The data sources and methods used to develop global cancer incidence and mortality statistics—the GLOBOCAN estimates—for the year 2022 are documented in this article, alongside a brief overview of the global cancer burden. The estimates, made available in 185 countries or territories worldwide for 36 cancer sites by sex and age, are based on the best available local data sources, namely population‐based cancer registries (for incidence) and national vital statistics (for mortality). In males, lung cancer was the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide in 2022 (1.57 million new cases [95% UI: 1.56–1.58]), followed by prostate cancer (1.47 million [1.46–1.48]). With 2.30 million (2.28–2.30) new cases estimated in 2022, breast cancer was the most diagnosed cancer in females, followed by lung cancer (0.91 million [0.90–0.91 million]) and cervical cancer (0.66 million [0.66–0.67]). The most common causes of cancer death in males and females were lung cancer (1.23 million [1.22–1.24]) and breast cancer (0.67 million [0.66–0.67]), respectively.

The benefit of combination neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibition in patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma is unknown. We assess the antitumor activity of neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma.The KEYNOTE-585 study is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study done at 143 medical centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with untreated, locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system to neoadjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously or placebo (saline) plus cisplatin-based doublet chemotherapy (main cohort) every 3 weeks for 3 cycles, followed by surgery, adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo plus chemotherapy for 3 cycles, then adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo for 11 cycles. A small cohort was also randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab or placebo plus fluorouracil, docetaxel, and oxaliplatin (FLOT)-based chemotherapy (FLOT cohort) every 2 weeks for four cycles, followed by surgery, adjuvant pembrolizumab, or placebo plus FLOT for four cycles, then adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo for 11 cycles. Patients were stratified by geographic region, tumour stage, and chemotherapy backbone. Primary endpoints were pathological complete response (reviewed centrally), event-free survival (reviewed by the investigator), and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population, and safety assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03221426, and is closed to accrual.Between Oct 9, 2017, and Jan 25, 2021, of 1254 patients screened, 804 were randomly assigned to the main cohort, of whom 402 were assigned to the pembrolizumab plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy group and 402 to the placebo plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy group, and 203 to the FLOT cohort, of whom 100 were assigned to the pembrolizumab plus FLOT group and 103 to placebo plus FLOT group. In the main cohort of 804 participants, 575 (72%) were male and 229 (28%) were female. In the main cohort, after median follow-up of 47·7 months (IQR 38·0-54·8), pembrolizumab was superior to placebo for pathological complete response (52 [12·9%; 95% CI 9·8-16·6] of 402 vs eight [2·0%; 0·9-3·9] of 402; difference 10·9%, 95% CI 7·5 to 14·8; p<0·00001). Median event-free survival was longer with pembrolizumab versus placebo (44·4 months, 95% CI 33·0 to not reached vs 25·3 months, 20·6 to 33·9; hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·67 to 0·99; p=0·0198) but did not meet the threshold for statistical significance (p=0·0178). Median overall survival was 60·7 months (95% CI 51·5 to not reached) in the pembrolizumab group versus 58·0 months (41·5 to not reached) in the placebo group (HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·73 to 1·12; p=0·174). Grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause occurred in 312 (78%) of 399 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 297 (74%) of 400 patients in the placebo group; the most common were nausea (240 [60%] vs 247 [62%]), anaemia (168 [42%] vs 158 [40%]), and decreased appetite (163 [41%] vs 172 [43%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 102 (26%) and 97 (24%) patients. Treatment-related adverse events that led to death occurred in four (1%) patients in the pembrolizumab group (interstitial ischaemia, pneumonia, decreased appetite, and acute kidney injury [n=1 each]) and two (<1%) patients in the placebo group (neutropenic sepsis and neutropenic colitis [n=1 each]).Although neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo improved the pathological complete response, it did not translate to significant improvement in event-free survival in patients with untreated, locally advanced resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal cancer.Merck Sharp & Dohme.Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Medical literature does not have clear consensus on inter-rater reliability of PS assessment by different oncology health care professionals (HCPs) although it plays an important role in treatment decision and prognosis for oncology patients. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) scores are commonly used for this purpose by oncology HCPs around the world. This study was conducted to find variability or similarities in assessment of PS among the different oncology HCPs. A survey based on four hypothetical clinical scenarios was devised and sent to 50 oncology HCPs to assess the PS using ECOG PS tool. No significant variations in PS assessment by oncology HCPs was noted in our study sample.

Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions.A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.

As immunotherapy has gained increasing interest as a new foundation for cancer therapy, some atypical response patterns, such as pseudoprogression and hyperprogression, have garnered the attention of physicians. Pseudoprogression is a phenomenon in which an initial increase in tumor size is observed or new lesions appear, followed by a decrease in tumor burden; this phenomenon can benefit patients receiving immunotherapy but often leads to premature discontinuation of treatment owing to the false judgment of progression. Accurately recognizing pseudoprogression is also a challenge for physicians. Because of the extensive attention on pseudoprogression, significant progress has been made. Some new criteria for immunotherapy, such as irRC, iRECIST and imRECIST, were proposed to accurately evaluate the response to immunotherapy. Many new detection indexes, such as ctDNA and IL-8, have also been used to identify pseudoprogression. In this review, the definition, evaluation criteria, mechanism, monitoring, management and prognosis of pseudoprogression are summarized, and diagnostic and treatment processes for patients with progression but with a suspicion of pseudoprogression are proposed; these processes could be helpful for physicians in clinical practice and enhances the understanding of pseudoprogression.Copyright 2019 Cancer Biology & Medicine.

Tumours respond differently to immunotherapies compared with chemotherapeutic drugs, raising questions about the assessment of changes in tumour burden-a mainstay of evaluation of cancer therapeutics that provides key information about objective response and disease progression. A consensus guideline-iRECIST-was developed by the RECIST working group for the use of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) in cancer immunotherapy trials, to ensure consistent design and data collection, facilitate the ongoing collection of trial data, and ultimate validation of the guideline. This guideline describes a standard approach to solid tumour measurements and definitions for objective change in tumour size for use in trials in which an immunotherapy is used. Additionally, it defines the minimum datapoints required from future trials and those currently in development to facilitate the compilation of a data warehouse to use to later validate iRECIST. An unprecedented number of trials have been done, initiated, or are planned to test new immune modulators for cancer therapy using a variety of modified response criteria. This guideline will allow consistent conduct, interpretation, and analysis of trials of immunotherapies.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The extensive utilization of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) has achieved significant advancements in the treatment of diverse solid tumors. The present meta-analysis aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) plus PD-1 inhibitors for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).