key: cord-0985309-9k6gy2yg
authors: Woodruff, Phillip; Wallis, Christopher J.D.; Albers, Peter; Klaassen, Zachary
title: Virtual Conferences and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Are We Missing Out with an Online Only Platform?
date: 2021-03-29
journal: Eur Urol
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.03.019
sha: cee93953038400d553bcca56995c575f20c25123
doc_id: 985309
cord_uid: 9k6gy2yg

Virtual conferences rapidly became the norm during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although necessary, there are shortfalls to strictly virtual meetings, including less enthusiasm for submitting abstracts. An approach that combines in-person attendance and virtual platforms may be an optimal compromise both during the ongoing pandemic and moving forward.

component of conference participation [2] . In light of these effects, we wondered how the transition to a virtual format affects interest in conferences.

In a recent Twitter poll conducted by European Urology (@EUplatinum), followers were asked "As we round out 2020 and the ongoing pandemic: Are you more or less likely to submit an abstract to a conference if the meeting is going to be virtual?" The majority of respondents indicated that they would be less likely to submit to a virtual conference (54%, Fig. 1 ). With clinicians and researchers less inclined to submit their work to strictly virtual conferences, the ramifications of these "lost opportunities", from the perspectives of both a research dissemination and in-person fostering of research/mentoring collaborations, remain to be determined.

Virtual conferences are arguably less likely to negatively affect the reporting of results from important phase 2/3 clinical trials. The recent 2021 virtual genitourinary American Society of Clinical Oncology (GU ASCO) meeting marked 1 yr since urology/major oncology meetings were forced to adopt a completely virtual platform. Despite the virtual platform, GU ASCO 2021 saw the reporting and publication of two New England Journal of Medicine [3, 4] and two Lancet [5, 6] trials in prostate, kidney, and urothelial carcinoma. However, fewer submissions to virtual conferences may lead to fewer presentations of studies not funded by pharmaceutical companies, including observational and post hoc analyses of clinical trials, which are often presented by residents, fellows, and trainees. While much of the important data from these studies will eventually be published in peer-reviewed journals, a large proportion will not [7] and the loss of these academic opportunities for junior physicians probably extends beyond the dissemination of their data.

This transition to virtual meetings has probably also hampered professional development, The results of the @EUplatinum Twitter poll demonstrate that with 1 yr of experience with virtual medical conferences necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, European Urology followers are much less interested in contributing to conferences held virtually. This is important in the context of the upcoming European Association of Urology annual meeting, which was recently changed to an entirely virtual format from the planned hybrid meeting to be held in Milan, Italy. With increasing uptake and availability of COVID-19 vaccines, a return to inperson urology conferences is probably not far off. The utilization of virtual formats has allowed for wide dissemination of conferences in real time, including increased participation by virtual attendees from South America and China, and wider dissemination of knowledge to countries with lower income, a valuable goal we need to maintain in the future. However, the enthusiasm, networking, collaborations, and social gatherings that come with in-person conferences are uniquely valuable in the academic world. Thoughtful adoption of hybrid meetings may allow the urology community to reap the benefits of each of these approaches for many years after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides.

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Virtual conferences rapidly became the norm during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although necessary, there are shortfalls to strictly virtual meetings, including less enthusiasm for submitting abstracts. An approach that combines in-person attendance and virtual platforms may be an optimal compromise both during the ongoing pandemic and moving forward. 

Improving on legacy conferences by moving online

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab or everolimus for advanced renal cell carcinoma

Enfortumab vedotin in previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma

Lu-PSMA-617 versus cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TheraP): a randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial

A comparison of sunitinib with cabozantinib, crizotinib, and savolitinib for treatment of advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma: a randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial

Publication of results of abstracts presented at medical education conferences