You're listening to Plenary Session.

This week on Plenary Session, you're in for a real treat.

First, I'm going to update something we talked about on the last episode, the I Predict study.

An astute hematology oncology fellow at Seattle, Fred Hutch, has found me the poster

presentation of I predict in treatment naive patients. You won't want to miss this discussion.

Next, I'm going to talk about a piece of correspondence that appeared in the New England Journal of

Medicine on May 9th. It's called the imputability of adverse events to anti-cancer drugs.

Like a prior letter to the editor in the New England Journal of Medicine on phase one trials

about the response rate in the published literature on phase one trials, this too is deeply flawed.

And just as I raked that first paper over the coals, I'm going to rake this one over the coals.

And you won't want to miss this discussion of another piece of bad research. It's just as simple as that. And you'll

want to know why it's bad so that hopefully you won't make the error in the future. Finally, I'm

going to have an interview with Dr. Daniel Hartung. Daniel Hartung works in the school of pharmacy here, and he is an expert on the cost of drugs.

I didn't say cancer drugs. I just said drugs because he's an expert on the cost of all drugs.

He's going to talk about two things that he's done. One, the Akhtar gel, and two, multiple

sclerosis drugs, and you won't want to miss his insights. So, stay tuned. But first, a plug. If you like this episode

and you like this podcast, I need you to do three things. One, go to patreon.com and back this

podcast. Backing an artist you support on patreon.com is a great way to keep something going. Next,

go to the iTunes store and don't just give us five stars.

Write a review.

Tell us what you like about the podcast and what you don't like.

A written review goes a long way.

...