Showing papers on "Cancer published in 2022"

Cancer statistics, 2022

Abstract: 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. Incidence data (through 2018) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2019) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2022, 1,918,030 new cancer cases and 609,360 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States, including approximately 350 deaths per day from lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death. Incidence during 2014 through 2018 continued a slow increase for female breast cancer (by 0.5% annually) and remained stable for prostate cancer, despite a 4% to 6% annual increase for advanced disease since 2011. Consequently, the proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed at a distant stage increased from 3.9% to 8.2% over the past decade. In contrast, lung cancer incidence continued to decline steeply for advanced disease while rates for localized‐stage increased suddenly by 4.5% annually, contributing to gains both in the proportion of localized‐stage diagnoses (from 17% in 2004 to 28% in 2018) and 3‐year relative survival (from 21% to 31%). Mortality patterns reflect incidence trends, with declines accelerating for lung cancer, slowing for breast cancer, and stabilizing for prostate cancer. In summary, progress has stagnated for breast and prostate cancers but strengthened for lung cancer, coinciding with changes in medical practice related to cancer screening and/or treatment. More targeted cancer control interventions and investment in improved early detection and treatment would facilitate reductions in cancer mortality.

Hallmarks of Cancer: New Dimensions

Abstract: The hallmarks of cancer conceptualization is a heuristic tool for distilling the vast complexity of cancer phenotypes and genotypes into a provisional set of underlying principles. As knowledge of cancer mechanisms has progressed, other facets of the disease have emerged as potential refinements. Herein, the prospect is raised that phenotypic plasticity and disrupted differentiation is a discrete hallmark capability, and that nonmutational epigenetic reprogramming and polymorphic microbiomes both constitute distinctive enabling characteristics that facilitate the acquisition of hallmark capabilities. Additionally, senescent cells, of varying origins, may be added to the roster of functionally important cell types in the tumor microenvironment. SIGNIFICANCE: Cancer is daunting in the breadth and scope of its diversity, spanning genetics, cell and tissue biology, pathology, and response to therapy. Ever more powerful experimental and computational tools and technologies are providing an avalanche of "big data" about the myriad manifestations of the diseases that cancer encompasses. The integrative concept embodied in the hallmarks of cancer is helping to distill this complexity into an increasingly logical science, and the provisional new dimensions presented in this perspective may add value to that endeavor, to more fully understand mechanisms of cancer development and malignant progression, and apply that knowledge to cancer medicine.

Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants

Abstract: The cancer burden in the United States of America (USA) has decreased gradually. However, China is experiencing a transition in its cancer profiles, with greater incidence of cancers that were previously more common in the USA. This study compared the latest cancer profiles, trends, and determinants between China and USA.This was a comparative study using open-source data. Cancer cases and deaths in 2022 were calculated using cancer estimates from GLOBOCAN 2020 and population estimates from the United Nations. Trends in cancer incidence and mortality rates in the USA used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and National Center for Health Statistics. Chinese data were obtained from cancer registry reports. Data from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 and a decomposition method were used to express cancer deaths as the product of four determinant factors.In 2022, there will be approximately 4,820,000 and 2,370,000 new cancer cases, and 3,210,000 and 640,000 cancer deaths in China and the USA, respectively. The most common cancers are lung cancer in China and breast cancer in the USA, and lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both. Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates for lung cancer and colorectal cancer in the USA have decreased significantly recently, but rates of liver cancer have increased slightly. Rates of stomach, liver, and esophageal cancer decreased gradually in China, but rates have increased for colorectal cancer in the whole population, prostate cancer in men, and other seven cancer types in women. Increases in adult population size and population aging were major determinants for incremental cancer deaths, and case-fatality rates contributed to reduced cancer deaths in both countries.The decreasing cancer burden in liver, stomach, and esophagus, and increasing burden in lung, colorectum, breast, and prostate, mean that cancer profiles in China and the USA are converging. Population aging is a growing determinant of incremental cancer burden. Progress in cancer prevention and care in the USA, and measures to actively respond to population aging, may help China to reduce the cancer burden.

