Medical congress intelligence that briefs every rival readout within the hour, not the next morning
Every rival readout and abstract briefed within the hour.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Turning what is presented at a medical congress — abstracts, late-breakers, posters, symposia — into timely, cited competitive intelligence for programme, brand and medical affairs teams. Medical Congress Intelligence lays the agenda out as a live grid, reads each tracked rival abstract the moment its embargo lifts and posts three cited lines to the programme channel minutes later, for the CI lead to rate and act on.
How to choose AI solutions for life sciences →
Updated
A major congress puts two to three thousand abstracts public in four days, and the late-breakers stay under embargo until their slot. The competitive intelligence team covers the tracked sessions with two or three people on site: the analyst listens in Hall A, types up notes, checks the numbers against the abstract book and writes the debrief once the day closes. The programme team reads it the next morning — often after the sponsor's investor call.
The time goes on transcription, not interpretation. Setting a rival's week-12 remission next to your own pivotal trial — same endpoint, same timepoint, labelled as separate trials — is done by hand, after the sessions end. And the rules cut both ways: an abstract cannot be read or shared before its embargo lifts, and a remark overheard at a booth that may be non-public cannot be used at all.
Estimated split of the ≈ 9.5 hours a late-breaker takes to reach the programme team by hand (the sample dashboard's baseline), and with the solution. The cited summary itself posts about 3 minutes after the lift; most of what remains is the CI lead's rating and the so-what.
Six agents hold, read, check and compare each abstract as its embargo lifts; the CI lead rates it and decides who is told.
EIMC 2026, the Inflammation & Mucosal Congress in Vienna, 5–8 October. Day 3, 08:39. Halvard Therapeutics' Phase 3 ASCEND-UC induction abstract for its anti-TL1A antibody HLV-217 — late-breaker LB-07 — is embargoed until its slot at 08:40 in Hall A. Northwind Bio's own anti-IL-23 antibody, Veltrimab, is heading for filing. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Dana's session tracker lays out Wednesday 7 October by hall and hour: 9 sessions with tracked abstracts across Hall A, Hall B, Hall C, the poster hall and the industry symposia — 46 of 2,318 abstracts tracked for the whole meeting. Each chip is marked competitor, our data or embargoed, with the initials of whoever covers the session. Sam Patel is in Hall A; the 16:00 safety session in Hall B still shows “+ Assign”. The embargo watch counts down to LB-07.
“The abstract text is not read, stored or shared before 08:40. Only the published title is known.”
The Congress Abstract Reader added LB-07 to the tracked list on 28 September from the published title. Until 08:40 the event holds only what is public: the title, the session, Sam Patel covering it in the room, and where the summary will go — the Veltrimab programme channel, 14 people.
“Abstract under embargo until 08:40 CEST.” The reader never reads or uses an abstract before its embargo lifts.
LB-07 flips from locked to high-impact competitor on the grid. The Congress Abstract Reader reads it the moment the embargo lifts. The Event Extractor pulls 14 fields, every one cited to the abstract. The Compliance Guard confirms the abstract has been public since 08:40, and the Cross-Trial Comparator sets it against Veltrimab's VLT-302 on the same endpoint at week 12.
“08:40 · LB-07 embargo lifted · the agents are reading it now.”
Three minutes after the lift the Brief Writer posts to #veltrimab-programme, 14 people: HLV-217 met its Phase 3 induction endpoint, clinical remission 27.4% vs 9.8% placebo at week 12 (Δ 17.6 points, n=1,014); Veltrimab's VLT-302 reached 24.9% vs 8.3% (Δ 16.6) in a more refractory population — 52% vs 47% advanced-therapy experienced, separate trials, not head-to-head; marker-positive patients (38%) reached 33.2% vs 9.1%. Every line carries its source.
“Sent under the rule ‘Embargo summaries’ · your rating and the so-what still wait for you.”
