Deep Chakrabarti MD, Peter Albertsen MD, Aidan Adkins MA, Amar Kishan MD, Vedang Murthy MD, Chris Parker MD, Angela Pathmanathan MDRes, Alison Reid PhD, Oliver Sartor MD, Nicholas Van As MDRes, Jochen Walz MD, Alison Tree MDRes
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in two thirds of the world, with an expected doubling in both incidence and mortality in the next two decades. No strong environmental associations exist for the development of prostate cancer; therefore, lifestyle measures are unlikely to mitigate this increasing burden. The last three decades have seen rapid developments in the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape of prostate cancer, including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, robotic surgery, image-guided hypofractionated and stereotactic radiotherapy, novel anti-androgens and radioligand therapies. Prostate cancer is unique in that not everyone with a diagnosis needs treatment, and active surveillance is the preferred option for some. This review discusses the contemporary management of all stages of prostate cancer in the light of these modern developments, enabling holistic individualization of treatment, and describes the promise of future research to further improve outcomes.
{"title":"The contemporary management of prostate cancer","authors":"Deep Chakrabarti MD, Peter Albertsen MD, Aidan Adkins MA, Amar Kishan MD, Vedang Murthy MD, Chris Parker MD, Angela Pathmanathan MDRes, Alison Reid PhD, Oliver Sartor MD, Nicholas Van As MDRes, Jochen Walz MD, Alison Tree MDRes","doi":"10.3322/caac.70020","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70020","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in two thirds of the world, with an expected doubling in both incidence and mortality in the next two decades. No strong environmental associations exist for the development of prostate cancer; therefore, lifestyle measures are unlikely to mitigate this increasing burden. The last three decades have seen rapid developments in the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape of prostate cancer, including multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, robotic surgery, image-guided hypofractionated and stereotactic radiotherapy, novel anti-androgens and radioligand therapies. Prostate cancer is unique in that not everyone with a diagnosis needs treatment, and active surveillance is the preferred option for some. This review discusses the contemporary management of all stages of prostate cancer in the light of these modern developments, enabling holistic individualization of treatment, and describes the promise of future research to further improve outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 6","pages":"552-586"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70020","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144504586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Wesley Yip MD, Salvador Jaime-Casas MD, Anjaney Kothari PhD, Mary Sullivan MA, Leslie K. Ballas MD, Domenique Escobar MD, Anne K. Schuckman MD, Jonathan E. Rosenberg MD, Jonathan A. Coleman MD
Urothelial carcinoma is an aggressive entity that is associated with significant morbidity, but there have been major advances in both our understanding of and treatment options for patients with this disease. In this review, the authors focus on novel therapeutic and diagnostic approaches in the perioperative setting, with an emphasis on patient-centered and individualized care. For urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), advances in nonplatinum-based therapies, specifically immunotherapy and antibody–drug conjugates, have expanded the therapeutic arsenal for patients with muscle-invasive UCB in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings to improve survival outcomes. Given the significant morbidity of extirpative surgery (radical cystectomy and urinary diversion), there have also been greater efforts to evaluate bladder-sparing protocols and improve the selection of patients for surgery and their postoperative recovery. The authors review special considerations for organ-sparing surgery in females, geriatric co-management, and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. For upper tract urothelial carcinoma, there has been increasing recognition of its unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, including risks of renal functional loss. There have been advances in molecular profiling that have demonstrated various genomic differences between upper tract urothelial carcinoma and UCB, with treatment implications. This article reviews studies evaluating perioperative care that focused on optimizing therapeutic approaches, including neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy, as well as nephron-sparing strategies in carefully selected cases.
