DOI: 10.1097/01.COT.0000360982.19873.10
,
Issn Print: 0276-2234
Publication Date: 2009/09/10
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email
 |
Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid | |
Excerpt
OT spoke with ASCO CEO and Executive Vice President Allen S. Lichter, MD, in August about the longtime commitment to a single location, and its benefits and disadvantages.
When asked, he dismissed with a chuckle the question about the influence that University of Chicago-based Immediate-Past President Richard L. Schilsky, MD, might have had on the decision. “Rich had a vote [as a member of ASCO's Board of Directors], but Chicago was chosen because our meeting has scaled to the point that there are very few cities we could fit in without having to alter the format of our meeting in a meaningful way, or we would have to compromise on the quality of hotels and distances people would have to be transported,” he said.
Other positive factors, he said, were the layout and vibrancy of the city, attractions for spouses and guests during the meeting, the quality of the restaurants, and the ease of flying in and out internationally.
Due to the economic recession, the swine-flu scare, and logistical challenges faced by some international travelers, who constitute about half of the Annual Meeting's attendees, the total registration for this year's Annual Meeting of 29,500, held in Orlando, was down somewhat from the 30,000-plus that had been the rule for the previous several years (for example, 34,800 for the 2008 meeting in Chicago) (OT, 7/10/09).
The move to globally accessible Chicago should eliminate some of the travel hassles, Dr. Lichter said, since many major cities around the world have direct flights there.
Other possible contenders were Orlando and Atlanta, but Chicago won out because “it represented the option we felt most comfortable with, and we had a chance to lock it in for a substantial amount of time, which was in the best interest of ASCO and our members.