The 5th edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours: Myeloid and Histiocytic/Dendritic Neoplasms

Abstract: Abstract The upcoming 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours is part of an effort to hierarchically catalogue human cancers arising in various organ systems within a single relational database. This paper summarizes the new WHO classification scheme for myeloid and histiocytic/dendritic neoplasms and provides an overview of the principles and rationale underpinning changes from the prior edition. The definition and diagnosis of disease types continues to be based on multiple clinicopathologic parameters, but with refinement of diagnostic criteria and emphasis on therapeutically and/or prognostically actionable biomarkers. While a genetic basis for defining diseases is sought where possible, the classification strives to keep practical worldwide applicability in perspective. The result is an enhanced, contemporary, evidence-based classification of myeloid and histiocytic/dendritic neoplasms, rooted in molecular biology and an organizational structure that permits future scalability as new discoveries continue to inexorably inform future editions.

Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in Previously Treated HER2-Low Advanced Breast Cancer.

Abstract: BACKGROUND Among breast cancers without human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) amplification, overexpression, or both, a large proportion express low levels of HER2 that may be targetable. Currently available HER2-directed therapies have been ineffective in patients with these "HER2-low" cancers. METHODS We conducted a phase 3 trial involving patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer who had received one or two previous lines of chemotherapy. (Low expression of HER2 was defined as a score of 1+ on immunohistochemical [IHC] analysis or as an IHC score of 2+ and negative results on in situ hybridization.) Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan or the physician's choice of chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the hormone receptor-positive cohort. The key secondary end points were progression-free survival among all patients and overall survival in the hormone receptor-positive cohort and among all patients. RESULTS Of 557 patients who underwent randomization, 494 (88.7%) had hormone receptor-positive disease and 63 (11.3%) had hormone receptor-negative disease. In the hormone receptor-positive cohort, the median progression-free survival was 10.1 months in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 5.4 months in the physician's choice group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; P<0.001), and overall survival was 23.9 months and 17.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; P = 0.003). Among all patients, the median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 5.1 months in the physician's choice group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.50; P<0.001), and overall survival was 23.4 months and 16.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; P = 0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 52.6% of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan and 67.4% of those who received the physician's choice of chemotherapy. Adjudicated, drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 12.1% of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan; 0.8% had grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS In this trial involving patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer, trastuzumab deruxtecan resulted in significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than the physician's choice of chemotherapy. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca; DESTINY-Breast04 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03734029.).

Cancer statistics in China and United States, 2022: profiles, trends, and determinants.

Abstract: The cancer burden in the United States of America (USA) has decreased gradually. However, China is experiencing a transition in its cancer profiles, with greater incidence of cancers that were previously more common in the USA. This study compared the latest cancer profiles, trends, and determinants between China and USA.This was a comparative study using open-source data. Cancer cases and deaths in 2022 were calculated using cancer estimates from GLOBOCAN 2020 and population estimates from the United Nations. Trends in cancer incidence and mortality rates in the USA used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and National Center for Health Statistics. Chinese data were obtained from cancer registry reports. Data from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 and a decomposition method were used to express cancer deaths as the product of four determinant factors.In 2022, there will be approximately 4,820,000 and 2,370,000 new cancer cases, and 3,210,000 and 640,000 cancer deaths in China and the USA, respectively. The most common cancers are lung cancer in China and breast cancer in the USA, and lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both. Age-standardized incidence and mortality rates for lung cancer and colorectal cancer in the USA have decreased significantly recently, but rates of liver cancer have increased slightly. Rates of stomach, liver, and esophageal cancer decreased gradually in China, but rates have increased for colorectal cancer in the whole population, prostate cancer in men, and other seven cancer types in women. Increases in adult population size and population aging were major determinants for incremental cancer deaths, and case-fatality rates contributed to reduced cancer deaths in both countries.The decreasing cancer burden in liver, stomach, and esophagus, and increasing burden in lung, colorectum, breast, and prostate, mean that cancer profiles in China and the USA are converging. Population aging is a growing determinant of incremental cancer burden. Progress in cancer prevention and care in the USA, and measures to actively respond to population aging, may help China to reduce the cancer burden.

Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019

Abstract:

Importance

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden.

Objective

To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019.

Evidence Review

The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).

