CancerLinQ's Transformational Role in Oncology with Dr. Robert Miller

Jeff Elton sits down with Dr. Robert Miller, Chief Medical and Science Officer at CancerLinQ, to unpack the integration of real-world data and AI in oncology care. Dr. Miller shares his journey from community practice to shaping CancerLinQ, revealing insights into the network's growth and its pivotal role in improving patient care. The episode delves into the transformation of quality measures, the burgeoning role of electronic health records, and the automation of data to enhance the quality and reach of oncological care. As CancerLinQ evolves, discover its expanding capabilities, the drive towards patient-centric care, and the influence on CancerLinQ's partnerships, particularly with ASCO. This is a must-listen for professionals seeking to understand the landscape of data-driven healthcare improvements. Tune in to explore the trajectory of oncology practice transformation with two industry leaders at the helm.

Website
www.ConcertAI.com

LinkedIn
www.linkedin.com/company/concertai/

Twitter
www.twitter.com/concertai

Transcript

Jeff Elton:

Welcome to the ConcertAI Podcast, season two. Today, I have the great pleasure of being here with Dr. Robert Miller, who is the Chief Medical and Science Officer of ConcertAI's CancerLinQ entity. I've had a long history of working and interacting with Bob, now going back the better part of a decade plus.

And I've always known Bob to be an extraordinary, thoughtful individual that's actually been at the front edge of applications and real-world data, clinical quality, clinical research methodologies. He's one of the more broadly traveled individuals across many oncology sites, be they academic centers, NCI designated centers, or community, Bob himself has been instrumental to building the CancerLinQ network over the years. It's a great pleasure to introduce Bob Miller.

So, I am pleased today to be here with Dr. Bob Miller, who is the Chief Medical Science Officer for CancerLinQ. As many of you know, CancerLinQ and ConcertAI have begun to come together in a number of ways, and we continue to also have a collaborative model with ASCO itself in a variety of areas.

But today, what I really want to focus on is many of the activities of CancerLinQ. Some of the areas where CancerLinQ is looking to do some future development of activity, priorities, value of CancerLinQ to the network, current members, new members, and just a few comments about what to expect as we go forward.

Bob, to begin here, you have a very interesting background. In the sense of coming, obviously with your academic training, but also coming into clinical practice for a good number of years before going into ASCO and then becoming really part of CancerLinQ. Can you give us a little bit more of your background?

Bob Miller:

Sure. Thanks, Jeff. And it's great to be here and talk to you today. So I'm a board-certified medical oncologist, and I started my career after I finished a fellowship in community practice. It was in Sacramento, California, and I practiced general medical oncology for 17 years there. I saw patients with a full spectrum of hematologic malignancies and solid tumors as well as benign hematologic conditions. And just did sort of standard stuff, was very involved in patient care. I was a hospice medical director, was part of an institutional review board and other things. I did that, as I said, for 17 years.

Sort of mid-career, I transitioned to a different setting, to an academic medical center setting. I got involved in some areas related to clinical informatics as a specialty and did some additional training in that. Became very interested in electronic health record implementations.

This was around the time of the beginnings of meaningful use and so forth. For the last nine years, I've worked as an employee at ASCO as the Chief Medical Science Officer at CancerLinQ, which had been a wholly-owned nonprofit subsidiary of ASCO.

So, I guess I would summarize by saying I've sort of seen the whole spectrum of oncology care, community practice in an academic setting where I practiced for five years in breast cancer, as well as the importance of using data and technology. And that's really been my current passion, to better use data and technology to help doctors take better care of their patients.

Jeff Elton:

I would imagine that all aspects of that career, given there's an increased emphasis of moving clinical trials, other activities, and capabilities into the community, and representativeness of research itself, of which most patients are seen in a community setting, that's incredibly important. And we'll come back to some of the technologies.

