Cancer statistics, 2022 Siegel, Rebecca L.; Miller, Kimberly D.; Fuchs, Hannah E. ...
CA: a cancer journal for clinicians,
January/February 2022, 2022-01-00, 20220101, Letnik:
72, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
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.
Rapid advance in oncology leads to increasing survival of oncologic patients. More and more of them live long enough to reach either the natural age of menopause or, as a side effect of their ...oncotherapy, experience the cessation of gonadal function, leading to premature ovarian insufficiency, with disturbing vasomotor symtoms and long-term negative cardiovascular and skeletal effects. Thus, an ever increasing number of cancer survivors search endocrinologic help in the form of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The misinterpretation of the WHI (Women's Health Initiative) Study has lead to an irrational fear of female hormone replacement, both by the general population and medical professionals. It has seemed the logical and safe conclusion to many physicians to avoid HRT, supposing that this attitude definitely causes no harm, whereas the decision of prescribing estrogen alone or with progestins might bear oncologic and thromboembolic risks and may even lead to litigation in case of a potentially related complication. However, it was known even before the WHI results that premature menopause and hypogonadism decreases the life expectancy of women by years through its skeletal and cardiovascular effects, and this negative effect correlates with the length of the hypoestrogenaemic period. Therefore, the denial of HRT also needs to be supported by evidence and should be weighed againts the risks of HRT. Yet, the oncologic risk of HRT is extremely difficult to assess. In this work we review the latest evidence from in vitro experiments to clinical studies, regarding HRT in survivors of gynecologic and non-gynecologic cancers. Based on our literature research, we group tumours regarding the oncologic risk of properly chosen female hormone replacement therapy in cancer survivors as follows: ’HRT is advanageous’ (e.g. endometrial cancer type I, cervical adenocarcinoma, haematologic malignancies, local cutaneous malignant melanoma, colorectal cancer, hepatocellular cancer); ’HRT is neutral’ (e.g. BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers without cancer, endometrial cancer type II, uterinal carcinosarcoma and adenosarcoma, certain types of ovarian cancer, cervical, vaginal and vulvar squamous cell carcinoma, prolactinoma, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, thyroid cancer); ’HRT is relatively contraindicated’ for various reasons (e.g. leiomyosarcoma, certain types of ovarian tumours, brain tumours, advanced metastatic malignant melanoma, lung cancer, gastric cancer, bladder cancer); ’HRT is diasadvantageous and thus contraindicated’ (e.g. breast cancer, endometrial stroma sarcoma, meningioma, glioma, hormone receptor positive gastric and bladder cancer).
Emerging immune therapy, such as with the anti-programmed cell death-1 (anti-PD-1) monoclonal antibody nivolumab, has shown efficacy in tumor suppression. Patients with terminal cancer suffer from ...cancer pain as a result of bone metastasis and bone destruction, but how PD-1 blockade affects bone cancer pain remains unknown. Here, we report that mice lacking Pdcd1 (Pd1-/-) demonstrated remarkable protection against bone destruction induced by femoral inoculation of Lewis lung cancer cells. Compared with WT mice, Pd1-/- mice exhibited increased baseline pain sensitivity, but the development of bone cancer pain was compromised in Pd1-/- mice. Consistently, these beneficial effects in Pd1-/- mice were recapitulated by repeated i.v. applications of nivolumab in WT mice, even though nivolumab initially increased mechanical and thermal pain. Notably, PD-1 deficiency or nivolumab treatment inhibited osteoclastogenesis without altering tumor burden. PD-L1 and CCL2 are upregulated within the local tumor microenvironment, and PD-L1 promoted RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis through JNK activation and CCL2 secretion. Bone cancer upregulated CCR2 in primary sensory neurons, and CCR2 antagonism effectively reduced bone cancer pain. Our findings suggest that, despite a transient increase in pain sensitivity following each treatment, anti-PD-1 immunotherapy could produce long-term benefits in preventing bone destruction and alleviating bone cancer pain by suppressing osteoclastogenesis.
Background:
The risk of second primary cancers (SPC) is increasing after the first primary cancers (FPC) are diagnosed and treated. The underlying causal relationship remains unclear.
Methods:
We ...conducted a pan-cancer association (26 cancers) study in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (non-Hispanic whites). The standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was estimated as the risk of SPCs in cancer survivors based on the incidence in the general population. Furthermore, the causal effect was evaluated by two-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR, 13 FPCs) in the UK Biobank (UKB, n=459,136,, European whites) and robust analysis (radial MR and Causal Analysis Using Summary Effect estimates, CAUSE).
