American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book / ASCO. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Meeting最新文献

In the dynamic landscape of oncology, collaborative efforts between the medical community and patient advocacy groups are pivotal in shaping standards of care and advancing research. Nowhere is this collaboration more evident than in sarcoma, a group of rare cancers posing unique challenges to diagnosis, management, and treatment, which profoundly affect patient outcomes. Here, we explore the vital role of patient-centric collaboration in improving global health outcomes in sarcoma, emphasizing the transformative power of collective action and shared expertise. Challenges in sarcoma care, including diagnostic complexities, disparities in access to care, and genomic tumor heterogeneity, underscore the urgent need for collaborative solutions. Initiatives like the Sarcoma European and Latin American Network (SELNET) and The Life Raft Group (LRG) exemplify successful models of collaborative research and patient advocacy, driving advancements in diagnosis, treatment, and disease understanding. Stakeholders across disciplines are uniting to improve sarcoma care and outcomes through the development of clinical practice guidelines, continuous medical education, patient registries, virtual tumor boards, and consortium-driven research endeavors, all of which foster the growth of global collaborative groups. The success of these collaborative efforts serves as a model for other rare diseases, highlighting the potential of collective action to drive progress and innovation in health care.

The worldwide cancer burden is growing, and populations residing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are experiencing a disproportionate extent of this growth. Breast, colorectal, and cervical cancers are among the top 10 most frequently diagnosed malignancies, and they also account for a substantial degree of cancer mortality internationally. Effective screening strategies are available for all three of these cancers. Individuals from LMICs face substantial cost and access barriers to early detection programs, and late stage at diagnosis continues to be a major cause for cancer mortality in these communities. This chapter will review the epidemiology of breast, colorectal, and cervical cancers, and will explore prospects for improving global control through novel approaches to screening in cost-constrained environments.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a treatable cancer with an incidence peak in adolescent and young adult years. Treatment strategies have been developed to balance the intensity of therapy needed to maintain disease-free survival while simultaneously preserving overall survival. Risk-based, response-adapted frontline therapy has long used a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT). Successive clinical trials over the past three decades have safely reduced cumulative alkylator, anthracycline, and RT exposures for many patients. The advent of checkpoint inhibitors and the CD30-targeted antibody drug conjugate, brentuximab vedotin, has provided new options for de-escalation of conventional therapies associated with late effects in survivors treated at a young age. The ability to evaluate novel agents has been accelerated in collaborative trials inclusive of children and adolescents within the US National Clinical Trials Network and between the Children's Oncology Group and the EuroNet Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Consortium. With numerous treatment options, patients with HL and their clinicians have an opportunity for shared decision making from diagnosis, through cancer treatment, and into survivorship. Given excellent survival outcomes, decisions about treatment in classic HL should be collaborative and attention to long-term survivorship needs should remain a high priority. Patient-reported outcomes remain an important tool to aid clinicians working with survivors to optimize health status and related quality of life for decades after HL therapy.

The increasing rate of the older adult population across the world over the next 20 years along with significant developments in the treatment of oncology will require a more granular understanding of the older adult population with cancer. The ASCO Geriatric Oncology Community of Practice (COP) herein provides an outline for the field along three fundamental pillars: education, research, and implementation, inspired by ASCO's 5-Year Strategic Plan. Fundamental to improving the understanding of geriatric oncology is research that intentionally includes older adults with clinically meaningful data supported by grants across all career stages. The increased knowledge base that is developed should be conveyed among health care providers through core competencies for trainees and continuing education for practicing oncologists. ASCO's infrastructure can serve as a resource for fellowship programs interested in acquiring geriatric oncology content and provide recommendations on developing training pathways for fellows interested in pursuing formalized training in geriatrics. Incorporating geriatric oncology into everyday practice is challenging as each clinical setting has unique operational workflows with barriers that limit implementation of valuable geriatric tools such as Geriatric Assessment. Partnerships among experts in quality improvement from the ASCO Geriatric Oncology COP, the Cancer and Aging Research Group, and ASCO's Quality Training Program can provide one such venue for implementation of geriatric oncology through a structured support mechanism. The field of geriatric oncology must continue to find innovative strategies using existing resources and partnerships to address the pressing needs of the older adult population with cancer to improve patient outcomes.

Cancer care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) faces numerous challenges, such as limited resources, infrastructure constraints, and a shortage of specialized training. To address these challenges, innovative quality improvement (QI) approaches are required. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) by the ASCO provides a framework for improving care quality through evidence-based standards. This article explores how QOPI has been adapted to the local context of the Uganda Cancer Institute (UCI) and highlights the importance of aligning international best practices with local health care realities to bridge disparities in care standards. The adaptation of the QOPI program at UCI commenced with a collaborative meeting with the ASCO-QOPI team in 2020. A tailored implementation plan was developed focusing on incorporating ASCO's QOPI measures and additional metrics relevant to the Ugandan context, engaging multidisciplinary teams, and optimizing resource use by leveraging existing resources for data collection and analysis. The execution of the plan relied heavily on staff training, participatory data collection, and continuous quality improvement processes that utilized data-driven methodologies. A retrospective analysis of QOPI data of UCI from 2020 to 2023 shows significant improvements in oncology care quality, highlighted by an upward trend in QOPI assessment scores across various metrics. These reflect the journey of UCI toward aligning its oncology care practices with international standards despite facing significant challenges. UCI's experience demonstrated the feasibility and impact of implementing international QI programs in LMICs. The success demonstrates that significant improvements in cancer care quality can be achieved in resource-constrained settings through adaptability, stakeholder engagement, and strategic resource optimization. UCI's journey is a model for other LMICs seeking to raise their cancer care standards, demonstrating that QI is necessary and attainable worldwide.

