Screening for lung cancer: 2023 guideline update from the American Cancer Society.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of mortality and person-years of life lost from cancer among US men and women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced lung cancer mortality. Our objective was to update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2013 lung cancer screening (LCS) guideline for adults at high risk for lung cancer. The guideline is intended to provide guidance for screening to health care providers and their patients who are at high risk for lung cancer due to a history of smoking. The ACS Guideline Development Group (GDG) utilized a systematic review of the LCS literature commissioned for the US Preventive Services Task Force 2021 LCS recommendation update; a second systematic review of lung cancer risk associated with years since quitting smoking (YSQ); literature published since 2021; two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network-validated lung cancer models to assess the benefits and harms of screening; an epidemiologic and modeling analysis examining the effect of YSQ and aging on lung cancer risk; and an updated analysis of benefit-to-radiation-risk ratios from LCS and follow-up examinations. The GDG also examined disease burden data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. The GDG judged that the overall evidence was moderate and sufficient to support a strong recommendation for screening individuals who meet the eligibility criteria. LCS in men and women aged 50-80 years is associated with a reduction in lung cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports LCS for men and women older than 80 years who are in good health. The ACS recommends annual LCS with low-dose computed tomography for asymptomatic individuals aged 50-80 years who currently smoke or formerly smoked and have a ≥20 pack-year smoking history (strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence). Before the decision is made to initiate LCS, individuals should engage in a shared decision-making discussion with a qualified health professional. For individuals who formerly smoked, the number of YSQ is not an eligibility criterion to begin or to stop screening. Individuals who currently smoke should receive counseling to quit and be connected to cessation resources. Individuals with comorbid conditions that substantially limit life expectancy should not be screened. These recommendations should be considered by health care providers and adults at high risk for lung cancer in discussions about LCS. If fully implemented, these recommendations have a high likelihood of significantly reducing death and suffering from lung cancer in the United States.

The contemporary management of cancers of the sinonasal tract in adults.

Sinonasal malignancies make up <5% of all head and neck neoplasms, with an incidence of 0.5-1.0 per 100,000. The outcome of these rare malignancies has been poor, whereas significant progress has been made in the management of other cancers. The objective of the current review was to describe the incidence, causes, presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and recent developments of malignancies of the sinonasal tract. The diagnoses covered in this review included sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma, sinonasal adenocarcinoma, sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma, and esthesioneuroblastoma, which are exclusive to the sinonasal tract. In addition, the authors covered malignances that are likely to be encountered in the sinonasal tract-primary mucosal melanoma, NUT (nuclear protein of the testis) carcinoma, and extranodal natural killer cell/T-cell lymphoma. For the purpose of keeping this review as concise and focused as possible, sarcomas and malignancies that can be classified as salivary gland neoplasms were excluded.

Consensuses, controversies, and future directions in treatment deintensification for human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal cancer.

The most common cancer caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in the United States is oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), and its incidence has been rising since the turn of the century. Because of substantial long-term morbidities with chemoradiation and the favorable prognosis of HPV-positive OPC, identifying the optimal deintensification strategy for this group has been a keystone of academic head-and-neck surgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology for over the past decade. However, the first generation of randomized chemotherapy deintensification trials failed to change the standard of care, triggering concern over the feasibility of de-escalation. National database studies estimate that up to one third of patients receive nonstandard de-escalated treatments, which have subspecialty-specific nuances. A synthesis of the multidisciplinary deintensification data and current treatment standards is important for the oncology community to reinforce best practices and ensure optimal patient outcomes. In this review, the authors present a summary and comparison of prospective HPV-positive OPC de-escalation trials. Chemotherapy attenuation compromises outcomes without reducing toxicity. Limited data comparing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) with radiation raise concern over toxicity and outcomes with TORS. There are promising data to support de-escalating adjuvant therapy after TORS, but consensus on treatment indications is needed. Encouraging radiation deintensification strategies have been reported (upfront dose reduction and induction chemotherapy-based patient selection), but level I evidence is years away. Ultimately, stage and HPV status may be insufficient to guide de-escalation. The future of deintensification may lie in incorporating intratreatment response assessments to harness the powers of personalized medicine and integrate real-time surveillance.

