Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a poor prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival rate of 10%. In November 2018, NCCN recommended that all patients with PDAC receive genetic counseling (GC) and germline testing regardless of family history. We hypothesized that patients with PDAC were more likely to be referred for testing after this change to the guidelines, regardless of presumed predictive factors, and that compliance would be further improved following the implementation of a hereditary cancer clinic (HCC).
We conducted a single-institution retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with PDAC from June 2017 through December 2021 at University of California, Irvine. We compared rates of genetics referral among patients in different diagnostic eras: the 18-month period before the NCCN Guideline change (pre-NCCN era: June 2017 through November 2018), 14 months following the change (post-NCCN era: December 2018 through January 2020), and 18 months after the creation of an HCC (HCC era: June 2020 through December 2021). Family and personal cancer history, genetics referral patterns, and results of GC were recorded. Data were compared using chi-square, Fisher exact, and multivariate analyses.
A total of 335 patients were treated for PDAC (123 pre-NCCN, 109 post-NCCN, and 103 HCC) at University of California, Irvine. Demographics across groups were comparable. Prior to the guideline changes, 30% were referred to GC compared with 54.7% in the post-NCCN era. After the implementation of the HCC, 77.4% were referred to GC (P<.0001). The odds ratio (OR) for referral to GC among patients with a positive family history of cancer progressively decreased following the change (pre-NCCN era: OR, 11.90 [95% CI, 3.00-80.14]; post-NCCN era: OR, 3.39 [95% CI, 1.13-10.76]; HCC era: OR, 3.11 [95% CI, 0.95-10.16]).
The 2018 updates to the NCCN Guidelines for PDAC recommending germline testing for all patients with PDAC significantly increased GC referral rates at our academic medical center. Implementation of an HCC further boosted compliance with guidelines.

Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network ® (NCCN ®) guidelines for Colorectal Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment provide limited guidance for genetic testing for individuals with already diagnosed hereditary cancer conditions. We are presenting the case of a 36-year-old woman who was diagnosed with Lynch Syndrome at age 23 after genetic testing for a familial variant (c.283del) in the MLH1 gene. The patient had a previous history of Hodgkin Lymphoma at the time of familial variant testing, and she would later develop stage IIIa cecal adenocarcinoma at age 33 and metastatic papillary thyroid carcinoma at age 35. The patient\'s family history included a first-degree relative who was diagnosed with colorectal cancer at age 39, multiple second-degree relatives with colorectal, endometrial, and stomach cancer, and third and fourth-degree relatives with breast cancer. In light of her personal and family history, a comprehensive cancer panel was recommended. This panel found a second hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome: a likely pathogenic variant (c. 349 A > G) in the CHEK2 gene. This specific CHEK2 variant was recently reported to confer a moderately increased risk for breast cancer. The discovery of this second cancer predisposition syndrome had important implications for the patient\'s screening and risk management. While uncommon, the possibility of an individual having multiple cancer predisposition syndromes is important to consider when evaluating patients and families for hereditary cancer, even when a familial variant has been identified.

UNASSIGNED: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend definitive chemoradiation rather than surgery for patients with locally advanced clinical stage T3 and N2 (stage IIIB) lung cancer involving the chest wall. The data supporting this recommendation are controversial. We studied whether surgery confers a survival advantage over definitive chemoradiation in the National Cancer Database.
UNASSIGNED: We identified all patients with clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2017 who underwent a lobectomy with en bloc chest wall resection and compared them with patients with clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer who had definitive chemoradiation. We used propensity score matching to minimize confounding by indication while excluding patients with tumors in the upper lobes to exclude Pancoast tumors. We used 1:1 propensity score matching and Kaplan-Meir survival analyses to estimate associations.
UNASSIGNED: Of 4467 patients meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria, 210 (4.49%) had an en bloc chest wall resection. Patients undergoing surgical resection were younger (mean age = 60.3 ± 10.3 years vs 67.5 ± 10.4 years; P < .001) and had more adenocarcinoma (59.0% vs 44.5%; P < .001) but were otherwise similar in terms of sex (37.1% female vs 42.0%; P = .167) and race (Whites 84.3% vs 84.0%; P = .276) compared with the definitive chemoradiation group. After resection, there was an unadjusted 30- and 90-day mortality rate of 3.3% and 9.5%, respectively. A substantial survival benefit with surgical resection persisted after propensity score matching (log-rank P < .001).
UNASSIGNED: In this large observational study, we found that in select patients, en bloc chest wall resection for locally advanced clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer was associated with improved survival compared with definitive chemoradiation. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines should be revisited.