Findings

In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022

Abstract: The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States due to the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics, and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Database are presented for the most prevalent cancer types by race, and cancer‐related and treatment‐related side‐effects are also briefly described. More than 18 million Americans (8.3 million males and 9.7 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2022. The 3 most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,523,230), melanoma of the skin (760,640), and colon and rectum (726,450) among males and breast (4,055,770), uterine corpus (891,560), and thyroid (823,800) among females. More than one‐half (53%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and two‐thirds (67%) were aged 65 years or older. One of the largest racial disparities in treatment is for rectal cancer, for which 41% of Black patients with stage I disease receive proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 66% of White patients. Surgical receipt is also substantially lower among Black patients with non‐small cell lung cancer, 49% for stages I‐II and 16% for stage III versus 55% and 22% for White patients, respectively. These treatment disparities are exacerbated by the fact that Black patients continue to be less likely to be diagnosed with stage I disease than White patients for most cancers, with some of the largest disparities for female breast (53% vs 68%) and endometrial (59% vs 73%). Although there are a growing number of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence‐based strategies and equitable access to available resources are needed to mitigate disparities for communities of color and optimize care for people with a history of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:409‐436.

Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Abstract: Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

PD-1 Blockade in Mismatch Repair–Deficient, Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Abstract: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation followed by surgical resection of the rectum is a standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. A subset of rectal cancer is caused by a deficiency in mismatch repair. Because mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer is responsive to programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade in the context of metastatic disease, it was hypothesized that checkpoint blockade could be effective in patients with mismatch repair-deficient, locally advanced rectal cancer.We initiated a prospective phase 2 study in which single-agent dostarlimab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was administered every 3 weeks for 6 months in patients with mismatch repair-deficient stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma. This treatment was to be followed by standard chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Patients who had a clinical complete response after completion of dostarlimab therapy would proceed without chemoradiotherapy and surgery. The primary end points are sustained clinical complete response 12 months after completion of dostarlimab therapy or pathological complete response after completion of dostarlimab therapy with or without chemoradiotherapy and overall response to neoadjuvant dostarlimab therapy with or without chemoradiotherapy.A total of 12 patients have completed treatment with dostarlimab and have undergone at least 6 months of follow-up. All 12 patients (100%; 95% confidence interval, 74 to 100) had a clinical complete response, with no evidence of tumor on magnetic resonance imaging, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography, endoscopic evaluation, digital rectal examination, or biopsy. At the time of this report, no patients had received chemoradiotherapy or undergone surgery, and no cases of progression or recurrence had been reported during follow-up (range, 6 to 25 months). No adverse events of grade 3 or higher have been reported.Mismatch repair-deficient, locally advanced rectal cancer was highly sensitive to single-agent PD-1 blockade. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the duration of response. (Funded by the Simon and Eve Colin Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04165772.).

Nivolumab versus sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 459): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial

Abstract: Single-agent nivolumab showed durable responses, manageable safety, and promising survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the phase 1-2 CheckMate 040 study. We aimed to investigate nivolumab monotherapy compared with sorafenib monotherapy in the first-line setting for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at medical centres across 22 countries and territories in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America, patients at least 18 years old with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for, or whose disease had progressed after, surgery or locoregional treatment; with no previous systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma, with Child-Pugh class A and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and regardless of viral hepatitis status were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system to receive nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02576509.Between Jan 11, 2016, and May 24, 2017, 743 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (nivolumab, n=371; sorafenib, n=372). At the primary analysis, the median follow-up for overall survival was 15·2 months (IQR 5·7-28·0) for the nivolumab group and 13·4 months (5·7-25·9) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 16·4 months (95% CI 13·9-18·4) with nivolumab and 14·7 months (11·9-17·2) with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·72-1·02]; p=0·075; minimum follow-up 22·8 months); the protocol-defined significance level of p=0·0419 was not reached. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (1 [<1%] of 367 patients in the nivolumab group vs 52 [14%] of patients in the sorafenib group), aspartate aminotransferase increase (22 [6%] vs 13 [4%]), and hypertension (0 vs 26 [7%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 43 (12%) patients receiving nivolumab and 39 (11%) patients receiving sorafenib. Four deaths in the nivolumab group and one death in the sorafenib group were assessed as treatment related.First-line nivolumab treatment did not significantly improve overall survival compared with sorafenib, but clinical activity and a favourable safety profile were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, nivolumab might be considered a therapeutic option for patients in whom tyrosine kinase inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs are contraindicated or have substantial risks.Bristol Myers Squibb in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Abstract: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) provide recommended management for patients with NSCLC, including diagnosis, primary treatment, surveillance for relapse, and subsequent treatment. Patients with metastatic lung cancer who are eligible for targeted therapies or immunotherapies are now surviving longer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC focuses on targeted therapies for patients with metastatic NSCLC and actionable mutations.

