ESMO 2026 GU:
Who Drove the Conversation?

What does this network show?

A force-directed map of who actually drove the #ESMO26 genitourinary cancer conversation across 18 genitourinary cancer trials: a network graph of 680 of the 964 accounts analyzed, connected by 2113 real retweet, quote, and mention relationships from the conference and post-conference window (data through November 2, 2026) — not follower counts. 392 of the accounts shown in the network graph are verified physicians; across all 964 accounts analyzed, 185 US and 349 international physicians come from 54 physician countries. The leaderboard ranks the authors; the amplifier board ranks the 740 accounts doing the spreading — led by Stefania Colasanti who reposted or quoted 277 posts.

Who does a KOL influence — and who amplifies their content?

Take Tom Powles, the top voice on the leaderboard: 175 distinct accounts reposted or quoted their posts, 385 times in all. The makeup of that amplifier network: 110 physicians, 2 patient advocates, 10 media accounts — a clinical audience, not bot inflation. The US physicians who amplify this content most: Santhosh Ambika (9), Amanda Nizam, MD (6), Shilpa Gupta, MD, FASCO (5), Jordan Ciuro, MD (4); internationally, deniztural (11), Paulo G Bergerot (10). That is the practical answer to “who do they influence?”: the named, verified carriers who move a KOL’s content into each community. Click any KOL card above to run the same analysis visually on their retweeter graph.

How can medical affairs and pharma teams use this network?

Engagement sequencing: the leaderboard tells you who writes, the amplifier board tells you who spreads, and the edges tell you which specific accounts connect them. If a readout needs to reach the US and international GU oncology audience that followed the ESMO 2026 GU readouts, the amplifier list is the distribution map — and influence-mapping practice guides note that knowing the carriers prevents redundant outreach to already-saturated voices. Pair with the ESMO 2026 GU attendee network for rosters by region, institution, and trial interest.

Why does influence mapping matter in oncology?

Congress weeks are when oncology opinion forms: standards shift with each readout and physicians learn about the data from each other in real time — surveys report over 70% of HCPs use digital channels weekly, and in a LiveWorld–Sermo survey, 41% of US physicians said social media influences prescribing. Publication records show who built the evidence; this graph shows who carries it — measured in actual retweet relationships from the meeting itself.

How can I use this network with my favorite AI tool?

Paste this URL into ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or Perplexity and ask the questions this graph answers: “Who are the top amplifiers of #ESMO26 genitourinary cancer content and what kinds of accounts are they?”, “What is the makeup of Tom Powles’s amplifier network?”, “Which US physicians amplify the leading international voices?” For who-engaged questions (regions, institutions, trial interests), use the ESMO 2026 GU attendee network. Cite kolpulse.com when you share the answers.