The management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has advanced significantly in the past two decades. Many promising functional imaging modalities such as radiolabeled tracer targeting carbonic anhydrase IX and prostate-specific membrane antigen are under development to detect primary kidney tumors, stage systemic disease, and assess treatment response in RCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1 and cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 have changed the treatment paradigm in advanced RCC. Trials investigating novel mechanisms such as LAG-3 immune checkpoint inhibition, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, and T-cell engagers targeting RCC-associated antigens are currently ongoing. With the rapidly changing treatment landscape of RCC, the treatment sequence strategies will continue to evolve. Familiarity with the toxicities associated with the therapeutic agents and how to manage them are essential to achieve optimal patient outcomes. This review summarizes the recent developments of functional imaging and immunotherapy strategies in RCC, and the evidence supports treatment sequencing.

This article endeavors to navigate the clinical journey of bispecific antibodies (BsAbs), from elucidating common toxicities and management strategies to examining novel agents and broadening access in community health care. These drugs, commonly through T-cell activation, result in shared adverse events such as cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. Variations in target antigens and designs, however, might introduce unique toxicities for different BsAbs, warranting specific management approaches. Recent US Food and Drug Administration approvals of BsAbs targeting CD3⁺ T cells linked to CD20 for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and to B-cell maturation antigen or GPRC5D for multiple myeloma have transformed the treatment landscape for hematologic malignancies. Emerging new agents promise further enhancement and safety, exploring novel antigen targets, innovative structures such as trispecific antibodies, and the engagement of diverse immune cells. Simultaneously, the expansion of BsAbs into community practices is underway, demanding a multifaceted strategy that encompasses educational initiatives, operational adaptations, and collaborative frameworks. This ensures comprehensive treatment access, allowing every patient, irrespective of geographical or socioeconomic status, to benefit from these advancements in cancer therapy.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are being increasingly integrated into routine clinical practice to enhance individual patient care. This has been driven by recognition of the benefits of PROs in enhancing symptom management, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and overall survival, and reductions in acute health care utilization. These benefits are reflected in the emergence of value-based health care initiatives incorporating PRO symptom monitoring such as the Enhancing Oncology Model in the United States. However, implementing PROs can be challenging and it can be difficult to know where to begin to select appropriate PROs, and effectively display and appropriately interpret PRO data. This manuscript summarizes an educational session at the 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting, which provided practical guidance to clinicians seeking to incorporate PROs into the care of people with advanced cancer. We focus on why it is important to collect PROs in routine care from a patient's perspective, how to select PROs for symptom monitoring (including using static patient-reported outcome measures and newer item libraries), and highlight key pearls and pitfalls in the display and interpretation of PROs. We highlight the breadth of existing resources available to guide clinicians in PRO implementation.

The management of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer is continually evolving. Recent data now support omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in most patients with metastases in up to two sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) during upfront surgery and those with residual isolated tumor cells after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). In the upfront surgery setting, ALND is still indicated, however, in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer or more than two positive SLNs and, after NACT, in case of residual micrometastases and macrometastases. Omission of the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can be considered in many postmenopausal patients with small luminal breast cancer, particularly when axillary ultrasound is negative. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are currently aiming at eliminating the remaining indications for ALND and also establishing omission of SLNB in a broader patient population. The movement to deescalate axillary staging is in part because of the association between ALND and lymphedema, which is swelling of an extremity because of lymphatic damage and obstructed lymphatic drainage. To reduce the risk of developing this condition, patients undergoing ALND can undergo reverse mapping of the axilla and immediate reconstruction or bypass of the lymphatics from the involved extremity. Decongestion and compression are the foundation of conservative treatment for established lymphedema, while lymphovenous bypass and lymph node transfer are surgical procedures to address the physiologic dysfunction. Radiotherapy is an essential component of breast locoregional therapy: more than three decades of radiation research has optimized treatment according to patient's risk of local recurrence while substantially reducing the number of treatment visits. High-quality RCTs have shown the efficacy and safety of hypofractionation-more than 2Gy radiation dose per treatment (fraction)-significantly reducing the burden of radiotherapy treatment for many patients with breast cancer. In 2024, guidelines recommend no more than 15-16 fractions for whole-breast and nodal radiotherapy, with some recommending five fractions for whole-breast radiotherapy. In addition, simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) has been shown to be noninferior to sequential boost with regards to ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence with similar or reduced long-term side effects, also reducing overall treatment length. Further RCTs are underway investigating other indications for five fractions, including SIB and regional node irradiation, such that, in future, it may be possible for the majority of breast radiotherapy patients to be treated with a 1-week course. This manuscript serves to outline the latest updates on axillary surgical staging, lymphatic surgery, and evidence-based radiotherapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an uncommon, aggressive high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma, associated with tobacco use. It is a highly chemosensitive disease that initially responds quickly to systemic therapy, although patients with SCLC tend to develop relapse. Although the landscape of SCLC treatment has remained stagnant for many decades, the field has seen notable advances in the past few years, including the use of immunotherapy, the development of further lines of systemic therapy, the refinement of thoracic and intracranial radiotherapy, and-most recently-the promise of more targeted therapies. Patients with SCLC also must face unique psychosocial burdens in their experience with their cancer, distinct from patients with other lung cancer. In this article, we review the latest literature and future directions in the management and investigation of SCLC, as well as the critical decisions that providers and patients must navigate in the current landscape. We also present the perspectives of several patients with SCLC in conjunction with this summary, to spotlight their individual journeys in the context of this challenging disease.