So, my understanding of CancerLinQ, and my own relationship, really, probably started more formally 2017, 2018, but my understanding is preceding the formation and maybe as a catalyst for the formation was the quality programs of ASCO and the initiation of QOPI itself. Can you provide a little bit more background around that?

Bob Miller:

Sure, that's exactly right, Jeff. CancerLinQ was conceived of as a way of extending ASCO's quality measurement and improvement programs. And sort of the primary, one of those was called, the acronym is QOPI, Q-O-P-I, stands for the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. And this was sort of a grassroots ground level program that was developed, I think, almost 20 years ago now. And it was a way for oncologists, oncology practices to measure themselves the quality of care that they were rendering to patients to see whether their care was consistent with national guidelines that were produced by ASCO and others.

So, initially, QOPI was a manual process. What it meant is there was a series of so-called QOPI measures across different tumor types in general oncology. And the practices were responsible for manually abstracting their charts. There was a certain number that were required by different tumor types, and they had to report these into a web form. And they received, after a number of months, a quality score, and that told them how they were performing.

And I actually did QOPI myself in the manual process. It was late 2008, something like that. And this was in the paper chart era. And what we had to do was to actually go in. It was my nurse practitioner and me, from my practice, we went in on weekends because that was the only time to do it. And we pulled charts from the chart rack, and went through them, and filled out the forms.

Anyhow, that's how QOPI started. That's the way it was. And then when CancerLinQ was first conceived of by ASCO, it was felt to be a way of automating QOPI. So, instead of doing manual abstraction on a limited number of charts, it allowed oncologists to be able to use the electronic health record data that they were already collecting as part of routine care, to, if you will, power these quality measures. The data that was in the electronic health record was going to feed into QOPI.

And that's pretty much what we at CancerLinQ have been doing the last several years. We have an electronic version of QOPI. It's specifically for an outreach of QOPI, called QOPI Certification where there's some additional requirements to demonstrate the quality of the care that's being rendered. But the main part that CancerLinQ does, that was the barrier for most practices, is it completely automates the abstraction of data. So there's no additional manual data entry participating QOPI if you do it through CancerLinQ's SmartLinQ platform.

Jeff Elton:

And is QOPI a measurement of all patient activity? Is it a sampled framework, or how is QOPI set up in that respect?

Bob Miller:

Yeah, great question. So, the traditional sort of paper-based QOPI or the manual QOPI was an audit. It was a sample. There were a minimum number of charts that were required. However, in the CancerLinQ world, we actually can apply the QOPI measures to all eligible patients. The practice doesn't choose which patients go in. And in some ways, that's a fairer, more complete-

Jeff Elton:

Unbiased.

Bob Miller:

... representation. Absolutely. And there's no case selection that you don't pick your 20 prettiest charts. You show what's really happening in the practice, and that's what oncologists need to know.

Jeff Elton:

And for practices that achieve the certified status, I mean, I could imagine there's sort of an ethos of assuring you're doing best by your patients. That's a motivation broadly. Are there other benefits that come to practices that achieve certification that actually becomes part of the catalyst to kind of both go into it and stay in it?

Bob Miller:

Yes, there are. I mean, certainly, the desire to understand your own quality, where you are, just for the main purpose of practicing the best quality of care. That's the reason practices are interested. But there are other benefits. QOPI Certification is recognized by some insurers. Some health plans will grant practices that are QOPI certified. Certain discounts or other consideration for showing this extra step of measuring quality. QOPI Certification can be used, frankly, in competitive markets as a differentiator.

Practices that have gone to the extra length of going through the full certification process, both the quality measures that CancerLinQ deliver and the other parts, which is basically an onsite survey to make sure that safe chemotherapy prescribing practices are followed. That's a competitive differentiator for practices in markets where they show that they're going to this extra step.

And there are some other benefits too. I think that as healthcare financing is transitioning to a pay for quality, as opposed to pay for quantity model, it is this cultural change and practice transformation change that allow practices to start thinking about the results of their care, not necessarily the services that are rendered. And that'll be the basis for reimbursement.

