What Pharma Brands and Their Agency Partners Need to Know—and Why It Matters at the Point of Care
By Amy Pecile
Cancer care is advancing faster than most can process. ASCO recently underscored that reality in two ways: At its Annual Meeting, the organization showcased plenary data that oncologists are already calling some of the most consequential findings in years. And earlier this year, ASCO published its first update to its patient to healthcare professional (HCP) communication guidelines since 2017, laying out a new standard for how oncology conversations should happen. Together, these developments point to the same conclusion: the conversation between patient and HCP has never mattered more. For healthcare marketers, that presents both a challenge and an opportunity.
For the estimated 18.6 million cancer survivors in the U.S., and the millions more who will receive a diagnosis this year, what happens in the exam room can shape everything that follows. As treatment decisions become more personalized and scientifically complex, helping patients understand their options, and helping HCPs communicate them effectively, has become increasingly important.
A New Playbook for the Patient–HCP Conversation
Earlier this year, ASCO published an update to its foundational guidelines on patient–HCP communication in oncology in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, separate from, but highly relevant to, the conversations happening at the Annual Meeting. It represents one of the most comprehensive evidence reviews the field has seen on this topic: a multidisciplinary panel drew on 73 studies, including 54 systematic reviews and 19 randomized controlled trials, to chart what effective communication in cancer care looks like today.2
The guidelines cover the full continuum of care, from the first diagnosis conversation through end-of-life planning. But several themes stand out as particularly meaningful for patients and the HCPs who care for them.
Treatment decisions require real dialogue, not one-way delivery. The guidelines call on HCPs to discuss treatment options in a way that balances patient hope with an honest assessment of likely outcomes, and to position patients as the ultimate decision-makers. This isn’t just good bedside manner. Research shows that strong patient–HCP communication is associated with measurable improvements in medication adherence and patient satisfaction,2 outcomes that matter enormously in conditions where treatment consistency directly affects survival.
The whole person belongs in the conversation. One of the most striking additions to the updated guidelines is a direct recommendation for HCPs to explore how a patient’s cultural background, religious beliefs, or spiritual values shape their care preferences and end-of-life decisions. This is an acknowledgment that cancer care doesn’t happen in a clinical vacuum, and that the HCP who understands their patient’s values is better positioned to help them navigate the hardest choices.
Interprofessional communication is patient safety. Cancer care is rarely delivered by a single HCP. The updated guidelines emphasize that communication among oncology team members, including nurses, pharmacists, navigators and palliative care specialists, must be treated with the same rigor as the HCP-to-patient conversation itself. Team miscommunication doesn’t just create friction; it creates risk.
The bottom line from ASCO’s expert panel: effective communication is not a soft skill. It is a clinical competency, and it requires the same institutional investment in time, training and resources as any other part of cancer care delivery.
New Treatments, New Conversations
While the communication guideline sets a new standard for how HCPs talk with patients, the 2026 ASCO Annual Meeting fundamentally shifted what they need to talk about. This year’s plenary session delivered what many in attendance are calling the most practice-changing data in years, across three cancer types that together affect hundreds of thousands of patients annually.