OBJECTIVE: Descriptive study focusing on real-world utilization and characteristics of men with prostate cancer tested with the 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score® (GPS™) assay by linking administrative claims and electronic health record (EHR) data with GPS results.
METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study (January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2020) included men aged 40-80 years with localized prostate cancer claims, continuous enrollment in Optum\'s Integrated Claims data set, ≥1 day of EHR clinical activity, and a GPS result. Men were classified as undergoing definitive therapy (DT) (prostatectomy, radiation, or focal therapy) or active surveillance (AS). AS and DT distribution were analyzed across GPS results, National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) risk, and race. Costs were assessed 6 months after the first GPS result (index); clinical outcomes and AS persistence were assessed during the variable follow-up. All variables were analyzed descriptively.
RESULTS: Of 834 men, 650 (77.9%) underwent AS and 184 (22.1%) DT. Most men had Quan-Charlson comorbidity scores of 1-2 and a tumor stage of T1c (index). The most common Gleason patterns were 3 + 3 (79.6%) (AS cohort) and 3 + 4 (55.9%) (DT cohort). The mean (standard deviation) GPS results at index were 23.2 (11.3) (AS) and 30.9 (12.9) (DT). AS decreased with increasing GPS result and NCCN risk. Differences between races were minimal. Total costs were substantially higher in the DT cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: Most men with GPS-tested localized prostate cancer underwent AS, indicating the GPS result can inform clinical management. Decreasing AS with increasing GPS result and NCCN risk suggests the GPS complements NCCN risk stratification.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the dominant form of lung cancer, comprising around 85% of cases. Stage 4 NSCLC has a grim prognosis; however, immunotherapy and radiation therapy have become vital treatments for advanced-stage NSCLC, despite the risk of inducing a second primary malignancy. This case report focuses on a 45-year-old female diagnosed with NSCLC and metastasis to the 11th thoracic vertebral body. After various treatments, including radiation, a potential radiation-associated secondary malignancy, epithelial angiosarcoma, was discovered. Following treatment modification, the patient achieved complete metabolic remission, highlighting the importance of clinicians being cautious about secondary primary cancers in NSCLC patients with a history of radiation therapy. Accurate diagnosis through biopsy and continuous surveillance are essential in managing NSCLC patients effectively.

The treatment of glottic cancer remains challenging, especially with regard to morbidity reduction and larynx preservation rates. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has published guidelines to aid decision-making about this treatment according to the tumor site, clinical stage, and patient medical status.
The present review was conducted to identify changes in the NCCN guidelines for glottic cancer treatment made between 2011 and 2022 and to describe the published evidence concerning glottic cancer treatment and oncological outcomes in the same time period.
Clinical practice guidelines for head and neck cancer published from 2011 up to 2022 were obtained from the NCCN website (www.NCCN.org). Data on glottic cancer treatment recommendations were extracted, and descriptive analysis was performed. In addition, a review of literature registered in the PubMed database was performed to obtain data on glottic cancer management protocols and treatment outcomes from randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published from 2011 to 2022. In total, 24 NCCN guidelines and updates and 68 relevant studies included in the PubMed database were identified. The main guideline changes made pertained to surgical and systemic therapies, the consideration of adverse features, and new options for the treatment of metastatic disease at initial presentation. Early-stage glottic cancer received the most research attention, with transoral endoscopic laser surgery and radiotherapy assessed and compared as the main treatment modalities. Reported associations between treatment types and survival rates for this stage of glottic cancer appear to be similar, but functional outcomes can be highly compromised.
NCCN panel members provide updated recommendations based on currently accepted treatment approaches for glottic cancer, constantly reviewing new surgical and non-surgical techniques. The guidelines support decision-making about glottic cancer treatment that should be individualized and prioritize patients\' quality of life, functionality, and preferences.