{"title":"Urothelial carcinoma: Perioperative considerations from top to bottom","authors":"Wesley Yip MD, Salvador Jaime-Casas MD, Anjaney Kothari PhD, Mary Sullivan MA, Leslie K. Ballas MD, Domenique Escobar MD, Anne K. Schuckman MD, Jonathan E. Rosenberg MD, Jonathan A. Coleman MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70019","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70019","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Urothelial carcinoma is an aggressive entity that is associated with significant morbidity, but there have been major advances in both our understanding of and treatment options for patients with this disease. In this review, the authors focus on novel therapeutic and diagnostic approaches in the perioperative setting, with an emphasis on patient-centered and individualized care. For urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), advances in nonplatinum-based therapies, specifically immunotherapy and antibody–drug conjugates, have expanded the therapeutic arsenal for patients with muscle-invasive UCB in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings to improve survival outcomes. Given the significant morbidity of extirpative surgery (radical cystectomy and urinary diversion), there have also been greater efforts to evaluate bladder-sparing protocols and improve the selection of patients for surgery and their postoperative recovery. The authors review special considerations for organ-sparing surgery in females, geriatric co-management, and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. For upper tract urothelial carcinoma, there has been increasing recognition of its unique diagnostic and therapeutic challenges, including risks of renal functional loss. There have been advances in molecular profiling that have demonstrated various genomic differences between upper tract urothelial carcinoma and UCB, with treatment implications. This article reviews studies evaluating perioperative care that focused on optimizing therapeutic approaches, including neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy, as well as nephron-sparing strategies in carefully selected cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 6","pages":"528-551"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70019","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144237423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>A 52-year-old transgender man presented for evaluation of a new diagnosis of breast cancer. The patient was designated female at birth. Three months after initiation of gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) with testosterone gel, he underwent bilateral mastectomy for gender affirmation. Final pathology revealed a left-sided, pathologic T1 tumor (pT1) that was identified as grade 2 invasive ductal carcinoma and as estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, progesterone receptor-negative, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative by immunohistochemistry (score, 1+). The patient reported no preoperative symptoms of breast lumps or any changes to the skin of the breast or the nipples. He had a past medical history of Barrett esophagus, depression, and orthopedic surgeries. He had no history of chest irradiation. Family history was negative for breast or ovarian cancer. Of note, he had a negative screening mammogram performed 5 years earlier; repeat screening had not been obtained.</p><p>This patient's presentation as a transgender man with incidentally found breast cancer raises several considerations regarding his gender-related health needs. An overview of frequently used terms in gender health and recommendations on how best to deliver quality cancer care to transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals is provided in a 2025 review by Cathcart-Rake et al.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>For many TGD individuals, gender-affirming medical interventions are an important component of addressing gender incongruence and alleviating gender dysphoria.<span><sup>2</sup></span> For trans men, a key intervention is GAHT with testosterone gel or injections.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Testosterone treatment leads to suppression of the hypothalamic–pituitary–ovarian axis, which reduces estrogen and progesterone production and leads to cessation of menses. In addition, numerous physical changes are seen after 1–2 years of testosterone treatment, including voice deepening, increased facial and body hair growth, clitoromegaly, fat redistribution, and increased muscle mass (Figure 1). Such treatment has been associated with lower rates of depression, gender dysphoria, and suicidality.<span><sup>4, 5</sup></span> For example, in one study<span><sup>5</sup></span> of 64 TGD patients seeking GAHT with testosterone, early treatment with testosterone was found to significantly relieve gender incongruence, depression, and suicidal ideation within 3 months of treatment (Figure 2).</p><p>Several studies have attempted to elucidate the risk of breast cancer in transgender populations, and the results generally indicate that transgender men have a lower breast cancer risk than cisgender women, but it is higher than the risk for cisgender men.<span><sup>6</sup></span> The reduced risk compared with cisgender women has largely been attributed to the effect of gender-affirming mastectomy leading to a lower volume of tissue susceptible to developing breast cancer,