Colorectal cancer statistics, 2023.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society provides an update of CRC statistics based on incidence from population-based cancer registries and mortality from the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2023, approximately 153,020 individuals will be diagnosed with CRC and 52,550 will die from the disease, including 19,550 cases and 3750 deaths in individuals younger than 50 years. The decline in CRC incidence slowed from 3%-4% annually during the 2000s to 1% annually during 2011-2019, driven partly by an increase in individuals younger than 55 years of 1%-2% annually since the mid-1990s. Consequently, the proportion of cases among those younger than 55 years increased from 11% in 1995 to 20% in 2019. Incidence since circa 2010 increased in those younger than 65 years for regional-stage disease by about 2%-3% annually and for distant-stage disease by 0.5%-3% annually, reversing the overall shift to earlier stage diagnosis that occurred during 1995 through 2005. For example, 60% of all new cases were advanced in 2019 versus 52% in the mid-2000s and 57% in 1995, before widespread screening. There is also a shift to left-sided tumors, with the proportion of rectal cancer increasing from 27% in 1995 to 31% in 2019. CRC mortality declined by 2% annually from 2011-2020 overall but increased by 0.5%-3% annually in individuals younger than 50 years and in Native Americans younger than 65 years. In summary, despite continued overall declines, CRC is rapidly shifting to diagnosis at a younger age, at a more advanced stage, and in the left colon/rectum. Progress against CRC could be accelerated by uncovering the etiology of rising incidence in generations born since 1950 and increasing access to high-quality screening and treatment among all populations, especially Native Americans.

Systemic therapy for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early stage and metastatic breast cancer.

Hormone receptor (HR)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer is defined by the presence of the estrogen receptor and/or the progesterone receptor and the absence of HER2 gene amplification. HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer accounts for 65%-70% of all breast cancers, and incidence increases with increasing age. Treatment varies by stage, and endocrine therapy is the mainstay of treatment in both early stage and late-stage disease. Combinations with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors have reduced distant recurrence in the early stage setting and improved overall survival in the metastatic setting. Chemotherapy is used based on stage and tumor biology in the early stage setting and after endocrine resistance for advanced disease. New therapies, including novel endocrine agents and antibody-drug conjugates, are now changing the treatment landscape. With the availability of new treatment options, it is important to define the optimal sequence of treatment to maximize clinical benefit while minimizing toxicity. In this review, the authors first discuss the pathologic and molecular features of HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer and mechanisms of endocrine resistance. Then, they discuss current and emerging therapies for both early stage and metastatic HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, including treatment algorithms based on current data.

Breast Cancer Statistics, 2022.

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.

Intermittent fasting in the prevention and treatment of cancer.

Chronic caloric restriction (CR) has powerful anticarcinogenic actions in both preclinical and clinical studies but may be difficult to sustain. As an alternative to CR, there has been growing interest in intermittent fasting (IF) in both the scientific and lay community as a result of promising study results, mainly in experimental animal models. According to a survey by the International Food Information Council Foundation, IF has become the most popular diet in the last year, and patients with cancer are seeking advice from oncologists about its beneficial effects for cancer prevention and treatment. However, as discussed in this review, results from IF studies in rodents are controversial and suggest potential detrimental effects in certain oncologic conditions. The effects of IF on human cancer incidence and prognosis remain unknown because of a lack of high-quality randomized clinical trials. Preliminary studies suggest that prolonged fasting in some patients who have cancer is safe and potentially capable of decreasing chemotherapy-related toxicity and tumor growth. However, because additional trials are needed to elucidate the risks and benefits of fasting for patients with cancer, the authors would not currently recommend patients undergoing active cancer treatment partake in IF outside the context of a clinical trial. IF may be considered in adults seeking cancer-prevention benefits through means of weight management, but whether IF itself affects cancer-related metabolic and molecular pathways remains unanswered.

