For award-winning science writer and photographer Margie Patlak, exploring the unique nature of the Maine coast opens a door to deeper ties and insights. This collection of photographs conveys the sublime sense of wonder she feels every time she visits the shore. Tides show how fleeting time is, and clouds and weather reveal greater forces that take away all illusions of control. These facets of the natural world speak a hidden language of light and color that Patlak translates with her lens.

The National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a public workshop, Incorporating Weight Management and Physical Activity Throughout the Cancer Care Continuum, on February 13 and 14, 2017, in Washington, DC. The purpose of this workshop was to highlight the current evidence base, gaps in knowledge, and research needs on the associations among obesity, physical activity, weight management, and health outcomes for cancer survivors, as well as to examine the effectiveness of interventions for promoting physical activity and weight management among people living with or beyond cancer. Workshop sessions also reviewed the opportunities and challenges for providing weight management and physical activity interventions to cancer survivors. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

The oncology careforce faces challenges as population growth in the U.S. contributes to increases in the number of patients diagnosed with cancer. Significant advances in cancer research, screening and diagnostic practices, and treatment have led to the age-adjusted declining mortality rate from cancer. However, as the field continues to develop and advance, cancer care has become more complex than ever before. There is a growing concern regarding the U.S. health care system's capacity to deliver high-quality cancer care to the increasing number of patients. The National Academies convened a workshop on February 11-12, 2019 to explore trends in cancer care and identify opportunities for improvement in the rapidly developing oncology careforce. Discussions at the workshop primarily focused on trends in demographics, the careforce, and oncology practice, as well as implications for the future of cancer care and strategies to improve the organization and delivery of cancer care. Opportunities to change policy and leverage technologies in oncology were also identified. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

The public health burden from lung cancer is substantial: it is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Given the individual and population health burden of lung cancer, especially when it is diagnosed at later stages, there has been a push to develop and implement screening strategies for early detection. However, many factors need to be considered for broad implementation of lung cancer screening in clinical practice. Effective implementation will entail understanding the balance of potential benefits and harms of lung cancer screening, defining and reaching eligible populations, addressing health disparities, and many more considerations. In recognition of the substantial challenges to developing effective lung cancer screening programs in clinical practice, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop in June 2016. At the workshop, experts described the current evidence base for lung cancer screening, the current challenges of implementation, and opportunities to overcome them. Workshop participants also explored capacity and access issues; best practices for screening programs; assessment of patient outcomes, quality, and value in lung cancer screening; and research needs that could improve implementation efforts. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda Appendix C: Glossary

Immunotherapy is a form of cancer therapy that harnesses the body's immune system to destroy cancer cells. In recent years, immunotherapies have been developed for several cancers, including advanced melanoma, lung cancer, and kidney cancer. In some patients with metastatic cancers who have not responded well to other treatments, immunotherapy treatment has resulted in complete and durable responses. Given these promising findings, it is hoped that continued immunotherapy research and development will produce better cancer treatments that improve patient outcomes. With this promise, however, there is also recognition that the clinical and biological landscape for immunotherapies is novel and not yet well understood. For example, adverse events with immunotherapy treatment are quite different from those experienced with other types of cancer therapy. Similarly, immunotherapy dosing, therapeutic responses, and response time lines are also markedly different from other cancer therapies. To examine these challenges and explore strategies to overcome them, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop in February and March of 2016. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda Appendix C: Glossary