Results:
We found 11 significant cross-correlations among different cancers after harmonizing SIR and MR results. Whereas only 4 of them were confirmed by MR to have a robust causal relationship. In particular, patients initially diagnosed with oral pharyngeal cancer would have an increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (SIR
SEER
= 1.18, 95%Confidence Interval CI:1.05–1.31, OR
radial-MR
=1.21, 95% CI:1.13–1.30, p=6.00 × 10
-3
; OR
cause
= 1.17, 95% CI:1.05–1.31, p=8.90 × 10
-3
). Meanwhile, ovary cancer was identified to be a risk factor for soft tissue cancer (SIR
SEER
= 1.72, 95%Confidence Interval CI:1.08–2.60, OR
radial-MR
=1.39, 95% CI:1.22–1.58, p=1.07 × 10
-3
; OR
cause
= 1.36, 95% CI:1.16–1.58, p=0.01). And kidney cancer was likely to cause the development of lung cancer (SIR
SEER
= 1.28, 95%Confidence Interval CI:1.22–1.35, OR
radial-MR
=1.17, 95% CI:1.08–1.27, p=6.60 × 10
-3
; OR
cause
= 1.16, 95% CI:1.02–1.31, p=0.05) and myeloma (SIR
SEER
= 1.54, 95%Confidence Interval CI:1.33–1.78, OR
radial-MR
=1.72, 95% CI:1.21–2.45, p=0.02; OR
cause
= 1.49, 95% CI:1.04–2.34, p=0.02).
Conclusions:
A certain type of primary cancer may cause another second primary cancer, and the profound mechanisms need to be studied in the future.
Funding:
This work was in supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 81972645), Innovative research team of high-level local universities in Shanghai, Shanghai Youth Talent Support Program, intramural grant of The University of Hong Kong to Dr. Rong Na, and Shanghai Sailing Program (22YF1440500) to Dr. Da Huang.
Better cancer treatment and early detection have increased survival rates among patients with cancer. But some cancer survivors can develop a second cancer called a second primary cancer. Second primary cancers may occur months or years after successful treatment of the primary cancer. They are not caused by the spread of the original tumor like a cancer metastasis. Instead, they appear to occur independently in another location or tissue.
Scientists are trying to understand what causes second primary cancers. Genetics, lifestyle, the environment, treatments used for the initial tumor, or other factors may all contribute to individuals developing a second cancer. Learning more about who is at risk of developing a second cancer and why, may lead to new prevention, treatment or screening strategies.
Ruan, Huang et al. found that people with some primary cancers have an increased risk of secondary primary cancers in specific tissues. The researchers first looked at the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database that tracks US cancer patients to see if different types of cancers were more likely to lead to a second primary cancer. Then, the team conducted a comprehensive analysis for a causal relationship in a second extensive health database, the UK Biobank, to determine if the primary cancers may have caused the second primary cancer. The study showed that patients diagnosed with mouth or throat cancers were at increased risk of later developing a lymph node cancer called non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer were at increased risk of later developing cancer in one of the body's soft tissues. Kidney cancer is likely the cause of later lung cancers and a type of blood cancer called myeloma.
Understanding the relationships between an initial and later cancer diagnosis is essential to improve cancer survivors' care. It is especially important for patients diagnosed early in life. More studies are needed to confirm the links Ruan, Huang et al. identified and to understand the mechanism. If more studies confirm the associations, physicians may want to screen survivors for specific cancers. Scientists may also be able to use the information to develop new strategies to help prevent or treat secondary primary cancers.
The Special Issue on high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) and the contribution of the tumor microenviroment (TME) consists of reviews contributed by leaders in the OC field. As HGSOC metastases ...have a highly complex TME, there is an urgent need to better understand the TME in general, its distinct components in particular, and the role of the TME in the context of disease recurrence and development of chemoresistance. The Special Issue incorporates the current understanding of the different parts of thd TME components, including the cancer cells themselves, the cells surrounding the cancer cells or stromal cells, and the cells of the immune system, which are attracted to the site of metastases. In addition to these cells of the TME, the role of various cellular factors made by the cells of the TME are also the subject of the reviews. In addition, reviews in this Special Issue cover the complex relationships between the molecular mechanisms of HGSOC progression, including genomic, epigenomic and transcriptomic changes and changes in the immune cell landscape, as these may provide attractive new molecular targets for HGSOC therapy.