{"title":"Breast cancer in a transgender man","authors":"Alison May Berner BA(Hons), MBBS, MSc, PhD, MRCP, Tristan Michael MacKenzie MTH, MHR, Shirish Kulkarni MBBS, MRCP, Chin Chong BSc(Hons), MBBS, MRCGP, Loren Schechter MD, Caroline Michie MBChB, FRCPE, Ole-Petter Riksfjord Hamnvik MB, BCh, BAO, MMSc, MRCPI","doi":"10.3322/caac.70021","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70021","url":null,"abstract":"<p>A 52-year-old transgender man presented for evaluation of a new diagnosis of breast cancer. The patient was designated female at birth. Three months after initiation of gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) with testosterone gel, he underwent bilateral mastectomy for gender affirmation. Final pathology revealed a left-sided, pathologic T1 tumor (pT1) that was identified as grade 2 invasive ductal carcinoma and as estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, progesterone receptor-negative, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative by immunohistochemistry (score, 1+). The patient reported no preoperative symptoms of breast lumps or any changes to the skin of the breast or the nipples. He had a past medical history of Barrett esophagus, depression, and orthopedic surgeries. He had no history of chest irradiation. Family history was negative for breast or ovarian cancer. Of note, he had a negative screening mammogram performed 5 years earlier; repeat screening had not been obtained.</p><p>This patient's presentation as a transgender man with incidentally found breast cancer raises several considerations regarding his gender-related health needs. An overview of frequently used terms in gender health and recommendations on how best to deliver quality cancer care to transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals is provided in a 2025 review by Cathcart-Rake et al.<span><sup>1</sup></span></p><p>For many TGD individuals, gender-affirming medical interventions are an important component of addressing gender incongruence and alleviating gender dysphoria.<span><sup>2</sup></span> For trans men, a key intervention is GAHT with testosterone gel or injections.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Testosterone treatment leads to suppression of the hypothalamic–pituitary–ovarian axis, which reduces estrogen and progesterone production and leads to cessation of menses. In addition, numerous physical changes are seen after 1–2 years of testosterone treatment, including voice deepening, increased facial and body hair growth, clitoromegaly, fat redistribution, and increased muscle mass (Figure 1). Such treatment has been associated with lower rates of depression, gender dysphoria, and suicidality.<span><sup>4, 5</sup></span> For example, in one study<span><sup>5</sup></span> of 64 TGD patients seeking GAHT with testosterone, early treatment with testosterone was found to significantly relieve gender incongruence, depression, and suicidal ideation within 3 months of treatment (Figure 2).</p><p>Several studies have attempted to elucidate the risk of breast cancer in transgender populations, and the results generally indicate that transgender men have a lower breast cancer risk than cisgender women, but it is higher than the risk for cisgender men.<span><sup>6</sup></span> The reduced risk compared with cisgender women has largely been attributed to the effect of gender-affirming mastectomy leading to a lower volume of tissue susceptible to developing breast cancer, ","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 5","pages":"376-386"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70021","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228768","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nikita Sandeep Wagle PhD, MBBS, MHA, Leticia Nogueira PhD, MPH, Theresa P. Devasia PhD, Angela B. Mariotto PhD, K. Robin Yabroff PhD, Farhad Islami MD, PhD, Ahmedin Jemal DVM, PhD, Rick Alteri MD, Patricia A. Ganz MD, Rebecca L. Siegel MPH
The number of people living with a history of cancer in the United States continues to rise because of the growth and aging of the population as well as improved survival through advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community serve the needs of these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and the United States Census Bureau. In addition, cancer treatment patterns are presented from the National Cancer Database along with a brief overview of treatment-related side effects. As of January 1, 2025, about 18.6 million people were living in the United States with a history of cancer, and this number is projected to exceed 22 million by 2035. The three most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,552,460), melanoma of the skin (816,580), and colorectum (729,550) among males and breast (4,305,570), uterine corpus (945,540), and thyroid (859,890) among females. About one half (51%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and nearly four fifths (79%) were aged 60 years and older. Racial differences in treatment in 2021 were common across disease stage; for example, Black people with stage I-II lung cancer were less likely to undergo surgery than their White counterparts (47% vs. 52%). Larger disparities exist for rectal cancer, for which 39% of Black people with stage I disease undergo proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 64% of their White counterparts. Targeted, multi-level efforts to expand access to high-quality care and survivorship resources are vital to reducing disparities and advancing support for all survivors of cancer.
