Search

Summary: Two early papers expressing conflicting views on the occurrence of effective immune attack against cancers stimulate an analysis of the gradual development of an understanding of tumour biology. This understanding has led to the development of the strikingly effective check point blocking and CART anti-cancer immunotherapies, and the promise of more widely applicable therapies based on T cell attracting genetically engineered monoclonal antibodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper outlines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer services in the UK including screening, symptomatic diagnosis, treatment pathways and projections on clinical outcomes as a result of these care disruptions. A restoration of cancer services to pre-pandemic levels is not likely to mitigate this adverse impact, particularly with an ageing population and increased cancer burden. New cancer cases are projected to rise to over 500,000 per year by 2035, with over 4 million people living with and beyond cancer. This paper calls for a strategic transformation to prioritise effort on the basis of available datasets and evidence—in particular, to prioritise cancers where an earlier diagnosis is feasible and clinically useful with a focus on mortality benefit by preventing emergency presentations by harnessing data and analytics. This could be delivered by a focus on underperforming groups/areas to try and reduce inequity, linking near real-time datasets with clinical decision support systems at the primary and secondary care levels, promoting the use of novel technologies to improve patient uptake of services, screening and diagnosis, and finally, upskilling and cross-skilling healthcare workers to expand supply of diagnostic and screening services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We proposed the Physical Activity and Cancer Control (PACC) framework in 2007 to help organise, focus, and stimulate research on physical activity in eight cancer control categories: prevention, detection, treatment preparation/coping, treatment coping/effectiveness, recovery/rehabilitation, disease prevention/health promotion, palliation, and survival. Methods: This perspective paper provides a high-level overview of the scientific advances in physical activity research across cancer control categories, summarises current guidelines, updates the PACC framework, identifies remaining and emerging knowledge gaps, and provides future research directions. Results: Many scientific advances have been made that are reflected in updated physical activity guidelines for six of the cancer control categories apart from detection and palliation. Nevertheless, the minimal and optimal type, dose, and timing of physical activity across cancer control categories remain unknown, especially for the understudied population subgroups defined by cancer type, age, race/ethnicity, and resource level of regions/countries. Conclusion: To achieve the full benefit of physical activity in cancer control, future research should use innovative study designs that include diverse at-risk populations and understudied cancer sites. Additionally, effective behaviour change strategies are needed to increase physical activity levels across populations that use implementation science to accelerate the translation from evidence generation into practical, real-world interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic brought unplanned service disruption for breast cancer diagnostic, treatment and support services. This scoping review describes these changes and their impact in the UK and the Republic of Ireland based on studies published between January 2020 and August 2023. Thirty-four of 569 papers were included. Data were extracted and results thematically organized. Findings include fewer new cases; stage shift (fewer early- and more late-stage disease); and changes to healthcare organization, breast screening and treatment. Examples are accepting fewer referrals, applying stricter referral criteria and relying more on virtual consultations and multi-disciplinary meetings. Screening service programs paused during the pandemic before enacting risk-based phased restarts with longer appointment times to accommodate reduced staffing numbers and enhanced infection-control regimes. Treatments shifted from predominantly conventional to hypofractionated radiotherapy, fewer surgical procedures and increased use of bridging endocrine therapy. The long-term impact of such changes are unknown so definitive guidelines for future emergencies are not yet available. Cancer registries, with their large sample sizes and population coverage, are well placed to monitor changes to stage and survival despite difficulties obtaining definitive staging during diagnosis because surgery and pathological assessments are delayed. Multisite longitudinal studies can also provide guidance for future disaster preparedness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Detecting cancer early is essential to improving cancer outcomes. Minoritized groups remain underrepresented in early detection cancer research, which means that findings and interventions are not generalisable across the population, thus exacerbating disparities in cancer outcomes. In light of these challenges, this paper sets out twelve recommendations to build relations of trust and include minoritized groups in ED cancer research. The Recommendations were formulated by a range of stakeholders at the 2022 REPRESENT consensus-building workshop and are based on empirical data, including a systematic literature review and two ethnographic case studies in the US and the