Society, the National Institutes of Health, and the Melanoma Research Foundation, among other agencies. He holds two patents for his research inventions. He is the author and Principal Investigator of the Sunbelt Melanoma Trial, a multi-institutional study involving more than 3,500 patients from 79 institutions across North America. Dr. McMasters is President of the Society of Surgical Oncology, President of the Western Surgical Association, President of the Society of Surgical Chairs, Secretary of the Southern Surgical Association, and past President of the Southeastern Surgical Congress. He served on the Melanoma Staging Committee of the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) and has served as a Deputy Editor of Annals of Surgical Oncology since February 2016. He has published over 400 articles in the medical/scientific literature, as well as 19 book chapters. He is co-editor of the book: Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Targeted Therapy and Multidisciplinary Care. He earned his medical degree at UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and his PhD in Cell and Developmental Biology from Rutgers University. He completed his General Surgery residency at the University of Louisville School of Medicine and his fellowship in Surgical Oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
“Annals of Surgical Oncology has a rich heritage as the premier source of clinical and translational science related to cancer surgery and multidisciplinary care. It is an honor and a privilege to lead an outstanding editorial board into the future,” said Dr. McMasters.
ASO is the worldwide journal of choice of surgical oncologists and is the official journal of the Society of Surgical Oncology and the American Society of Breast Surgeons. According to Thompson-Reuters, in the 2016 impact factor ranking among all surgical oncology scholarly periodicals, ASO has the most citations of all surgical journals in the world, the highest number of source items, and a current impact factor of 4.041. The journal promotes clinical and translational cancer research, with an emphasis on clinical trials. Leading subject areas of ASO include Gastrointestinal Oncology, Breast Oncology, Hepatobiliary Tumors, Colorectal Cancer, Thoracic Oncology, and Translational Research. ASO strives to enhance the quality of life and survival of the surgical patient with cancer and to improve the practice environment in which high-quality surgical oncology care is delivered. ASO also facilitates the career development of surgical trainees and their transition into academic and community-based practice and publishes timely articles about public policy and patient advocacy issues related to the surgical patient with cancer.
About the Society of Surgical Oncology
The Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) is the premier international organization for surgeons and health care providers dedicated to advancing and promoting the science and treatment of cancer. The Society’s focus on all solid-tumor disease sites is reflected in its Annual Cancer Symposium, monthly scientific journal (Annals of Surgical Oncology), educational initiatives and committee structure. The Society’s mission is to improve multidisciplinary patient care by advancing the science, education and practice of cancer surgery worldwide
Sandra L. Wong, MD MS, SSO Treasurer, served as the lead author for the publication, “Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Management of Regional Lymph Nodes in Melanoma: American Society of Clinical Oncology and Society of Surgical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update” published in the December Online First edition of Annals of Surgical Oncology.
This publication was part of a continuing collaborative effort between ASCO and SSO to update the 2012 joint guideline. An expert panel was reconvened to address results from highly anticipated randomized controlled trials addressing the important question of regional nodal management following a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy. Two major recommendations were updated using a rigorous methodologic process including a systematic literature review.
The first recommendation addresses specific indications to assure appropriateness of SLN biopsy, noting the importance of avoiding overutilization of the procedure in patients with a very low likelihood of having regional nodal disease. Indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy to include intermediate thickness melanoma were affirmed. The guideline was updated to reflect changes in the AJCC staging system (8th edition) and while SLN biopsy for patients with thin melanoma classified as T1a is not recommended, SLN biopsy may be considered for T1b lesions (defined as 0.8 to 1.0 mm Breslow thickness or <0.8 mm Breslow thickness with ulceration).
Secondly, following a positive SLN biopsy, completion lymph node dissection (CLND) or careful observation may be considered for patients with low-risk micrometastatic disease. For higher risk patients, observation may be considered after discussion about the potential risks and benefits of foregoing CLND. This second recommendation is very timely, taking new practice changing data into account and updating the prior guideline recommendation (which was to perform CLND when SLN biopsy is positive).
Dr. Wong stated, “We were gratified to be able to convene a group of melanoma experts to review new data in a timely fashion and allow the ASCO-SSO guideline to guide truly contemporary clinical practice.” Other SSO members on the expert panel include the following: Charlotte Ariyan, MD, Charles Balch, MD, Keith Delman, MD, Mark Faries, MD, Marc Moncrieff, MD, and Jonathan Zager, MD.
