Urgent need to mitigate disparities in federal funding for cancer research

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Screening and Surveillance in Individuals at Increased Risk for Gastric Cancer in the United States: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Gastric cancer (GC) is a leading cause of preventable cancer and mortality in certain US populations. The most impactful way to reduce GC mortality is via primary prevention, namely Helicobacter pylori eradication, and secondary prevention, namely endoscopic screening and surveillance of precancerous conditions, such as gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM). An emerging body of evidence supports the possible impact of these strategies on GC incidence and mortality in identifiable high-risk populations in the United States. Accordingly, the primary objective of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update (CPU) Expert Review is to provide best practice advice for primary and secondary prevention of GC in the context of current clinical practice and evidence in the United States.

METHODS

This CPU Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute CPU Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPU Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These best practice advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these best practice advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: There are identifiable high-risk groups in the United States who should be considered for GC screening. These include first-generation immigrants from high-incidence GC regions and possibly other non-White racial and ethnic groups, those with a family history of GC in a first-degree relative, and individuals with certain hereditary gastrointestinal polyposis or hereditary cancer syndromes. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Endoscopy is the best test for screening or surveillance in individuals at increased risk for GC. Endoscopy enables direct visualization to endoscopically stage the mucosa and identify areas concerning for neoplasia, as well as enables biopsies for further histologic examination and mucosal staging. Both endoscopic and histologic staging are key for risk stratification and determining whether ongoing surveillance is indicated and at what interval. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: High-quality upper endoscopy for the detection of premalignant and malignant gastric lesions should include the use of a high-definition white-light endoscopy system with image enhancement, gastric mucosal cleansing, and insufflation to achieve optimal mucosal visualization, in addition to adequate visual inspection time, photodocumentation, and use of a systematic biopsy protocol for mucosal staging when appropriate. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: H pylori eradication is essential and serves as an adjunct to endoscopic screening and surveillance for primary and secondary prevention of GC. Opportunistic screening for H pylori infection should be considered in individuals deemed to be at increased risk for GC (refer to Best Practice Advice 1). Screening for H pylori infection in adult household members of individuals who test positive for H pylori (so-called "familial-based testing") should also be considered. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: In individuals with suspected gastric atrophy with or without intestinal metaplasia, gastric biopsies should be obtained according to a systematic protocol (eg, updated Sydney System) to enable histologic confirmation and staging. A minimum of 5 total biopsies should be obtained, with samples from the antrum/incisura and corpus placed in separately labeled jars (eg, jar 1, "antrum/incisura" and jar 2, "corpus"). Any suspicious areas should be described and biopsied separately. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: GIM and dysplasia are endoscopically detectable. However, these findings often go undiagnosed when endoscopists are unfamiliar with the characteristic visual features; accordingly, there is an unmet need for improved training, especially in the United States. Artificial intelligence tools appear promising for the detection of early gastric neoplasia in the adequately visualized stomach, but data are too preliminary to recommend routine use. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Endoscopists should work with their local pathologists to achieve consensus for consistent documentation of histologic risk-stratification parameters when atrophic gastritis with or without metaplasia is diagnosed. At a minimum, the presence or absence of H pylori infection, severity of atrophy and/or metaplasia, and histologic subtyping of GIM, if applicable, should be documented to inform clinical decision making. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: If the index screening endoscopy performed in an individual at increased risk for GC (refer to Best Practice Advice 1) does not identify atrophy, GIM, or neoplasia, then the decision to continue screening should be based on that individual's risk factors and preferences. If the individual has a family history of GC or multiple risk factors for GC, then ongoing screening should be considered. The optimal screening intervals in such scenarios are not well defined. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Endoscopists should ensure that all individuals with confirmed gastric atrophy with or without GIM undergo risk stratification. Individuals with severe atrophic gastritis and/or multifocal or incomplete GIM are likely to benefit from endoscopic surveillance, particularly if they have other risk factors for GC (eg, family history). Endoscopic surveillance should be considered every 3 years; however, intervals are not well defined and shorter intervals may be advisable in those with multiple risk factors, such as severe GIM that is anatomically extensive. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Indefinite and low-grade dysplasia can be difficult to reproducibly identify by endoscopy and accurately diagnose on histopathology. Accordingly, all dysplasia should be confirmed by an experienced gastrointestinal pathologist, and clinicians should refer patients with visible or nonvisible dysplasia to an endoscopist or center with expertise in the diagnosis and management of gastric neoplasia. Individuals with indefinite or low-grade dysplasia who are infected with H pylori should be treated and have eradication confirmed, followed by repeat endoscopy and biopsies by an experienced endoscopist, as visual and histologic discernment may improve once inflammation subsides. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Individuals with suspected high-grade dysplasia or early GC should undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection with the goal of en bloc, R0 resection to enable accurate pathologic staging with curative intent. Eradication of active H pylori infection is essential, but should not delay endoscopic intervention. Endoscopic submucosal dissection should be performed at a center with endoscopic and pathologic expertise. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Individuals with a history of successfully resected gastric dysplasia or cancer require ongoing endoscopic surveillance. Suggested surveillance intervals exist, but additional data are required to refine surveillance recommendations, particularly in the United States. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Type I gastric carcinoids in individuals with atrophic gastritis are typically indolent, especially if <1 cm. Endoscopists may consider resecting gastric carcinoids <1 cm and should endoscopically resect lesions measuring 1-2 cm. Individuals with type I gastric carcinoids >2 cm should undergo cross-sectional imaging and be referred for surgical resection, given the risk of metastasis. Individuals with type I gastric carcinoids should undergo surveillance, but the intervals are not well defined. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: In general, only individuals who are fit for endoscopic or potentially surgical treatment should be screened for GC and continued surveillance of premalignant gastric conditions. If a person is no longer fit for endoscopic or surgical treatment, then screening and surveillance should be stopped. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: To achieve health equity, a personalized approach should be taken to assess an individual's risk for GC to determine whether screening and surveillance should be pursued. In conjunction, modifiable risk factors for GC should be distinctly addressed, as most of these risk factors disproportionately impact people at high risk for GC and represent health care disparities.