BACKGROUND:  ChatGPT, created by OpenAI, is a large language model which has become the fastest growing consumer application in history, recognized for its expansive knowledge of varied subjects. The field of oncology is highly specialized and requires nuanced understanding of medications and conditions. Herein, we sought to better qualify the ability of ChatGPT to name applicable treatments for patients with advanced solid cancers.
METHODS:  This observational study was conducted utilizing ChatGPT. The capacity of ChatGPT to tabulate appropriate systemic therapies for new diagnoses of advanced solid malignancies was ascertained through standardized prompts. A ratio of those medications listed by ChatGPT to those suggested in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines was produced and called the valid therapy quotient (VTQ). Additional descriptive analyses of the VTQ and its association with incidence and type of treatment were performed.
RESULTS:  Some 51 distinct diagnoses were utilized within this experiment. ChatGPT was able to identify 91 distinct medications in response to prompts related to advanced solid tumors. The overall VTQ is 0.77. In all cases, ChatGPT was able to provide at least one example of systemic therapy suggested by the NCCN. There was a weak association between incidence of each malignancy and the VTQ.
CONCLUSIONS:  The capacity of ChatGPT to identify medications used to treat advanced solid tumors indicates a level of concordance with the NCCN guidelines. As it stands, the role of ChatGPT to assist oncologists and patients in treatment decision making remains unknown. Nonetheless, in future iterations, it may be anticipated that accuracy and consistency in this domain will improve, and further studies will be needed to better quantify its capabilities.

A core component of NCCN\'s mission is to improve and facilitate equitable cancer care. Inclusion and representation of diverse populations are essential toward this goal of equity. Within NCCN\'s professional content, inclusivity increases the likelihood that clinicians are prepared to provide optimal oncology care to all patients; within NCCN\'s patient-facing content, it helps ensure that cancer information is relevant and accessible for all individuals. This article describes changes that have been made in the language and images used in the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) and the NCCN Guidelines for Patients to promote justice, respect, and inclusion for all patients with cancer. The goals are to use language that is person-first, nonstigmatizing, inclusive of individuals of all sexual orientations and gender identities, and anti-racist, anti-classist, anti-misogynist, anti-ageist, anti-ableist, and anti-fat-biased. NCCN also seeks to incorporate multifaceted diversity in images and illustrations. NCCN is committed to continued and expanding efforts to ensure its publications are inclusive, respectful, and trustworthy, and that they advance just, equitable, high-quality, and effective cancer care for all.

暂无摘要。

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, highly aggressive cutaneous neuroendocrine carcinoma. Controversy exists regarding optimal management of MCC as high-quality randomized studies and clinical trials are limited, and physicians are bound to interpret highly heterogeneous, retrospective literature in their clinical practice. Furthermore, the rising incidence and notably poor prognosis of MCC urges the establishment of best practices for optimal management of the primary tumor and its metastases. Herein, we summarized the relevant evidence and provided an algorithm for decision-making in MCC management based on the latest 2021 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Additionally, we report current active MCC clinical trials in the United States. The initial management of MCC is dependent upon the pathology of the primary tumor and presence of metastatic disease. Patients with no clinical evidence of regional lymph node involvement generally require sentinel node biopsy (SLNB) while clinically node-positive patients should undergo fine needle aspiration (FNA) or core biopsy and full imaging workup. If SLNB or FNA/core biopsy are positive, a multidisciplinary team should be assembled to discuss if additional node dissection or adjuvant therapy is necessary. Wide local excision is optimal for primary tumor management and SLNB remains the preferred staging and predictive tool in MCC. The management of MCC has progressively improved in the last decade, particularly due to the establishment of immunotherapy as a new treatment option in advanced MCC. Ongoing trials and prospective studies are needed to further establish the best practices for MCC management.