Though cancer was once considered to be a problem primarily in wealthy nations, low- and middle-income countries now bear a majority share of the global cancer burden, and cancer often surpasses the burden of infectious diseases in these countries. Effective low-cost cancer control options are available for some malignancies, with the World Health Organization estimating that these interventions could facilitate the prevention of approximately one-third of cancer deaths worldwide. But these interventions remain inaccessible for many people in the world, especially those residing in low-resource communities that are characterized by a lack of funds ? on an individual or societal basis ? to cover health infrastructure and care costs. Few guidelines and strategies for cancer control consider the appropriateness and feasibility of interventions in low-resource settings, and may undermine the effectiveness of these efforts. For example, interventions that are designed for high-resource settings may not account for important considerations in low-resource settings, such as resource constraints, infrastructure requirements, or whether a community has the capacity to deliver downstream cancer care. Patients in resource-constrained communities continue to face delayed diagnoses of cancer, potentially resulting in the diagnosis of later stage cancers and worsened patient outcomes. In addition, social stigmas, geopolitical issues, and cultural norms may limit access to cancer care in certain communities. Recognizing the challenges of providing cancer care in these settings, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine developed a workshop series examining cancer care in low-resource communities. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions from the first workshop, which focused on cancer prevention and early detection. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Summary Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Childhood cancer is an area of oncology that has seen both remarkable progress as well as substantial continuing challenges. While survival rates for some pediatric cancers present a story of success, for many types of pediatric cancers, little progress has been made. Many cancer treatments are known to cause not only significant acute side effects, but also lead to numerous long-term health risks and reduced quality of life. Even in cases where the cancer is considered curable, the consequences of treatment present substantial long-term health and psychosocial concerns for children, their families, their communities, and our health system. To examine specific opportunities and suggestions for driving optimal care delivery supporting survival with high quality of life, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the Institute of Medicine and the American Cancer Society co-hosted a workshop which convened experts and members of the public on March 9 and 10, 2015. At this workshop, clinicians and researchers in pediatric oncology, palliative, and psychosocial care, along with representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Cancer Institute, Children's Oncology Group, pharmaceutical companies, and patient advocacy organizations, discussed and developed a menu of options for action to improve research, quality of care, and outcomes for pediatric cancer patients and their families. In addition, parents of children with cancer and pediatric cancer survivors shared their experiences with care and provided poignant personal perspectives on specific quality of life concerns and support needs for children and families across the life spectrum. This report summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter WORKSHOP SUMMARY Appendix

A long-held goal in oncology has been to develop therapies that target the specific abnormalities in each patient's cancer rather than simply treating cancers based on the tissue of origin. In the past decade, advances in technology have enabled researchers to relatively quickly and inexpensively determine, in minute detail, the genetic makeup of tumors. Although relatively few targeted cancer therapies are currently available in the clinic and it is not yet clear whether all cancers are driven by genetic changes that can be targeted, there is widespread optimism in the cancer community that this new ability to assess the genetic abnormalities in tumors will ultimately lead to better cancer treatments and improved patient outcomes. Policy Issues in the Development and Adoption of Biomarkers for Molecularly Targeted Cancer Therapies is the summary of a workshop convened in November 2014 by the Institute of Medicine's National Cancer Policy Forum to discuss recent trends in the development and implementation of molecularly targeted cancer therapies and explore potential policy actions to address specific challenges. This report highlights the presentations and discussions at the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Summary Appendix: Workshop Statement of Task and Agenda

In recent years, patients' out-of-pocket costs for cancer care have been rising rapidly. These costs include health insurance deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments for covered services, as well as services that are not covered by insurance. Many cancer patients are especially vulnerable financially because their illness and/or treatment impedes their ability to work, with some patients losing employment altogether. Even with insurance, cancer patients often experience financial hardships, such as going into debt, depleting all assets to pay for cancer treatment, and personal bankruptcy. Although many elements contribute to the cost of cancer care, one important component is the cost of new cancer drugs, which has been escalating rapidly in recent years. To explore the issue of cancer drug costs and patient access to affordable, appropriate drug therapies, the Institute of Medicine's National Cancer Policy Forum convened a workshop on ensuring patient access to affordable cancer drugs in June 2014. Affordability was considered from both individual and societal perspectives. The workshop featured discussion panels as well as invited presentations from clinicians, researchers, representatives from the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and patient advocates. Ensuring Patient Access to Affordable Cancer Drugs summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.

