Multiple myeloma (MM) has experienced rapid therapeutic innovation over the past two decades, leading to a substantial increase in clinical trial activity. However, the geographic distribution of these trials and the representation of different economic regions remain poorly characterized. We evaluated the global distribution, growth patterns, and phase-specific trends of MM clinical trials and trial sites across different economic settings.

We conducted a retrospective registry-based analysis interventional MM clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between January 2006 and January 2026. Trials were categorized based on the economic classification of participating countries using World Bank income groups and Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) status. Trial characteristics including phase, geographic distribution, number of participating sites, and site-years were analyzed. Population-adjusted trial density and compound annual growth rates (CAGR) were calculated to assess temporal trends and geographic representation.

A total of 845 interventional MM clinical trials were identified during the study period. Trial activity was highest in the United States (337 trials, 39.9%), followed by international trials (271, 32.1%), high-income-OECD countries (129, 15.3%), and upper-middle-income countries (103, 12.2%), while high-income non-OECD countries contributed only a small fraction of trials. Trial activity increased substantially over time across all regions with the highest growth observed in upper-middle-income countries (CAGR 18.5%). The US demonstrated the highest population-adjusted trial density (0.99 per million population) and accounted for the largest number of trial sites and site-years. Phase-specific analyses revealed distinct geographic patterns. Phase 1 trials were predominantly conducted in the US and in international collaborative trials. Phase 3 trials were largely international, although the majority of participating sites remained located in the US and High-income countries that are members of the OECD (HIC-OECD).

Over the past two decades, MM clinical trial activity has expanded globally but remains highly concentrated in the United States and high income-OECD countries, particularly with respect to trial sites and population-adjusted trial density. Although upper-middle-income countries have shown the fastest growth in trial activity expanding clinical trial infrastructure and strengthening international collaboration will be essential to promote a more equitable global distribution of MM research.

The Canadian cancer care landscape faces rising cancer incidence, persistent inequities, and increasing system pressures. Led by the Canadian Association of Provincial Cancer Agencies (CAPCA), this scoping review applied an implementation science lens to evaluate the scalability of innovative cancer care models across Canada. Using a mixed-methods design, innovations were identified through a scoping review (n = 42), grey literature analysis (>50), a pan-Canadian survey (n = 72), and key informant interviews (n = 24). Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), this review assessed feasibility, barriers, and facilitators influencing adoption and scale-up of identified innovations. Results revealed widespread adoption across various domains including virtual oncology, artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tools, and expansion of team-based care. At-home models, including home infusion, palliative care, and pharmacist-led chronic disease clinics, demonstrated improved access, patient satisfaction, and reduced hospital burden. CFIR mapping revealed cross-cutting facilitators including strong stakeholder engagement, structured training, and demonstrated patient benefits. However, persistent barriers include regulatory variability, funding instability, digital infrastructure gaps, and workforce capacity constraints. This paper highlights implemented innovations in cancer care and identifies strategic scaling opportunities needed to ensure all people living in Canada benefit from high-quality, person-centred equitable cancer care.

Sarcoma awareness among healthcare practitioners in our institution was limited, prompting an evaluation of their ability to recognize early presentations and initiate appropriate work-up for soft tissue and bone sarcomas. A structured survey assessed familiarity with key clinical features, recommended investigations, and perceived contributors to diagnostic delay. Overall awareness was modest, but higher among healthcare practitioners with prior sarcoma exposure, oncology-focused training, longer experience, or heavier patient loads; female practitioners and oncology nurses also scored higher. Confidence in identifying red-flag symptoms was strongly linked to familiarity with guideline-based practice. Despite these strengths, notable gaps persisted across specialties and training levels, indicating that exposure alone is insufficient. Targeted education, improved recognition of early warning signs, and clearer referral pathways are needed to reduce diagnostic delays and support timely management of suspected sarcomas.