In pancreatic cancer, the phase 3 RASolute 302 trial reported that daraxonrasib, a daily pill that blocks the growth-driving RAS gene pathway, nearly doubled median overall survival compared to chemotherapy in patients with previously treated metastatic disease—from 6.6 months to 13.2 months. Pancreatic cancer has been one of oncology’s most stubborn challenges, with survival rates largely unchanged for decades. Patient-reported outcomes from the trial also showed that daraxonrasib was significantly better at delaying deterioration in pain and quality of life compared to chemotherapy. For patients and families who have long faced this diagnosis with limited options, these results may fundamentally change conversations about what treatment can offer.3
In breast cancer, the OPTIMA trial presented phase 3 evidence that two-thirds of patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer can safely forgo chemotherapy when guided by a genomic test. Using the Prosigna gene expression test to measure tumor biology, the trial showed that patients with low-risk scores had comparable outcomes with hormone therapy alone. As lead investigator RC Stein observed, “many patients can safely avoid chemotherapy without compromising their outcomes,” sparing them the physical and emotional burden of treatment they may not need. The Prosigna test is commercially available now, meaning these conversations can begin immediately, but only if HCPs and patients are equipped to have them.4
In lung cancer, the HARMONI-6 trial showcased ivonescimab, a bispecific antibody that simultaneously blocks two tumor-promoting pathways, PD-1 and VEGF, in a single molecule. The trial showed this approach outperformed a PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy in squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A global trial is underway to confirm results across broader patient populations.5 Also in lung cancer, the LIBRETTO-432 trial reported that adjuvant selpercatinib demonstrated an 83% reduction in the risk of recurrence or death for patients with early-stage RET fusion-positive NSCLC, with investigators calling it a new standard of care for this molecularly defined group.6
Across all three areas, the theme is the same: the era of precision medicine is no longer approaching—it is here. Biomarker testing, genomic profiling and molecularly targeted therapies are actively reshaping who gets what treatment and why. But these advances only reach patients when HCPs have the tools to explain them clearly and patients have the knowledge to ask the right questions.
Why This Matters at the Point of Care
The convergence of these two ASCO storylines, better communication standards and faster-moving science, points to a clear and urgent need: patients and HCPs must have better tools to have better conversations at the moment care decisions are being made. As oncology care becomes increasingly personalized, patients are being asked to understand more complex information about biomarkers, genomic testing, treatment sequencing and risk-benefit tradeoffs. At the same time, HCPs face growing pressure to communicate these concepts clearly, efficiently and in ways that align with individual patient values and preferences.
This creates a significant opportunity for pharmaceutical brands and their agency partners to support both audiences with tools and content that help patients and HCPs navigate increasingly complex treatment decisions. Whether helping patients better understand their options or equipping HCPs to facilitate shared decision-making, these efforts can improve the quality of healthcare conversations.
The point of care remains one of the most influential environments for these interactions because it is where clinical evidence, patient questions and treatment decisions converge. Delivering relevant education at that moment can help reinforce understanding, increase confidence in treatment discussions and support more informed decision-making.
Ultimately, this is where the gap closes or widens. Educational materials that translate the latest science into patient-appropriate language, and that equip HCPs to have more informed, more empathetic and more personalized conversations, are not supplementary to oncology care. According to ASCO’s own guidelines, they are part of delivering it.
The science is ready. The question is whether the conversations will be, too.
Sources
- American Society of Clinical Oncology. ASCO Annual Meeting 2026. Chicago, May 29–June 2, 2026. https://www.asco.org/meeting
- Gilligan T, Bohlke K, et al. “Patient-Clinician Communication: ASCO Guideline Update.” Journal of Clinical Oncology. Published March 10, 2026. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO-26-00118
- Wolpin BM, et al. “Daraxonrasib vs. chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Phase 3 RASolute 302 study.” Presented at ASCO 2026 Plenary Session, May 31, 2026. Published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2605555
- Stein RC, et al. “OPTIMA: A randomized trial of genomic test-directed chemotherapy de-escalation in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.” Presented at ASCO 2026 Annual Meeting. https://meetings.asco.org/abstracts-presentations/240836
- Yuan Y, et al. “HARMONI-6: Ivonescimab vs. pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in squamous non-small cell lung cancer.” Presented at ASCO 2026 Annual Meeting. https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-center/ivonescimab-may-improve-survival-squamous-nsclc
- Goldman JW, et al. “LIBRETTO-432: Adjuvant selpercatinib in stage II-IIIA RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer.” Presented at ASCO 2026 Annual Meeting. https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-center/adjuvant-selpercatinib-reduces-disease-recurrence-lung-cancer
- Wagle NS, et al. “Cancer Treatment and Survivorship Statistics, 2025.” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. Published May 30, 2025. American Cancer Society. https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3322/caac.70011