Jeff Elton:

Yeah, I mean, obviously, outcomes is why we're doing what we're doing and what we're targeting. If you had to just do a sort of rough order magnitude, or you may have a precise number on this, of the difference for a practice in terms of 100% coverage in full automation versus sampled coverage in manual entry, what's the difference in burden on the individual practice setting for this?

Bob Miller:

Oh, in terms of burdens, it can be hundreds of hours, depending on-

Jeff Elton:

Wow, okay. Wow.

Bob Miller:

... how big the practice is. I mean, we have seen, again, I know from my relatively small eight-doctor practice in Sacramento, it took a couple of months of Saturdays for my nurse and I to go through roughly only 25, 30 charts per disease type. And it's tedious. Abstracting a chart manually can take one hour for one chart.

Jeff Elton:

Wow. Okay.

Bob Miller:

So there's just no comparison between manual and the automated process through CancerLinQ.

Jeff Elton:

So, over the course of the last few years, I know there was oncology medical home initiatives occurring in ASCO. And then more recently, at least if my date's correct, there was some announcements in the July timeframe probably coming just away from the 2023 ASCO meetings in Chicago about the next generation, if you will, of the quality framework. Now, something termed ASCO Certified.

Now, my understanding is there's a set of measures that are continuous with what was in QOPI, but then some emphasis on pathways, but then some more patient-centric measures were brought into that. What was the catalyst to move to the next generation quality framework, and what characterizes what's in the ASCO Certified approach?

Bob Miller:

So, I think you've hit the highlights there, Jeff, that ASCO Certified is a more comprehensive program that reflects practice transformation. It had some roots in CMS programs that have been piloted. As well as the native ASCO QOPI program, but it wasn't just quality measures. It was, yes, there's a suite of quality measure requirements that will look at whether practices have achieved certain markers for the delivery of care or avoiding the overuse of certain less valuable or lower valuable interventions.

But it also involves following pathways. It involves things like making sure that there is access for patients 24/7 to the practice, that patients are not just directed to the emergency room. And as we know, oncology patients are very unwell, and they require after-hours care frequently. So, that whole practice transformation is part of ASCO Certified.

And then, of course, there's the patient-reported outcome/patient satisfaction aspects that we've known for far too long. What the doctor thinks is actually being experienced by the patient who's going through cancer treatment is oftentimes very, very wrong. It's often underestimated, the extent of the toxicity that patients experience.

So, these type of programs, ASCO Certified, and some of these others, they have an important component of having patient measurement in that where patients can express what their experience of care has been. And again, the hope is really that there will be a comprehensive transformation of care at the practice level, and this automation will help deliver that.

Jeff Elton:

So, the way you framed it, and even as I had read more of the specifics of the approach, but the way you've framed it and expressed that patient experience, and then the patient, as well as the physiological disease-associated outcomes, is actually an important set of things to measure. And not data that's easily accessible today.

There aren't readily available third-party sources. Sometimes, there's institutional own, and sometimes there's a piece of research that may measure it and almost have people consent into something that looks like a short registry model to collect some data comparable to that. But it's not a standard set of what's integrated around a practice today in a way that's so accessible that they can direct it to their own decision-making, and care design, and staffing models, and things of that nature.

So, I could imagine that if that could be automated, that could actually be exceptionally valuable. Also, it could open up, just the data itself could open up some new areas of research that have probably been quite difficult to accomplish.

Bob Miller:

Yes, I think it goes without saying that we've done a fairly poor job to date in capturing the patient experience that should be integral to understanding outcomes that are important to patients. Whether that's functional status, whether it's time out of the clinic, so you're not spending all of your time getting infusions and so forth.

And we're good at measuring tumor-specific endpoints like the progression of a disease or the shrinkage or growth of a specific lesion on a CT scan. But historically, less good than understanding how that patient is experiencing those things. And these kinds of programs will help do that.