Cancer statistics, 2025

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 (through 2021) and mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics (through 2022). In 2025, 2,041,910 new cancer cases and 618,120 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. The cancer mortality rate continued to decline through 2022, averting nearly 4.5 million deaths since 1991 because of smoking reductions, earlier detection for some cancers, and improved treatment. Yet alarming disparities persist; Native American people bear the highest cancer mortality, including rates that are two to three times those in White people for kidney, liver, stomach, and cervical cancers. Similarly, Black people have two-fold higher mortality than White people for prostate, stomach, and uterine corpus cancers. Overall cancer incidence has generally declined in men but has risen in women, narrowing the male-to-female rate ratio (RR) from a peak of 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.57-1.61) in 1992 to 1.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.12) in 2021. However, rates in women aged 50-64 years have already surpassed those in men (832.5 vs. 830.6 per 100,000), and younger women (younger than 50 years) have an 82% higher incidence rate than their male counterparts (141.1 vs. 77.4 per 100,000), up from 51% in 2002. Notably, lung cancer incidence in women surpassed that in men among people younger than 65 years in 2021 (15.7 vs. 15.4 per 100,000; RR, 0.98, p = 0.03). In summary, cancer mortality continues to decline, but future gains are threatened by rampant racial inequalities and a growing burden of disease in middle-aged and young adults, especially women. Continued progress will require investment in cancer prevention and access to equitable treatment, especially for Native American and Black individuals.

Shattering the monolith: burden of gastrointestinal cancer in Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders in the United States

Asian Americans remain the fastest-growing racial group in the United States, and are anticipated to double over the next few decades. Asian Americans are the only major racial-ethnic group for whom cancer remains the leading cause of death, and multiple gastrointestinal cancers rank among the top five incident and fatal cancers. Most research to date presents Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) in aggregate, overlooking their vast heterogeneity and hindering efforts to identify and address health disparities within AANHPI origin groups. Here, we present gastrointestinal cancer incidence and mortality in AANHPI, including disaggregated rates where feasible, and highlight gaps in current screening practices. We conclude with actionable suggestions to shift away from using broad racial categories to evaluate cancer disparities, towards high-quality, disaggregated data to better isolate and address factors driving the clear differential cancer risks among AANHPI.

Clinical Trials in Gastroesophageal Cancers: An Analysis of the Global Landscape of Interventional Trials From ClinicalTrials.gov

PURPOSE

To describe the global landscape of clinical research into interventions for gastroesophageal cancers (GECs), with examination of trial characteristics, geographic distribution of trial sites, and factors associated with trial termination.

METHODS

We queried ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all completed or terminated phase III interventional studies investigating GECs (esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC], esophageal adenocarcinoma [EAC], gastroesophageal junctional [GEJ], and gastric adenocarcinoma). Data on all reported trial characteristics were extracted. Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare differences in completed and terminated trials. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated predictors of termination.

RESULTS

A total of 179 trials were identified; of these, 90% were therapeutic. Most included sites in Asia (61%) and Europe (32%); few included sites in Africa (4%). Thirty percent included sites in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Most (70%) focused on gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, 13% on EAC and ESCC, and 9% on ESCC alone. Sixteen percent (n = 29) of trials terminated prematurely. In multivariate analysis, study site number, location of recruitment sites, and patient population emerged as predictors of termination. Trials recruiting from US-based sites were more likely to terminate (odds ratio [OR], 7.22 [95% CI, 1.59 to 32.69]). Trials conducted exclusively in LMICs were less likely to terminate (OR, 0.04 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.59] v conducted in high-income countries [HICs] alone). Studies on ESCC were more likely to terminate (OR, 17.74 [95% CI, 1.49 to 210.69]).

CONCLUSION

Although 80% of GECs occur in LMICs, trial activity disproportionately occurs in HICs. Few trials focus on EAC/ESCC despite being highly fatal, highlighting an unmet need. Overall, this study highlights (1) a missed opportunity to recruit patients from high-incidence regions globally; and (2) a pressing need for increasing funding, infrastructure, and support for GEC trials in LMICs.

