CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians最新文献

{"title":"MCED blood test boosts cancer detection in symptomatic patients","authors":"Mike Fillon","doi":"10.3322/caac.21817","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21817","url":null,"abstract":"<p>A large observational study of patients in England and Wales evaluated the effectiveness of the methylation-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood test Galleri to identify over 50 types of cancer in symptomatic subjects. According to the University of Oxford researchers, who led the SYMPLIFY study, never before has an MCED test’s performance been evaluated in patients suspected of having some form of cancer.</p><p>“This is the first study to examine the performance of this blood test in a symptomatic population,” says study co-author Mark R. Middleton, PhD, professor of experimental cancer medicine, a consultant medical oncologist, and head of the Department of Oncology at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. “The test has been developed for screening asymptomatic people in the general population. Looking at people with symptoms is important because most people with cancer have symptoms before they present.”</p><p>Dr Middleton, who is also director of the cancer research UKOxford Centre, adds, “Often, the symptoms are vague and family physicians have to work out whom to refer for invasive tests. We were interested in seeing how [this blood test] might perform here, to see if it could help sort out who needs more tests for what symptoms.” The study appears in <i>Lancet Oncology</i> (doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00277-2).</p><p>Each subject was referred for imaging, endoscopy, or other diagnostic tests as follow-ups for suspected gynecological, lung, lower gastrointestinal, or upper gastrointestinal cancer and other non-specific but suspicious symptoms. Each subject also provided a blood sample for DNA testing.</p><p>According to the researchers, the most frequently reported symptoms were unexplained weight loss (1318, 24.1%), erratic bowel habits (1199, 22.0%), postmenopausal bleeding (875, 16.0%), and rectal bleeding (858, 15.7%). Other symptoms included abdominal pain (794, 14.5%), other pains (580, 10.6%), dysphagia (482, 8.8%) and anemia (390, 7.1%)</p><p>The researchers found that the MCED test detected cancer signals in 323 subjects. Of these, 244 were diagnosed with cancer, a positive predictive value of 75.5% and a negative predictive value of 97.6%. The investigators found that the test’s sensitivity for cancer detection increased with more advanced cancer stages, and that there was some variation in accuracy depending on referral pathway, symptom cluster, and symptoms. In essence, they wrote that the results illustrated the importance of clinical context in interpreting the results and urged careful evaluation of each individual case.</p><p>With these caveats, researchers found that the most common cancer diagnoses of the 368 cancers detected were colorectal cancer (137, 37.2%), lung cancer (81, 22.0%), uterine cancer (30, 8.2%), oesophago-gastric cancer (22, 6.0%), and ovarian cancer (14, 3.8%).</p><p>The overall sensitivity and specificity of the MCED test for uncovering the 368 cancers was 66.3% and 98.4%, respecti","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"73 6","pages":"552-554"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71435795","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}

{"title":"To lower cancer risks, study shows that food choices matter","authors":"Mike Fillon","doi":"10.3322/caac.21816","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21816","url":null,"abstract":"<p>It has long been believed—but with few large-scale epidemiological studies to prove it—that ultra-processed foods can contribute to a number of cancers. A new European observational study, based on results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort study, offers more proof validating the issue. The EPIC study goes one step further by showing how diet alternatives can result in a lower risk of certain cancers. The study appears in <i>Lancet Planetary Health</i> (doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(23)00021-9).</p><p>The EPIC cohort study included participants from 23 universities, university hospitals, and cancer research centers in 10 European countries recruited from March 18, 1991, to July 2, 2001. The researchers administered dietary questionnaires to determine each subject’s food and drink consumption. They identified participants with cancer by checking cancer registries and other sources, such as health insurance records and follow up questioning. Participants were excluded if they had a cancer diagnosis before recruitment, and other factors they believed might distort the research. Of the more than 521,000 EPIC subjects, 450,111 were included in this study, of which 318,686 were female (70.8%) and 131,425 were male (29.2%).