A citation opens event E-1041 with the abstract highlighted at the results passage. Beside it, the agents' trail: read at 08:40, 14 fields at 08:41, public at 08:41, compared at 08:42, posted at 08:43 — then at 08:47 the Source Watcher matched Halvard's press release, and at 08:52 the event was routed to Dana with a suggested impact of High. Each extracted field shows its confidence and its source.
The Event Extractor never publishes a field below 0.85 confidence without a person.
The comparator lines up week-12 clinical remission: HLV-217 +17.6 points over placebo, Veltrimab +16.6, the HLV-217 marker-positive subgroup +24.1. The Brief Writer drafts what it means: “HLV-217 now matches Veltrimab on the headline induction number,” Halvard's filing is guided for the second half of 2027, about six months after Northwind's planned filing — and three actions for the Veltrimab team, every number cited.
“Comparison across separate trials — not head-to-head. Populations, doses and sites differ.”
Dana confirms the impact as High and picks the audiences: the Veltrimab programme team (14) and Immunology strategy (9) — 23 people on 2 lists; Medical affairs and Business development stay off. She can edit the so-what, then approves and signs the alert — hours before Halvard's investor call at 14:00.
“Signed by Dana Okafor · the alert, its sources and your decision are kept on the audit trail.”
Not everything from the floor can be used. Sam Patel's note from the Orsolis booth on 6 October quotes a staff member: “the unblinded interim safety look was better than we expected” — which has not been published anywhere. The Compliance Guard held the note and routed it to Priya Raman, compliance counsel. The public part — the study-design handout and booth display — can be released once she removes the held sentence.
“Held — not used in any brief or alert.”
In ulcerative colitis, HLV-217 sits in Phase 3 in the TL1A row, marked “Today”, next to Veltrimab in the IL-23 row. The catalyst calendar runs from October 2026 to June 2027: Halvard's investor call on 7 October at 14:00 CEST, ASCEND-UC-M completing in November 2026 — moved earlier — and Veltrimab's planned filing in H1 2027.
The daily debrief workflow runs at 18:00 on each congress day — Dana can run it early. Sessions covered, field notes matched, a compliance check with held notes left out, then a draft in six sections with five citations: headlines, session by session, what it means for Veltrimab, from the floor, the watch list for the rest of today and Day 4, and the sources. She signs; it goes to the congress debrief list, 38 people.
“6 sources, all public … Comparisons are across separate trials and are not head-to-head.”
The same late-breaker, seen by the five people who carry the congress — what their week looked like, and what it looks like now.
Six agents hold, read, check and compare each abstract as its embargo lifts; the CI lead rates it and decides who is told.
Loads the congress programme, proposes the tracked list for the CI lead, and reads each tracked abstract the moment its embargo lifts.
Polls trial registries, press releases, pipeline pages, securities filings and journals every hour, and keeps every captured version.
Turns a source into a structured event — asset, sponsor, mechanism, phase, endpoint, result, dates — and merges duplicates from the abstract, press release and filing.
Checks every source and field note: public or licensed, embargo respected, no possible non-public information.
Places a result next to Veltrimab and peers on the same endpoint and timepoint, with a caveat.
Writes the facts-only embargo summaries, drafts the “so what for us”, alerts, congress daily debriefs and weekly briefs in house style.
Rates impact, signs and sends. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask in plain words about a rival asset, a congress session or what reads out next — every answer cites its source.
What changed for Veltrimab today?
Two events matter today. HLV-217 Phase 3 induction (LB-07, lifted 08:40): remission 27.4% vs 9.8%, level with Veltrimab's 24.9% vs 8.3%; marker-positive patients reach 33.2%. And HLV-217 maintenance may read out 7 months earlier — completion moved to Nov 2026. Separate trials — not head-to-head.
Compare HLV-217 with Veltrimab
Week-12 induction in ulcerative colitis: remission 27.4% vs 24.9%; placebo 9.8% vs 8.3%; Δ vs placebo 17.6 vs 16.6; prior advanced therapy 47% vs 52%. Veltrimab maintenance is subcutaneous every 8 weeks; HLV-217's is ongoing. Filing H2 2027 for HLV-217, H1 2027 for Veltrimab. Separate trials — not head-to-head.
