The Cracking Cancer Podcast

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon reunites with patient advocate Samantha Murrell and science communicator Dr. Rob Swanda to tackle some of the most persistent, widespread myths and misconceptions in oncology. The team explores the emotional and practical realities of navigating a cancer diagnosis, addressing online health claims, and clearing up common misunderstandings about treatments, genetics, and screening.
Dr. Kyle and Samantha break down why pathology and diagnostic scans are not always straightforward, how "Stage IV" and "terminal" are often conflated, and why modern palliative chemotherapy looks vastly different from treatments 30 years ago. They also address dangerous online misinformation—such as the claim that biopsies or mammograms spread cancer, or that alternative therapies alone can cure metastatic disease. Finally, the panel emphasizes the critical role of open communication with your care team, particularly regarding potential interactions between targeted therapies and over-the-counter supplements.
 
Key Takeaways:
Biopsy Diagnostics Aren't Always Clear-Cut
Reframing "Stage IV" and "Terminal"
Modern Chemotherapy Is Not "30-Year-Old Toxin"
Debunking Screening and Biopsy Misconceptions
Supplement-Drug Interactions Are Real
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
0:00 Welcome & Introductions: The Myth-Busting Episode
2:10 Myth 1: Diagnoses Are Always Clear-Cut (Pathology & Biopsies)
6:45 Myth 2: Stage IV Means Immediate "End-of-Life"
11:20 Myth 3: Chemotherapy Is the Same Harsh "Toxin" It Was 30 Years Ago
17:15 Myth 4: If One Treatment Fails, You're Out of Options
22:40 Myth 5: Clinical Trial Participants Are "Guinea Pigs" Getting Placebos
29:15 Myth 6: Cancer Is Always Inherited / "No Family History Means I'm Safe"
35:00 Myth 7: Mammograms and Biopsies Spread Cancer
42:15 The Danger of Online "Cure" Claims & Herb-Drug Interactions
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon is joined by breast surgical oncologist Dr. Monique Gary (Dr. Mo) and Stage IV metastatic breast cancer advocate Lindsay Campbell. The panel unpacks the complex and often overwhelming world of breast cancer surgery, moving step-by-step from the initial consultation through the operating room experience to post-operative recovery.
Lindsay shares her personal surgical path—navigating the emotional frustration of an 11-week scheduling delay due to tumor growth and operating room availability, which forced a pivot from a planned double mastectomy with DIEP flap reconstruction to an immediate lumpectomy. Dr. Mo demystifies surgical decision-making, explaining how tumor grade, genetic mutations (such as BRCA1/2), and hormone/HER2 status shape surgical choices. The panel also covers practical OR preparations—such as nerve blocks, pre-medication for nausea, surgical drain management, and handling "time toxicity"—offering actionable insights for patients preparing for their own surgical journeys.
 
Key Takeaways:
Lumpectomy vs. Mastectomy
The Role of Genetic Status in Surgical Choice
Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy & Axillary Management
Surgical Delays and "Two-Stage" Reconstruction
Nerve Blocks and Post-Operative Pain Management
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
0:00 Welcome & Introductions: Dr. Mo Gary and Lindsay Campbell
2:15 Lindsay’s Journey: From Biopsy to the First Surgical Consultation
6:30 The Mastectomy vs. Lumpectomy Decision Matrix
10:45 Food Analogies in Oncology: Popcorn Kernels, Avocados, and Margins
15:20 Handling Surgical Delays: Switching Protocols for Grade 3 Tumors
20:30 What Happens in the OR: Pre-op, Nerve Blocks, and Music Selections
26:15 Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsies and Axillary Staging
31:40 Managing Post-Op Drains, Pain Alarms, and Posture Recovery
37:50 AYA Considerations: Fertility, Body Image, and Peer Advocacy
42:15 Parting Advice: How to Ask "How Can We Be More Sure?"
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon is joined by breast radiologist Dr. Deepa Sheth and Stage IV metastatic breast cancer advocate Lindsay Campbell. Lindsay shares her personal story of being diagnosed at age 38 after facing nearly a year of medical delays. Despite noticing visible skin dimpling and localized pain, she was repeatedly turned away because she was under the traditional screening age of 40 and lacked a felt mass due to deep chest-wall tumor placement. It was only after her father was diagnosed with breast cancer and identified as BRCA-positive that she was able to secure a diagnostic workup.
Dr. Sheth and Lindsay break down the mechanics of screening versus diagnostic imaging, explaining how 2D/3D mammography, targeted ultrasound, and breast MRI function together. Dr. Sheth highlights the critical importance of free risk-assessment tools—such as the Tyrer-Cuzick model—which can identify high-risk individuals (>20% lifetime risk) who qualify for screening starting as early as age 30. The panel also tackles the federal mandate surrounding dense breast tissue, insurance coverage nuances, and why patients must trust their intuition when advocating for timely care.
 