{"title":"Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2025","authors":"Nikita Sandeep Wagle PhD, MBBS, MHA, Leticia Nogueira PhD, MPH, Theresa P. Devasia PhD, Angela B. Mariotto PhD, K. Robin Yabroff PhD, Farhad Islami MD, PhD, Ahmedin Jemal DVM, PhD, Rick Alteri MD, Patricia A. Ganz MD, Rebecca L. Siegel MPH","doi":"10.3322/caac.70011","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70011","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The number of people living with a history of cancer in the United States continues to rise because of the growth and aging of the population as well as improved survival through advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community serve the needs of these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and the United States Census Bureau. In addition, cancer treatment patterns are presented from the National Cancer Database along with a brief overview of treatment-related side effects. As of January 1, 2025, about 18.6 million people were living in the United States with a history of cancer, and this number is projected to exceed 22 million by 2035. The three most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,552,460), melanoma of the skin (816,580), and colorectum (729,550) among males and breast (4,305,570), uterine corpus (945,540), and thyroid (859,890) among females. About one half (51%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and nearly four fifths (79%) were aged 60 years and older. Racial differences in treatment in 2021 were common across disease stage; for example, Black people with stage I-II lung cancer were less likely to undergo surgery than their White counterparts (47% vs. 52%). Larger disparities exist for rectal cancer, for which 39% of Black people with stage I disease undergo proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 64% of their White counterparts. Targeted, multi-level efforts to expand access to high-quality care and survivorship resources are vital to reducing disparities and advancing support for all survivors of cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 4","pages":"308-340"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144176850","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>The publication of the American Cancer Society’s “Cancer Treatment and Survivorship Statistics, 2025” report affirms that the number of people living in the United States with a history of cancer is rising because of advances in detection and treatment that have improved survival.<span><sup>1, 2</sup></span> In our opinion, it also presents a new opportunity to engage all stakeholders in the discourse on cancer survivorship. More cancers have become treatable and controllable, and the sheer number of survivors demands a concerted approach involving a trained health care workforce, accessible referral pathways, and adequate reimbursement for services rendered.</p><p>There are reasons to celebrate the findings as we learn that general cancer mortality continues to fall, with an overall incidence decline in men. Yet these improvements are not distributed equally among subpopulations because cancer mortality continues to rise in women, and we are presented with evidence of the persistence of disparities in access to life-saving cancer treatment and receipt of guideline-concordant care. For instance, there is evidence that patients with private insurance are twice as likely to receive recommended treatment for stage II–III colon cancer compared with patients who are uninsured, and Black patients are less likely than White patients to receive surgery for early stage colon and rectal cancers.<span><sup>3, 4</sup></span> Disparities in receipt of guideline-concordant care have been reported for patients with many solid tumors,<span><sup>5, 6</sup></span> and this inevitably leads to worse outcomes.</p><p>The global disruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic will continue to be studied for years, but some of its consequential effects are beginning to surface. Among them are delays in screening and disruptions in care pathways that contribute to stage migration.<span><sup>7</sup></span> In addition, the pandemic exposed fault lines across health care systems and exacerbations in disparities in cancer care. Other global events, including wars and famine that lead to massive migration, will undoubtedly have an impact on global cancer statistics in years to come.</p><p>Robust data banks are essential to advancing our understanding of long-term outcomes in cancer survivors. Studies like the St Jude Lifetime Cohort and the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study have generated invaluable insights into survivorship in pediatric populations. The National Cancer Institute-funded cancer epidemiology survivor cohorts, which were established to follow survivors over time to capture data on treatment exposures, long-term health outcomes, and social determinants of health, are an important step that will inform future interventions and guidelines for care, but comprehensive population-based surveillance of survivorship outcomes remains limited.<span><sup>8</sup></span></p><p>Growing recognition of the toxicities and long-term burdens associated with cancer t