</p><p>“We performed a substitution analysis to assess the effect of replacing 10% of processed foods and ultra-processed foods with 10% of minimally processed foods on cancer risk at 25 anatomical sites using Cox proportional–hazards models,” the researchers wrote.</p><p>“We do not consider our study ground-breaking, since other cohorts like Nutrinet Sante, UK Biobank, etc., have published similar results,” says study author Inge Huybrechts, PhD, a nutritional epidemiologist and head of the lifestyle exposure and interventions team at the World Health Organization in Lyon, France. “However, we would like to underline that it is the largest multi-center prospective cohort study conducted so far, with multiple cancer endpoints and careful control for multiple testing that confirm that our findings are robust. In addition, we [were] the first cohort to validate our food processing indicators against food processing biomarkers, which further supports our findings” [doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.1035580].</p><p>The researchers found that a diet that focused on minimally processed and fresh foods, including whole grains, dairy products, nonstarchy vegetables, and even coffee, may reduce the risk for developing several cancers overall, while cancer risks increased when diets included more processed and ultra-processed foods.</p><p>The study also reported that when 10% of processed foods were replaced by minimally processed foods, the risk for cancer overall was reduced by 4%, and the risk for several specific cancer types was significantly reduced, including the risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma (43%) and hepatocellular carcinoma (23%).</p><p>Substituting minimally processed foods for ultra-processed f","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"73 6","pages":"549-551"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71435794","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}

{"title":"Screening for lung cancer","authors":"","doi":"10.3322/caac.21815","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21815","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The American Cancer Society has updated its guideline for lung cancer screening in people who are at higher risk because of their history of smoking.</p><p>The test used to screen for lung cancer is a LDCT scan. During an LDCT scan, you lie on a table while a computed tomography scanner uses x-rays to make detailed images of your chest, including your lungs. The scan only takes a few minutes.</p><p>LDCT scans can help find abnormal areas in the lungs that may be cancer, before they start causing any symptoms. An LDCT scan is recommended once a year for lung cancer screening.</p><p>For more information about lung cancer and screening, visit the American Cancer Society (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/lung-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/detection.html).</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 1","pages":"82-83"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21815","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71417639","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":"Lung cancer diagnosis and mortality beyond 15 years since quit in individuals with a 20+ pack-year history: A systematic review","authors":"Karli K. Kondo PhD,&nbsp;Basmah Rahman MPH,&nbsp;Chelsea K. Ayers MPH,&nbsp;Rose Relevo MLIS, MSMI,&nbsp;Jessica C. Griffin MS,&nbsp;Michael T. Halpern MD, PhD, MPH","doi":"10.3322/caac.21808","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21808","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Current US lung cancer screening recommendations limit eligibility to adults with a pack-year (PY) history of ≥20 years and the first 15 years since quit (YSQ). The authors conducted a systematic review to better understand lung cancer incidence, risk and mortality among otherwise eligible individuals in this population beyond 15 YSQ. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched through February 14, 2023, and relevant articles were searched by hand. Included studies examined the relationship between adults with both a ≥20-PY history and ≥15 YSQ and lung cancer diagnosis, mortality, and screening ineligibility. One investigator abstracted data and a second confirmed. Two investigators independently assessed study quality and certainty of evidence (COE) and resolved discordance through consensus. From 2636 titles, 22 studies in 26 articles were included. Three studies provided low COE of elevated lung cancer incidence beyond 15 YSQ, as compared with people who never smoked, and six studies provided moderate COE that the risk of a lung cancer diagnosis after 15 YSQ declines gradually, but with no clinically significant difference just before and after 15 YSQ. Studies examining lung cancer-related disparities suggest that outcomes after 15 YSQ were similar between African American/Black and White participants; increasing YSQ would expand eligibility