Sex Differences in Cancer-Specific Survival Are Pronounced during Adolescence and Young Adulthood: A SEER Population-Based Study

CBTRUS Statistical Report: American Brain Tumor Association & NCI Neuro-Oncology Branch Adolescent and Young Adult Primary Brain and Other Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2016-2020

Recent analyses have shown that, whereas cancer survival overall has been improving, it has not improved for adolescents and young adults ages 15-39 years (AYA). The clinical care of AYA with primary brain and other central nervous system (CNS) tumors (BT) is complicated by the fact that the histopathologies of such tumors in AYA differ from their histopathologies in either children (ages 0-14 years) or older adults (ages 40+ years). The present report, as an update to a 2016 publication from the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States and the American Brain Tumor Association, provides in-depth analyses of the epidemiology of primary BT in AYA in the United States and is the first to provide biomolecular marker-specific statistics and prevalence by histopathology for both primary malignant and non-malignant BT in AYA. Between 2016 and 2020, the annual average age-specific incidence rate (AASIR) of primary malignant and non-malignant BT in AYA was 12.00 per 100,000 population, an average of 12,848 newly diagnosed cases per year. During the same period, an average of 1,018 AYA deaths per year were caused by primary malignant BT, representing an annual average age-specific mortality rate of 0.96 per 100,000 population. When primary BT were categorized by histopathology, pituitary tumors were the most common (36.6%), with an AASIR of 4.34 per 100,000 population. Total incidence increased with age overall; when stratified by sex, the incidence was higher in females than males at all ages. Incidence rates for all primary BT combined and for non-malignant tumors only were highest for non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native individuals, whereas malignant tumors were more frequent in non-Hispanic White individuals, compared with other racial/ethnic groups. On the basis of histopathology, the most common molecularly defined tumor was diffuse glioma (an AASIR of 1.51 per 100,000). Primary malignant BT are the second most common cause of cancer death in the AYA population. Incidence rates of primary BT overall, as well as specific histopathologies, vary significantly by age. Accordingly, an accurate statistical assessment of primary BT in the AYA population is vital for better understanding the impact of these tumors on the US population and to serve as a reference for afflicted individuals, for researchers investigating new therapies, and for clinicians treating these patients.

Sex dimorphism and cancer immunotherapy: May pregnancy solve the puzzle?

In the immunoncology era, growing evidence has shown a clear sex dimorphism in antitumor immune response with a potential impact on outcomes upon immunecheckpoint blockade (ICI) in patients with cancer. Sex dimorphism could affect tumor microenvironment composition and systemic anticancer immunity; however, the modifications induced by sex are heterogeneous. From a clinical perspective, six metanalyses have explored the role of sex in cancer patients receiving ICI with conflicting results. Environmental and reproductive factors may further jeopardize the sex-related heterogeneity in anticancer immune response. In particular, pregnancy is characterized by orchestrated changes in the immune system, some of which could be long lasting. A persistence of memory T-cells with a potential fetal-antigen specificity has been reported both in human and mice, suggesting that a previous pregnancy may positively impact cancer development or response to ICI, in case of fetal-antigen sharing from tumor cells. On the other hand, a previous pregnancy may also be associated with a regulatory memory characterized by increased tolerance and anergy towards cancer-fetal common antigens. Finally, fetal-maternal microchimerism could represent an additional source of chronic exposure to fetal antigens and may have important immunological implications on cancer development and ICI activity. So far, the role of pregnancy dimorphism (nulliparous vs parous) in women and the impact of pregnancy-related variables remain largely underexplored in cancer patients. In this review, we summarize the evidence regarding sex and pregnancy dimorphism in the context of immune response and anticancer immunotherapy and advocate the importance of analyzing pregnancy variables on ICIs clinical trials.

Sex differences in cancer incidence and mortality among patients managed at King Hussein Cancer Center

We investigated if female survival advantage trends in cancer are consistent within Jordanian patients with cancer across different age groups and non-sex specific cancer types. We explored the King Hussein Cancer Center registry for primary malignant tumors from 2006 to 2019. The registry (n = 16,454) was stratified into three groups based on age: children (<15 years), adolescents and young adults (AYA) (modified; 15 - 49 years), and older adults (≥50 years). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the 5-year all-site cancer-specific survival probabilities, which were compared using the log-rank test by sex and age group. Out of 16,454 eligible records, 2286 (13.9%) were children, 5975 (36.3%) were AYAs, and 8193 (49.8%) were older adults. Males outnumbered females 10,339 (62.8%) to 6115 (37.2%). The 5-year OS rates were 74.0% (71.6%-76.4%) and 72.7% (69.9%-75.5%) for pediatric males and females, respectively, 57.3% (55.6%-59.0%) and 64.5% (62.6%-66.4%) for male and female AYAs, respectively, and 37.5% (36.2%-38.9%) and 44.2% (42.3%-46.2%) for older adult males and females, respectively. Females demonstrated significantly better overall survival in the AYA and older adults' groups. In conclusion, females exhibit a survival advantage in terms of non-sex specific cancers. This advantage peaks at the AYA age stratum and mitigates thereafter. Further studies are warranted to examine the etiological factors behind such discrepancy on a site-by-site basis so that sex-specific interventions can be designed and validated. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Cancer Burden Among Arab-World Females in 2020: Working Toward Improving Outcomes

PURPOSE

Cancer is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. This work presents the Arab-world females' cancers (AFCs) statistics in 2020, compared with the 2018 AFCs statistics, the Arab-world male cancers statistics, and the world females' cancers (WFCs) statistics in 2020. This can help set the stage for a better policy for cancer control programs and improve outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A descriptive review of the 2020 Global Cancer Observatory concerning AFCs was performed. Data on various cancers were compiled and compared among the countries in the region and WFCs.

RESULTS

A total estimate of 244,317 new cases and 132,249 deaths is reported in AFCs; representing 2.65% and 2.99% of WFCs, respectively, with an average crude incidence/mortality ratio of 116.2 (/100,000 population)/62.9 (/100,000 population) and an age-standardized incidence/mortality ratio of 137.7(/100,000 population)/77.2(/100,000 population) compared with 238.8(/100,000 population)/114.6(/100,000 population) and 186(/100,000 population)/84.2(/100,000 population) of WFCs, respectively. Five-year prevalent cases were 585,295; 2.28% of WFCs. In comparison to males, females accounted for 47.8% of the whole population, 52.9% in incidence, 46.9% in mortality, and 56.9% in the prevalence of patients with cancer. Mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR) was 0.54 (range 0.39-0.62 in Arab countries, compared with 0.48 globally), and it ranged from 0.14 to 0.97 in the 30 AFC types. Breast cancer was the most common cancer in incidence and mortality, with an MIR of 0.39.

CONCLUSION

The 2020 descriptive analysis of the females' cancers in the Arab world revealed a relatively high MIR compared with females' cancers worldwide; a lower MIR compared with the males; and comparable MIR to 2018 one. We call for more in-depth studies to determine the causes of these differences that might translate into actionable interventions and better outcomes.