需要专门的技术和转诊机制来确保从急性癌症护理到幸存者护理的无缝过渡,这可能包括从儿科环境到成人环境的过渡,每一次过渡都有不连续性和随后不遵守推荐筛查指南的风险。生存护理的科学和实践随着临床治疗的发展而蓬勃发展,以解决癌症及其治疗的长期后果。它包括对患者进行彻底和持续的评估,重点是监测和管理癌症的身体和心理影响,预防和监测新发癌症/复发癌症,监测和管理慢性疾病,促进一般健康和预防疾病,以及护理协调癌症幸存者可能受益于支持性服务,包括身体康复和营养指导,并需要获得心血管肿瘤学、肿瘤生育、心理肿瘤学、内分泌学、淋巴水肿治疗、神经认知康复、疼痛管理、性健康等方面的专业转诊。促进戒烟、锻炼、健康体重和节制饮酒对减轻公众癌症负担至关重要,鉴于幸存者共同的风险因素,这对他们至关重要。谁来照顾癌症幸存者,这个问题既不明确也不标准化。护理模式分为几个大类,包括专家主导的护理、共享护理、初级保健主导的护理和提供多学科服务的专门幸存者诊所。高级实践从业者可以在癌症中心和诊所提供幸存者服务方面发挥关键作用,许多人认为这项工作非常适合他们的实践范围。创新实践正在测试幸存者护理的咨询模式,以及将幸存者护理完全纳入初级保健。根据诊断、暴露以及未来风险(癌症治疗的复发或后期影响)定制生存护理,可以更好地利用资源。然而,从长远来看,大多数幸存者将需要过渡到全科医生主导的护理。确保医疗人员做好充分的准备需要在医疗培训和持续的专业发展中整合幸存者教育11-14通过提高自我效能和自我宣传以及用简明的治疗总结和护理计划武装癌症幸存者的努力在过去20年中受到了相当大的关注。15,16事实上,癌症幸存者、社区、倡导团体和临床医生需要更多的机会来共同设计基于个体患者水平特征和相关结果测量的模型,并且必须有适当的评估机制。显而易见的是,到2025年,我们还无法为1860万癌症幸存者提供适当的护理,如果没有协调一致的战略努力,到2030年,我们将无法满足美国预计的2600万癌症幸存者的复杂护理需求——这一差距对肿瘤学和初级保健系统都构成了重大挑战。在一个分散的医疗保健系统中,幸存者专业知识集中在主要的癌症中心,农村和服务不足地区缺乏初级保健临床医生,幸存者护理质量和癌症幸存者结果的差距有可能进一步扩大。我们需要以现有的高水平证据为基础的创新方法,以及旨在传播最佳做法的干预措施和可负担且可扩展的面向患者的干预措施。美国国家癌症研究所(national Cancer Institute)于2024年发布了美国国家生存护理标准,为癌症幸存者及其家人在癌症诊断后的期望提供了清晰的蓝图制定这些标准是为了指导卫生保健专业人员和卫生系统提供全面、个性化的幸存者护理,以满足幸存者复杂和不断变化的需求。它们反映了对生存的理解取得了重大进展,但并没有解决越来越大的挑战,即识别和治疗来自免疫疗法或患者通过临床试验登记接受的药物等新疗法的毒性。我们学到的一个教训是,积极主动地采取支持性护理方法,特别是精神卫生服务,可以在治疗意图治疗期间和完成后减轻症状负担。在护理过程的早期引入支持性干预可以帮助幸存者长期保持更好的身心健康,而不是等到治疗结束后才解决并发症。 这种方法旨在确保幸存者在整个过程中得到支持,提高整体生活质量,并帮助他们更顺利地从积极治疗过渡到幸存者。随着癌症幸存者数量的持续增长,幸存者人口的老龄化,新型治疗方法引入新的且通常不可预测的毒性,以及肿瘤学家和初级保健医生的劳动力短缺,我们在未来几年将面临重大挑战。为了满足癌症幸存者日益增长的需求,我们需要创新和探索新的护理模式。这些模式不仅应该评估其临床效果,还应该从幸存者、护理人员、卫生保健专业人员和社会的角度来评估。
{"title":"Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2025: An urgent call to optimize health after cancer","authors":"Lidia Schapira MD, Christine M. Duffy MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70017","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70017","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The publication of the American Cancer Society’s “Cancer Treatment and Survivorship Statistics, 2025” report affirms that the number of people living in the United States with a history of cancer is rising because of advances in detection and treatment that have improved survival.<span><sup>1, 2</sup></span> In our opinion, it also presents a new opportunity to engage all stakeholders in the discourse on cancer survivorship. More cancers have become treatable and controllable, and the sheer number of survivors demands a concerted approach involving a trained health care workforce, accessible referral pathways, and adequate reimbursement for services rendered.</p><p>There are reasons to celebrate the findings as we learn that general cancer mortality continues to fall, with an overall incidence decline in men. Yet these improvements are not distributed equally among subpopulations because cancer mortality continues to rise in women, and we are presented with evidence of the persistence of disparities in access to life-saving cancer treatment and receipt of guideline-concordant care. For instance, there is evidence that patients with private insurance are twice as likely to receive recommended treatment for stage II–III colon cancer compared with patients who are uninsured, and Black patients are less likely than White patients to receive surgery for early stage colon and rectal cancers.<span><sup>3, 4</sup></span> Disparities in receipt of guideline-concordant care have been reported for patients with many solid tumors,<span><sup>5, 6</sup></span> and this inevitably leads to worse outcomes.</p><p>The global disruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic will continue to be studied for years, but some of its consequential effects are beginning to surface. Among them are delays in screening and disruptions in care pathways that contribute to stage migration.<span><sup>7</sup></span> In addition, the pandemic exposed fault lines across health care systems and exacerbations in disparities in cancer care. Other global events, including wars and famine that lead to massive migration, will undoubtedly have an impact on global cancer statistics in years to come.</p><p>Robust data banks are essential to advancing our understanding of long-term outcomes in cancer survivors. Studies like the St Jude Lifetime Cohort and the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study have generated invaluable insights into survivorship in pediatric populations. The National Cancer Institute-funded cancer epidemiology survivor cohorts, which were established to follow survivors over time to capture data on treatment exposures, long-term health outcomes, and social determinants of health, are an important step that will inform future interventions and guidelines for care, but comprehensive population-based surveillance of survivorship outcomes remains limited.