Congress Navigator

Longitudinal view

Compare across congresses

Anchor on a single tracked question and see how HCP positions shift from one congress to the next — what strengthened, what softened, and where new divergence emerged.

Illustrative synthetic data for prototype demonstration — not real clinical findings.

1 · Choose an analytical question

Comparison is anchored on a KBQ or KIQ tracked across congresses — not on whole-congress metrics.

2 · Select congresses to compare

Choose two or three. Each is an independent sample of anonymised HCP conversations.

Key Business Question

What is the expert consensus regarding the clinical significance of the study’s primary endpoint results?

What changed — EHA 2026 to ESMO 2026

The share of supportive positions was lower at ESMO 2026 (47%, n=15) than at EHA 2026 (63%, n=16) — a 16 point decrease in post-congress movement.

  • Overall support softened at the later congress, with a larger share expressing mixed rather than clearly supportive positions.
  • Durability of benefit and patient selection featured more prominently as reservations in later conversations.
  • The core recognition of the endpoint as clinically meaningful persisted throughout.

Differences reflect distinct conversation samples at each congress and are described as observed shifts, not causal effects. Illustrative synthetic data.

Quantitative comparison

EHA 2026

Jun 2026

n=16

  • Supportive1063%
  • Mixed425%
  • Unconvinced213%

ESMO 2026

Oct 2026

n=15

  • Supportive747%
  • Mixed533%
  • Unconvinced320%

Supporting evidence by congress

Inspect the HCP evidence behind each congress separately. Base-sample evidence links through to the underlying transcript.

EHA 2026

HCP 01

Supportive

Medical Oncologist · Germany

“The effect size here is hard to ignore — for the patients I see this is a genuinely meaningful result.”
Profile

HCP 03

Mixed

Breast Cancer Specialist · United Kingdom

“The result is encouraging, but I would want to know which patients benefit most before changing practice.”
Profile

HCP 06

Unconvinced

Breast Cancer Specialist · United Kingdom

“I am not convinced the incremental benefit is large enough to change how I practise.”
Profile

ESMO 2026

ESMO · HCP 01

Supportive
“The effect size here is hard to ignore — for the patients I see this is a genuinely meaningful result.”

Illustrative sample · transcript not available in this prototype

ESMO · HCP 02

Mixed
“The result is encouraging, but I would want to know which patients benefit most before changing practice.”

Illustrative sample · transcript not available in this prototype

ESMO · HCP 03

Unconvinced
“For now I would stay with our established pathway until the data are more mature.”

Illustrative sample · transcript not available in this prototype