I had promised myself that I would reduce my posting to HC for...

I had promised myself that I would reduce my posting to HC for a while ... then I thought I would give both @AlCp and @SumRando a quick response, drawing upon my experience when submitting abstracts and their accompanying conference papers.

At international events such as this, there is a ‘call for papers’. Now please note, each submission is scrutinised by a panel of ‘specialists’ in that field. Believe me, this is usually highly competitive for many reasons. The abstract will be the first paperwork required, and this may often be enough to gain an invite. Other times the review panel will want to see the actual paper, before it will be accepted, but this is not as common.

Yes @SumRando , the abstract is sometimes used as a ‘place holder’ as you say, because the whole data set may not yet be available at the final submission date for abstracts. Several times I have submitted the abstract, to meet the deadline, before my/our conference paper was actually complete. Now, I don’t work in a field that is related to oncology, but I believe you will find that this is common practice.

Also, and very importantly, I or my colleagues will usually include any new data we have available, during the actual presentation. In my field we would have to have a very good reason not to share our latest findings. After all, this is the reason we are presenting. Of course, IMU may not share ‘new data’ for any number of reasons, but one would certainly be the many challenges of conducting mid-trial data cuts.

I hope this sheds some light on the process. I am certainly looking to see some new data around the MAST trial, but who knows. Fingers and toes are crossed.