Jeff Elton:

So, CancerLinQ itself really automated things in the former QOPI framework, or actually even the current QOPI framework, in some ways that you indicated really lower burden on the individual practices to engage in QOPI measurement and participation, based on what you're seeing.

And I know you're at the beginning of a process of making a translation between automated QOPI to potentially automated ASCO Certified. But given the nature of that certified framework, are you optimistic about the ability to make that as easy to implement and as low burden as possible as the work you've been able to do and accomplish within CancerLinQ around QOPI itself?

Bob Miller:

Yeah, absolutely, Jeff. The heart of CancerLinQ is the connection to the data that the practices are producing as part of care that has historically been the electronic health record, where transactions are captured and transmitted to CancerLinQ. But that will have to be other data sources that are equally important. And I think that's something that we expect to see more things coming to that framework to be able to get a more complete picture of the patient care.

So, the automation is the only way to do it. There's simply no way that any of this data can be entered manually. We know that one of the biggest causes of physician burnout is indeed the administrative burden of entering the same data over and over again in different electronic systems. And so, we adhere to one of the basic principles of informatics, which is, enter data once, use it many times.

Jeff Elton:

Could not agree more. And in a future one, we'll talk about TrialLink and some of the work that we've done in digital trial solution, with the whole idea, if it's electronically available, no one should be entering that again. The only thing you're doing is opening up potential for errors and other things as well as taking away time from the patient at the end of the day.

So, I know that CancerLinQ itself has approached about a hundred participating practices and sites, and I know there are still practices. I think you've had two recently join. You have a couple more that are moving through and moving towards confirmation.

If you were to excite what, as people think about that process, think about becoming part of the CancerLinQ network, what's their 1, 2, 3 top motivations? And what does the decision process look like for them? Who inside those practice entities becomes the endorser? And I think, I'm assuming, like most clinical entities, there's a little bit of a collaborative consensus process among some principles before that kind of decision can be made.

Bob Miller:

Sure. So, let me take both parts of that question. So in terms of what brings practices and cancer centers to CancerLinQ in the first place. Historically, it has been the things that we've been talking about already, which is the ability to measure the quality of care that they're rendering. Whether or not they formally participate in the QOPI program or not, the data that they get out of CancerLinQ to show them the type of performance they have on these measures is oftentimes the number one or number two reason that practices come to us.

We know that their electronic health record systems, the reports they get out of those, do a relatively poor job of that. And so that's where we are able to deliver these reports and dashboards to them to show them that. And many go on to continue to the QOPI Certification, and we expect the ASCO Certified in the future.

We have also had a lot of practices become interested in what we are offering because of the promise of some of these additional tools that a lot of these things, as you know, Jeff, have been on our drawing boards for a long time. We look forward to bringing some of those out. But just as an example, we just, in the last month, rolled out a new FDA approvals feature within the CancerLinQ SmartLink platform, as we call it.

And this basically alerts practices that they may have patients that are eligible, that they may not be aware of. They may be eligible for a newly approved FDA therapy. It's so hard to keep current with all of the FDA approvals, dozens and dozens of drugs over the last few years. And many of them are based on very specific biomarkers. And the data gets lost sometimes in the EHR, and so-

Jeff Elton:

Label expansions, label modifications, sometimes even label reductions, actually.

Bob Miller:

Right. Exactly. Exactly. So, one of the tools, this is just an example, one of the tools that we have built and is available to our subscribers now does just that. It shows them patients that might be prescribed this particular drug. It doesn't practice medicine for them. It basically says, "Think about this, because now the FDA has approved it."

In terms of your question about how does the process work or who do we talk to? So lots of times when we either approach or are approached by a practice, the first people we talk to are the doctors, the oncologists who take care of the patients. Most often that is the medical oncologists or hematologists-oncologists.

But we certainly, in integrated cancer centers, in particular, talk to GYN oncologists, to radiation oncologists, and some surgeons. They're often the ones that when they see what we do, understand our vision, can see where we've come over the last few years.