Key Takeaways:
Screening vs. Diagnostic Mammography
The Tyrer-Cuzick High-Risk Threshold
Dense Breast Tissue as an Independent Risk Factor
Pain and Skin Dimpling Are Clinical Signals
Self-Advocacy and Second Opinions
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
More info on the NCCN patient guildelines can be found here:
https://www.nccn.org/patientresources/patient-resources/guidelines-for-patients
 
Chapters:
0:00 Welcome & Introductions: Lindsay Campbell and Dr. Deepa Sheth
2:10 Lindsay’s Story: Dimpling, Delays, and a Late Diagnosis at 38
6:45 Screening Guidelines vs. Young Adult Symptoms
11:20 Calculating Your Risk: Using the Tyrer-Cuzick Model
15:30 Screening vs. Diagnostic Mammograms: What Happens in Clinic
21:00 Dense Breast Tissue: The White-on-White Imaging Challenge
27:15 What to Expect During an Ultrasound and MRI (and Avoiding Silver-Thread Leggings!)
35:40 High-Risk Genetics: BRCA Inadvertently Passed Through the Paternal Line
42:00 Advocating for Yourself: Overcoming Medical Delays and Seeking Second Opinions
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon sits down in person with science communicator Rob Swanda, PhD, to tackle one of the most persistent and anxiety-inducing topics in oncology: Does sugar feed cancer? Rob and Kyle break down the biochemistry behind how the body processes carbohydrates, deconstruct online misconceptions, and address the real-world harm caused when cancer patients starve themselves of vital nutrition out of fear.
Rob explains the Warburg Effect—a phenomenon where cancer cells preferentially use glucose via fast, anaerobic glycolysis to generate rapid cellular energy—and clarifies why cell culture findings in a Petri dish do not translate to human metabolism. Dr. Kyle discusses human glucose homeostasis, highlighting how the liver and muscles maintain steady blood sugar through gluconeogenesis and glycogen breakdown regardless of dietary intake. The hosts issue a stark warning against extreme restrictions that lead to cancer cachexia (muscle and weight wasting) and explain why, for patients without uncontrolled diabetes, enjoying food and maintaining caloric intake is far more vital than cutting out sugars.
 
Key Takeaways:
The Warburg Effect Misconception
The Body Regulates Blood Sugar Automatically
The Danger of Cancer Cachexia
When Sugar Does Matter (Uncontrolled Diabetes)
A Calorie is a Calorie During Treatment
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
0:00 Welcome & Intro: Addressing the "Sugar Feeds Cancer" Myth
2:15 Biochemistry 101: Deconstructing the Warburg Effect
6:40 Blood Sugar Regulation: Why the Body Makes Its Own Glucose
11:50 Metabolic Syndromes vs. Direct Tumor Growth
16:20 The Real Danger: Malnourishment, Starvation, and Cachexia
21:10 Preclinical Mouse Models vs. Human Diets
28:30 Evaluating the Clinical Data: Why Ketogenic Studies Struggle
35:15 Restoring Quality of Life: Why You Should Eat Your Ice Cream
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, science communicator Rob Swanda, PhD, is joined by glioblastoma researcher Dr. Julio Sanchez, a postdoctoral fellow at UCLA. Julio pulls back the curtain on early-stage cancer research, shedding light on the quiet, rigorous, and often high-failure world of preclinical science that takes place long before a new drug ever reaches a clinical trial.
Julio details the transition from in vitro cell line work to complex in vivo mouse models, explaining why glioblastoma remains one of the most notoriously aggressive and difficult-to-treat brain cancers. He highlights his lab's recent publication in Cancer Research, which introduced next-generation, CRISPR-engineered mouse models that far better mirror human glioblastoma pathology and the tumor immune microenvironment compared to traditional cell lines developed in the 1970s. The pair also explore the rise of therapeutic mRNA vaccines and organoid platforms, and discuss why the scientific method is fundamentally a mindset built on resilience, critical thinking, and iterative problem-solving.
 