A June 5, 2017 online publication in JAMA Oncology by Monica Morrow, MD, et al, “Trends in Reoperation After Initial Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer,” evaluates the impact of a 2014 consensus guideline on margins for breast conserving surgery by Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). The study showed a significant decline in surgery after initial lumpectomy by 16% (P<0.001) and more than two-thirds of surgeons endorsing a margin of “no ink on tumor.” 1
The study was a population-based cohort survey study of 7,303 eligible women with stage I and II breast cancer diagnosed in 2013 to 2015 and reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County, CA Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries. After exclusion criteria were applied, the analytic sample was comprised of 3,729 patients. The study also compared rates of reexcision and subsequent mastectomy after initial lumpectomy in April 2013 and April 2015. The rates were 21% and 13% and 14% and 4% respectively. The difference over the two-year period was significant (P<0.001). The decrease in surgery after initial lumpectomy led to a significant increase in the rate of final lumpectomy and a decrease in both unilateral and bilateral mastectomy.
The findings come approximately three years after the release of the SSO-ASTRO consensus guideline statement, which was endorsed by American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Breast Surgeons. The guideline was based upon a meta-analysis of margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) from 33 studies that included 28,162 patients. The multidisciplinary expert panel concluded that negative margins (no ink on tumor) minimized the risk of IBTR and wider margin widths do not significantly lower this risk. Furthermore, the routine practice to obtain wider negative margin widths than no ink on tumor is not indicated.2
Morrow’s study also evaluated the adoption of the guidelines by surveying the attitudes of attending surgeons who conducted the cohort patients’ surgeries. Findings indicated that 69% of surgeons now endorse a margin of no ink on tumor as adequate to avoid reexcision for both estrogen receptor-positive progesterone receptor-positive and estrogen receptor-negative progesterone receptor-negative patients. The SSO-ASTRO consensus guidelines on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery correlates to the change in the surgeons’ attitude about margins. Armando E. Giuliano, MD, SSO President Elect; Cedars-Sinai Cancer Institute, Co-Director of the Saul and Joyce Brandman Breast Center says, “Having served on the multidisciplinary panel that developed the consensus guidelines, it is remarkable that such strong evidence already exists that demonstrates the acceptance of no ink on tumor by surgeons.”
“As the preeminent surgical oncology organization, SSO partners with organizations across the cancer care spectrum to develop and implement guidelines that enhance clinical outcomes in efficient, yet scientifically supported ways,” said Kelly McMasters, MD, PhD, SSO President; Ben A. Reid, Sr., MD, Professor and Chairman, The Hiram C. Polk Jr., MD, Department of Surgery, University of Louisville. “We continue to work with leaders in the field to evaluate where our guidance could have the biggest impact.”
About the Society of Surgical Oncology
The Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) is the premier organization for surgeons and health care providers dedicated to advancing and promoting the science and treatment of cancer. The Society’s focus on all solid-tumor disease sites is reflected in its Annual Cancer Symposium, monthly scientific journal (Annals of Surgical Oncology), educational initiatives and committee structure. The Society’s mission is to improve multidisciplinary patient care by advancing the science, education and practice of cancer surgery worldwide.
- Morrow M., et. al.Trends in Reoperation After Initial Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer.JAMA Oncol. Published online June 5, 2017.
- Moran M., et. al.Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conversing Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Stages I and II Invasive Breast Cancer.Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:704-716.
Chandrakanth Are, MD, Chair, SSO International Committee, and Russell Berman, MD, SSO Executive Council Member, collaborated with the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) to investigate and stimulate dialogue on the critical issue of research literacy. This collaboration builds upon the previously published joint report that highlighted the global variations in training and made the case for a streamlined global surgical oncology curriculum of uniform standards. Chandrakanth Are, MD stated, “The proposed Global Curriculum in cancer research can provide the framework to stimulate research or promote research literacy, thereby improving care for cancer patients globally.”
The two most recent manuscripts were published in the December Online First edition of Annals of Surgical Oncology, “Global Curriculum in Research Literacy for the Surgical Oncologist and Global Variations in the Level of Cancer-Related Research Activity and Correlation to Cancer-Specific Mortality: Proposal for a Global Curriculum”. The two publications complement one another and emphasize that providing timely, effective and safe cancer care depends on an understanding of current evidence-based clinical practices and that participation in research helps cancer doctors provide optimal care.
“Global Curriculum in Research Literacy for the Surgical Oncologist” is structured into eight sections with topics that include research methodologies, statistics, outcomes, ethics and writing and presenting research findings. Russell Berman, MD stated “We recognize that although not all individuals or nations will be able to actively participate in research, cancer practitioners globally should have the opportunity to learn the skills necessary to interpret scientific literature.”