What reads out before our filing?
Before Veltrimab's H1 2027 filing: ORS-450 52-week Crohn's data and ASCEND-UC-M completion in November 2026; then, in Q1 2027, HLV-217 maintenance topline at the earliest, BWL-310's second psoriasis study and the ORS-450 Phase 3 start in UC.
Why was a field note held?
Sam Patel's note from the Orsolis booth quotes a staff member about an unpublished interim safety look. The Compliance Guard held it — nothing from it is used — and routed it to Priya Raman. The public part, the study-design handout, can be released by her.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
What the agents watch, when they alert and who decides are settings your CI lead and compliance counsel own.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Embargo summaries → programme channel | On | Three lines, facts only, every line cited — your rating and the so-what still wait for you · On · Off |
| High-impact events → programme team within 1 hour | On | Alert by email and chat; needs your approval first · On · Off |
| Registry date moves by more than 3 months | On | Primary completion, study completion or status · On · Off |
| Deals with more than $25 M upfront | On | From current reports and press releases · On · Off |
| Social media posts | Off — not used for events | On · Off |
| Alerts are approved by | Dana Okafor | Dana Okafor · Sam Patel · Omar Haddad |
| Daily debrief is signed by | Dana Okafor — sent by 07:00 the next morning | Dana Okafor · Omar Haddad |
| Held field notes are reviewed by | Priya Raman | Set by compliance policy |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample congress data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (EMJ review of the ESMO Congress 2025 — 2,926 of 5,677 abstracts accepted; SIOP on ASCO 2025 — over 5,000 abstracts, more than 44,000 participants). People, companies, products, trials and the congress named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Turning what is presented at a medical congress — abstracts, late-breakers, posters, symposia — into timely, cited competitive intelligence for programme, brand and medical affairs teams. Medical Congress Intelligence lays the agenda out as a live grid, reads each tracked rival abstract the moment its embargo lifts and posts three cited lines to the programme channel minutes later, for the CI lead to rate and act on.
The Congress Abstract Reader builds the tracked list from the published programme and titles. Each embargoed abstract stays locked with a live countdown; its text is not read, stored or shared before the slot. At the lift the agents read, extract, check and compare it, and the facts-only summary goes to the channel the CI lead chose.
The Cross-Trial Comparator only lines up the same endpoint at the same timepoint — in the sample, week-12 clinical remission for HLV-217 and Veltrimab — and labels every comparison “separate trials — not head-to-head”. Your own data comes from your approved top-line summaries and is always labelled as ours.
Notes added from the floor are matched to their session's abstracts and checked by the Compliance Guard. A note that may contain non-public information is held, never used in any brief or alert, and routed to compliance counsel, who can release its public part.
Public or licensed sources only: the congress programme and abstracts, trial registries, press releases and pipeline pages, securities filings, journal indexes and a licensed pipeline database. Social media is off, and the watchers never log in to anything unlicensed.
Yes. Only the facts-only embargo summary goes out on its own, to one pre-approved channel under a rule the CI lead approved. Impact ratings, the so-what, alerts to any other list and the daily debrief all wait for her signature, and every step is on the audit trail.
Yes. Therapy areas, competitors, mechanisms, alert rules — such as registry date moves of more than 3 months or deals above $25 M upfront — sources, distribution lists, who approves alerts and who signs the debrief are all settings.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your watch list, the congress programme, your own trials' top-line summaries and distribution lists — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on a past congress first.
Sourced answers from papers, patents and reports in seconds, our own disagreements first.
1-min demoCompetitive Pipeline TrackingEvery rival trial, readout and approval in a sourced brief each Monday
1-min demoPreclinical Study Report AutomationA draft GLP report in hours, every number traced to raw data.
1-min demoWe'll run Medical Congress Intelligence on your watch list and a past congress programme.