Review Process

Abstracts are reviewed by Annual Meeting organizers, Annual Meeting session co-chairs and volunteer reviewers. Four or five people are assigned to review, score and provide comments about each abstract. Abstract reviewers consider a number of variables in rating the abstracts for selection for awards and oral presentation. General considerations include quality of the research and presentation, the strength of the results and methods and whether the reported research significantly advances the field. 

Quality of Research and Presentation of Results

• Overall quality of the research as described in the abstract is high
• Reported results are novel and scientifically important
• Results are presented clearly

Methods and Results

• Abstract includes clear description of reliable methodology and models
• Abstract includes specific results and data on sample size, endpoints and outcomes, with statistical analysis demonstrating significance of findings

Research Advances the Field

• Abstract includes concise description of the implications of the research to advance basic scientific understanding, translation and/or clinical application of cancer immunotherapy
• New biomarkers or combinations

Additional Considerations

• Are the reported results novel and scientifically important?
• Are the results presented clearly?
• Does the abstract include specific results and data on sample size, endpoints and outcomes with statistical analysis demonstrating significance of findings?
• Does the abstract include clear descriptions of reliable methodology and models?
• Does the abstract include a concise description of the implications of the research to advance basic scientific understanding, translation and/or clinical application of cancer immunotherapy?

• Is the overall quality of the research as described in the abstract high?
• Reviewers are asked if they believe the abstract should be considered for an oral presentation and if so, if there is a specific session they recommend the presentation be presented in. They are asked if the abstract should be accepted as a poster presentation.

Reviewers are asked if they believe the abstract should be considered for an oral presentation and if so, if there is a specific session they recommend the presentation be presented in. They are asked if the abstract should be accepted as a poster presentation.

Selection

Young Investigator Abstract Awards

Young Investigator Abstract Awards are reviewed and selected by the Presidential Award Review Committee, which is comprised of the SITC Executive Committee, nominated at-large directors and leaders. The Presidential Award Review Committee selects the four Presidential Travel Awards, who present during the Presidential Session, and the 34 Travel Award recipients. In addition to the abstract information and requirements for Young Investigator Awards, the Presidential Award Review Committee takes into consideration the review scores and feedback of all reviewers as well as the contribution, institution, and background of the presenting author. New this year, five Young Investigator Awards will be reserved for those who self-identify as individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the Biomedical Sciences according to the NIH definition. The 34 Travel Award recipients and any other abstracts not selected for an award are still considered for oral presentation per below as well as poster presentation.

Regular Oral Abstract Presentations

Regular Abstracts are selected for presentation during plenary or concurrent sessions by the session co-chairs and Annual Meeting organizers. In addition to the abstract information, the session co-chairs and Annual Meeting organizers take into consideration the review scores and feedback of all reviewers, the intent of the session, the other presentations in the session, and if the abstract serves the needs and interest of the SITC audience before selecting abstracts for oral presentation.

Late-Breaking Oral Abstract Presentations

Late-breaking Abstracts are selected for presentation during the Late-breaking Abstract Sessions by the Annual Meeting organizers. If recommended by the Annual Meeting organizers, they may also be considered for presentation in a regular plenary or concurrent session. In addition to the abstract information, the Annual Meeting organizers take into consideration the review scores and feedback of all reviewers, whether the abstract is truly late-breaking, and if the abstract serves the needs and interest of the SITC audience.

Rapid Oral Abstract Presentations

Rapid oral abstract presentations are selected for presentation during the rapid oral abstract presentation sessions by the Annual Meeting organizers. In addition to the abstract information, the Annual Meeting organizers take into consideration the review scores and feedback of all reviewers as well as the focus of the session (clinical or basic science). The Annual Meeting organizers also take into consideration if the presenter is a young investigator and if the presenter’s professional role selected on their registration form is under represented throughout the 38^th Annual Meeting program.

Notifications

Regular Abstracts and Young Investigator Award Abstracts

Notifications for both Regular and Young Investigator Award Abstracts will be sent out on Monday, July 31, 2023. All notifications will be sent to the presenting author and the submitter of the abstracts. Any questions about abstract notifications can be directed to education@sitcancer.org. 

Late-Breaking Abstracts

Notifications for Late-breaking Abstracts will be sent out on Friday, September 22, 2023. All notifications will be sent to the presenting author and the submitter of the abstracts. Any questions about abstract notifications can be directed to education@sitcancer.org.