<span><sup>8</sup></span></p><p>Growing recognition of the toxicities and long-term burdens associated with cancer t","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 4","pages":"277-279"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70017","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144176851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Arnaud Beddok MD, PhD, Jonas Willmann MD, Anna Embring MD, PhD, Ane L. Appelt PhD, Panagiotis Balermpas MD, Kevin Chua MD, J. Isabelle Choi MD, Bernice Simone Elger MD, PhD, Dorota Gabrys MD, PhD, Peter Hoskin MD, Maximilian Niyazi MD, PhD, David Pasquier MD, PhD, Kelly Paradis PhD, Orit Kaidar-Person MD, PhD, Corien Plaisier BSc, Nicole C. Schmitt MD, Conor E. Steuer MD, Juliette Thariat MD, PhD, Sue S. Yom MD, PhD, Philip Poortmans MD, PhD, Eliana Vasquez Osorio PhD, Nicolaus Andratschke MD
Reirradiation (reRT), defined as administering a course of radiation therapy to a specific area previously irradiated, is an evolving treatment strategy for locoregionally recurrent cancer that offers significant potential and poses inherent challenges. Advances in such techniques as intensity-modulated and stereotactic body radiation therapy have improved precision, making reRT a viable option for complex scenarios previously deemed high-risk. Nevertheless, reRT remains associated with substantial risks—including life-threatening side effects, functional impairments, and psychosocial effects—which must be carefully balanced against the patient's overall health and the likelihood of achieving cancer control or palliation. Patient selection is essential to optimize outcomes while mitigating risks. Decisions should account for tumor characteristics at the time of primary diagnosis and recurrence, elapsed time since prior treatment, the possibility of delivering meaningful doses to the tumor, and the cumulative irradiation tolerance of normal tissues. Advanced imaging modalities, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging and fluorine-18–labeled fluorodeoxyglucose–positron emission tomography, are important for distinguishing recurrences from treatment-induced changes, refining treatment targets, and minimizing exposure to healthy tissue. Combined treatment with systemic regimens—targeted therapies and immunotherapy in particular—offers promising opportunities but requires coordination to manage side effects. Standardized guidelines, such as those from the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology-European Society for Research and Treatment of Cancer, are essential for improving the consistency of reporting, guiding clinical decision making, and fostering patient-centered care. Multidisciplinary collaboration and ongoing research, particularly through clinical trials, are central to fully exploiting reRT strategies. In addition, the development of innovative techniques, such as proton therapy, would likely enable safer treatments. These efforts aim to improve the therapeutic balance of reRT, enhancing outcomes and quality of life.
{"title":"Reirradiation: Standards, challenges, and patient-focused strategies across tumor types","authors":"Arnaud Beddok MD, PhD, Jonas Willmann MD, Anna Embring MD, PhD, Ane L. Appelt PhD, Panagiotis Balermpas MD, Kevin Chua MD, J. Isabelle Choi MD, Bernice Simone Elger MD, PhD, Dorota Gabrys MD, PhD, Peter Hoskin MD, Maximilian Niyazi MD, PhD, David Pasquier MD, PhD, Kelly Paradis PhD, Orit Kaidar-Person MD, PhD, Corien Plaisier BSc, Nicole C. Schmitt MD, Conor E. Steuer MD, Juliette Thariat MD, PhD, Sue S. Yom MD, PhD, Philip Poortmans MD, PhD, Eliana Vasquez Osorio PhD, Nicolaus Andratschke MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70016","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70016","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Reirradiation (reRT), defined as administering a course of radiation therapy to a specific area previously irradiated, is an evolving treatment strategy for locoregionally recurrent cancer that offers significant potential and poses inherent challenges. Advances in such techniques as intensity-modulated and stereotactic body radiation therapy have improved precision, making reRT a viable option for complex scenarios previously deemed high-risk. Nevertheless, reRT remains associated with substantial risks—including life-threatening side effects, functional impairments, and psychosocial effects—which must be carefully balanced against the patient's overall health and the likelihood of achieving cancer control or palliation. Patient selection is essential to optimize outcomes while