Oncology Frontier: Dr. Balch， congratulations for winning the “Honorary foreign consultant award". This year marks the 20th anniversary of CSCO，?will you share some of your stories with CSCO?

　　Dr Balch: I have been involved with CSCO as an organization since 2001. Seventeen years ago， the first President， Professor Datong Chu， approached me at an ASCO Meeting with a big vision of this new organization， the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology. His vision and the vision of the leadership of CSCO was for this organization in China to have the same scale and value as ASCO. This was a big vision， because， at the time， the membership and attendance at the CSCO Meetings was around 1000 people， but their vision was that there would be 20000 or more attendees， even in those early days. The reason they approached me as the CEO of ASCO was because they wanted to know how we were organized， so as CSCO grew， it could absorb the growth and provide good membership service for its new members. That started a partnership between CSCO and ASCO that has gone on through all these years as CSCO and ASCO have grown as organizations and as they have grown closer in their partnership with joint projects. We were supposed to have our first meeting at the CSCO Meeting in September 2001. I had my tickets and was ready to go， and the terrorist attack of 9/11 occurred and all flights were canceled. Datong Chu sent me an email saying “I hate those terrorists” because it prevented us all meeting in 2001. We did， however， all come in 2002 for the meeting in Guangzhou. There was Dr Paul Bunn， the President， Dr Margaret Tempero， the new Director of International Affairs， Paula Rieger， and myself， and we met with Drs Chu， Sun and a young person named Yilong Wu， who eventually became President. After that， we started programs， such as a multidisciplinary cancer management course， which we held in Xian and other cities. There was the Best of ASCO， for which the Best of ASCO in China is the best attended of any ASCO session anywhere in the world. The partnership has been meaningful over the years with joint symposia almost each year that take into account our collaboration as partners on the world stage. Here we are at the 20th Anniversary where the original vision of the leaders of CSCO has been realized with attendance >20000， with a meeting that is one of the best on the world stage， and an organizational structure and exhibit hall and themes that are very much like an ASCO Meeting， because we grew up together as partners. I feel good about watching the growth of CSCO as an organization， but I also have a great deal of respect for those early leaders of CSCO in the first five years， when they originally had the vision to be a first-tier oncology organization for all of China， to exist on a large scale and to have a role in transmitting research and education to all physicians who treat cancer， not only in China， but throughout the world. Another part of what we did together was to start an English-language oncology journal， which became Chinese Clinical Oncology. Dr Dan Haller， who is the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Clinical Oncology and myself as Editor-in-Chief of the Annals of Surgical Oncology， both helped in those early years to form Chinese Clinical Oncology. We became the Associate Editors， and then last year， I became the Co-Editor-in-Chief of Chinese Clinical Oncology， which is endorsed by CSCO as one of its educational journals and an English-language journal allowing China and other countries to share our thoughts and procedures and how we treat cancer patients， how we organize our research， and how we can become partners together.

　　Oncology Frontier: You have a lecture at the President Symposium?on how to?write the result of research，?would you please introduce the main points of your presentation?

　　Dr Balch: I commend Dr Yilong Wu for introducing in his last presidential year a Presidential Symposium related to research. The strategy is for Chinese researchers， both laboratory and clinical， to not only influence science and clinical care in China， but also to influence cancer care and research around the world. He organized a very nice symposium， which essentially said that the rules that we follow around the world are: to have prospective， clean data; to do clinical trials to validate new therapies; and then to communicate that new knowledge through English-language journals. I was privileged to be on the podium with Professor David Collingridge， the Editor-in-Chief of Lancet Oncology， which represents one of the world-class oncology journals. I was representing Chinese Clinical Oncology and the Annals of Surgical Oncology. Both of us had more-or-less the same message – to publish in high quality medical journals， the research has to be organized around a hypothesis that tells a story， that is original and significant， and that is published in fluent and smooth English. One of my and Professor Collingridge’s points as well is that if Chinese investigators want to influence research and patient care in China， they can publish in China and achieve that. But they have the possibility of impacting on and adding value to research and patient care throughout the word. In that case， they need to publish in English-language journals， because English is the scientific language of the world today， both in laboratory research and clinical research. As the common language， if we are going to learn from our Chinese collaborators， then they have learned that it has to be published in a high quality English-language medical or scientific journal. That was our message.

　　Oncology Frontier: As the editor-in-chief?of?Annals of Surgical Oncology， could you give Chinese researchers some advice on publishing research papers?

　　Dr Balch: I am here in China representing the Annals of Surgical Oncology because Chinese investigators and Chinese surgeons are one of our main clients. We receive more manuscripts from China to our journal than any other country outside of America， so it is very important that we have a good client relationship. It is an opportunity to tell Chinese researchers and clinical investigators how to compete to get their manuscript published in our journal. It comes down to: originality; significance; and framing the story around a hypothesis. I have found that in reading manuscripts that we end up rejecting， the authors have a very diffuse story that is more about look at all the patients I have treated or all the research I have done， but as a reader， I want to know what you have learned from that experience， so that I can now understand and incorporate it into my knowledge pool. A journal is the medium for transmitting that new knowledge. We are looking for well-told stories around a solid hypothesis with good data to back it up， and a discussion that puts the research in a context with the rest of the published literature. What I find is that there are many manuscripts from China and other countries where English is not the native language， where there is a nucleus of good science and information， but the story is not told well around a hypothesis or a focused theme， or the paper is not written in good English. Therefore， even though the science is good， we may end up rejecting the manuscript because it is not written in fluent smooth English. My message for the audience here in China is to be sure you tell a solid story around a hypothesis with good science and methodology， but equally important is to tell your story in smooth and fluent English. Many Chinese are not fluent in English scientifically. They may be good in conversational English， but not necessarily writing scientific English. So one of our recommendations is to use editorial services. Even more than that， I would spend the money using editorial services that are based in English-speaking countries such as England， the United States or Canada， so that the people who are helping in an editorial role understand the nuances of the English language so that the translation from Mandarin to English is smooth and accurate， and tells a compelling， interesting story.