Cancer treatment can lead to an array of significant short- and long-term physical, psychosocial, and socioeconomic consequences for patients and their families. To examine the opportunities to prevent and mitigate the adverse effects of cancer treatment, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine hosted a virtual workshop, Addressing the Adverse Consequences of Cancer Treatment, in November 2020. This workshop was convened by the Academies' National Cancer Policy Forum in collaboration with the Forum on Aging, Disability, and Independence. Workshop presentations and discussions described the range of adverse effects that patients with cancer may experience across the life course, and highlighted potential strategies to improve quality of life for cancer survivors and their families. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

New technologies and improved understanding of the genesis and progression of various cancers have added to the enthusiasm for potential new strategies to improve screening and early detection of cancer. Research is also under way to evaluate refinements in current screening approaches, including determining optimal screening intervals, the ages at which screening should begin and end, as well as more specific estimates of the potential risks and benefits of screening for certain populations, such as racial and ethnic minority populations and people who have elevated risk for specific cancers. However, there remain significant challenges to developing, validating, and effectively implementing new cancer screening approaches. Guidelines for screening issued by different organizations vary considerably with no clear way of deciding which guidelines are most trustworthy. There is also a need to improve access to high-quality cancer screening and follow-up care, particularly in low-resource communities and among populations who are underserved or have numerous barriers to receiving care. To examine the challenges and opportunities related to improving current approaches to cancer screening, as well as the evidence base for novel cancer screening methods, the National Cancer Policy Forum held a workshop, Advancing Progress in the Development and Implementation of Effective, High-Quality Cancer Screening, on March 2-3, 2020, in Washington, DC. This workshop convened a broad range of experts, including clinicians, researchers, statisticians, and patient advocates, as well as representatives of health care organizations, academic medical centers, insurers, and federal agencies. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions of the workshop and highlights suggestions from individual participants regarding how to improve cancer screening. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held the workshop Applying Big Data to Address the Social Determinants of Health in Oncology on October 28?29, 2019, in Washington, DC. This workshop examined social determinants of health (SDOH) in the context of cancer, and considered opportunities to effectively leverage big data to improve health equity and reduce disparities. The workshop featured presentations and discussion by experts in technology, oncology, and SDOH, as well as representatives from government, industry, academia, and health care systems. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