Trastuzumab Deruxtecan versus Trastuzumab Emtansine for Breast Cancer

Abstract: Trastuzumab emtansine is the current standard treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–positive metastatic breast cancer whose disease progresses after treatment with a combination of anti-HER2 antibodies and a taxane. Download a PDF of the Research Summary. We conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan (a HER2 antibody–drug conjugate) with those of trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. The primary end point was progression-free survival (as determined by blinded independent central review); secondary end points included overall survival, objective response, and safety. Among 524 randomly assigned patients, the percentage of those who were alive without disease progression at 12 months was 75.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69.8 to 80.7) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 34.1% (95% CI, 27.7 to 40.5) with trastuzumab emtansine (hazard ratio for progression or death from any cause, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.37; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were alive at 12 months was 94.1% (95% CI, 90.3 to 96.4) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 85.9% (95% CI, 80.9 to 89.7) with trastuzumab emtansine (hazard ratio for death, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86; prespecified significance boundary not reached). An overall response (a complete or partial response) occurred in 79.7% (95% CI, 74.3 to 84.4) of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan and in 34.2% (95% CI, 28.5 to 40.3) of those who received trastuzumab emtansine. The incidence of drug-related adverse events of any grade was 98.1% with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 86.6% with trastuzumab emtansine, and the incidence of drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was 45.1% and 39.8%, respectively. Adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 10.5% of the patients in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and in 1.9% of those in the trastuzumab emtansine group; none of these events were of grade 4 or 5. Among patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane, the risk of disease progression or death was lower among those who received trastuzumab deruxtecan than among those who received trastuzumab emtansine. Treatment with trastuzumab deruxtecan was associated with interstitial lung disease and pneumonitis. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca; DESTINY-Breast03 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03529110.) QUICK TAKE VIDEO SUMMARYTrastuzumab Deruxtecan for Breast Cancer 02:05

Event-free Survival with Pembrolizumab in Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Abstract: The addition of pembrolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy led to a significantly higher percentage of patients with early triple-negative breast cancer having a pathological complete response (defined as no invasive cancer in the breast and negative nodes) at definitive surgery in an earlier analysis of this phase 3 trial of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy. The primary results regarding event-free survival in this trial have not been reported.We randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated stage II or III triple-negative breast cancer to receive neoadjuvant therapy with four cycles of pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks plus paclitaxel and carboplatin, followed by four cycles of pembrolizumab or placebo plus doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide or epirubicin-cyclophosphamide. After definitive surgery, patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab (pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group) or placebo (placebo-chemotherapy group) every 3 weeks for up to nine cycles. The primary end points were pathological complete response (the results for which have been reported previously) and event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization to the date of disease progression that precluded definitive surgery, local or distant recurrence, occurrence of a second primary cancer, or death from any cause. Safety was also assessed.Of the 1174 patients who underwent randomization, 784 were assigned to the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 390 to the placebo-chemotherapy group. The median follow-up at this fourth planned interim analysis (data cutoff, March 23, 2021) was 39.1 months. The estimated event-free survival at 36 months was 84.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 81.7 to 86.9) in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group, as compared with 76.8% (95% CI, 72.2 to 80.7) in the placebo-chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for event or death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82; P<0.001). Adverse events occurred predominantly during the neoadjuvant phase and were consistent with the established safety profiles of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy.In patients with early triple-negative breast cancer, neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab after surgery, resulted in significantly longer event-free survival than neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-522 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03036488.).

Five-Year Survival Outcomes From the PACIFIC Trial: Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Abstract: The phase III PACIFIC trial compared durvalumab with placebo in patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer and no disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Consolidation durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87; P = .00251) and progression-free survival (PFS [blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1]; stratified HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .0001), with manageable safety. We report updated, exploratory analyses of survival, approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomly assigned.Patients with WHO performance status 0 or 1 (any tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 status) were randomly assigned (2:1) to durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; administered once every 2 weeks for 12 months) or placebo, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. Time-to-event end point analyses were performed using stratified log-rank tests. Medians and landmark survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.Seven hundred and nine of 713 randomly assigned patients received durvalumab (473 of 476) or placebo (236 of 237). As of January 11, 2021 (median follow-up, 34.2 months [all patients]; 61.6 months [censored patients]), updated OS (stratified HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; median, 47.5 v 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68; median, 16.9 v 5.6 months) remained consistent with the primary analyses. Estimated 5-year rates (95% CI) for durvalumab and placebo were 42.9% (38.2 to 47.4) versus 33.4% (27.3 to 39.6) for OS and 33.1% (28.0 to 38.2) versus 19.0% (13.6 to 25.2) for PFS.These updated analyses demonstrate robust and sustained OS and durable PFS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and 33.1% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive and free of disease progression, establishing a new benchmark for standard of care in this setting.

