Breast cancer was the most diagnosed malignant neoplasm and the second leading cause of cancer mortality among Chinese females in 2020. Increased risk factors and widespread adoption of westernized lifestyles have resulted in an upward trend in the occurrence of breast cancer. Up to date knowledge on the incidence, mortality, survival, and burden of breast cancer is essential for optimized cancer prevention and control. To better understand the status of breast cancer in China, this narrative literature review collected data from multiple sources, including studies obtained from the PubMed database and text references, national annual cancer report, government cancer database, Global Cancer Statistics 2020, and Global Burden of Disease study (2019). This review provides an overview of the incidence, mortality, and survival rates of breast cancer, as well as a summary of disability‐adjusted life years associated with breast cancer in China from 1990 to 2019, with comparisons to Japan, South Korea, Australia and the United States.

Breast cancer care has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic review aims to describe the observed pandemic-related changes in clinical and health services outcomes for breast screening and diagnosis. Seven databases (January 2020-March 2021) were searched to identify studies of breast cancer screening or diagnosis that reported observed outcomes before and related to the pandemic. Findings were presented using a descriptive and narrative approach. Seventy-four studies were included in this systematic review; all compared periods before and after (or fluctuations during) the pandemic. None were assessed as being at low risk of bias. A reduction in screening volumes during the pandemic was found with over half of studies reporting reductions of ≥49%. A majority (66%) of studies reported reductions of ≥25% in the number of breast cancer diagnoses, and there was a higher proportion of symptomatic than screen-detected cancers. The distribution of cancer stage at diagnosis during the pandemic showed lower proportions of early-stage (stage 0-1/I-II, or Tis and T1) and higher proportions of relatively more advanced cases than that in the pre-pandemic period, however population rates were generally not reported. Evidence of substantial reductions in screening volume and number of diagnosed breast cancers, and higher proportions of advanced stage cancer at diagnosis were found during the pandemic. However, these findings reflect short term outcomes, and higher-quality research examining the long-term impact of the pandemic is needed.

Objective To assess the effect of participating in an exercise intervention compared with no exercise during cancer treatment on the duration and frequency of hospital admissions. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro and Cochrane Central Registry of Randomized Controlled Trials. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised studies published until August 2023 evaluating exercise interventions during chemotherapy, radiotherapy or stem cell transplant regimens, compared with usual care, and which assessed hospital admissions (length of stay and/or frequency of admissions). Study appraisal and synthesis Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted by pooling the data using random-effects models. Results Of 3918 screened abstracts, 20 studies met inclusion criteria, including 2635 participants (1383 intervention and 1252 control). Twelve studies were conducted during haematopoietic stem cell transplantation regimens. There was a small effect size in a pooled analysis that found exercise during treatment reduced hospital length of stay by 1.40 days (95% CI: −2.26 to −0.54 days; low-quality evidence) and lowered the rate of hospital admission by 8% (difference in proportions=−0.08, 95% CI: −0.13 to −0.03, low-quality evidence) compared with usual care. Conclusion Exercise during cancer treatment can decrease hospital length of stay and admissions, although a small effect size and high heterogeneity limits the certainty. While exercise is factored into some multidisciplinary care plans, it could be included as standard practice for patients as cancer care pathways evolve.

Background: Psychosocial impacts of lung cancer screening (LCS) can cause both harm to individuals and serve as barriers to screening participation and adherence. Early data suggest that the psychosocial impacts of LCS are moderated by certain factors (e.g. sociodemographic characteristics and beliefs), but evidence synthesis is lacking. This systematic review aimed to understand individual‐level risk factors for psychosocial burden during LCS as a precursor to developing strategies to identify and support participants, and improve LCS engagement.Methods: Four databases were searched for full‐text articles published in English reporting any association between participant factors and psychosocial outcomes experienced during LCS. Study quality was assessed by two independent investigators; findings were synthesised narratively. The review was pre‐registered with PROSPERO and adhered to PRISMA guidelines.Results: Thirty‐five articles were included; most (33/35) studies were assessed at high or moderate risk of bias. Study designs were pre‐post (n = 13), cross‐sectional (n = 13), qualitative (n = 8) and mixed‐methods (n = 1) and conducted primarily in the United States (n = 17). Psychological burden in LCS varied, and was often associated with younger age, female gender, current smoking status or increased smoking history, lower education, lower socio‐economic group, not being married or co‐habiting and experience with cancer. However, results were mixed, and non‐significant associations were also reported across all factors. Beliefs (e.g. fatalism, stigma and expectation of LDCT results) and comorbid psychological burden were also linked to psychosocial outcomes, but evidence was sparse. Associations between risk perception, other participant factors and other psychosocial outcomes was inconclusive, likely reflecting individual biases in risk conceptualisation.Conclusion(s): Several participant factors are consistently reported to be associated with psychosocial impacts of LCS, though study heterogeneity and high risk of bias necessitate more robust evaluation. Further research on how perceptions, beliefs and expectations can be used to improve psychosocial outcomes during LCS is needed.

Introduction: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) addresses some of the limitations of digital mammography (DM) by reducing the effect of overlapping tissue. Emerging data have shown that DBT increases breast cancer (BC) detection and reduces recall in BC screening programs. Studies have also suggested that DBT improves assessment of screen-recalled findings. Areas covered: Studies of DBT for population BC screening and those for assessment of screen-detected findings were reviewed to provide an up-to-date summary of the evidence on DBT in the screening setting. A systematic literature search was conducted for each of the topics; study-specific information and/or quantitative data on detection or accuracy were extracted and collated in tables. Expert commentary: The evidence on DBT for BC screening reinforces that DBT integrated with DM increases cancer detection rates compared to DM alone, although the extent of improved detection varied between studies. The effect of DBT on recall rates was heterogeneous with substantial reductions evident noticeably in retrospective comparative studies. The evidence on DBT for workup was sparse and those studies had limitations related to design and methods. Even though the majority showed improved specificity using DBT compared with conventional imaging, there was little evidence on how DBT impacts assessment outcomes.