They're the ones that are most interested in moving forward. But it's a big undertaking. We have to connect to their electronic health record. We've figured out the way from a technology standpoint to do that with 10 different EHRs. But we still have to go through a number of approvals from their IT side, from their security privacy side.

We take the responsibility of safeguarding protected health information that the practices send to us to deliver these tools and services. We take that as our highest priority to safeguard that and make sure that all relevant rules and regulations, federal, state law, HIPAA, everything else that applies is safeguarded as our highest priority.

And that takes some discussion with practices for them to have the confidence in us that we can do that. So once we get past that point and there's sort of executive leadership sign off, then we execute a business associate agreement, participation agreement with the practices. And that governs our relationship going forward.

Jeff Elton:

So it's a complex process. Those are the stakeholders I would expect to be involved. But it sounds like the process itself becomes a bit of a solemn commitment on both sides to enter into it. You're safeguarding and delivering them something that will change how they will practice, and information and data that they're going to find of value. So I appreciate that description.

You said earlier that there may be, through both QOPI Certification, but I would imagine as we go into this broader framework of ASCO Certified, reimbursement advantages or individual payer advantages that may come from the recognition a payer may grant to the standard of care that's being practiced.

As you think about the world of value-based care, and I almost feel like I should put air quotes around that because I actually, all the way back in 2015, '16, I wrote extensively about that, and now I'm sitting here, and it's 10 years later. I'd probably be writing the same sentences that I wrote in 2016, and still looking at that same future.

But as you kind of think about that particular construct, are there ways that you think that a CancerLinQ entity, making quality easier to practice and generating data, showing that quality realized was achieved, and that quality can be improved over time and the patient experience over time?

Are there things that you believe that entities like a CancerLinQ and an ASCO together, and I'll put this under Bob's personal point of view, rather than you representing any one institution's point of view for the moment-

Bob Miller:

Thank you.

Jeff Elton:

... that if we gather entities that collaborate together, could do with the payer community, that might even help reinforce that, but also improve the position of practices themselves. Because, as you know, staffing levels have kind of gotten more acute. Payments have actually only gone down basis points. It's an important area for making sure that oncological care is truly accessible to everybody. And it's been challenging.

Bob Miller:

It is. And I think that in the last, say, five years, we've had, of course, the additional challenge of the pandemic, which changed a lot of things. But I think in terms of the care transformation, if you think about now we have, through CMS, the Enhancing Oncology Model, EOM, which is a successor to the earlier programs that they had.

And frankly, our colleagues in the federal government are struggling a little bit. There was a radiation oncology model which was supposed to happen and never happened. And I'm sure that's not the end of that. But I guess the point is, it's what I said earlier, we know that the basic fee-for-service reimbursement patterns are going to have to change. It's not sustainable given the cost of cancer care, the cost of drugs, the cost of diagnostics, and other things, to keep doing reimbursement the way that it's been done.

What goes without saying is you need data. You need to know where you are. You need to be able to track where you stand. You need to benchmark your experiences against other care. And that was also the vision of CancerLinQ. CancerLinQ is this mirror, if you will, to the individual practice. It shows what's going on, but it's also sort of the aggregates are a mirror against all of the care that's being rendered around the US. Because with our network now of, what is it, 106 cancer centers and practices, they represent all comers.

They're small, two or three physician groups, all the way up to large academic multi-state medical centers. And so this is the way care is being rendered. This is what these new drugs are doing, these are the outcomes. I think where we need to go and we'll be going is having more cost data, having expense data in that.

We focus largely on the clinical data, which is the most important thing for quality now. I think to your larger question, Jeff, if I'm reading into it a little bit, is we want to be central in this space because we want to be able to show the practices and the payers who are paying for the care, what's really happening and what the opportunities are.