for African American/Black individuals, but for a significantly larger proportion of White individuals. The authors observed that the risk of lung cancer not only persists beyond 15 YSQ but that, compared with individuals who never smoked, the risk may remain significantly elevated for 2 or 3 decades. Future research of nationally representative samples with consistent reporting across studies is needed, as are better data from which to examine the effects on health disparities across different populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 1","pages":"84-114"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21808","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71417637","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":"Reviewer acknowledgement 2023","authors":"","doi":"10.3322/caac.21821","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21821","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In order to maintain the high standards of <i>CA</i>’s content, the Editors of <i>CA</i> rely on the knowledge and dedication of many experts in deciding which topics to pursue, which manuscripts to publish, and what modifications to make to ensure medical and scientific accuracy and suitability for our readers. We thank our Associate Editors and our Editorial Advisory Board, who continue to provide these services for us time and time again.</p><p>We are also greatly indebted to the effort and expertise of the following individuals for reviewing manuscripts for the journal from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023. These individuals go beyond expectations by consistently and expeditiously delivering comprehensive, discerning reviews.</p><p>Larry Anderson Jr.</p><p>Mary Beth Beasley</p><p>Jacques Beauvais</p><p>Paul Bunn</p><p>George Calin</p><p>Steve Cohen</p><p>John Cramer</p><p>Sophie Dream</p><p>Marc Emerson</p><p>Cecilia Ethun</p><p>Martine Extermann</p><p>Sarah Fisher</p><p>Edward Garon</p><p>Hans Gerdes</p><p>Miriam Gotte</p><p>John Grecula</p><p>Alessandro Gronchi</p><p>Carmen Guerra</p><p>Dana Guyer</p><p>Sudath Hapuarachchige</p><p>Thatcher Heumann</p><p>Amanda M. Hopp</p><p>Anna Kaltsas</p><p>Hormuzd Katki</p><p>Pamela Kunz</p><p>Laura Lambert</p><p>Lisa X. Lee</p><p>Hyunjung Lee</p><p>Stephenie Lemon</p><p>Cynthia Ma</p><p>Allison Magnuson</p><p>Deana Manassaram-Baptiste</p><p>Charles Matthews</p><p>Jessica McDermott</p><p>Lorna McWilliams</p><p>Jane Meisel</p><p>Craig Messick</p><p>Joseph Misdraji</p><p>Kristen Ness</p><p>Brenda Nevidjon</p><p>Electra Paskett</p><p>Sameer Patel</p><p>Mauro Pittiruti</p><p>Richard Riedel</p><p>Flavio Rocha</p><p>Ari J. Rosenberg</p><p>Marilyn Roubidoux</p><p>Nicole Stout</p><p>Kevin ten Haaf</p><p>Richard Wein</p><p>Rudolf Werner</p><p>Lily Yang</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"73 6","pages":"653"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71417636","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}

{"title":"Lung cancer screening guidelines: Smoking matters, not quitting","authors":"Don S. Dizon MD,&nbsp;Arif H. Kamal MD, MBA, MHS","doi":"10.3322/caac.21814","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21814","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Lung cancer screening is a proven method to detect cancers early, resulting in reduced morbidity and mortality. Guidelines regarding lung cancer screening have been published by a few groups, including the American Cancer Society (ACS) who, since 2010, have recommended for low-dose computed tomography screening for those who meet the criteria. One such criterion is &lt;i&gt;years since quitting&lt;/i&gt; (YSQ). The 2023 update&lt;span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;1&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/span&gt; incorporates significant evolutions that reflect an updated evidence base, in particular related to YSQ. In recognizing that genomic alterations from combustible tobacco exposure do not reliably reverse over time, the guideline update expands the population of those eligible for screening. Furthermore, it serves as a cautionary tale to current episodic smokers regarding the common assumption that quitting smoking removes the risk of lung cancer, particularly with the passage of time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The rationale for this change is explained as follows: the individual risk of lung cancer does indeed decrease over time once someone quits smoking, but this reduction is relatively lower only if compared &lt;i&gt;with a similar person who continues to smoke&lt;/i&gt;. Compared with a person who never smoked, the risk for lung cancer appears to remain three times greater, even at 20 and 30 YSQ. This introduces an entirely new cohort of people now eligible for lung cancer screening, some of whom we may not visualize when imagining the patient who should be contacted for annual screening. For example, picture a business executive in her 50s who previously smoked two