CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians最新文献

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence and outcomes using incidence data collected by central cancer registries (through 2021) and mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics (through 2022). In 2025, 2,041,910 new cancer cases and 618,120 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. The cancer mortality rate continued to decline through 2022, averting nearly 4.5 million deaths since 1991 because of smoking reductions, earlier detection for some cancers, and improved treatment. Yet alarming disparities persist; Native American people bear the highest cancer mortality, including rates that are two to three times those in White people for kidney, liver, stomach, and cervical cancers. Similarly, Black people have two-fold higher mortality than White people for prostate, stomach, and uterine corpus cancers. Overall cancer incidence has generally declined in men but has risen in women, narrowing the male-to-female rate ratio (RR) from a peak of 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.57–1.61) in 1992 to 1.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.12–1.12) in 2021. However, rates in women aged 50–64 years have already surpassed those in men (832.5 vs. 830.6 per 100,000), and younger women (younger than 50 years) have an 82% higher incidence rate than their male counterparts (141.1 vs. 77.4 per 100,000), up from 51% in 2002. Notably, lung cancer incidence in women surpassed that in men among people younger than 65 years in 2021 (15.7 vs. 15.4 per 100,000; RR, 0.98, p = 0.03). In summary, cancer mortality continues to decline, but future gains are threatened by rampant racial inequalities and a growing burden of disease in middle-aged and young adults, especially women. Continued progress will require investment in cancer prevention and access to equitable treatment, especially for Native American and Black individuals.

Poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, such as olaparib, talazoparib, rucaparib, and niraparib, comprise a therapeutic class that targets PARP proteins involved in DNA repair. Cancer cells with homologous recombination repair defects, particularly BRCA alterations, display enhanced sensitivity to these agents because of synthetic lethality induced by PARP inhibitors. These agents have significantly improved survival outcomes across various malignancies, initially gaining regulatory approval in ovarian cancer and subsequently in breast, pancreatic, and prostate cancers in different indications. This review offers a comprehensive clinical overview of PARP inhibitor approvals, emphasizing their efficacy across different cancers based on landmark phase 3 clinical trials.

Since 1946, the American Cancer Society (ACS) has invested more to find the causes and cures of cancer than any other single nongovernmental, not-for-profit organization. Each year, the ACS extends this support to investigators at institutions across the United States as part of its grants program, funding research for high school interns through world-renowned professors, including the ACS Professorship.

We applaud the grantees supported by the ACS; and, as part of this commitment to acknowledge and highlight these investigators, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians (CA), is proud to launch a new series, “American Cancer Society Research Award Spotlight.” As the flagship journal of the ACS, CA's goal is to educate and widely disseminate their work, and their passions, to our diverse audience of cancer professionals. Topics will be of relevance to the broad audience of CA, and much of the work will be developed in consultation between the authors and the editorial board. Notably, we have not restricted the scope of articles to research directly supported by the ACS. Rather, we will work with the authors on a topic that drives their career, whether in the laboratory or in the clinic, reflecting timely issues within the scope of oncology or society at large.

In addition to recipients of our standard grant mechanisms, CA will feature content from recipients of the ACS Professor Award, which recognizes key thought leaders who have made substantial contributions in cancer research.

For more information around ACS-funded cancer research, please visit https://www.cancer.org/research/currently-funded-cancer-research.html for a full list of up-to-date funded research grants and current and past ACS professors.

Don S. Dizon reports personal/consulting fees from Doximity, ImmunoGen Inc, Puma Biotechnology Inc, Data and Safety Monitoring board for AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology Inc., and GlaxoSmithKline LLC; and stock options in Midi outside the submitted work. Christina M. Annuniziata disclosed no conflicts of interest.

Despite ongoing efforts to increase the number of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and in medicine, Hispanic women remain severely underrepresented in these fields. This disparity not only hinders scientific innovation and the delivery of culturally competent medical care but also perpetuates a systemic exclusion. Research specifically addressing the challenges faced by Hispanic women, the extent of underrepresentation in these disciplines, and strategies to mitigate these issues is sparce. The authors conducted a systematic analysis of peer-reviewed articles to address this gap. The findings reveal a stark underrepresentation of Hispanic women across all examined fields, particularly compared with White women. In addition, the underrepresentation persists when compared with Hispanic men, although the disparity is less pronounced. The authors identify ongoing disparities in promotion, compensation, and retention rates for Hispanic women; present data for barriers to entry and retention; and highlight existing programs and strategies aimed at addressing this underrepresentation. Finally, a framework is presented for future studies and actionable initiatives, and the broader implications of these findings for the field of oncology are highlighted.