Current treatment and recent progress in gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer is not a top-10 malignancy in the United States but represents one of the most common causes of cancer death worldwide. Biological differences between tumors from Eastern and Western countries add to the complexity of identifying standard-of-care therapy based on international trials. Systemic chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy all have proven efficacy in gastric adenocarcinoma; therefore, multidisciplinary treatment is paramount to treatment selection. Triplet chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer is now accepted and could represent a plateau of standard cytotoxic chemotherapy for localized disease. Classification of gastric cancer based on molecular subtypes is providing an opportunity for personalized therapy. Biomarkers, in particular microsatellite instability (MSI), programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), tumor mutation burden, and Epstein-Barr virus, are increasingly driving systemic therapy approaches and allowing for the identification of populations most likely to benefit from immunotherapy and targeted therapy. Significant research opportunities remain for the less differentiated histologic subtypes of gastric adenocarcinoma and those without markers of immunotherapy activity.

An update on the immune landscape in lung and head and neck cancers.

Immunotherapy has dramatically changed the treatment landscape for patients with cancer. Programmed death-ligand 1/programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitors have been in the forefront of this clinical revolution. Currently, there are 6 US Food and Drug Administration-approved checkpoint inhibitors for approximately 18 different histologic types of cancer. Lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) are 2 diseases that have led the way in the development of immunotherapy. Atezolizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab are all currently used as part of standard-of-care treatment for different stages of lung cancer. Similarly, nivolumab and pembrolizumab have US regulatory approval as treatment for advanced metastatic HNSCC. This is significant because lung cancer represents the most common and most fatal cancer globally, and HNSCC is the sixth most common. Currently, most of the approvals for the use of immunotherapy agents are for patients diagnosed in the metastatic setting. However, research is ongoing to evaluate these drugs in earlier stage disease. There is plausible biological rationale to expect that pharmacologic activation of the immune system will be effective for early-stage and smaller tumors. In addition, selecting patients who are more likely to respond to immunotherapy and understanding why resistance develops are crucial areas of ongoing research. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of the current immune landscape and future directions in lung cancer and HNSCC.

Cervical cancer screening for individuals at average risk: 2020 guideline update from the American Cancer Society.

The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that individuals with a cervix initiate cervical cancer screening at age 25 years and undergo primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing every 5 years through age 65 years (preferred); if primary HPV testing is not available, then individuals aged 25 to 65 years should be screened with cotesting (HPV testing in combination with cytology) every 5 years or cytology alone every 3 years (acceptable) (strong recommendation). The ACS recommends that individuals aged >65 years who have no history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe disease within the past 25 years, and who have documented adequate negative prior screening in the prior 10 years, discontinue all cervical cancer screening (qualified recommendation). These new screening recommendations differ in 4 important respects compared with the 2012 recommendations: 1) The preferred screening strategy is primary HPV testing every 5 years, with cotesting and cytology alone acceptable where access to US Food and Drug Administration-approved primary HPV testing is not yet available; 2) the recommended age to start screening is 25 years rather than 21 years; 3) primary HPV testing, as well as cotesting or cytology alone when primary testing is not available, is recommended starting at age 25 years rather than age 30 years; and 4) the guideline is transitional, ie, options for screening with cotesting or cytology alone are provided but should be phased out once full access to primary HPV testing for cervical cancer screening is available without barriers. Evidence related to other relevant issues was reviewed, and no changes were made to recommendations for screening intervals, age or criteria for screening cessation, screening based on vaccination status, or screening after hysterectomy. Follow-up for individuals who screen positive for HPV and/or cytology should be in accordance with the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors.

Innovations in research and clinical care using patient-generated health data.

Patient-generated health data (PGHD), or health-related data gathered from patients to help address a health concern, are used increasingly in oncology to make regulatory decisions and evaluate quality of care. PGHD include self-reported health and treatment histories, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and biometric sensor data. Advances in wireless technology, smartphones, and the Internet of Things have facilitated new ways to collect PGHD during clinic visits and in daily life. The goal of the current review was to provide an overview of the current clinical, regulatory, technological, and analytic landscape as it relates to PGHD in oncology research and care. The review begins with a rationale for PGHD as described by the US Food and Drug Administration, the Institute of Medicine, and other regulatory and scientific organizations. The evidence base for clinic-based and remote symptom monitoring using PGHD is described, with an emphasis on PROs. An overview is presented of current approaches to digital phenotyping or device-based, real-time assessment of biometric, behavioral, self-report, and performance data. Analytic opportunities regarding PGHD are envisioned in the context of big data and artificial intelligence in medicine. Finally, challenges and solutions for the integration of PGHD into clinical care are presented. The challenges include electronic medical record integration of PROs and biometric data, analysis of large and complex biometric data sets, and potential clinic workflow redesign. In addition, there is currently more limited evidence for the use of biometric data relative to PROs. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of PGHD make them increasingly likely to be integrated into oncology research and clinical care.