Nivolumab Combination Therapy in Advanced Esophageal Squamous-Cell Carcinoma

Abstract: First-line chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma results in poor outcomes. The monoclonal antibody nivolumab has shown an overall survival benefit over chemotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. Download a PDF of the Research Summary. In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus the monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor-cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of 1% or greater and then in the overall population (all randomly assigned patients). A total of 970 patients underwent randomization. At a 13-month minimum follow-up, overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone, both among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 15.4 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.54; 99.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.80; P<0.001) and in the overall population (median, 13.2 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.74; 99.1% CI, 0.58 to 0.96; P=0.002). Overall survival was also significantly longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 13.7 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.64; 98.6% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P=0.001) and in the overall population (median, 12.7 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.78; 98.2% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P=0.01). Among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater, a significant progression-free survival benefit was also seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy over chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; 98.5% CI, 0.46 to 0.92; P=0.002) but not with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with chemotherapy. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was 47% with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, 32% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and 36% with chemotherapy alone. Both first-line treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma, with no new safety signals identified. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 648 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03143153.) QUICK TAKE VIDEO SUMMARYImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Esophageal Cancer 02:20

Breast Cancer Statistics, 2022

Abstract: This article is the American Cancer Society’s update on female breast cancer statistics in the United States, including population‐based data on incidence, mortality, survival, and mammography screening. Breast cancer incidence rates have risen in most of the past four decades; during the most recent data years (2010–2019), the rate increased by 0.5% annually, largely driven by localized‐stage and hormone receptor‐positive disease. In contrast, breast cancer mortality rates have declined steadily since their peak in 1989, albeit at a slower pace in recent years (1.3% annually from 2011 to 2020) than in the previous decade (1.9% annually from 2002 to 2011). In total, the death rate dropped by 43% during 1989–2020, translating to 460,000 fewer breast cancer deaths during that time. The death rate declined similarly for women of all racial/ethnic groups except American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom the rates were stable. However, despite a lower incidence rate in Black versus White women (127.8 vs. 133.7 per 100,000), the racial disparity in breast cancer mortality remained unwavering, with the death rate 40% higher in Black women overall (27.6 vs. 19.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2016–2020) and two‐fold higher among adult women younger than 50 years (12.1 vs. 6.5 deaths per 100,000). Black women have the lowest 5‐year relative survival of any racial/ethnic group for every molecular subtype and stage of disease (except stage I), with the largest Black–White gaps in absolute terms for hormone receptor‐positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐negative disease (88% vs. 96%), hormone receptor‐negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐positive disease (78% vs. 86%), and stage III disease (64% vs. 77%). Progress against breast cancer mortality could be accelerated by mitigating racial disparities through increased access to high‐quality screening and treatment via nationwide Medicaid expansion and partnerships between community stakeholders, advocacy organizations, and health systems.

Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab for Advanced Endometrial Cancer

Abstract: Standard therapy for advanced endometrial cancer after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy remains unclear.

Darolutamide and Survival in Metastatic, Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer

Abstract: Darolutamide is a potent androgen-receptor inhibitor that has been associated with increased overall survival among patients with nonmetastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer. Whether a combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel would increase survival among patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer is unknown.In this international, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive darolutamide (at a dose of 600 mg [two 300-mg tablets] twice daily) or matching placebo, both in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. The primary end point was overall survival.The primary analysis involved 1306 patients (651 in the darolutamide group and 655 in the placebo group); 86.1% of the patients had disease that was metastatic at the time of the initial diagnosis. At the data cutoff date for the primary analysis (October 25, 2021), the risk of death was significantly lower, by 32.5%, in the darolutamide group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.80; P<0.001). Darolutamide was also associated with consistent benefits with respect to the secondary end points and prespecified subgroups. Adverse events were similar in the two groups, and the incidences of the most common adverse events (occurring in ≥10% of the patients) were highest during the overlapping docetaxel treatment period in both groups. The frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 66.1% in the darolutamide group and 63.5% in the placebo group; neutropenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event (in 33.7% and 34.2%, respectively).In this trial involving patients with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, overall survival was significantly longer with the combination of darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel than with placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel, and the addition of darolutamide led to improvement in key secondary end points. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. (Funded by Bayer and Orion Pharma; ARASENS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02799602.).