Key Takeaways:
The In Vitro to In Vivo Pipeline
Modernizing Glioblastoma Models
Therapeutic vs. Preventative Vaccines
The Promise of Organoid Platforms
Resilience as a Core Metric
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
00:00 Meet Rob and Julio
02:29 Inside the Lab Pipeline
03:03 Julio Research Focus
04:45 Teamwork in Science
07:42 Cell Lines Explained
11:41 Limits of In Vitro
15:31 From Cells to Mice
17:19 Better GBM Models
22:25 Immunocompetent Mice
25:42 Choosing Mouse Strains
28:07 Organoids as Bridge
31:12 Why Research Takes Time
36:56 Mechanisms and Rigor
40:01 Future of GBM Therapy
47:43 Science as Mindset
50:59 Resilience and Hope
53:36 Trust Science Outreach
57:13 Closing Thanks and Wrap
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon is joined by GI medical oncologist Dr. Chris Lieu (University of Colorado Cancer Center) and Stage IV neuroendocrine rectal cancer patient advocate Bill Thach. Bill brings an incredible, rare perspective—having navigated 11 lines of therapy and participated in 5 distinct clinical trials since his diagnosis in 2018.
Dr. Lieu and Bill break down why clinical trials should be viewed as proactive options starting at diagnosis rather than as "last resorts." They demystify the multi-phase clinical trial pipeline, dispel common myths around "guinea pigs" or placebo controls, and highlight how trial participants gain access to FDA-approved therapies years ahead of the public. The panel also covers the essential role of comprehensive biomarker testing in colorectal and GI cancers—such as KRAS, DLL3, ATM, and Claudin—and highlights game-changing emerging modalities like Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs), Radieligand/Radiopharmaceutical therapies, and homegrown CAR-T cell trials.
 
Key Takeaways:
Early Access Advantage
Debunking the Placebo Myth
The Three Essential Biomarker Questions
Sequencing Strategy Matters
Concierge Level of Monitoring
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
00:00 Welcome to Cracking Cancer
01:55 Bill’s Diagnosis Journey
05:42 When to Consider Trials
08:51 What Trials Really Are
14:07 Finding Trial Options
19:55 Second Opinions Matter
22:46 Trial Logistics and Tradeoffs
29:27 Trial Phases Explained
36:16 Choosing the Right Trial
39:25 Biomarkers in Colorectal Cancer
49:05 Future Therapies on the Horizon
52:54 Final Advice and Wrap Up
 
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this episode of Cracking Cancer, science communicator Rob Swanda, PhD, is joined by virologist and gene therapy researcher Dr. Cole Peters to pull back the curtain on the hidden mechanics of academic cancer funding in the United States. Dr. Peters walks listeners through the pipeline of National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Cancer Institute (NCI) grants—from training awards to multi-year R01 research grants. He exposes the immense administrative burden and fierce competitiveness required to keep basic research labs alive.
The conversation explores the critical distinction between basic research (discovering fundamental biological processes) and translational research (moving lab findings to clinical trials), illustrating how iconic breakthroughs like PCR testing, Keytruda (PD-1 inhibitors), and CRISPR gene editing were all born out of basic research that initially had no direct clinical mandate. Dr. Peters also breaks down recent 2025–2026 administrative policy changes regarding grant funding structures and political oversight of peer review. He provides a stark, first-hand account of how grant freezes, "brain drain," and sudden funding interruptions disrupt mouse models, dismantle research teams, and set scientific momentum back by years.
 
Key Takeaways:
The Engine of American Innovation
Basic vs. Translational Research
The High Bar of Peer Review
Policy Shifts in Grant Oversight
The True Cost of Funding Delays
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
00:00 Welcome to Cracking Cancer01:41 Why Early Funding Matters02:11 How NIH Funding Works04:13 What Makes a Strong Grant11:01 Grant Success Rates and Competition15:33 Why Basic Research Matters18:34 Keytruda and PD-1 Origins23:52 How Grants Get Awarded27:35 Peer Review Changes and Risks33:38 Funding Cuts Hit Labs36:30 Brain Drain and Lost Momentum46:54 Basic Research Breakthroughs PCR50:30 State Funding and Local ROI52:55 Get Involved and Closing
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this solo episode of Cracking Cancer, patient advocate Samantha Murrell and science communicator Rob Swanda, PhD, dive into an unexpected topic in integrative oncology: the potential anti-cancer properties of statins—the most widely prescribed class of cardiovascular medications in the world. Driven by digital discussions around drug repurposing (similar to their recent exploration of GLP-1s), Samantha and Rob explore how cholesterol-lowering drugs might influence oncogenic signaling pathways and complement standard cancer therapies.
Rob breaks down the underlying biochemistry of statins, detailing how they block the HMG-CoA reductase enzyme. This mechanism not only reduces bad LDL cholesterol production but also cuts off the synthesis of isoprenoid lipids. These lipids act as essential molecular anchors that help key oncogenic driver proteins—such as RAS and Rho—attach to cell membranes and send downstream growth signals. The hosts contrast lipophilic versus hydrophilic statins, evaluate retrospective survival data in breast and lung cancer cohorts, and emphasize the critical importance of checking for drug-drug interactions and genetic variants (like the SLCO1B1 transporter gene) before modifying any medication regimen.
 