packs per day throughout high school and into young adulthood, quitting when she became a parent at age 30 years. She smoked during college and graduate school, but that is now in the distant past. Because of her previous smoking history of 20 pack-years, she is now—for the first time ever—considered a prime candidate for lung cancer screening to reduce the potential morbidity and mortality from lung cancer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Embedded within this update are acknowledgments of the limitations of available data. For example, large trials used in this analysis did not routinely report on race or ethnicity; and, where race was captured, the vast majority of individuals were White study volunteers. Whether the same eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening applies across races is not clear, but some data suggest that race matters, with lung cancer onset at a younger age among Black people compared to White people, and with a higher proportion of those who did not meet the critical 30 pack-year threshold to initiate lung cancer screening (compared with White people). Finally, how to identify nonsmokers who may benefit from screening is not known. This is important because it accounts for 20% of all diagnoses of lung cancer. We agree that further work into who they are is urgent.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For now, this important update is one that requires swift action at the individual, community, state, an","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 1","pages":"10-11"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21814","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71417662","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":"Rare Manifestation of the Cutaneous and Cervical Lymph Node Metastases of Urothelial Carcinoma of Urinary Bladder: A Case Report.","authors":"Woo Yeol Sim, Noh Hyuck Park, Yoon Yang Jung","doi":"10.3348/jksr.2022.0064","DOIUrl":"10.3348/jksr.2022.0064","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Lymph node metastasis from bladder cancer mainly involves the external/internal iliac and obturator nodes as the primary lymphatic drainage sites of the bladder, and common iliac sites as the secondary drainage. Lymph node involvement above the diaphragm is rare. Metastasis to the head and neck region is associated with poor prognosis and low survival rate. Herein, we report a case of cervical cutaneous and lymph node metastases in a patient with bladder cancer. This is a rare case of advanced urothelial carcinoma presenting as an aggressive inflammatory process with extensive lymph node involvement, without bony or visceral metastasis.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"19 1","pages":"1403-1407"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10721421/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72394712","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":"Screening for lung cancer: 2023 guideline update from the American Cancer Society","authors":"Andrew M. D. Wolf MD,&nbsp;Kevin C. Oeffinger MD,&nbsp;Tina Ya-Chen Shih PhD,&nbsp;Louise C. Walter MD,&nbsp;Timothy R. Church PhD,&nbsp;Elizabeth T. H. Fontham MPH, DrPH,&nbsp;Elena B. Elkin PhD, MPA,&nbsp;Ruth D. Etzioni PhD,&nbsp;Carmen E. Guerra MD, MSCE,&nbsp;Rebecca B. Perkins MD, MSc,&nbsp;Karli K. Kondo PhD,&nbsp;Tyler B. Kratzer MPH,&nbsp;Deana Manassaram-Baptiste PhD, MPH,&nbsp;William L. Dahut MD,&nbsp;Robert A. Smith PhD","doi":"10.3322/caac.21811","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21811","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Lung cancer is the leading cause of mortality and person-years of life lost from cancer among US men and women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced lung cancer mortality. Our objective was to update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2013 lung cancer screening (LCS) guideline for adults at high risk for lung cancer. The guideline is intended to provide guidance for screening to health care providers and their patients who are at high risk for lung cancer due to a history of smoking. The ACS Guideline Development Group (GDG) utilized a systematic review of the LCS literature commissioned for the US Preventive Services Task Force 2021 LCS recommendation update; a second systematic review of lung cancer risk associated with years since quitting smoking (YSQ); literature published since 2021; two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network-validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening; an epidemiologic and modeling analysis examining the effect of YSQ and aging on lung cancer risk; and an updated analysis of benefit-to-radiation-risk ratios from LCS and follow-up examinations. The GDG also examined disease burden data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. The GDG judged that the overall evidence was moderate and sufficient to support a strong recommendation for screening individuals who