Multidisciplinary standards of care and recent progress in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Despite tremendous gains in the molecular understanding of exocrine pancreatic cancer, the prognosis for this disease remains very poor, largely because of delayed disease detection and limited effectiveness of systemic therapies. Both incidence rates and mortality rates for pancreatic cancer have increased during the past decade, in contrast to most other solid tumor types. Recent improvements in multimodality care have substantially improved overall survival, local control, and metastasis-free survival for patients who have localized tumors that are amenable to surgical resection. The widening gap in prognosis between patients with resectable and unresectable or metastatic disease reinforces the importance of detecting pancreatic cancer sooner to improve outcomes. Furthermore, the developing use of therapies that target tumor-specific molecular vulnerabilities may offer improved disease control for patients with advanced disease. Finally, the substantial morbidity associated with pancreatic cancer, including wasting, fatigue, and pain, remains an under-addressed component of this disease, which powerfully affects quality of life and limits tolerance to aggressive therapies. In this article, the authors review the current multidisciplinary standards of care in pancreatic cancer with a focus on emerging concepts in pancreatic cancer detection, precision therapy, and survivorship.

Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society provides an update of CRC occurrence based on incidence data (available through 2016) from population-based cancer registries and mortality data (through 2017) from the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2020, approximately 147,950 individuals will be diagnosed with CRC and 53,200 will die from the disease, including 17,930 cases and 3,640 deaths in individuals aged younger than 50 years. The incidence rate during 2012 through 2016 ranged from 30 (per 100,000 persons) in Asian/Pacific Islanders to 45.7 in blacks and 89 in Alaska Natives. Rapid declines in incidence among screening-aged individuals during the 2000s continued during 2011 through 2016 in those aged 65 years and older (by 3.3% annually) but reversed in those aged 50 to 64 years, among whom rates increased by 1% annually. Among individuals aged younger than 50 years, the incidence rate increased by approximately 2% annually for tumors in the proximal and distal colon, as well as the rectum, driven by trends in non-Hispanic whites. CRC death rates during 2008 through 2017 declined by 3% annually in individuals aged 65 years and older and by 0.6% annually in individuals aged 50 to 64 years while increasing by 1.3% annually in those aged younger than 50 years. Mortality declines among individuals aged 50 years and older were steepest among blacks, who also had the only decreasing trend among those aged younger than 50 years, and excluded American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom rates remained stable. Progress against CRC can be accelerated by increasing access to guideline-recommended screening and high-quality treatment, particularly among Alaska Natives, and elucidating causes for rising incidence in young and middle-aged adults.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit.

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Congenital Vascular and Lymphatic Diseases.

Over the past several centuries, the integration of contemporary medical techniques and innovative technologies, like genetic sequencing, have played a pivotal role in enhancing our comprehension of congenital vascular and lymphatic disorders. Nonetheless, the uncommon and complex characteristics of these disorders, especially considering their formation during the intrauterine stage, present significant obstacles in diagnosis and treatment. Here, we review the intricacies of these congenital abnormalities, offering an in-depth examination of key diagnostic approaches, genetic factors, and therapeutic methods.

A blueprint for cancer screening and early detection: Advancing screening's contribution to cancer control.

From the mid-20th century, accumulating evidence has supported the introduction of screening for cancers of the cervix, breast, colon and rectum, prostate (via shared decisions), and lung. The opportunity to detect and treat precursor lesions and invasive disease at a more favorable stage has contributed substantially to reduced incidence, morbidity, and mortality. However, as new discoveries portend advancements in technology and risk-based screening, we fail to fulfill the greatest potential of the existing technology, in terms of both full access among the target population and the delivery of state-of-the art care at each crucial step in the cascade of events that characterize successful cancer screening. There also is insufficient commitment to invest in the development of new technologies, incentivize the development of new ideas, and rapidly evaluate promising new technology. In this report, the authors summarize the status of cancer screening and propose a blueprint for the nation to further advance the contribution of screening to cancer control.

Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening.

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines are summarized, and the most current data from the National Health Interview Survey are provided on the utilization of cancer screening for men and women and on the adherence of men and women to multiple recommended screening tests.

Follow the trail: Using insights from the growth of palliative care to propose a roadmap for cancer rehabilitation.

Despite research explicating the benefits of cancer rehabilitation interventions to optimize physical, social, emotional, and vocational functioning, many reports document low rates of referral to and uptake of rehabilitation in oncology. Cancer rehabilitation clinicians, researchers, and policy makers could learn from the multidisciplinary specialty of palliative care, which has benefited from a growth strategy and has garnered national recognition as an important and necessary aspect of oncology care. The purpose of this article is to explore the actions that have increased the uptake and integration of palliative care to yield insights and multimodal strategies for the development and growth of cancer rehabilitation. After examining the history of palliative care and its growth, the authors highlight 5 key strategies that may benefit the field of cancer rehabilitation: 1) stimulating the science in specific gap areas; 2) creating clinical practice guidelines; 3) building clinical capacity; 4) ascertaining and responding to public opinion; and 5) advocating for public policy change. Coordinated and simultaneous advances on these 5 strategies may catalyze the growth, utilization, and effectiveness of patient screening, timely referrals, and delivery of appropriate cancer rehabilitation care that reduces disability and improves quality of life for cancer survivors who need these services.

Breast cancer statistics, 2019.

This article is the American Cancer Society's biennial update on female breast cancer statistics in the United States, including data on incidence, mortality, survival, and screening. Over the most recent 5-year period (2012-2016), the breast cancer incidence rate increased slightly by 0.3% per year, largely because of rising rates of local stage and hormone receptor-positive disease. In contrast, the breast cancer death rate continues to decline, dropping 40% from 1989 to 2017 and translating to 375,900 breast cancer deaths averted. Notably, the pace of the decline has slowed from an annual decrease of 1.9% during 1998 through 2011 to 1.3% during 2011 through 2017, largely driven by the trend in white women. Consequently, the black-white disparity in breast cancer mortality has remained stable since 2011 after widening over the past 3 decades. Nevertheless, the death rate remains 40% higher in blacks (28.4 vs 20.3 deaths per 100,000) despite a lower incidence rate (126.7 vs 130.8); this disparity is magnified among black women aged <50 years, who have a death rate double that of whites. In the most recent 5-year period (2013-2017), the death rate declined in Hispanics (2.1% per year), blacks (1.5%), whites (1.0%), and Asians/Pacific Islanders (0.8%) but was stable in American Indians/Alaska Natives. However, by state, breast cancer mortality rates are no longer declining in Nebraska overall; in Colorado and Wisconsin in black women; and in Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia in white women. Breast cancer was the leading cause of cancer death in women (surpassing lung cancer) in four Southern and two Midwestern states among blacks and in Utah among whites during 2016-2017. Declines in breast cancer mortality could be accelerated by expanding access to high-quality prevention, early detection, and treatment services to all women.

Epithelial ovarian cancer: Evolution of management in the era of precision medicine.

Ovarian cancer is the second most common cause of gynecologic cancer death in women around the world. The outcomes are complicated, because the disease is often diagnosed late and composed of several subtypes with distinct biological and molecular properties (even within the same histological subtype), and there is inconsistency in availability of and access to treatment. Upfront treatment largely relies on debulking surgery to no residual disease and platinum-based chemotherapy, with the addition of antiangiogenic agents in patients who have suboptimally debulked and stage IV disease. Major improvement in maintenance therapy has been seen by incorporating inhibitors against poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) molecules involved in the DNA damage-repair process, which have been approved in a recurrent setting and recently in a first-line setting among women with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. In recognizing the challenges facing the treatment of ovarian cancer, current investigations are enlaced with deep molecular and cellular profiling. To improve survival in this aggressive disease, access to appropriate evidence-based care is requisite. In concert, realizing individualized precision medicine will require prioritizing clinical trials of innovative treatments and refining predictive biomarkers that will enable selection of patients who would benefit from chemotherapy, targeted agents, or immunotherapy. Together, a coordinated and structured approach will accelerate significant clinical and academic advancements in ovarian cancer and meaningfully change the paradigm of care.