“Global Variations in the Level of Cancer-Related Research Activity and Correlation to Cancer-Specific Mortality: Proposal for a Global Curriculum” correlates data from the SCOPUS database on the number of cancer-related publications per country and World Health Organization data regarding cancer-specific mortality rates. Results indicate significant global variation in cancer-related research that correlates with cancer specific mortality. As noted in the manuscript, promoting participation in cancer research or increasing cancer research literacy may lead to improved care and patient outcomes.
As the preeminent surgical oncology organization, SSO is leading the dialogue related to surgical oncology, the role of the surgeon and the worldwide cancer burden to affect change both locally and globally. SSO currently partners with eight international surgical oncology societies including: Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology, Canadian Society of Surgical Oncology, Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology, European Society of Surgical Oncology, Indian Association of Surgical Oncology, Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery, Korean Society of Surgical Oncology and Sociedad Mexicana de Oncologia.
The Lancet Oncology: Major report sets out how to accelerate cancer research and care, delivering on US Cancer Moonshot initiative
A fundamental shift in how cancer research is conducted and how cancer care is delivered in the USA is required in order to deliver on the US Cancer Moonshot initiative, according to a major new report published today in The Lancet Oncology journal.
The report sets out a detailed roadmap to deliver on the Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations, including a focus on prevention, a new model for drug discovery and development, a vast expansion of patient access to clinical trials, and an emphasis on targeted interventions to improve cancer care for underserved groups, specifically children, cancer survivors and minority groups. The report emphasizes the importance of addressing health disparities in all recommendations.
The Lancet Oncology Commission on Future Research Priorities in the USA is authored by over 50 leading oncologists in the USA , including members of leading US cancer organisations, and sets out 13 key priority areas, each with measurable goals, to focus the US$2 billion of funding released to the National Cancer Institute as part of the 21stCentury Cures Act.
It highlights how technological advances, including understanding and mapping pre-cancer biology and the rapid adoption of big data, as well as new collaborations across industry, patient groups, academia, government and clinical practice will be critical to advancing research, and ultimately improving patient care.
The Commission will be launched on November 1st at an event on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC and presented on November 3rd at the United Nations Association of New York Humanitarian Awards, where former Vice President Joe Biden is being honoured for his work on improving cancer outcomes as part of the US Cancer Moonshot Initiative.
Professor Elizabeth Jaffee, President-elect of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) and co-Chair of the Commission from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA, says: “The US 21st Century Cures Act provided nearly US$2 billion in funding to accelerate cancer research, but strategic allocation of resources will be crucial to accelerate research, treatment and ultimately patient care. This Commission maps an ambitious path ahead to guide researchers, funders, industry, and policy makers in prioritising the best research to benefit patients.” 
Professor Chi Van Dang, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, New York and The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia; and co-Chair, says: “The cancer research community has embraced the extraordinary opportunity of the Moonshot initiative with remarkable energy. To ensure that cancer research in the USA continues to be world-leading, it is imperative that investment is concentrated into specific research areas. The Commission identifies key areas to prioritise across technology, clinical research, public health and drugs policy to achieve this goal.” 
Commenting on the Commission, Gregory Simon, President of the Biden Cancer Initiative, says the report “provides a roadmap to change the course of cancer in our lifetime—a journey in which we should actively participate. Patients, caregiver, doctors, researchers, nurses, and scientist all need to embark on the course of action proposed by the report, without delay. Time is of the essence, and so action must be taken now.”
The Commission highlights the importance of cancer prevention, including the development of a premalignant cancer atlas to identify small changes in healthy tissue at the earliest stages of cancer development, opening up new opportunities for precision-based cancer prevention. The need to move towards targeted screening will also be important.
Professor Scott Lippman, University of California San Diego Moores Cancer Center, co-author, says: “Past efforts to prevent cancer have been limited and sometimes hindered by serious and substantial disparities. A one-size-fits-all strategy does not work. That’s the premise of precision medicine and it should be for prevention efforts as well, such as screenings, which should be tailored by age, risk, demographics and other factors. Colorectal screening, for example, is extremely poor in Latinos, especially of low income, but there are new programs that overcome language and social barriers to boost breadth and success. Obesity research is crucial given the growing global epidemic and promise of recent work in special energetics, sedentary behaviour and meal timing. These strategies will have a great effect on minimising morbidities and mortality from cancer in future generations.” 