meet the eligibility criteria. LCS in men and women aged 50–80 years is associated with a reduction in lung cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports LCS for men and women older than 80 years who are in good health. The ACS recommends annual LCS with low-dose computed tomography for asymptomatic individuals aged 50–80 years who currently smoke or formerly smoked and have a ≥20 pack-year smoking history (<i>strong recommendation</i>, <i>moderate quality of evidence</i>). Before the decision is made to initiate LCS, individuals should engage in a shared decision-making discussion with a qualified health professional. For individuals who formerly smoked, the number of YSQ is not an eligibility criterion to begin or to stop screening. Individuals who currently smoke should receive counseling to quit and be connected to cessation resources. Individuals with comorbid conditions that substantially limit life expectancy should not be screened. These recommendations should be considered by health care providers and adults at high risk for lung cancer in discussions about LCS. If fully implemented, these recommendations have a high likelihood of significantly reducing death and suffering from lung cancer in the United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 1","pages":"50-81"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21811","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71417638","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":"Immunosurveillance in clinical cancer management","authors":"Guido Kroemer MD, PhD,&nbsp;Timothy A. Chan MD, PhD,&nbsp;Alexander M. M. Eggermont MD, PhD,&nbsp;Lorenzo Galluzzi PhD","doi":"10.3322/caac.21818","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21818","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The progression of cancer involves a critical step in which malignant cells escape from control by the immune system. Antineoplastic agents are particularly efficient when they succeed in restoring such control (immunosurveillance) or at least establish an equilibrium state that slows down disease progression. This is true not only for immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but also for conventional chemotherapy, targeted anticancer agents, and radiation therapy. Thus, therapeutics that stress and kill cancer cells while provoking a tumor-targeting immune response, referred to as <i>immunogenic cell death</i>, are particularly useful in combination with ICIs. Modern oncology regimens are increasingly using such combinations, which are referred to as <i>chemoimmunotherapy</i>, as well as combinations of multiple ICIs. However, the latter are generally associated with severe side effects compared with single-agent ICIs. Of note, the success of these combinatorial strategies against locally advanced or metastatic cancers is now spurring successful attempts to move them past the postoperative (adjuvant) setting to the preoperative (neoadjuvant) setting, even for patients with operable cancers. Here, the authors critically discuss the importance of immunosurveillance in modern clinical cancer management.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 2","pages":"187-202"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21818","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50159986","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":"Locally advanced mismatch repair-deficient gastroesophageal junction cancer: Diagnosis, treatment modifications, and monitoring","authors":"Rutika Mehta MD, MPH,&nbsp;Andrew Sinnamon MD,&nbsp;Aamir Dam MD,&nbsp;Christine Walko PharmD, BCOP,&nbsp;Russell Palm MD,&nbsp;Laura Barton MS,&nbsp;Gregory Lauwers MD,&nbsp;Jose M. Pimiento MD","doi":"10.3322/caac.21813","DOIUrl":"10.3322/caac.21813","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Rutika Mehta has served on advisory boards for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Eli Lilly &amp; Company, Merck, Astellas Pharma US Inc., Novartis, BostonGene, Guardant Health, SeaGen Inc., and Natera; and on a Data and Safety Monitoring Board for Arcus Biosciences outside the submitted work. Christine Walko is employed by Mission Healthcare, has stock and ownership interests in Nabriva Therapeutics, and has served on advisory boards or as a consultant for Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Intermountain Precision Genomics, and Clarified Precision Medicine outside the submitted work. Laura Barton reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. Gregory Lauwers reports consulting fees from ALIMENTIV outside the submitted work. The remaining authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":137,"journal":{"name":"CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians","volume":"74 2","pages":"123-131"},"PeriodicalIF":254.7,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21813","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41230823","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}