Facility-level availability of Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) specialists may influence care processes, but national cancer genomic medicine data rarely capture patient-level specialist involvement. We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of pancreatic cancer cases in the Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics (C-CAT). The primary exposure was facility-level registry-listed JSMO specialist count (0-1 vs. ≥2 specialists), with ≥2 interpreted as a proxy for minimum plural specialist-team availability. The primary endpoint was time from systemic therapy start to recorded first-line treatment end. The primary cohort included 14,568 patients at 261 facilities. Median recorded first-line treatment-process duration was 5.7 months in the 0-1 specialist group and 6.4 months in the ≥2 specialist group. In the clinical plus facility-adjusted Cox model, ≥2 specialist availability was associated with a lower hazard of recorded first-line treatment end (HR 0.895, 95% CI 0.810-0.988; p = 0.028). Supportive overall survival findings did not indicate a survival advantage, reinforcing the operational nature of the primary endpoint. These findings indicate a facility-level association with an operational treatment-process endpoint, not patient-level specialist involvement, treatment efficacy, survival benefit, facility ranking, or causality. Chemotherapy-specific national database elements are needed to evaluate specialist contribution directly.

After first-line therapy with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP), 20-30% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have relapsed or refractory disease. Semi-quantitative volume parameters on [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ([18F]FDG PET/CT), performed at diagnosis, could represent variables with prognostic influence. We retrospectively analyzed 53 consecutive patients, treated between 2016 and 2022. Semi-quantitative metabolic parameters, assessed by the software LIFEx, included total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), Dmax and DmaxVox. All cases received R-CHOP/CHOP-like regimens with curative intent. The International Metabolic Prognostic Index (IMPI) was low in 43/53 cases (81.1%). CR was achieved in 49/53 patients (92.4%); 7/53 (13.2%) relapsed after achieving a CR. For the entire cohort, 2-year PFS and OS were 84.9% and 90.6%, respectively, while 5-year PFS and OS were 65.5% and 77.6%, respectively. IPI score, B symptoms, TMTV, Dmax and DmaxVox were associated with reduced PFS in an exploratory univariate analysis. IPI score was the only variable for which we found a significant association with reduced OS. In this exploratory analysis in a small, event-limited population, we suggest the baseline, semi-quantitative metabolic parameters of PET/CT at diagnosis could contribute to defining tumor burden and to predict PFS for DLBCL patients.

This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of peripheral blood inflammatory markers and nutritional indices for overall survival (OS) in young patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at initial diagnosis. Additionally, we sought to develop a survival prediction model based on combined indicators.

We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics, inflammatory markers, and nutritional indices of young patients with advanced NSCLC initially diagnosed at the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University between January 2013 and March 2025. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent prognostic factors for OS. Three prognostic models were constructed: a clinical-inflammation model, a clinical-nutrition model, and a clinical-inflammation-nutrition model. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), concordance index (C-index), and decision curve analysis (DCA), with TNM staging as the reference.

A total of 514 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 56.6 months and a median survival time of 27.2 months. Multivariate analysis identified sex, liver metastasis, gene mutation, targeted therapy, white blood cell count, and serum albumin level as independent prognostic factors for OS. Among the three models, the clinical-inflammation-nutrition model showed the best predictive performance, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year AUCs of 0.788, 0.756, and 0.704, respectively, and a C-index of 0.711 (95% CI: 0.696-0.726). DCA further demonstrated its clinical net benefit.

Peripheral blood inflammatory markers and nutritional indices are closely associated with survival in young patients with advanced NSCLC. In this exploratory single-center study, a prognostic model integrating clinicopathological factors, inflammatory markers, and nutritional indices showed better apparent predictive performance than models based on single categories of variables or TNM staging, warranting further validation in independent cohorts.

Head and neck neuroendocrine carcinoma (HN-NEC) is exceedingly rare. Standardized treatment strategies for this malignancy remain unestablished. This study aimed to explore promising treatment modalities, and to identify prognostic factors in HN-NEC.

Thirty-nine patients diagnosed with HN-NEC at West China Hospital of Sichuan University between 2006 and 2025 were enrolled. The 5-year survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The log-rank test and Firth's penalized Cox multivariable analysis regression model were used to identify prognostic factors.

The 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates for patients who did and did not receive radiotherapy were 63.2% vs. 29.6% (p = 0.031), 75.5% vs. 48.0% (p = 0.065), and 81.4% vs. 46.9% (p = 0.039), respectively. Laryngeal NEC was associated with poorer 5-year DMFS (41.2% vs. 87.5%, p = 0.023) and 5-year OS (38.1% vs. 92.9%, p = 0.027) compared with non-laryngeal HN-NEC. Radiotherapy (HR = 0.152, 95% CI: 0.025-0.757, p = 0.022) was a potentially protective factor influencing LRRFS.

