The San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) is one of the largest gatherings where researchers, patients, and drug developers come together to present, discuss and debate the latest innovations in breast cancer research and patient care. As in years past, SABCS 2025, held December 9th through 12th, delivered exciting updates, which I was excited to hear about and review.
Listening to the presentations and engaging with researchers, scientists, and patients raised an important question: how do we communicate findings and data in ways that advance patient care while also fostering trust and meaningful relationships between industry and community?
No one-size-fits-all digital solution
Some of the most recent developments in data and research presented in San Antonio are worth recognizing, not only for what they found, but also for what they can teach us. For example, the YES (Young, Empowered & Strong) study demonstrated the potential of a mobile health (mHealth) app to address quality of life issues and reduce key symptoms in young breast cancer survivors.
While the study presented promising information for this group of patients, it also highlighted some persistent challenges, indicating that there is no one-size-fits-all digital solution. First, it highlighted the continued existence of a digital divide, indicating that equitable patient access to digital devices cannot be assumed. The YES study also pointed out valuably that while improvements were seen in some areas of treatment as a result of mobile technology use, several menopausal and psychological challenges for patients remained that were not significantly addressed.
More information is needed
Data from the oral SERD study are exciting. The study validates the oral SERD (Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader) approach and sets the stage for further development of novel SERDs and combination strategies. This represents a potentially transformative advance in endocrine therapy for HR+ HER2‑breast cancer. While the study’s findings are promising, longer follow-up, survival data, and subgroup analyses are still needed. In addition, data from a hormone therapy in BRCA1/2 carriers study suggest that while hormone therapy may not increase breast cancer risk, treatment remains highly individualized and requires personalized care and shared decision-making to be as effective as possible.
The Cleveland Clinic’s early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) vaccine trials showed promising immune responses and good safety in small studies. These preliminary results are promising, but larger trials are necessary to confirm any real clinical benefit.
Finally, the results of a study on neoadjuvant strategies with radiation + Keytruda showed promise in shrinking tumors and boosting immune responses before surgery. These findings challenge the traditional surgery-first paradigm and further support more personalized care. But these approaches remain early and complex, and are not yet standard.
Wellness doesn’t have to be complicated
While early-phase, the results of trials on acupuncture and integrative therapies suggest that these approaches may help survivors with cognitive symptoms (“chemo‑brain”) and improve their quality of life with minimal side effects. These studies highlight that integrative care can complement, not compete with, conventional treatment.
The broader adoption of these approaches will require clinicians to be aware of, sensitive to, and supportive of personalized wellness. Like with other therapies, there’s no one-size-fits-all approach, but these promising findings remind us that wellness doesn’t have to be complicated, overwhelming or inaccessible.
How do we better communicate scientific updates?
The researchers, scientists, funders, and patients who participate in these studies are critical to advancing care and creating a healthier tomorrow. I’m honored to be part of this ecosystem.
This year’s symposium has also prompted me to reflect: How do we best communicate, rather than commercialize, scientific updates? How can we inform, not inflate? How do we continue to educate without exaggerating? What will allow us to better inspire, not deflate?
While thousands of abstracts are presented each year, only a small fraction ultimately changes clinical practice. So, what can we do to ensure they receive a broader hearing? I believe that as researchers, scientists, and physicians who rely on communicating the promise and potential of our work and its ability to improve patients’ lives, we should follow these four communication imperatives.
- Prioritize the heart of the story, not the headlines. Headline-first news stories are the norm for those consuming news. While the temptation may be to present your work in the best possible light, including caveats (“early stage,” “with limitations”) that accurately convey the current state of a study or research program can help curb misinformation and limit premature hype.
- Encourage dialogue. It’s crucial to establish connections with disease communities to foster collaborative partnerships that facilitate improved communication and outcomes. Intentionally creating channels for questions or feedback on published studies fosters transparency between the industry and the community.
- Non-updates are still updates. Patients who are waiting for effective treatments rely on honest and open communication to base their decisions on. However, it’s essential to recognize that both positive and negative findings contribute to innovation. Breaking down wins and losses in clear language helps bridge the trust gap between the industry and the community.
- Support for replication and wellness research. Currently, there is no large, dedicated Federal program funding large-scale repeat clinical trials solely for confirmation purposes. Greater investment in replicating research in prevention, while advancing breakthrough therapies, could help actualize a whole-person health approach.
The proceedings of SABCS 2025 and the research presented remind us that progress in cancer treatment and care is iterative, collaborative, and deeply human. They also emphasized that, even as we celebrate exciting breakthroughs, we must recognize that honestly communicating the nuances and limitations of research is also our responsibility. As communicators, that is how we translate the most promising research into meaningful, equitable patient care.