mitigating risks. Decisions should account for tumor characteristics at the time of primary diagnosis and recurrence, elapsed time since prior treatment, the possibility of delivering meaningful doses to the tumor, and the cumulative irradiation tolerance of normal tissues. Advanced imaging modalities, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging and fluorine-18–labeled fluorodeoxyglucose–positron emission tomography, are important for distinguishing recurrences from treatment-induced changes, refining treatment targets, and minimizing exposure to healthy tissue. Combined treatment with systemic regimens—targeted therapies and immunotherapy in particular—offers promising opportunities but requires coordination to manage side effects. Standardized guidelines, such as those from the European Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology-European Society for Research and Treatment of Cancer, are essential for improving the consistency of reporting, guiding clinical decision making, and fostering patient-centered care. Multidisciplinary collaboration and ongoing research, particularly through clinical trials, are central to fully exploiting reRT strategies. In addition, the development of innovative techniques, such as proton therapy, would likely enable safer treatments. These efforts aim to improve the therapeutic balance of reRT, enhancing outcomes and quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 6","pages":"630-666"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70016","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144165671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Approximately one in 3500 to one in 5100 live-born infants have atypical external genital development, known as differences in sex development (DSD). In 2005, an expert consensus conference thoroughly reviewed aspects of health care for individuals with DSD. The conference proposed a classification system to help provide individualized evaluations and management. Some types of DSD are associated with germ cell tumors, which comprise a heterogeneous group of neoplasms derived from germline cells. These neoplasms commonly occur in infants, children, adolescents, and young adults. Herein, an overview of DSDs and risks for germ cell tumors is provided.
{"title":"Germ cell and other tumors in individuals with differences in sex development","authors":"Selma Feldman Witchel MD, Miguel Reyes-Múgica MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70015","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70015","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Approximately one in 3500 to one in 5100 live-born infants have atypical external genital development, known as differences in sex development (DSD). In 2005, an expert consensus conference thoroughly reviewed aspects of health care for individuals with DSD. The conference proposed a classification system to help provide individualized evaluations and management. Some types of DSD are associated with germ cell tumors, which comprise a heterogeneous group of neoplasms derived from germline cells. These neoplasms commonly occur in infants, children, adolescents, and young adults. Herein, an overview of DSDs and risks for germ cell tumors is provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 6","pages":"587-601"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144122303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dimitrios Moris MD, MSc, PhD, Alessandro Martinino MD, Sarah Schiltz BS, Peter J. Allen MD, Andrew Barbas MD, Debra Sudan MD, Lindsay King MD, MPH, Carl Berg MD, Charles Kim MD, Mustafa Bashir MD, Manisha Palta MD, Michael A. Morse MD, MHS, Michael E. Lidsky MD
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Contemporary advances in systemic and locoregional therapies have led to changes in peer-reviewed guidelines regarding systemic therapy as well as the possibility of downstaging disease that may enable some patients with advanced disease to ultimately undergo partial hepatectomy or transplantation with curative intent. This review focuses on all modalities of therapy for HCC, guided by modern-day practice-changing randomized data where available. The surgical management of HCC, including resection and transplantation, both of which have evolving criteria for what is considered biologically resectable and transplantable, as well as locoregional therapy (i.e., therapeutic embolization, ablation, radiation, and hepatic arterial infusion), are discussed. Historical and modern-day practice-changing trials evaluating immunotherapy with targeted therapies for advanced disease, as well as adjuvant systemic therapy, are also summarized. In addition, this article examines the critical dimension of toxicities and patient-oriented considerations to ensure a comprehensive and balanced discourse on treatment implications.
