BACKGROUND:Cancer statistics for Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) people are usually aggregated, masking substantial variation within this heterogeneous population. Herein, the American Cancer Society reports cancer incidence and survival for 8 Asian American and 3 NHPI ethnic groups. METHODS:The authors used population-based cancer registry data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, for Asian American and NHPI ethnic groups from 2000 through 2022. RESULTS:During 2018-2022, overall cancer incidence ranged from 218.3 per 100,000 Kampuchean people to 474.5 per 100,000 Native Hawaiian people, which was 1.5 times higher than the rate for the aggregated Asian American and NHPI population (307.3 per 100,000). High incidence among Native Hawaiian people is largely driven by the highest rates of female breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers, whereas infection-related cancers were highest among Asian American ethnic groups. For example, liver and stomach cancer incidence is highest among Vietnamese (22.2 per 100,000) and Korean people (17.8 per 100,000), respectively, both of which were nearly twice that in Native Hawaiian people (12.9 and 9.6 per 100,000, respectively). Native Hawaiian and Samoan women are twice and 3 times as likely, respectively, to be diagnosed with uterine corpus cancer as aggregated Asian American and NHPI women or White women. Five-year relative survival ranges from 42% in Laotians to 74% in Asian Indians/Pakistanis, with largest differences for colorectal (43% in Laotians to 72% in Asian Indians/Pakistanis) and prostate (63% in Kampucheans to 97% in Japanese) cancers. CONCLUSIONS:Wide variation in cancer risk within the Asian American and NHPI population highlights the critical need for disaggregated data to effectively target cancer prevention and control interventions.

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence and outcomes using data collected by central cancer registries (incidence, through 2022) and the National Center for Health Statistics (mortality, through 2023). In 2026, approximately 2,114,850 new cancer cases and 626,140 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. The cancer mortality rate continued to decline through 2023, averting 4.8 million deaths since 1991, largely because of smoking reductions, earlier detection, and improved treatment. These interventions are also evident in rising 5-year relative survival, which reached a milestone 70% for diagnoses during 2015-2021 overall, 69% for regional-stage disease, and 35% for distant-stage (metastatic) disease, up from 63%, 54%, and 17%, respectively, in the mid-1990s. People with high-mortality cancers and advanced diagnoses had the largest gains, including increases from 32% to 62% for myeloma, 7% to 22% for liver cancer, 16% to 35% for metastatic melanoma, 8% to 18% for metastatic rectal cancer, 20% to 37% for regional lung cancer, and 2% to 10% for metastatic lung cancer. Nevertheless, lung cancer will cause more deaths in 2026 than second-ranking colorectal cancer and third-ranking pancreatic cancer combined. In summary, decades of scientific investment have translated to longer lives for people with even the most fatal cancers. However, continued progress is threatened by proposed federal cuts to cancer research and health insurance, which provides access to life-saving cancer treatment.

This study examines changes in cancer mortality in the US for the 5 leading cancer-related deaths among people younger than 50 years over the past 3 decades.

BackgroundDiabetes self-management programs, often known as DSMPs, are crucial interventions for enhancing clinical and behavioral outcomes in individuals with diabetes. Despite the well-established advantages of these programs, little is known about how they are carried out and maintained in real world environments. This systematic review builds upon a previously published prequel by applying the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) and PRISM (Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model) frameworks to examine the process evaluations of traditional, group-based DSMPs, with the goal of identifying implementation strengths, gaps, and contextual influences.MethodsUsing five databases, a comprehensive analysis of peer-reviewed literature up to January 2024 was performed. Eligible studies included traditional, group-based DSMPs for adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes that reported at least one process evaluation outcome. Sixty-eight studies (n = 78 articles) met inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and synthesized using RE-AIM and PRISM components, and study quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).ResultsSixty-eight studies (k = 68; n = 78) satisfied the requirements for inclusion. Fewer research addressed Adoption (k = 5), Implementation (k = 24), and Maintenance (k = 26), whereas the majority focused on Reach (k = 66) and Effectiveness (k = 66). Only four studies found external contextual influences, compared to nineteen that found internal contextual elements. Process-level indicators—such as implementation fidelity, cost, sustainability, and provider engagement—were often underreported, despite consistent evidence of positive clinical and behavioral outcomes.DiscussionThe review highlights a critical gap between outcome evaluation and implementation reporting in DSMP research. The organizational and contextual elements that affect program scalability and durability were overlooked in favor of patient-level outcomes in most of the studies. When the RE-AIM and PRISM frameworks were used systematically, it was discovered that several process components that are essential for long-term integration were underreported. Resolving these shortcomings can help direct the creation of scalable, context-aware DSMPs that are more adaptable to diverse populations and settings.ConclusionProcess evaluations should be thorough, context-sensitive, and theory-driven to improve the implementation, execution, and long-term effects of DSMPs. A more comprehensive analysis of program success is made possible by integrating the RE-AIM and PRISM frameworks, which closes the gap between research and real-world implementation. To educate healthcare policy and practice, future evaluations should use mixed method designs that evaluate implementation as well as results.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review was registered in PROSPERO. The registration number is CRD42020177170.