Radiotherapy may be associated with improved LRRFS in patients with HN-NEC. HN-NEC originating in the larynx appeared to be associated with a poorer prognosis compared with other primary sites of the head and neck.

Background: Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for 15% of lung cancers, with 70% diagnosed at extensive-stage (ES). Systemic therapy is often considered in very unwell patients, although outcomes for inpatients with ES-SCLC are not well understood. Methods: We reviewed patients with de novo ES-SCLC who had an inpatient medical oncology consultation at the Ottawa Hospital between 2013 and 2021. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included length of stay (LOS) and tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) incidence. Results: There were 127 patients identified. Median age was 68 years (range 50-87), 58% female, 99% had prior smoking history, 22% had brain metastases, and 64% had liver metastases. Ninety-two (72%) received chemotherapy. Median OS for treated patients was 5.9 months (95% CI, 4.5-7.3 m), and a median LOS of 13 days. Patients in the non-treatment cohort had a median OS of 14 days (95% CI, 0.2-0.7 m), a median LOS of 11 days, and 54% in-hospital death rate. TLS occurred in six of the 76 (8%) evaluated patients, all dying within 7 days of chemotherapy. Conclusions: Chemotherapy was associated with longer survival among inpatients with ES-SCLC. TLS was rare but uniformly fatal, highlighting the need for aggressive prophylaxis among patients with identified risk factors.

Cancer patients receiving systemic therapy experience substantial treatment-related symptoms. Nurse-led digital health interventions, e.g., interactive voice response systems, web platforms, mobile apps, and telehealth, have emerged as strategies to strengthen supportive care. To evaluate its effectiveness, this systematic review summarizes evidence exclusively from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, four databases were searched from inception to January 2025 for eligible RCTs involving adults undergoing anticancer therapy; evaluating nurse-led or nurse-co-led interventions using digital or telecommunication technologies; reporting validated symptom or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed. Nine RCTs (N = 3344) met criteria; seven had low risk of bias. Interventions using telephone systems, web portals, mobile apps, or videoconferencing reduced symptom burden and improved HRQoL. The Symptom Care at Home system reduced symptom burden by ~43%, with greatest effects from combined automated monitoring and nurse practitioner follow-up. Additional benefits included improved anxiety, self-efficacy, patient participation, fewer severe toxicities and hospitalization days. In conclusion, nurse-led digital interventions effectively reduce symptom burden and support HRQoL during systemic therapy. Multicomponent models integrating automated monitoring with structured nursing follow-up and decision support appear most beneficial.

Background/objectives: To describe and compare Korean AYAs' and parental perspectives on the family environment in terms of agreement and significant differences and examine which variables were associated with AYAs' symptom distress. Sample and setting: Self-report data were collected from a total sample of 113 AYAs, recruited from a pediatric-oncology outpatient clinic at a university-affiliated hospital and community group in South Korea. Because each study aim required different data sources, different analytic samples were used. Specifically, 54 AYA-parent dyads were included for Aim 1, whereas self-report data from 111 AYAs with complete data were used for Aim 2. Methods and variables: This subgroup analysis used a quantitative-descriptive, cross-sectional design. AYAs' and parent perceptions of the family environment (family cohesion and adaptability, family strength, and social support from family) and AYAs' symptom distress were collected using reliable and validated self-report questionnaires and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: AYAs and their parents showed low (family support) to moderate agreement (family strength, family cohesion, and adaptability) on perceptions of family environment (ICC = 0.374-0.612). AYAs reported significantly lower perceptions of family support than their parents, with a small to moderate effect (p < 0.001, d = 0.48). All family environment variables were correlated with AYAs' symptom distress (p < 0.05). Among these variables, AYAs' perceived family strength emerged as the only family environment variable significantly associated with their symptom distress (F = 14.309, p < 0.001, R² = 0.359, R²adj = 0.334), which was stronger during treatment. Conclusions: AYAs' perceived family strength should be routinely assessed, especially during cancer treatment. Additional nursing interventions focusing on enhancing AYAs' families as a support group are needed.