{"title":"Advances in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: An overview of the current and evolving therapeutic landscape for clinicians","authors":"Dimitrios Moris MD, MSc, PhD, Alessandro Martinino MD, Sarah Schiltz BS, Peter J. Allen MD, Andrew Barbas MD, Debra Sudan MD, Lindsay King MD, MPH, Carl Berg MD, Charles Kim MD, Mustafa Bashir MD, Manisha Palta MD, Michael A. Morse MD, MHS, Michael E. Lidsky MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70018","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70018","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Contemporary advances in systemic and locoregional therapies have led to changes in peer-reviewed guidelines regarding systemic therapy as well as the possibility of downstaging disease that may enable some patients with advanced disease to ultimately undergo partial hepatectomy or transplantation with curative intent. This review focuses on all modalities of therapy for HCC, guided by modern-day practice-changing randomized data where available. The surgical management of HCC, including resection and transplantation, both of which have evolving criteria for what is considered biologically resectable and transplantable, as well as locoregional therapy (i.e., therapeutic embolization, ablation, radiation, and hepatic arterial infusion), are discussed. Historical and modern-day practice-changing trials evaluating immunotherapy with targeted therapies for advanced disease, as well as adjuvant systemic therapy, are also summarized. In addition, this article examines the critical dimension of toxicities and patient-oriented considerations to ensure a comprehensive and balanced discourse on treatment implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 6","pages":"498-527"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70018","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144097591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Angélica Nogueira-Rodrigues MD, PhD, Maaike H. M. Oonk MD, PhD, Domenica Lorusso MD, PhD, Brian Slomovitz MD, Mario M. Leitão Jr MD, Glauco Baiocchi MD, PhD
Vulvar and vaginal cancers represent rare malignancies, with an incidence of 2.7 per 100,000 women for vulvar cancer, predominantly affecting women older than 60 years, although rising rates are observed in younger demographics. Approximately 90% of vulvar cancers are squamous cell carcinoma and frequently are associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Vaginal cancer, constituting less than 1% of all female cancers, similarly exhibit HPV-related trends. This review delineates the etiology, histopathology, and treatment strategies for carcinomas and vulvovaginal melanomas and sarcomas. Surgical intervention remains the primary treatment modality for vulvar cancer, involving tumor resection and inguinofemoral lymph node staging. For locally advanced vulvar carcinoma, chemoradiation is advised when exenterative surgery would be indicated. Recurrence rates within 2 years after diagnosis range from 12% to 37%. Unfortunately, systemic treatments for recurrent or metastatic disease are limited, with 5-year survival rates at approximately 20%. Current evidence primarily derives from retrospective studies or small phase 2 trials or otherwise is extrapolated from the treatment of cervical cancer. Enrollment in clinical trials is strongly advocated, along with prompt access to best supportive care to mitigate the effect of locoregional progression on quality of life. Moreover, the psychosocial implications of treatment on body image and sexuality necessitate careful consideration. Future HPV vaccination initiatives may reduce cancer incidence, although significant effects of such vaccination will manifest over decades, underscoring the urgent need to enhance treatment efficacy and minimize morbidity in vulvar and vaginal cancers.
{"title":"Comprehensive management of vulvovaginal cancers","authors":"Angélica Nogueira-Rodrigues MD, PhD, Maaike H. M. Oonk MD, PhD, Domenica Lorusso MD, PhD, Brian Slomovitz MD, Mario M. Leitão Jr MD, Glauco Baiocchi MD, PhD","doi":"10.3322/caac.70014","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.70014","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Vulvar and vaginal cancers represent rare malignancies, with an incidence of 2.7 per 100,000 women for vulvar cancer, predominantly affecting women older than 60 years, although rising rates are observed in younger demographics. Approximately 90% of vulvar cancers are squamous cell carcinoma and frequently are associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Vaginal cancer, constituting less than 1% of all female cancers, similarly exhibit HPV-related trends. This review delineates the etiology, histopathology, and treatment strategies for carcinomas and vulvovaginal melanomas and sarcomas. Surgical intervention remains the primary treatment modality for vulvar cancer, involving tumor resection and inguinofemoral lymph node staging. For locally advanced vulvar carcinoma, chemoradiation is advised when exenterative surgery would be indicated. Recurrence rates within 2 years after diagnosis range from 12% to 37%. Unfortunately, systemic treatments for recurrent or metastatic disease are limited, with 5-year survival rates at approximately 20%. Current evidence primarily derives from retrospective studies or small phase 2 trials or otherwise is extrapolated from the treatment of cervical cancer. Enrollment in clinical trials is strongly advocated, along with prompt access to best supportive care to mitigate the effect of locoregional progression on quality of life. Moreover, the psychosocial implications of treatment on body image and sexuality necessitate careful consideration. Future HPV vaccination initiatives may reduce cancer incidence, although significant effects of such vaccination will manifest over decades, underscoring the urgent need to enhance treatment efficacy and minimize morbidity in vulvar and vaginal cancers.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 5","pages":"410-435"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.70014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144066589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"75 5","pages":"410-435"},"PeriodicalIF":232.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145038317","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}