Welcome back to the channel.

And for those of you listening on the audio feed, this is coming out on the plenary session podcast.

Plenary session at the intersection of medicine, oncology, and health policy.

I'm here to talk about Contact 2.

Contact 2 is a new randomized control trial that's out now at G.U.

Asco in my very own city of San Francisco, they're having the convention center

just a few blocks from here, and they're celebrating their popping bottles. But let's take a look

at this study and let's ask ourselves what happens when investigators run severely problematic

trials. What happens in the field when we run these kinds of studies? Because Contact 2, I think,

is a hugely problematic

study it's a study that is negative towards cancer patients it's negative towards the people who

pay for cancer medicine it really signifies i think so much of what's wrong in medical oncology

today so much of what makes internal medicine residents not want to pursue this field. To me, it feels

almost like corruption, so I'm going to present that case to you. Let me walk you through it.

So what happens when investigators run bad trials? They get promoted. That's the subtitle

of this piece. They get promoted. They actually get a lot of promotions, it turns out. So let's

take a look. Contact 2 is a randomized control trial of Cabo Xantinib, which is a pan-TKI and a

tzolizumab in metastatic castorosition prostate cancer.

I'm going to talk about what are the problems with this study.

Number one, the control arm is not what you would give your father.

Number two, the post-protacle therapy is negligent.

That's all so bad. Number three, the observed PSF endpoint is quite marginal.

...