#AMCCBS: Health Care Leadership, Market Dynamics, and Women’s Oncology

The ACCC 51st Annual Meeting and Cancer Center Business Summit (#AMCCBS) concluded with 3 evocative sessions on Friday, March 7.  

Decision-Making Grounded in Evidence 

The first session of the day, on Evidence-Based Decision-Making in Health Care Management and Leadership which highlighted the importance of leaders asking the right questions, finding the best available evidence, and using these insights to make managerial decisions in the constantly evolving health care landscape. Led by Neel Pathak, DSc, FACHE, assistant professor of practice, at the Heider College of Business, Creighton University, and project administrator at Johns Hopkins Hospital, the session opened with a focus on one key leadership skill—decision making. Pathak emphasized that good decision-making involves trusting the team, hearing everyone’s perspectives, and leaning into data points. He noted that, “A key role of being a leader is making effective decisions; not necessarily always the right decisions.” Applying this approach through a framework like the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis can facilitate collaboration. For example, a shared decision-making model—often used in clinical settings—can be adapted to leadership by ensuring key stakeholders are involved and that mutual respect and understanding guide the decision-making process. This model emphasizes the importance of information sharing, deliberation, and shared ownership, which can lead to decisions that align with both organizational goals and stakeholder values.  

One of the core principles of evidence-based management is using the best available evidence to guide decisions. “Management decisions should be based on a combination of critical thinking and the best available evidence,” Pathak highlighted. In practice, this involves understanding the different levels of evidence, from scientific research to organizational data, and making decisions on a clear, critical appraisal of these sources. The PICO framework—population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes—can serve as a vital tool to distill complex issues into practical, answerable questions. This structured approach helps leaders cut through the noise in everyday discussions, ensuring that they focus on the factors they can control and the evidence that will lead to better outcomes.  

Additionally, leaders must continuously evaluate the relevance and credibility of the evidence they use, recognizing that each decision-making model—whether a SWOT analysis or a cause-and-effect diagram—must be carefully tailored to their specific context. Pathak concluded with, “It is important to involve people who are closest to the process at the execution level. Often we miss that, and those people only hear the solution; they need to be involved in meetings to devise the solution.” 

Competitive Market Dynamics in Oncology 

After a networking break, attendees enjoyed 2 engaging panel discussions, the first of which addressed growth strategies and marketplace differentiators. The panel represented a diverse mix of organizations, varying in size and geographic location, and included the following speakers: Gregory P. Calosso, vice president, Network Development, Department of Business Strategy, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; Jodi Conachen, chief operating officer, Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center; Nick Jaidar, MHA, FACHE, senior director of oncology operations & business development, Oncology Faculty Practice Administrator, University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center; Laura Matthews, MBA, MPH, FACHE, vice president & administrator, Inova Schar Cancer, Inova Fairfax Hospital; and Matt Sturm, partner, ECG Management Consultants. 

Sharing key strategies, the discussion highlighted that the foundation of a cancer center can be based on a variety of relationship and partnership models, all working towards the common goal of improving cancer care for all.  

Calosso from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute emphasized that, “You have to keep the patient and their family at the center of all that we do. That’s the key to success; that’s the Dana Farber way.” Matthews from Inova Schar Cancer added, “We live by the motto of ‘are we delivering the care I would want, or that I would want for one of my loved ones?’ We want to provide that care as close to home as possible, we want to do that by having infrastructure and technology.”  

At Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Conachen described their strategy as focusing on top tier physicians who are industry leaders and subject matter experts. This approach provides support and expands their cancer services across both the main campus and community clinic settings. “Part of our strategy is to hire and recruit great doctors and build programs around them.” The University of Maryland Merlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center applies similar strategies, with a focus on equitable access. Jaidar added, “One of the things we pride ourselves on is our interventional clinical trials with underserved communities.”  

All panelists agreed on the importance of a future shift toward collaboration and partnerships. Providers must be as collaborative as possible between physician groups and academic hospitals to ensure the best outcomes for patients in the community.  

Pairing Women’s Health and Oncology 

The final session of the conference highlighted women’s health as the fastest growing sector of investment in the health care space. Speakers Matt Cox, MPH, partner, at Whitecap Health Advisors, LLC, and Tessa Kerby, MBA, MPH, principal, at Whitecap Health Advisors, LLC discussed key opportunities to merge women’s health and oncology service lines. They were joined by Kevin Davidson, MPH, vice president of ambulatory services & network development at Cottage Health, whose organization is a health-system leader that is actively developing a more cohesive model between women’s health and oncology services. 

The landscape of women’s health is undergoing rapid transformation, with many service lines facing unique challenges. As Kerby highlighted, “The world is changing pretty rapidly in this space, and there are a lot of service lines.” From high costs and low reimbursement to the increasing demand for high-risk care, the pressure on providers is palpable. Care deserts, where women have limited access to services, are a real concern, and many in the field are feeling the stress.  

One critical issue is the way women want to experience their care. Kerby emphasized that “women don’t want to be treated like they’re the average patient; they want to feel like they’re on a journey, they’re part of the care continuum.” This reflects a growing recognition that women’s health is not a one-size-fits-all approach, there is a pressing need to support women across their entire lifecycle – whether it’s wellness, fertility, or post-menopausal care.  

Cox further explored the complexities of women’s oncology, noting that it remains “a bit of an undefined space” with each health system defines it differently. The demand for women’s oncology services is rising sharply, driven by high disease burdens and increasing cancer rates. “Cancer rates are rising in women, particularly those under 50 years of age,” he explained, with breast and gynecological cancers accounting for the highest volume of cancers in the US each year.”  

To address the rise in cancer cases and decline in utilization of oncology services, Cox suggested that health systems should invest in women’s oncology and focus on the intersection of women’s health and oncology services through “joint clinical management.” Davidson concluded, a comprehensive, patient-centered care model that integrates these services can unlock “untapped revenue opportunities” and enhance patient access, ultimately providing a holistic and competitive approach to women’s health care delivery.  

Read more about #AMCCBS with ACCCBuzz's coverage of Capitol Hill Day, the Opening Keynote and 2025 ACCC Annual Awards, and Day 2 events.