Data sharing and patient-centred priorities will be critical to advancing research and improving care. The report strongly supports developing data systems that allow patients to input their own personal data for use by the cancer community and, in return, provide outputs to patients that allow them to identify the most scientifically sound clinical trials for which they might be eligible. The ultimate goal is to align research and care in a seamless continuum such that all patients have access to clinical trials as part of standard care and their clinical course and experience informs future research.
An unprecedented increase in the number of therapies have been approved for marketing by the US Food and Drug Administration in the past two to three years, but this continues at immense costs, with hundreds of drugs failing in clinical trials. Bringing a single new therapy to the market is estimated to cost US$2.6 billion. Among the Commission’s recommendations is the need for an overhaul of the drug discovery process so that projects can be discontinued earlier in the clinical development phase, and to transform how academia, industry and clinical groups collaborate to vastly improve efficiencies.
Patients with cancers that were once lethal are now living longer with cancer as a chronic condition, meaning that guidelines must be developed to address the long-term health care needs of patients while undergoing therapy and of survivors. Finally, patient outcomes are greatly affected by racial, cultural, and socioeconomic background and there is a need both to better understand the context of care, and ensure equitable access to care that is financially sustainable for the individual and society.
Professor Jeffrey Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, co-author, says: “As we make advances in cancer care, one of our priorities must be to ensure that all patients who may benefit have access to high quality care. We need to better understand and address costs of cancer care and disparities in care in the U.S. and internationally. This is an exciting time in cancer care and research and we need to make sure that the oncology community comes together, working beyond national borders whenever necessary, to accelerate global effort to control cancer and improve the lives of patients.”
Clifford Hudis, CEO of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and former Chief of Breast Medicine at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and co-author, says: “Although clinical research has been challenged by reduced support as well as regulatory and administrative burdens, we have recently seen truly remarkable progress across a range of malignancies. The blueprint laid out by the BRP and this Commission should help us prioritize our efforts to accelerate meaningful clinical advances in the next 4-5 years. The provisions provide an opportunity for cancer investigators, federal agencies, universities and research institutes, and private philanthropic supporters worldwide to direct their investments and help the global community meet the ambitious goal of delivering ten years progress in half that time. The time for action is now.”
NOTES TO EDITORS
 Full list of Commissioners:
Elizabeth M Jaffee, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
Chi Van Dang, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research New York, NY
David B Agus, University of Southern California, Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Brian M Alexander, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Kenneth C Anderson, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Alan Ashworth, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
Anna D Barker, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Roshan Bastani, Fielding School of Public Health and the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Sangeeta Bhatia, Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
Jeffrey A Bluestone, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
Otis Brawley, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
Atul J Butte, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
Daniel G Coit, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering, Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
Nancy E Davidson, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
Mark Davis, California Institute for Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
Ronald A DePinho, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
Robert B Diasio, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Rochester, MN, USA
Giulio Draetta, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
A Lindsay Frazier, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Andrew Futreal, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
Sam S Gambhir, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Patricia A Ganz, Fielding School of Public Health and the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Levi Garraway, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Stanton Gerson, Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
Sumit Gupta, Division of Haematology/Oncology, Hospital for Sick Children, Faculty of Medicine and IHPME, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
James Heath, California Institute for Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
Ruth I Hoffman, American Childhood Cancer Organization, Beltsville, MD, USA
Cliff Hudis, Breast Cancer Medicine Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering, Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
Chanita Hughes-Halbert, Medical University of South Carolina and the Hollings Cancer Center, Charleston, SC, USA
Ramy Ibrahim, Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, San Francisco, CA, USA
Hossein Jadvar, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Brian Kavanagh, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA
Rick Kittles, College of Medicine and the University of Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Quynh-Thu Le, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Scott M Lippman, University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
David Mankoff, Department of Radiology and Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Elaine R Mardis, The Institute for Genomic Medicine at Nationwide Children’s Hospital Columbus, OH, USA
Deborah K Mayer, University of North Carolina, Lineberger Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Kelly McMasters, The Hiram C Polk Jr MD Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
Neal J Meropol, Flatiron Health, New York, NY, USA
Beverly Mitchell, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Peter Naredi, Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Dean Ornish, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
Timothy M Pawlik, Department of Surgery, Wexner Medical Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
Jeffrey Peppercorn, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Martin G Pomper, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
Derek Raghavan, Levine Cancer Institute, Carolinas HealthCare, Charlotte, NC, USA
Christine Ritchie, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
Sally W Schwarz, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
Richard Sullivan, King’s College London, London, UK
Richard Wahl, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
Jedd D Wolchok, Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, San Francisco, CA, USA
Sandra L Wong, Department of Surgery,The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA
Alfred Yung, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
 Quotes direct from authors and cannot be found in the text of the Commission.