Key Takeaways:
Beyond Cholesterol Reduction
The Lipophilic vs. Hydrophilic Difference
Biomarker Overlaps (HER2 & EGFR)
The Danger of Pharmacogenomic Toxicity
Association Is Not Causation
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Want to read the papers disussed in this episode yourself? Links are below!
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11912801/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1933287423001630?utm_source=copilot.com
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12170056/
 
 
Chapters:
00:00 Welcome and Mission01:10 Why Statins and Cancer02:01 Cholesterol and Statins 10104:24 Other Cholesterol Drugs06:50 Statins Bad Rap12:06 Mevalonate Pathway and Cancer15:13 HER2 EGFR Connections18:34 What the Studies Show27:37 Why Papers Say More Research30:31 Drug Interactions and Dosing34:04 Genetics and Statin Response41:31 Wrap Up and Next Topics42:29 Outro and Support the Show
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

In this eye-opening episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon is joined by Max Doppelt, founder of Patient Data Vault, to tackle one of the most frustrating aspects of modern oncology: clinical trial exclusion criteria. Max shares the heartbreaking story of his mother, who was diagnosed with EGFR Exon 20 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). After weeks of agonizing screening to access a promising targeted trial, she was rejected over subtle CT scan findings that hinted at—but did not confirm—pneumonitis. That screening failure forced their family to travel to China to obtain a life-saving drug that was not yet accessible to her in the United States.
Dr. Kyle and Max dissect the hidden mechanics of clinical trial design, explaining why trials are often risk-averse, hyper-rigorous experiments designed to isolate variables for FDA approval rather than accommodate real-world complexity. The panel exposes common pitfalls that screen-fail patients—from active brain metastases and strict ECOG performance scores to the "first-line trap," where receiving a single dose of standard chemotherapy permanently disqualifies a patient from frontline trials. They also address "time toxicity"—the dangerous weeks lost in administrative limbo while a patient's cancer progresses—and highlight how platforms like Patient Data Vault use AI to bring total protocol transparency to patients before they waste critical time.
 
Key Takeaways:
The "First-Line" Trap
ECOG Performance Status is Dynamic
Brain Metastases Risk-Aversion
The High Cost of "Time Toxicity"
The US vs. EU Protocol Transparency Gap
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
00:00 Welcome to Cracking Cancer00:59 Meet Max Doppelt01:20 A Trial Rejection Story04:36 Why Exclusion Criteria Exist06:40 Pneumonitis Gray Areas09:58 Common Trial Dealbreakers11:04 Brain Mets and Delays16:29 Lines of Therapy Trap18:56 Finding Frontline Trials23:59 ECOG Performance Status34:25 Labs and Modifiable Factors36:32 Screening Delays and Retesting42:33 Protocol Design and Copy Paste45:25 Transparency and AI Tools55:12 Patient Support and Advocacy59:37 Final Takeaways and Resources
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos

The Ethics and Impacts of Clinical Trial Prediction Markets
In this episode of Cracking Cancer, host Dr. Kyle Concannon is joined by patient advocate Samantha Murrell and science communicator Rob Swanda, PhD, to tackle an unforeseen intersection in modern medicine: the rise of prediction markets on clinical trial outcomes. The panel dissects the recent introduction of prediction markets for FDA regulatory approvals and Phase 3 trial endpoints—including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
The team explores the severe moral and psychological ramifications of treating life-saving medical research like a sports wager. Samantha shares the distressing reality for cancer patients facing a Phase 3 trial, who may now see public financial markets actively "b*****g against" their treatment's success. Dr. Kyle and Rob analyze how these speculative markets risk introducing profound biases into clinical trial measurements, threatening patient enrollment, compromising investigator objectivity, and reducing complex biological discoveries down to binary, short-term financial wagers.
 
Key Takeaways:
The Arrival of Clinical Trial Prediction Markets
The Psychological Toll on Enrolled Patients
Unconscious Bias in Scan Measurement
Erosion of Scientific Nuance
Ethical and Insider Trading Vulnerabilities
 
Want to get more involved with cancer research and support the podcast? Visit the link below: ⬇️ (All proceeds go strictly towards furthering cancer research and supporting this podcast)
Giving.CU.EDU/CrackingCancer 
 
Chapters:
00:00 B*****g On Trials02:47 Patient Advocate Reaction05:03 Hope And Harm09:24 Endpoints Explained11:25 How Trial Data Forms12:40 Bias And Measurement17:29 Insider Info Risks25:01 Threats And Coercion39:04 Negative Trials Still Help47:57 Symptom Bias And Reporting59:07 Better Things To B** On
 
To find out more about supporting the show and research endeavors, please go to the following website: www.crackingcancer.org
 
Attributions
The music track - Progression Pulse - is provided by Denys Brodovskyi through the Attribution 4.0 International License
 
X: (1) Cracking Cancer Podcast (@Cracking_Cancer) / X
IG: Cracking Cancer (@crackingcancerpodcast) • Instagram photos and videos