Racial/Ethnic Differences in Cancer Diagnosed after Metastasis: Absolute Burden and Deaths Potentially Avoidable through Earlier Detection

Long-term survival outcomes of systemic therapy in patients with isolated and mixed medullary thyroid cancer

Background

Medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) is an uncommon thyroid cancer with limited treatment options for advanced disease. A small subset exhibits mixed MTC histology with both medullary and well-differentiated components. We investigated survival outcomes with systemic therapy in isolated versus mixed MTC using a large population-based cohort.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with MTC from 2000 to 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The overall and thyroid cancer-specific survivals were compared between isolated (n = 1814) and mixed (n = 113) MTC cohorts. The impact of postoperative systemic therapy on survival was analyzed.

Results

No significant difference in 10-year overall survival was observed between isolated (77.4 %) and mixed (75.2 %) MTC in a cohort of 1927 patients. Median overall survival was similar between isolated (136.9 months) and mixed MTC (129.0 months), p = 0.81. While systemic therapy improved 10-year survival in isolated MTC (83.2 % vs. 76.9 %, p < 0.001), no benefit was seen in mixed MTC (76.4 % vs. 74.2 %, p = 0.82). Multivariate analysis confirmed survival gains with systemic therapy for isolated (HR = 0.763, 95%CI = 0.590-0.987, p = 0.040) but not mixed MTC (HR = 0.909, 95%CI = 0.268-3.079, p = 0.88).

Conclusions

In this large population-based study, no significant survival difference was observed between isolated and mixed MTC. Systemic therapy was associated with improved survival in isolated MTC, but not in the mixed subtype. These findings suggest a differential treatment response that warrants further investigation in prospective studies and may inform histology-tailored management strategies for mixed MTC.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Integrating primary care, shared decision making, and community engagement to facilitate equitable access to multi-cancer early detection clinical trials

Effective implementation of cancer screening programs can reduce disease-specific incidence and mortality. Screening is currently recommended for breast, cervical, colorectal and lung cancer. However, initial and repeat adherence to screening tests in accordance with current guidelines is sub-optimal, with the lowest rates observed in historically underserved groups. If used in concert with recommended cancer screening tests, new biospecimen-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests could help to identify more cancers that may be amendable to effective treatment. Clinical trials designed to assess the safety and efficacy of MCED tests to assess their potential for reducing cancer mortality are needed and many are underway. In the conduct of MCED test trials, it is crucial that participant recruitment efforts successfully engage participants from diverse populations experiencing cancer disparities. Strategic partnerships involving health systems, clinical practices, and communities can increase the reach of MCED trial recruitment efforts among populations experiencing disparities. This goal can be achieved by developing health system-based learning communities that build understanding of and trust in biomedical research; and by applying innovative methods for identifying eligible trial patients, educating potential participants about research trials, and engaging eligible individuals in shared decision making (SDM) about trial participation. This article describes how a developing consortium of health systems has used this approach to encourage the uptake of cancer screening in a wide range of populations and how such a strategy can facilitate the enrollment of persons from diverse patient and community populations in MCED trials.

Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 gene rs671 G>A polymorphism is associated with an increased risk of digestive tract cancer

OBJECTIVE

Acetaldehyde can accumulate in cells and form acetaldehyde-DNA adducts that result in digestive tract cancer development. Acetaldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (ALDH2) enzymatic activity is involved in this process. Here, we aimed to analyze the relationship between an ALDH2 gene polymorphism and the digestive tract cancer risk in the Hakka population in China.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, with the ALDH2 rs671 genotype and medical record information collected from all subjects. The relationships between these factors, including various blood cell parameters, and digestive tract cancer susceptibility were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 307 cancer patients and 317 controls were included. The cancer patients had significantly higher percentages with a history of smoking and drinking alcohol, as well as an increased platelet to lymphocyte ratio and lower lymphocyte to monocyte ratio, compared with the controls. The ALDH2 rs671 genotype and allele distributions were significantly different between the cancer patients and controls. Logistic regression analysis showed that the ALDH2 G/A genotype (G/A vs. G/G) and A/A genotype (A/A vs. G/G) in the co-dominant mode were risk factors for digestive tract cancer susceptibility.

CONCLUSIONS

ALDH2 rs671 G/A or A/A genotype carriers may have an increased risk of developing digestive tract cancers among the Hakka people.

Perspectives of private payers on multicancer early-detection tests: informing research, implementation, and policy

Emerging blood-based multicancer early-detection (MCED) tests may redefine cancer screening, reduce mortality, and address health disparities if their benefit is demonstrated. U.S. payers' coverage policies will impact MCED test adoption and access; thus, their perspectives must be understood. We examined views, coverage barriers, and evidentiary needs for MCED from 19 private payers collectively covering 150 000 000 enrollees. Most saw an MCED test's potential merit for cancers without current screening (84%), but fewer saw its merit for cancers with existing screening (37%). The largest coverage barriers were inclusion of cancers without demonstrated benefits of early diagnosis (73%), a high false-negative rate (53%), and lack of care protocols for MCED-detected but unconfirmed cancers (53%). The majority (58%) would not require mortality evidence and would accept surrogate endpoints. Most payers (64%) would accept rigorous real-world evidence in the absence of a large randomized controlled trial. The majority (74%) did not expect MCED to reduce disparities due to potential harm from overtreatment resulting from an MCED and barriers to downstream care. Payers' perspectives and evidentiary needs may inform MCED test developers, researchers producing evidence, and health systems framing MCED screening programs. Private payers should be stakeholders of a national MCED policy and equity agenda.

Performance of a targeted methylation-based multi-cancer early detection test by race and ethnicity

Disparities in cancer screening and outcomes based on factors such as sex, socioeconomic status, and race and ethnicity in the United States are well documented. A blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test that detects a shared cancer signal across multiple cancer types and also predicts the cancer signal origin was developed and validated in the Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas study (CCGA; NCT02889978). CCGA is a prospective, multicenter, case-control, observational study with longitudinal follow-up (overall N = 15,254). In this pre-specified, exploratory, descriptive analysis, test performance was evaluated among racial and ethnic groups. Overall, 4077 participants comprised the independent validation set with confirmed cancer status (cancer: n = 2823; non-cancer: n = 1254). Participants were stratified into the following racial/ethnic groups: Black (non-Hispanic), Hispanic (all races), Other (non-Hispanic), Other/unknown and White (non-Hispanic). Cancer and non-cancer participants were predominantly White (n = 2316, 82.0% and n = 996, 79.4%, respectively). Across groups, specificity for cancer signal detection ranged from 98.1% [n = 103; 95% CI: 93.2-99.5%] to 100% [n = 85; 95% CI: 95.7-100.0%]. The sensitivity for cancer signal detection across groups ranged from 43.9% [n = 57; 95% CI: 31.8-56.7%] to 63.0% [n = 192; 95% CI: 56.0-69.5%] and generally increased with clinical stage. The MCED test had consistently high specificity and similar sensitivity across racial and ethnic groups, though results are limited by sample size for some groups. Results support the broad applicability of this MCED test and clinical implementation on a population scale as a complement to standard screening.