American Cancer Society's report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States, 2023

In 2021, the American Cancer Society published its first biennial report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States. In this second report, the authors provide updated data on racial, ethnic, socioeconomic (educational attainment as a marker), and geographic (metropolitan status) disparities in cancer occurrence and outcomes and contributing factors to these disparities in the country. The authors also review programs that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. There are substantial variations in risk factors, stage at diagnosis, receipt of care, survival, and mortality for many cancers by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and metropolitan status. During 2016 through 2020, Black and American Indian/Alaska Native people continued to bear a disproportionately higher burden of cancer deaths, both overall and from major cancers. By educational attainment, overall cancer mortality rates were about 1.6-2.8 times higher in individuals with ≤12 years of education than in those with ≥16 years of education among Black and White men and women. These disparities by educational attainment within each race were considerably larger than the Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality within each educational attainment, ranging from 1.03 to 1.5 times higher among Black people, suggesting a major role for socioeconomic status disparities in racial disparities in cancer mortality given the disproportionally larger representation of Black people in lower socioeconomic status groups. Of note, the largest Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality were among those who had ≥16 years of education. By area of residence, mortality from all cancer and from leading causes of cancer death were substantially higher in nonmetropolitan areas than in large metropolitan areas. For colorectal cancer, for example, mortality rates in nonmetropolitan areas versus large metropolitan areas were 23% higher among males and 21% higher among females. By age group, the racial and geographic disparities in cancer mortality were greater among individuals younger than 65 years than among those aged 65 years and older. Many of the observed racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in cancer mortality align with disparities in exposure to risk factors and access to cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment, which are largely rooted in fundamental inequities in social determinants of health. Equitable policies at all levels of government, broad interdisciplinary engagement to address these inequities, and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage, are needed to reduce cancer disparities.

Cancer statistics, 2024

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 (through 2020) and mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics (through 2021). In 2024, 2,001,140 new cancer cases and 611,720 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Cancer mortality continued to decline through 2021, averting over 4 million deaths since 1991 because of reductions in smoking, earlier detection for some cancers, and improved treatment options in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings. However, these gains are threatened by increasing incidence for 6 of the top 10 cancers. Incidence rates increased during 2015-2019 by 0.6%-1% annually for breast, pancreas, and uterine corpus cancers and by 2%-3% annually for prostate, liver (female), kidney, and human papillomavirus-associated oral cancers and for melanoma. Incidence rates also increased by 1%-2% annually for cervical (ages 30-44 years) and colorectal cancers (ages <55 years) in young adults. Colorectal cancer was the fourth-leading cause of cancer death in both men and women younger than 50 years in the late-1990s but is now first in men and second in women. Progress is also hampered by wide persistent cancer disparities; compared to White people, mortality rates are two-fold higher for prostate, stomach and uterine corpus cancers in Black people and for liver, stomach, and kidney cancers in Native American people. Continued national progress will require increased investment in cancer prevention and access to equitable treatment, especially among American Indian and Alaska Native and Black individuals.

Survivorship research in advanced gynecological cancer: A scoping review of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Recent calls to action highlight the need to address gaps in our understanding of survivorship for those living with advanced gynecological cancer to support optimal care. To ensure future research fills these knowledge gaps, we need to understand the breadth of existing survivorship research in this patient group, including the outcomes assessed, the populations included and the duration and retention in follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic scoping review searching PubMed, PsychINFO, and CINAHL during the month of November 2022 to identify prospective cohort studies measuring survivorship outcomes among participants with advanced (stage III-IV) gynecological cancer, or in cohorts in which ≥50% of participants had advanced cancer, or which provide results separately for patients with advanced cancer. Articles were screened, and data extracted using a standard form.

RESULTS

We assessed 33 articles from 21 unique studies, which overall included 6023 participants with gynecological cancer. Of these, 45% had cervical cancer, 44% ovarian, 10% endometrial/uterine, and 1% vaginal/vulvar cancer. The most frequently measured survivorship outcome was quality of life. Of the 33 articles, most reported on participant age (n = 31), but relatively few reported on comorbidities (n = 10), physical status (n = 6), ethnic background (n = 4), the country of birth (n = 2), or the area of participant residence (n = 2). None included details on indigenous status. Recruitment proportions ranged from 48% to 100%. Retention proportions ranged from 15% to 97%.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight gaps in survivorship research for advanced gynecological cancers and emphasize the need for future studies to include and describe the experiences of diverse and underrepresented groups.

Challenges and Opportunities in Building a Global Representative Single-Cell and Spatial Atlas in Cancer

SUMMARY

Cancer health disparities are complex and a mixture of factors that need to be accounted for in both our planning, implementation, and execution across all researchers, especially in single-cell and spatial technologies, which have a higher burden for adoption in low- and middle-income countries. This commentary tackles the hurdles these technologies face in creating a diverse, representative atlas of cancer and is a call to arms for a strategic plan toward inclusivity across all global populations.