The chemokine ligand CCL2 and its receptor CCR2 are implicated in the initiation and progression of various cancers. CCL2 can activate tumour cell growth and proliferation through a variety of ...mechanisms. By interacting with CCR2, CCL2 promotes cancer cell migration and recruits immunosuppressive cells to the tumour microenvironment, favouring cancer development. Over the last several decades, a series of studies have been conducted to explore the CCL2‐CCR2 signalling axis function in malignancies. Therapeutic strategies targeting the CCL2‐ CCR2 axis have also shown promising effects, enriching our approaches for fighting against cancer. In this review, we summarize the role of the CCL2‐CCR2 signalling axis in tumorigenesis and highlight recent studies on CCL2‐CCR2 targeted therapy, focusing on preclinical studies and clinical trials.
The chemokine ligand CCL2 and its receptor CCR2 are implicated in the initiation and progression of various cancers. The CCL2‐CCR2 signalling axis plays a critical role in the promotion of pathological angiogenesis, the survival and invasion of tumour cells, and the recruitment of immune inhibitory cells. Therefore, CCL2 and CCR2 enable us to explore the sophisticated mechanisms underlying cancer development and provide potential options for treating malignant tumours.
Conventional anticancer chemotherapy has been historically thought to act through direct killing of tumor cells. This concept stems from the fact that cytotoxic drugs interfere with DNA synthesis and ...replication. Accumulating evidence, however, indicates that the antitumor activities of chemotherapy also rely on several off-target effects, especially directed to the host immune system, that cooperate for successful tumor eradication. Chemotherapeutic agents stimulate both the innate and adaptive arms of the immune system through several modalities: (i) by promoting specific rearrangements on dying tumor cells, which render them visible to the immune system; (ii) by influencing the homeostasis of the hematopoietic compartment through transient lymphodepletion followed by rebound replenishment of immune cell pools; (iii) by subverting tumor-induced immunosuppressive mechanisms and (iv) by exerting direct or indirect stimulatory effects on immune effectors. Among the indirect ways of immune cell stimulation, some cytotoxic drugs have been shown to induce an immunogenic type of cell death in tumor cells, resulting in the emission of specific signals that trigger phagocytosis of cell debris and promote the maturation of dendritic cells, ultimately resulting in the induction of potent antitumor responses. Here, we provide an extensive overview of the multiple immune-based mechanisms exploited by the most commonly employed cytotoxic drugs, with the final aim of identifying prerequisites for optimal combination with immunotherapy strategies for the development of more effective treatments against cancer.
Cancer statistics, 2023 Siegel, Rebecca L.; Miller, Kimberly D.; Wagle, Nikita Sandeep ...
CA: a cancer journal for clinicians,
January/February 2023, 2023-01-00, 20230101, Letnik:
73, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
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 and mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2023, 1,958,310 new cancer cases and 609,820 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Cancer incidence increased for prostate cancer by 3% annually from 2014 through 2019 after two decades of decline, translating to an additional 99,000 new cases; otherwise, however, incidence trends were more favorable in men compared to women. For example, lung cancer in women decreased at one half the pace of men (1.1% vs. 2.6% annually) from 2015 through 2019, and breast and uterine corpus cancers continued to increase, as did liver cancer and melanoma, both of which stabilized in men aged 50 years and older and declined in younger men. However, a 65% drop in cervical cancer incidence during 2012 through 2019 among women in their early 20s, the first cohort to receive the human papillomavirus vaccine, foreshadows steep reductions in the burden of human papillomavirus‐associated cancers, the majority of which occur in women. Despite the pandemic, and in contrast with other leading causes of death, the cancer death rate continued to decline from 2019 to 2020 (by 1.5%), contributing to a 33% overall reduction since 1991 and an estimated 3.8 million deaths averted. This progress increasingly reflects advances in treatment, which are particularly evident in the rapid declines in mortality (approximately 2% annually during 2016 through 2020) for leukemia, melanoma, and kidney cancer, despite stable/increasing incidence, and accelerated declines for lung cancer. In summary, although cancer mortality rates continue to decline, future progress may be attenuated by rising incidence for breast, prostate, and uterine corpus cancers, which also happen to have the largest racial disparities in mortality.
PDF
