Welcome back to the channel. I want to talk about the latest GU abstract. This was out at the

GU ASCO just last week. It's Keynote 564, adjuvant pemberlizumab and kidney cancer. But here's the most

important thing. This is yet another example of oncology cheerleading, grossly unethical and

uninformative studies. So I'm going to walk you through why

this study is deeply uninformative. I'm going to walk you through the response that it got

from the G.U. Asco crowd. I'm going to pose the biggest question, the question that we all face,

which is why is oncology such a broken field, a field that many people don't want to do,

because they worry about this degree of corruption.

So let's take a look.

Keynote 564 adjuvant pemberlismab, another unethical study.

I call it.

It is.

It's terrible.

So here's what people say about it, okay, this gentleman, the Phase 3, Keynote 564.

This landmark study demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival compared to placebo,

making it the first to show such a meaningful survival benefit with adjuvant therapy in RCC.

Yes, we finally did it, the first one to show a meaningful benefit, meaningful benefit in RCC.

Bravo. Let's see if the study is actually done correctly. Okay, let's get to that.

A lab from Harvard. The impressive practice-changing findings from keynote 564 presented by Dr.

Choirie was a key highlight of ASCO. This is the first RCT to show a statistically significant

OS improvement with adjuvant pembryllizumab for patients with renal cell carcinoma.

38%.

...