A hallmark of high-quality cancer care is the delivery of the right treatment to the right patient at the right time. Precision oncology therapies, which target specific genetic changes in a patient's cancer, are changing the nature of cancer treatment by allowing clinicians to select therapies that are most likely to benefit individual patients. In current clinical practice, oncologists are increasingly formulating cancer treatment plans using results from complex laboratory and imaging tests that characterize the molecular underpinnings of an individual patient's cancer. These molecular fingerprints can be quite complex and heterogeneous, even within a single patient. To enable these molecular tumor characterizations to effectively and safely inform cancer care, the cancer community is working to develop and validate multiparameter omics tests and imaging tests as well as software and computational methods for interpretation of the resulting datasets. To examine opportunities to improve cancer diagnosis and care in the new precision oncology era, the National Cancer Policy Forum developed a two-workshop series. The first workshop focused on patient access to expertise and technologies in oncologic imaging and pathology and was held in February 2018. The second workshop, conducted in collaboration with the Board on Mathematical Sciences and Analytics, was held in October 2018 to examine the use of multidimensional data derived from patients with cancer, and the computational methods that analyze these data to inform cancer treatment decisions. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the second workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Rapid advances in cancer research, the development of new and more sophisticated approaches to diagnostic testing, and the growth in targeted cancer therapies are transforming the landscape of cancer diagnosis and care. These innovations have contributed to improved outcomes for patients with cancer, but they have also increased the complexity involved in diagnosis and subsequent care decisions. To examine opportunities to improve cancer diagnosis and care, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine developed a two-workshop series. The first workshop, held on February 12?13, 2018, in Washington, DC, focused on potential strategies to ensure that patients have access to appropriate expertise and technologies in oncologic pathology and imaging to inform their cancer diagnosis and treatment planning, as well as assessment of treatment response and surveillance. This publication chronicles the presentations and discussions at the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Overview Current Diagnostic Challenges in Cancer Care Ensuring the Quality and Accessibility of Diagnostic Expertise and Technologies Quality Improvement Efforts Integration and Collaboration of Specialties Wrap-Up References Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Delivering high-quality cancer care to all patients presents numerous challenges, including difficulties with care coordination and access. Patient navigation is a community-based service delivery intervention designed to promote access to timely diagnosis and treatment of cancer and other chronic diseases by eliminating barriers to care, and has often been proposed and implemented to address these challenges. However, unresolved questions include where patient navigation programs should be deployed, and which patients should be prioritized to receive navigation services when resources are limited. To address these issues and facilitate discussion on how to improve navigation services for patients with cancer, the National Cancer Policy Forum of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop on November 13 and 14, 2017. At this workshop, a broad range of experts and stakeholders, including clinicians, navigators, researchers, and patients, explored which patients need navigation and who should serve as navigators, and the benefits of navigation and current gaps in the evidence base. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Advances in cancer research have led to an improved understanding of the molecular mechanisms underpinning the development of cancer and how the immune system responds to cancer. This influx of research has led to an increasing number and variety of therapies in the drug development pipeline, including targeted therapies and associated biomarker tests that can select which patients are most likely to respond, and immunotherapies that harness the body's immune system to destroy cancer cells. Compared with standard chemotherapies, these new cancer therapies may demonstrate evidence of benefit and clearer distinctions between efficacy and toxicity at an earlier stage of development. However, there is a concern that the traditional processes for cancer drug development, evaluation, and regulatory approval could impede or delay the use of these promising cancer treatments in clinical practice. This has led to a number of efforts?by patient advocates, the pharmaceutical industry, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)?to accelerate the review of promising new cancer therapies, especially for cancers that currently lack effective treatments. However, generating the necessary data to confirm safety and efficacy during expedited drug development programs can present a unique set of challenges and opportunities. To explore this new landscape in cancer drug development, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine developed a workshop held in December 2016. This workshop convened cancer researchers, patient advocates, and representatives from industry, academia, and government to discuss challenges with traditional approaches to drug development, opportunities to improve the efficiency of drug development, and strategies to enhance the information available about a cancer therapy throughout its life cycle in order to improve its use in clinical practice. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Though cancer was once considered to be a problem primarily in wealthy nations, low- and middle-income countries now bear a majority share of the global cancer burden, and cancer often surpasses the burden of infectious diseases in these countries. Effective low-cost cancer control options are available for some malignancies, with the World Health Organization estimating that these interventions could facilitate the prevention of approximately one-third of cancer deaths worldwide. Effective cancer treatment approaches are also available and can reduce the morbidity and mortality due to cancer in low-resource areas. But these interventions remain inaccessible for many people in the world, especially those residing in low-resource communities that are characterized by a lack of funds?on an individual or a societal basis?to cover health infrastructure and care costs. As a result, worse outcomes for patients with cancer are more common in low- and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries. Few guidelines and strategies for cancer control consider the appropriateness and feasibility of interventions in low-resource settings, and this may undermine the effectiveness of care. Recognizing the challenges of providing cancer care in resource constrained settings, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine developed a two- workshop series examining cancer care in low-resource communities, building on prior work of the National Academies. The first workshop, held in October 2015, focused on cancer prevention and early detection. The second workshop was held in November 2016, and focused on cancer treatment, palliative care, and survivorship care in low-resource areas. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions of this workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Proceedings of a Workshop Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

Millions of women undergo screening mammography regularly with the hope of detecting breast cancer at an earlier and more curable stage. But the ability of such screening to accurately detect early cancers depends on the quality of mammography, including high-quality image acquisition and interpretation. To help ensure the quality of mammography, Congress passed the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) in 1994 and last reauthorized it in 2004. In advance of its expected reauthorization in 2007, Congress requested a consensus study from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommending ways to improve the quality of mammography, with an emphasis on image interpretation. The resulting report, Improving Breast Imaging Quality Standards, highlighted the need to decrease variability in mammography interpretation in the United States and identified gaps in the evidence needed to develop best practices. The consensus committee found that mammography interpretation remained quite variable, and that this variability limited the full potential of mammography to reduce breast cancer mortality by detecting breast cancers at an early stage. In May 2015, the IOM convened a workshop to address this issue. The participants discussed challenges in the delivery of high-quality mammography, the impact of training and experience on interpretive performance, how best to measure interpretive performance, and the potential impact of new technologies and supplemental imaging on interpretation of breast screening and diagnostic images. Assessing and Improving the Interpretation of Breast Images summarizes the presentations and discussions from this workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Summary Appendix: Statement of Task andWorkshop Agenda

