Jonathan C. M. Wan, Peter Sasieni, Nitzan Rosenfeld
{"title":"Promises and pitfalls of multi-cancer early detection using liquid biopsy tests","authors":"Jonathan C. M. Wan, Peter Sasieni, Nitzan Rosenfeld","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01033-x","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01033-x","url":null,"abstract":"Cancer screening is an essential public health intervention for diagnosing cancers at an early stage that can enable earlier treatment — ideally with curative intent — and thus lead to improved outcomes. Over the past decade, liquid biopsy-based tests have emerged as a promising, minimally invasive and broadly applicable screening approach by combining multi-cancer early detection (MCED) with tumour tissue-of-origin identification. Large-scale randomized clinical trials evaluating liquid biopsy-based MCED approaches are now under way, although whether the diagnostic performance of this first generation of MCED tests is sufficient to translate into clinical benefits remains to be determined. In this Review, we discuss the promises and pitfalls of current MCED tests and highlight possible trajectories for the field of early cancer detection. Liquid biopsy-based tests have demonstrated potential as a minimally invasive and broadly applicable approach to simultaneously screen individuals for multiple cancer types. In this Review, Wan, Sasieni and Rosenfeld discuss the promises and limitations of such multi-cancer early detection tests as well as future directions for this field.","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 8","pages":"566-580"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144288632","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":"Rechallenge with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced-stage lung cancer","authors":"Li-Bo Tang, Ying-Long Peng, Ji Chen, Jia-Ting Li, Mei-Mei Zheng, Lv Wu, Chang Lu, Xue-Wu Wei, Dong-Xuan Cai, Zhi Guo, Zi-Rui Ren, Si-Di Lv, Yu Deng, Zhi-Hong Chen, Chong-Rui Xu, Qing Zhou","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01029-7","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01029-7","url":null,"abstract":"Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, with many patients diagnosed with advanced-stage disease. Treatment in this setting relies on systemic therapies, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), which promote or restore antitumour immunity by inhibiting immunosuppressive signalling pathways, are currently the most widely used immunotherapies in these patients. However, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) or disease progression often necessitate discontinuation of these agents, leaving many patients with limited subsequent treatment options. In this scenario, ICI rechallenge has emerged as a potential strategy. Despite this potential, evidence for ICI rechallenge after either disease progression or irAEs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer is limited and evidence for those with small cell lung cancer seems to be non-existent. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the available data on ICI rechallenge in the context of both disease progression and irAEs, including a summary of current guidance on clinical management and detailed discussions of safety and efficacy. We also highlight important unanswered questions in an attempt to guide future research in this area. Patients with advanced-stage lung cancer might discontinue immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment for various reasons, including toxicities, disease progression or disease remission. Nonetheless, treatment options in this setting are often limited and some patients might derive benefit from re-administration of a previously received ICI. In this Review, the authors summarize the available data on ICI rechallenge, including the reasons for discontinuation and the feasibility of rechallenge in various clinical scenarios, and highlight important unaddressed research questions.","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 8","pages":"546-565"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144237819","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":"Overdiagnosis, competing morbidity and tumour biology in older women with breast cancer: building a case for active monitoring","authors":"Neil Carleton, Priscilla F. McAuliffe","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01040-y","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01040-y","url":null,"abstract":"Many women ≥75 years of age continue to undergo screening for breast cancer despite a lack of evidence supporting this practice. Evidence from the past 5 years suggests rising rates of breast cancer diagnosis in this age group without a corresponding increase in survival — either because the tumour itself is biologically indolent or because life-limiting comorbidities render a biologically aggressive tumour unlikely to further reduce life expectancy. Here, we review what we know, and what we do not know, about screening and overdiagnosis of breast cancer in women ≥75 years of age and build a case for active monitoring for selected screen-detected breast cancers in this population.","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 9","pages":"621-622"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144237815","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}
Matthew Vogel, Rona Yaeger, David J. Stewart, Vivek Subbiah, Frank S. David
{"title":"Surrogate end points in oncology: aligning drug development incentives and patient needs","authors":"Matthew Vogel, Rona Yaeger, David J. Stewart, Vivek Subbiah, Frank S. David","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01031-z","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01031-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 8","pages":"617-618"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228750","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":"Reply to ‘Surrogate end points in oncology: aligning drug development incentives and patient needs’","authors":"Vinay Prasad","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01032-y","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01032-y","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 8","pages":"619-620"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228752","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}
Melina A. McCabe, Anthony J. Mauro, Robert E. Schoen
{"title":"Novel colorectal cancer screening methods — opportunities and challenges","authors":"Melina A. McCabe, Anthony J. Mauro, Robert E. Schoen","doi":"10.1038/s41571-025-01037-7","DOIUrl":"10.1038/s41571-025-01037-7","url":null,"abstract":"Globally, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer death and the third most common incident cancer. CRC begins as adenomatous or serrated polyps, and in particular as advanced precursor lesions (APLs), which have the potential to progress into invasive cancers. Screening for CRC facilitates early detection and can identify cancers more amenable to cure, and can also detect and remove precursor lesions, thus also preventing CRC. Colonoscopy is the mainstay of screening in the USA and has the distinct advantage of enabling both detection and removal of precursors lesions. However, colonoscopy is burdensome, expensive and invasive, and often has negative findings. Non-invasive tests, such as testing stool samples for biomarkers of risk, have the potential to identify individuals who are more likely to benefit from colonoscopy. From a public health perspective, improving compliance with screening remains a priority. Technological innovations, including the emergence of new markers to improve stool testing and the development of blood tests that examine cell-free DNA have the potential to improve screening uptake and effectiveness. The trade-off between uptake of screening testing, detection of cancer and important precursor lesions such as APLs, and costs make for a complex calculus. In this Review, we describe the current state of CRC screening and evaluate the risks and benefits of new developments in screening. Despite being the second most lethal and the third most prevalent form of cancer, most cases of colorectal cancer (CRC) can be either detected at an early stage or prevented using screening colonoscopy with removal of precursor lesions. Nonetheless, universal colonoscopy is expensive and time consuming, and can be unpopular. Other less-invasive screening tests involving either faeces or more recently blood samples have the potential to improve overall CRC screening uptake and are an active area of research and development. In this Review, the authors describe the clinical utility of novel CRC screening methods such as multitarget stool DNA tests and blood cell-free DNA tests, including both the challenges and opportunities arising from their implementation.","PeriodicalId":19079,"journal":{"name":"Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology","volume":"22 8","pages":"581-591"},"PeriodicalIF":82.2,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144228837","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}