Jeff Elton:

Yeah, I think you definitely got what was both implicit and somewhat explicit in the question. Also, what I'm taking away from your response is we may not know all the models, and we're probably for sure going to have multiple models that will actually probably be operating at the same time coming from different directions. Non-government, semi-government, and governmental initiatives.

But there's a no-regret foundation that having these foundations, having these elements, are all going to be critical components. And if you can't measure it, manage to it. And if it's not comprehensive enough, then you can't enable any kind of program. No matter what the constituent element pieces of that reimbursement program may be.

So, I think this idea that it's a no-regret and a necessary foundation element, and then maybe if you know what the foundation is, you can use that to inform what kind of contracting model to enter into and not enter into. Because there have been some positive and negative experiences around that by different groups as well.

So, last Thursday and Friday ConcertAI and CancerLinQ came together. We have had a long-term relationship of working with each other. I think somewhere probably was quarter three of 2017, some of the agreements went to place and there's working models. So I like to think about this as being somewhat continuous with our past rather than a discontinuity to some of it.

But it's changed in terms of what's there. So for you personally, your personal vantage point, given that you saw the formation of CancerLinQ, and you kind of saw things coming together, what are you looking forward to? And what do you think was the promise inside CancerLinQ that actually this might help catalyze and kind of further accelerate?

Bob Miller:

Yeah, thank you for allowing me to comment on that. So, I think it is clear that many of us who have been working at CancerLinQ or being a part of this initiative that ASCO started now 10 years ago are driven by the passion for the mission. That's really an extension of ASCO's mission, which is to improve the quality of cancer care and enhance research. Enhance discovery of new findings that will benefit patients.

We, at CancerLinQ, have been slowly working toward that over these last nine years. First, by developing this infrastructure to collect the data, understand it, and then deliver it back in the forms that we've been talking about with the quality programs.

But we need to move more quickly. We need to develop more tools because care has gotten only more complicated in the last few years. And the needs of practices are even more acute. I just think back at the beginnings, when we started in 2014, we didn't have, I don't know, how many new drugs were approved in that interval time? What was the role of immunotherapy in that time? It was just getting started. I mean, these foundational changes in the way care is being rendered.

And CancerLinQ wants to be sort of the health technology platform for everybody. We want to be the place where oncologists and others can trust us that we are safeguarding the data, but we're using it to directly improve care in the ways we've talked about. But also, to make new discoveries, to look at data in new ways, and to deliver these next-generation tools.

We haven't really talked about artificial intelligence yet here. But, I mean, that's a place where certainly there's a lot of hype, a lot of interest, a lot of promise, a lot of work to do. And I like to think that we, as CancerLinQ, with our background with ConcertAI, with your company's experience to date. Now that we're together, to do these things together, to deliver these useful tools that are using the best of generative AI and large language models, and so forth, to improve care.

Clinical trials is clearly another area where so much work needs to be done. So many of our practices want to do more with clinical trials, but they can't. The administrative burden is too high. The challenge of finding patients that are eligible for trials that are defined by very narrow biomarker requirements, that's just too difficult.

But we can apply AI. We can apply the technology, even just the regular EHR data that they struggle, sort of aggregating themselves. We can do that. And I think that's the promise that we share. And one of the reasons that CancerLinQ and ConcertAI came together to sort of deliver on that specific promise,

Jeff Elton:

I couldn't have said it better. I think that's a great articulation of why the organizations came together. I have one last question, and then I kind of let us close out and see if you have any comments you'd like to make.

But one last question here, which is, CancerLinQ itself, we're talking about some of the technology-delivered services that were provided back to practices.

But it also represented a very unique research asset in the industry, both for some of ASCO's own research and the discovery technology layer that sits on top of some of the data that had been used by the ASCO Certified working group team to validate measures.

But it's very unusual, both in terms of size and composition. Can you say a little bit more about the CancerLinQ data itself and some of what you think really differentiates it?