Over the past few decades there have been major successes in creating evidence-based interventions to improve the cognitive, affective, and behavioral health of children. Many of these interventions have been put into practice at the local, state, or national level. To reap what has been learned from such implementation, and to explore how new legislation and policies as well as advances in technology and analytical methods can help drive future implementation, the Institute of Medicine-National Research Council Forum on Promoting Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health held the workshop "Harvesting the Scientific Investment in Prevention Science to Promote Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health" in Washington, DC, on June 16 and 17, 2014. The workshop featured panel discussions of system-level levers and blockages to the broad implementation of interventions with fidelity, focusing on policy, finance, and method science; the role of scientific norms, implementation strategies, and practices in care quality and outcomes at the national, state, and local levels; and new methodological directions. The workshop also featured keynote presentations on the role of economics and policy in scaling interventions for children's behavioral health, and making better use of evidence to design informed and more efficient children's mental health systems. Harvesting the Scientific Investment in Prevention Science to Promote Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

Over the last three decades, researchers have made remarkable progress in creating and testing family-focused programs aimed at fostering the cognitive, affective, and behavioral health of children. These programs include universal interventions, such as those for expecting or new parents, and workshops for families whose children are entering adolescence, as well as programs targeted to especially challenged parents, such as low-income single teens about to have their first babies, or the parents of children with autism. Some family-focused programs have been shown to foster significantly better outcomes in children, including enhanced educational performance, and reduced rates of teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and child conduct and delinquency, as well as reduced child abuse. The favorable cost-benefit ratios of some of these programs are due, in part, to the multiple and far-ranging effects that family-focused prevention programs targeting children can have. Other family-focused programs have shown success in smaller academic studies but have not been widely applied, or have not worked as effectively or failed when applied to more diverse real-world settings. Strategies for Scaling Effective Family-Focused Preventive Interventions to Promote Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health is the summary of a workshop convened by the Institute of Medicine Forum on Promoting Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health to explore effective preventive interventions for youth that can modify risk and promote protective factors that are linked to mental, emotional, and behavioral health, and how to apply this existing knowledge. Based on the 2009 report Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People, this report considers how to build a stronger research and practice base around the development and implementation of programs, practices, and policies that foster children's health and well-being across the country, while engaging multi-sectorial stakeholders. While research has advanced understanding of risk, promotive, and protective factors in families that influence the health and well-being of youth, a challenge remains to provide family-focused interventions across child and adolescent development at sufficient scale and reach to significantly reduce the incidence and prevalence of negative cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes in children and adolescents nationwide, as well as to develop widespread demand for effective programs by end users. This report explores new and innovative ways to broaden the reach and demand for effective programs and to generate alternative paradigms for strengthening families. Table of Contents Front Matter 1 Introduction 2 Scaled-Up, Evidence-Based Family-Focused Preventive Programs 3 Emerging Settings for Implementing Family-Focused Preventive Programs 4 Intermediary Organizations and Scale-Up 5 Expanding Programs Internationally 6 Scale-Up Challenges 7 Meeting Scale-Up Challenges 8 Sum Up and Way Forward Appendix A: Workshop Agenda Appendix B: Speaker Biosketches

In the nearly 40 years since implementation of federal regulations governing the protection of human participants in research, the number of clinical studies has grown exponentially. These studies have become more complex, with multisite trials now common, and there is increasing use of archived biospecimens and related data, including genomics data. In addition, growing emphasis on targeted cancer therapies requires greater collaboration and sharing of research data to ensure that rare patient subsets are adequately represented. Electronic records enable more extensive data collection and mining, but also raise concerns about the potential for inappropriate or unauthorized use of data, bringing patient protections into a new landscape. There are also long-standing concerns about the processes and forms used to obtain informed consent from patients participating in clinical studies. These changes and challenges raise new ethical and practical questions for the oversight of clinical studies, and for protecting patients and their health information in an efficient manner that does not compromise the progress of biomedical research. Contemporary Issues for Protecting Patients in Cancer Research is the summary of a workshop convened by the National Cancer Policy Forum of the Institute of Medicine in February 2014 to explore contemporary issues in human subjects protections as they pertain to cancer research, with the goal of identifying potential relevant policy actions. Clinical researchers, government officials, members of Institutional Review Boards, and patient advocates met to discuss clinical cancer research and oversight. This report examines current regulatory provisions that may not adequately protect patients or may be hindering research, and discusses potential strategies and actions to address those challenges.