The first 5 decades of research in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were dominated by the cytarabine plus anthracyclines backbone, with advances in strategies including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, high-dose cytarabine, supportive care measures, and targeted therapies for the subset of patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Since 2017, a turning point in AML research, 12 agents have received regulatory approval for AML in the United States: venetoclax (BCL2 inhibitor); gemtuzumab ozogamicin (CD33 antibody–drug conjugate); midostaurin, gilteritinib, and quizartinib (fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 inhibitors); ivosidenib, olutasidenib, and enasidenib (isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 inhibitors); oral azacitidine (a partially absorbable formulation); CPX351 (liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine:daunorubicin at a molar ratio of 5:1); glasdegib (hedgehog inhibitor); and recently revumenib (menin inhibitor; approved November 2024). Oral decitabine-cedazuridine, which is approved as a bioequivalent alternative to parenteral hypomethylating agents in myelodysplastic syndrome, can be used for the same purpose in AML. Menin inhibitors, CD123 antibody–drug conjugates, and other antibodies targeting CD123, CD33, and other surface markers are showing promising results. Herein, the authors review the frontline and later line therapies in AML and discuss important research directions.

In the United States, over 2 million individuals openly identify with a gender that differs from their sex assigned at birth. A cancer diagnosis is physically and psychologically taxing—and, in some, traumatic. However, for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people, many of whom have experienced discrimination in myriad health care settings, the challenges may be even greater. These recommendations focus on how best to deliver quality cancer care to transgender men (individuals who identify as men but were assigned female sex at birth), transgender women (individuals who identify as women but were assigned male sex at birth), and people who identify somewhere beyond this gender spectrum as nonbinary or using other terms, based on the available, albeit sparse, literature. This review broaches: (1) the epidemiology of cancer in TGD individuals, including the incidence of cancer and cancer-related mortality; (2) cancer center practices that are welcoming and affirming to TGD patients; (3) the need for awareness and intentionality in the spaces of diagnosis and treatment for cancer; (4) the inevitable conclusion that gender differences exist but much more needs to be learned about the impact of gender-affirming therapy, consisting of gender-affirming surgeries and gender-affirming hormone therapy, on cancer therapy; and (5) the efficacy and perceived safety of antineoplastic therapy and gender-affirming hormone therapy.

This is the American Cancer Society's biennial update of statistics on breast cancer among women based on high-quality incidence and mortality data from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Breast cancer incidence continued an upward trend, rising by 1% annually during 2012–2021, largely confined to localized-stage and hormone receptor-positive disease. A steeper increase in women younger than 50 years (1.4% annually) versus 50 years and older (0.7%) overall was only significant among White women. Asian American/Pacific Islander women had the fastest increase in both age groups (2.7% and 2.5% per year, respectively); consequently, young Asian American/Pacific Islander women had the second lowest rate in 2000 (57.4 per 100,000) but the highest rate in 2021 (86.3 per 100,000) alongside White women (86.4 per 100,000), surpassing Black women (81.5 per 100,000). In contrast, the overall breast cancer death rate continuously declined during 1989–2022 by 44% overall, translating to 517,900 fewer breast cancer deaths during this time. However, not all women have experienced this progress; mortality remained unchanged since 1990 in American Indian/Alaska Native women, and Black women have 38% higher mortality than White women despite 5% lower incidence. Although the Black-White disparity partly reflects more triple-negative cancers, Black women have the lowest survival for every breast cancer subtype and stage except localized disease, with which they are 10% less likely to be diagnosed than White women (58% vs. 68%), highlighting disadvantages in social determinants of health. Progress against breast cancer could be accelerated by mitigating racial, ethnic, and social disparities through improved clinical trial representation and access to high-quality screening and treatment.