Bob Miller:

Sure. So the CancerLinQ database now, there's almost 7 million patients that are part of CancerLinQ that we've aggregated the data from these last... since 2016, since our first practice went live with CancerLinQ. And this, first of all, represents care from across the US. We have patients in all 50 states and in DC and US territories. It represents practice sites that are diverse. As I said earlier, it's small community practices, large hospital health systems, big academic centers, and CCN, so forth centers.

So there's the diversity of care that we see, and this is the diversity of the population. So these are... When you look at sort of the types of patients that are in our database, these are the patients as they are being treated in these centers. So it's representative of the US population when it comes to socioeconomic status, racial and ethnic composition, and other social determinants of health.

So, what we've been able to do with this data, since 2016, we've made tumor-site specific datasets and now pan-cancer datasets available to research customers across the ecosystem. That's part of the partnership between CancerLinQ and ConcertAI to help deliver those data sets.

And we've had a growing number of publications. All of these are listed on their CancerLinQ.org website that show where these are at major scientific meetings, like the ASCO annual meetings, San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, Quality Symposium, and so forth. They basically show interesting things about care.

I'm just thinking of some really quick examples. Recent work was looking at an interesting population of patients. It's specifically younger patients with multiple myeloma. So this is not a disease you think of typically as occurring in young adult populations. But one of our research groups published several papers now looking at this population of second malignancies and other characteristics about that population.

And you can only do that in a population-type model like CancerLinQ because any one center is just not going to see that many 41-year-olds with myeloma. Another example, our group, with some external collaborators from the University of North Carolina, we published a paper looking at the early days of COVID. How were patients with cancer being affected? What was their risk of testing positive for COVID? What were the risk factors based on the tumor type, the type of treatment they received and so forth.

So, two examples of the type of research that is possible. And we intend to continue to deliver these research data sets again across the ecosystem from ASCO members, ASCO member organizations, CancerLinQ practices, government nonprofits, as well as life sciences companies.

Jeff Elton:

Personally, I've always appreciate your description and appreciate the examples. I think given that it is Pan EMR and community settings, regional systems, NCI designated leading academic centers, there really is no other source that actually has that heterogeneity.

And even, I would submit, representativeness, and I know that there's a real commitment to expanding it. And I think I couldn't be more pleased that even as we came together, there's an ongoing relationship with ASCO itself where we're going to continue to make sure that we're powering even more ASCO research.

In fact, we're going to work even more closely with them to make sure that ASCO-aligned investigators and research continue to have ongoing access to that. Which we think is an incredibly important part of a community responsibility for doing that. So, I think it has always been a very unique aspect, and as we talked about it, data underpins the ability to do quality.

It underpins the ability to actually do prospective clinical research and take the burden off identification of patients for clinical trial eligibility. Which has also been part of the vision that CancerLinQ had for some time. So we're super happy to kind of fulfill that vision as well.

So Bob, I think you're right. You identified other topics here. So we'll do this one as a down payment to future conversations. And you're also right, artificial intelligence and even that word, "generative to AI," will come in.

In fact, I was with the teams earlier, and we were sketching out a little bit of what that looks like. So we'll have some future illustrations, but I think there's incredible potential there and just accelerating the cycles of insights and ultimately value for patients that can be generated off that.

Thanks so much for doing this, and I look so much forward to having you as a colleague here in the coming years.

Bob Miller:

Great. Thank you. Likewise. Likewise, Jeff. Thank you so much.

Jeff Elton:

So Bob, thank you so much for being part of the ConcertAI podcast. It's such a pleasure to have you here. I know and appreciate all the different areas that, both in the context of your CancerLinQ work, your ASCO work, and your prior work, and the impact it's kind of had on the field. It's been so great to hear so much of that come out here. We're going to be advancing the next generation quality of solutions, and I'm sure a range of other innovations are going to come out of the work in that area.

Thank you so much for listening to the podcast today. If you want to learn more about ConcertAI initiatives, please visit us at www.concertai.com. Wherever you are, good morning, good afternoon, and good night.