Rising health care costs are a central fiscal challenge confronting the United States. National spending on health care currently accounts for 18 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), but is anticipated to increase to 25 percent of GDP by 2037. The Bipartisan Policy Center argues that "this rapid growth in health expenditures creates an unsustainable burden on America's economy, with far-reaching consequences". These consequences include crowding out many national priorities, including investments in education, infrastructure, and research; stagnation of employee wages; and decreased international competitiveness.In spite of health care costs that far exceed those of other countries, health outcomes in the United States are not considerably better. With the goal of ensuring that patients have access to high-quality, affordable cancer care, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM's) National Cancer Policy Forum convened a public workshop, Delivering Affordable Cancer Care in the 21st Century, October 8-9, 2012, in Washington, DC. Delivering Affordable Cancer Care in the 21st Century summarizes the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Summary Appendix: Workshop Agenda

The IOM's National Cancer Policy Forum held a workshop October 5-6, 2009, to examine how to apply the concept of a 'rapid learning health system' to the problem of cancer. This document summarizes the workshop.

In recent years, the field of oncology has witnessed a number of technological advances, including more precise radiation therapy and minimally invasive surgical techniques. Three-dimensional (3D), stereotactic, and proton-beam radiation therapy, as well as laparoscopy and robotic surgery, can enhance clinician's ability to treat conditions that were clinically challenging with conventional technologies, and may improve clinical outcomes or reduce treatment-related problems for some patients. Both patients and physicians seek access to these new technologies, which are rapidly being adopted into standard clinical practice. Such demand is often propelled by marketing that portrays the new technologies as the "latest and greatest" treatments available. However, evidence is often lacking to support these claims, and these novel technologies usually come with higher price tags and are often used to treat patients who might have achieved similar benefits from less expensive, conventional treatment. The increased cost of novel treatments without adequate assessment of how they affect patient outcomes is a pressing concern given that inappropriate use of expensive technologies is one of the key factors that threaten the affordability of cancer care in the United States. To explore these issues further, the National Cancer Policy Forum (NCPF) of the Institute of Medicine organized a workshop in July 2015. This is the third NCPF workshop in a series examining the affordability of cancer care. Participants explored clinical benefits and comparative effectiveness of emerging advanced technologies for cancer treatment in radiation therapy and surgery and potential strategies to assess the value and promote optimal use of new technologies in cancer treatment. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Workshop Summary Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Workshop Agenda

The National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has played an integral role in cancer research and in establishing the standard of care for cancer patients for more than 50 years. Formerly known as the NCI Clinical Trials Cooperative Group Program, the NCTN is comprised of more than 2,100 institutions and 14,000 investigators, who enroll more than 20,000 cancer patients in clinical trials each year across the United States and internationally. Recognizing the recent transformative advances in cancer research that necessitate modernization in how cancer clinical trials are run, as well as inefficiencies and other challenges impeding the national cancer clinical trials program, the NCI asked the IOM to develop a set of recommendations to improve the federally funded cancer clinical trials system. These recommendations were published in the 2010 report, A National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century: Reinvigorating the NCI Cooperative Group Program. In early 2011, the NCPF and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) held a workshop in which stakeholders discussed the changes they planned to implement in response to the IOM goals and recommendations. Two years later, on February 11-12, 2013, in Washington, DC, the NCPF and ASCO reconvened stakeholders to report on the changes they have made thus far to address the IOM recommendations. At this workshop, representatives from the NCI, the NCTN, comprehensive cancer centers, patient advocacy groups, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), industry, and other stakeholders highlighted the progress that has been made in achieving the goals for a reinvigorated national cancer clinical trials system. Implementing a National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century is a summary of that workshop. Table of Contents Front Matter Implementing a National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century References Acronyms Appendix A: Workshop Statement of Task and Agenda Appendix B: Executive Summary of *A National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century*