UK. The recommendations focus on: Long-term relationships that build trust; Sharing available resources; Inclusive and accessible communication; Harnessing community expertise; Unique risks and benefits; Compensation and support; Representative samples; Demographic data; Post-research support; Sharing results; Research training; Diversifying research teams. For each recommendation, the paper outlines the rationale, specifications for how different stakeholders may implement it, and advice for best practices. Instead of isolated recruitment, public involvement and engagement activities, the recommendations here aim to advance mutually beneficial and trusting relationships between researchers and research participants embedded in ED cancer research institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In current clinical practice, radiotherapy (RT) is prescribed as a pre-determined total dose divided over daily doses (fractions) given over several weeks. The treatment response is typically assessed months after the end of RT. However, the conventional one-dose-fits-all strategy may not achieve the desired outcome, owing to patient and tumor heterogeneity. Therefore, a treatment strategy that allows for RT dose personalization based on each individual response is preferred. Multiple strategies have been adopted to address this challenge. As an alternative to current known strategies, artificial intelligence (AI)-derived mechanism-independent small data phenotypic medicine (PM) platforms may be utilized for N-of-1 RT personalization. Unlike existing big data approaches, PM does not engage in model refining, training, and validation, and guides treatment by utilizing prospectively collected patient's own small datasets. With PM, clinicians may guide patients' RT dose recommendations using their responses in real-time and potentially avoid over-treatment in good responders and under-treatment in poor responders. In this paper, we discuss the potential of engaging PM to guide clinicians on upfront dose selections and ongoing adaptations during RT, as well as considerations and limitations for implementation. For practicing oncologists, clinical trialists, and researchers, PM can either be implemented as a standalone strategy or in complement with other existing RT personalizations. In addition, PM can either be used for monotherapeutic RT personalization, or in combination with other therapeutics (e.g. chemotherapy, targeted therapy). The potential of N-of-1 RT personalization with drugs will also be presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interest in understanding the relationship between body composition and cancer survival has remained strong for decades, with a number of recent systematic reviews on the topic. However, the current state of evidence is based on heterogeneous exposure definitions based on anthropometry, yielding inconsistent findings with regard to this association. Recently the field has taken an exciting direction with the application of radiological assessments to measure specific aspects of body composition, yet reconciliation of findings from these modern assessment tools with those from the historic use of anthropometric data proves challenging. In this paper, I briefly review the biological basis for a link between body composition and cancer survival and summarize the epidemiological evidence with consideration to specific exposure measures. As enthusiasm is building around novel assessments, I conclude with a discussion of issues that researchers should be aware of when interpreting results from these new modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allowing selected patients with few distant metastases to undergo potentially curative local ablation, the designation "oligometastatic" has become a widely popular concept in oncology. However, accumulating evidence suggests that many of these patients harbour an unrecognised microscopic disease, leading either to the continuous development of new metastases or to an overt polymetastatic state and questioning thus an indiscriminate use of potentially harmful local ablation. In this paper, reviewing data on oligometastatic disease, we advocate the importance of identifying a true oligometastatic disease, characterised by a slow speed of development, instead of relying solely on a low number of lesions as the term "oligometastatic" implies. This is particularly relevant in clinical practice, where terminology has been shown to influence decision making. To define a true oligometastatic disease in the context of its still elusive biology and interaction with the immune system, we propose using clinical criteria. As discussed further in the paper, these criteria can be classified into three categories involving a low probability of occult metastases, low tumour growth rate and low tumour burden. Such cases with slow tumour-cell shedding and slow proliferation leave a sufficiently broad window-of-opportunity to detect and treat accessible lesions, increasing thus the odds of a cure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Longitudinal models of biomarkers such as tumour size dynamics capture treatment efficacy and predict treatment outcome (overall survival) of a variety of anticancer therapies, including chemotherapies, targeted therapies, immunotherapies and their combinations. These pharmacological endpoints like tumour dynamic (tumour growth inhibition) metrics have been proposed as alternative endpoints to complement the classical RECIST endpoints (objective response rate, progression-free survival) to support early decisions both at the study level in drug development as well as at the patients level in personalised therapy with checkpoint inhibitors. This perspective paper presents recent developments and future directions to enable wider and robust use of model-based decision frameworks based on pharmacological endpoints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate existing evidence on the relationship between diagnostic and treatment intervals and outcomes for colorectal cancer. Methods: Four databases were searched for English language articles assessing the role of time before initial treatment in colorectal cancer on any outcome, including stage and survival. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and data were synthesised narratively. A dose–response meta-analysis was performed to examine the association between treatment interval and survival. Results: One hundred and thirty papers were included in the systematic review, eight were included in the meta-analysis. Forty-five different intervals were considered in the time from first symptom to treatment. The most common finding was of no association between the length of intervals on any outcome. The dose–response meta-analysis showed a U-shaped association between the treatment interval and overall survival with the nadir at 45 days. Conclusion: The review found inconsistent, but mostly a lack of, association between interval length and colorectal cancer outcomes, but study design and quality were heterogeneous. Meta-analysis suggests survival becomes increasingly poorer for those commencing treatment more than 45 days after diagnosis. Registration: This review was registered, and the protocol is available, in PROSPERO, the international database of systematic reviews, with the registration ID CRD42021255864. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent disease worldwide, with more than 50% of patients developing metastases to the liver. Five-year overall survival remains modest among patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) treated with conventional therapies however, liver transplantation in a highly selected population can improve clinical outcomes with an impressive 5-year overall survival of 83%. Despite liver transplantation appearing to be a promising therapeutical option for well-selected patients with mCRC with the liver-limited disease, these data come from small monocentric trials which included a heterogeneous population. Currently, several clinical trials are evaluating liver transplantation in this scenario, aiming for a more accurate patient selection by integrating liquid biopsy, tissue profiling, and nuclear medicine to the already known clinical biomarkers that eventually may lead to a survival improvement. In this paper, the clinical outcomes and inclusion criteria from the most relevant clinical trials and clinical series involving liver transplantation in patients with liver-limited disease colorectal cancer are reviewed as well as the trials currently recruiting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In our 2020 consensus paper, we devised ten recommendations for conducting Complex Innovative Design (CID) trials to evaluate cancer drugs. Within weeks of its publication, the UK was hit by the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Large CID trials were prioritised to compare the efficacy of new and repurposed COVID-19 treatments and inform regulatory decisions. The unusual circumstances of the pandemic meant studies such as RECOVERY were opened almost immediately and recruited record numbers of participants. However, trial teams were required to make concessions and adaptations to these studies to ensure recruitment was rapid and broad. As these are relevant to cancer trials that enrol patients with similar risk factors, we have added three new recommendations to our original ten: employing pragmatism such as using focused information sheets and collection of only the most relevant data; minimising negative environmental impacts with paperless systems; and using direct-to-patient communication methods to improve uptake. These recommendations can be applied to all oncology CID trials to improve their inclusivity, uptake and efficiency. Above all, the success of CID studies during the COVID-19 pandemic underscores their efficacy as tools for rapid treatment evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cell death is part of the lifecycle of every multicellular organism. Nineteenth-century pathologists already recognised that organised forms of cell death must exist to explain the demise and turnover of cells during metamorphosis (of insects), embryogenesis and normal tissue homoeostasis [1]. Nevertheless, Kerr, Wyllie and Currie in their seminal paper of 1972, were the first to collate and define the distinct morphological features of controlled cell death in different contexts [2]. To describe the processes of cell deletion observed under both physiological and pathological conditions, they coined the term 'Apoptosis' (derived from the Greek word 'ἀπόπτωσις', meaning 'dropping off or falling off' of petals from flowers). Kerr, Wyllie and Currie defined apoptosis as a mechanism 'complementary to mitosis in the regulation of animal cell populations'. In addition, they already recognised the potential to use this programmed form of cell death for cancer therapy, but they also emphasised the occurrence of apoptosis during cancer development. In this article, some 50 years after its initial publication in The British Journal of Cancer, we revaluate and put the authors initial assumptions and general concepts about apoptosis into the context of modern-day biology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]