Ca-A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

This article is the American Cancer Society’s update on female breast cancer statistics in the United States, including population‐based data on incidence, mortality, survival, and mammography screening. Breast cancer incidence rates have risen in most of the past four decades; during the most recent data years (2010–2019), the rate increased by 0.5% annually, largely driven by localized‐stage and hormone receptor‐positive disease. In contrast, breast cancer mortality rates have declined steadily since their peak in 1989, albeit at a slower pace in recent years (1.3% annually from 2011 to 2020) than in the previous decade (1.9% annually from 2002 to 2011). In total, the death rate dropped by 43% during 1989–2020, translating to 460,000 fewer breast cancer deaths during that time. The death rate declined similarly for women of all racial/ethnic groups except American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom the rates were stable. However, despite a lower incidence rate in Black versus White women (127.8 vs. 133.7 per 100,000), the racial disparity in breast cancer mortality remained unwavering, with the death rate 40% higher in Black women overall (27.6 vs. 19.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2016–2020) and two‐fold higher among adult women younger than 50 years (12.1 vs. 6.5 deaths per 100,000). Black women have the lowest 5‐year relative survival of any racial/ethnic group for every molecular subtype and stage of disease (except stage I), with the largest Black–White gaps in absolute terms for hormone receptor‐positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐negative disease (88% vs. 96%), hormone receptor‐negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐positive disease (78% vs. 86%), and stage III disease (64% vs. 77%). Progress against breast cancer mortality could be accelerated by mitigating racial disparities through increased access to high‐quality screening and treatment via nationwide Medicaid expansion and partnerships between community stakeholders, advocacy organizations, and health systems.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE

When delivered with palliative intent, radiotherapy can help to alleviate a multitude of symptoms related to advanced cancer. In general, time to symptom relief is measured in weeks to months after the completion of radiotherapy. Over the past several years, an increasing number of studies have explored rates of radiotherapy use in the final months of life and have found variable rates of radiotherapy use. The optimal rate is unclear, but would incorporate anticipated efficacy in patients whose survival allows it and minimize overuse among patients with expected short survival. Clinician prediction has been shown to overestimate the length of survival in repeated studies. Prognostic indices can provide assistance with estimations of survival length and may help to guide treatment decisions regarding palliative radiotherapy in patients with potentially short survival times. This review explores the recent studies of radiotherapy near the end of life, examines general prognostic models for patients with advanced cancer, describes specific clinical circumstances when radiotherapy may and may not be beneficial, and addresses open questions for future research to help clarify when palliative radiotherapy may be effective near the end of life. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:295–310. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual has become the benchmark for classifying patients with cancer, defining prognosis, and determining the best treatment approaches. Many view the primary role of the tumor, lymph node, metastasis (TNM) system as that of a standardized classification system for evaluating cancer at a population level in terms of the extent of disease, both at initial presentation and after surgical treatment, and the overall impact of improvements in cancer treatment. The rapid evolution of knowledge in cancer biology and the discovery and validation of biologic factors that predict cancer outcome and response to treatment with better accuracy have led some cancer experts to question the utility of a TNM‐based approach in clinical care at an individualized patient level. In the Eighth Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, the goal of including relevant, nonanatomic (including molecular) factors has been foremost, although changes are made only when there is strong evidence for inclusion. The editorial board viewed this iteration as a proactive effort to continue to build the important bridge from a “population‐based” to a more “personalized” approach to patient classification, one that forms the conceptual framework and foundation of cancer staging in the era of precision molecular oncology. The AJCC promulgates best staging practices through each new edition in an effort to provide cancer care providers with a powerful, knowledge‐based resource for the battle against cancer. In this commentary, the authors highlight the overall organizational and structural changes as well as “what's new” in the Eighth Edition. It is hoped that this information will provide the reader with a better understanding of the rationale behind the aggregate proposed changes and the exciting developments in the upcoming edition. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:93–99. © 2017 American Cancer Society.