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors: long-term implications of toxicity

Abstract: The development of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has heralded a new era in cancer treatment, enabling the possibility of long-term survival in patients with metastatic disease, and providing new therapeutic indications in earlier-stage settings. As such, characterizing the long-term implications of receiving ICIs has grown in importance. An abundance of evidence exists describing the acute clinical toxicities of these agents, although chronic effects have not been as well catalogued. Nonetheless, emerging evidence indicates that persistent toxicities might be more common than initially suggested. While generally low-grade, these chronic sequelae can affect the endocrine, rheumatological, pulmonary, neurological and other organ systems. Fatal toxicities also comprise a diverse set of clinical manifestations and can occur in 0.4–1.2% of patients. This risk is a particularly relevant consideration in light of the possibility of long-term survival. Finally, the effects of immune-checkpoint blockade on a diverse range of immune processes, including atherosclerosis, heart failure, neuroinflammation, obesity and hypertension, have not been characterized but remain an important area of research with potential relevance to cancer survivors. In this Review, we describe the current evidence for chronic immune toxicities and the long-term implications of these effects for patients receiving ICIs. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically improved the outcomes of patients with advanced-stage solid tumours, including the potential for long-term remission in a subset. However, long-term follow-up data reveal a risk of chronic toxicities from these agents, which can have important quality-of-life implications. In this Review, the authors describe the current level of evidence of chronic toxicities of ICIs and their implications for patients

Combination strategies with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade: current advances and future directions

Abstract: Antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) or its ligand PD-L1 rescue T cells from exhausted status and revive immune response against cancer cells. Based on the immense success in clinical trials, ten α-PD-1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, cemiplimab, sintilimab, camrelizumab, toripalimab, tislelizumab, zimberelimab, prolgolimab, and dostarlimab) and three α-PD-L1 antibodies (atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab) have been approved for various types of cancers. Nevertheless, the low response rate of α-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy remains to be resolved. For most cancer patients, PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is not the sole speed-limiting factor of antitumor immunity, and it is insufficient to motivate effective antitumor immune response by blocking PD-1/PD-L1 axis. It has been validated that some combination therapies, including α-PD-1/PD-L1 plus chemotherapy, radiotherapy, angiogenesis inhibitors, targeted therapy, other immune checkpoint inhibitors, agonists of the co-stimulatory molecule, stimulator of interferon genes agonists, fecal microbiota transplantation, epigenetic modulators, or metabolic modulators, have superior antitumor efficacies and higher response rates. Moreover, bifunctional or bispecific antibodies containing α-PD-1/PD-L1 moiety also elicited more potent antitumor activity. These combination strategies simultaneously boost multiple processes in cancer-immunity cycle, remove immunosuppressive brakes, and orchestrate an immunosupportive tumor microenvironment. In this review, we summarized the synergistic antitumor efficacies and mechanisms of α-PD-1/PD-L1 in combination with other therapies. Moreover, we focused on the advances of α-PD-1/PD-L1-based immunomodulatory strategies in clinical studies. Given the heterogeneity across patients and cancer types, individualized combination selection could improve the effects of α-PD-1/PD-L1-based immunomodulatory strategies and relieve treatment resistance.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Head and Neck Cancers, Version 1.2022.

Abstract: The NCCN Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancers address tumors arising in the oral cavity (including mucosal lip), pharynx, larynx, and paranasal sinuses. Occult primary cancer, salivary gland cancer, and mucosal melanoma (MM) are also addressed. The specific site of disease, stage, and pathologic findings guide treatment (eg, the appropriate surgical procedure, radiation targets, dose and fractionation of radiation, indications for systemic therapy). The NCCN Head and Neck Cancers Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's most recent recommendations regarding management of HPV-positive oropharynx cancer and ongoing research in this area.