The number of people living with a history of cancer in the United States continues to rise because of the growth and aging of the population as well as improved survival through advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community serve the needs of these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and the United States Census Bureau. In addition, cancer treatment patterns are presented from the National Cancer Database along with a brief overview of treatment-related side effects. As of January 1, 2025, about 18.6 million people were living in the United States with a history of cancer, and this number is projected to exceed 22 million by 2035. The three most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,552,460), melanoma of the skin (816,580), and colorectum (729,550) among males and breast (4,305,570), uterine corpus (945,540), and thyroid (859,890) among females. About one half (51%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and nearly four fifths (79%) were aged 60 years and older. Racial differences in treatment in 2021 were common across disease stage; for example, Black people with stage I-II lung cancer were less likely to undergo surgery than their White counterparts (47% vs. 52%). Larger disparities exist for rectal cancer, for which 39% of Black people with stage I disease undergo proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 64% of their White counterparts. Targeted, multi-level efforts to expand access to high-quality care and survivorship resources are vital to reducing disparities and advancing support for all survivors of cancer.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health care and reduced cancer diagnoses in the United States, raising concerns about its impact on time-to-treatment initiation (TTI), a critical factor for survival. This study examined the changes in TTI for 1 213 481 individuals newly diagnosed with female breast, nonsmall cell lung, colon, or rectal cancer between 2019 and 2022, using the National Cancer Database. We compared TTI in 2020-2022 with 2019 by cancer site, diagnosis time of year, stage, and treatment modality. In 2020, TTI statistically significantly decreased for all cancers compared to 2019, especially in the second quarter (2.97-4.29 days). However, TTI increased across sites in 2021 (0.31-2.15 days) and in 2022 (1.43-5.07 days). Reduced diagnoses and efforts to prioritize cancer care during the pandemic may partly explain observed TTI decreases, whereas workforce constraints likely contributed to the later increases. Ongoing evaluation of TTI and associations with patient outcomes is warranted.

This systematic review investigates the utilization and reporting of frameworks to guide process evaluations (PE) of diabetes self-management programmes (DSMPs). Constituting a subset of articles from a previously published systematic review, seven studies, comprising nine articles, met the inclusion criteria. The different approaches to manage diabetes were reflected in the study's characteristics and types of interventions. The quality of reporting differed even with the inclusion of evaluation frameworks, which affected the evidence's transferability and comparability. All studies cited their frameworks; yet, only a few gave thorough explanations and used the frameworks consistently throughout their research. A critical appraisal for reporting quality revealed a need for standardized guidelines to assess the thoroughness of framework utilization. Implications for practice include adopting a checklist of indicators to enhance reporting quality and encouraging uniformity in PE methodologies.

Increasing cancer incidence among young adults has been reported for several types of cancers, primarily in certain high-income countries. However, there is a lack of comprehensive examination of the global burden and trends in cancer incidence and mortality among young adults. We presented estimated numbers of cancer cases, cancer deaths, age-standardized incidence, and mortality rates per 100, 000 people among young adults (YAs, ages 25-49 years) for all cancers combined and 35 cancer sites in 185 countries and 20 UN regions using GLOBOCAN 2022. We further quantified trends in age-standardized incidence (ASIR; 52 countries) and age-standardized mortality (ASMR; 62 countries) for the top five incident cancers (female breast, cervix uteri, thyroid, colorectum, and trachea, bronchus and lung cancers) among YAs over the most recent decade by estimating average annual percent change (AAPC), using the Cancer Incidence in Five Continents (CI5; 2008-2017) and WHO mortality data (2011-2020; thyroid mortality data was not available), respectively. In 2022, an estimated 2.9 million cancer cases and 962, 000 cancer-related deaths occurred in YAs worldwide, corresponding to 108.1 cases per 100, 000 people per year and 35.9 deaths per 100, 000 people per year. Globally, ASIR and ASMR were higher in women than men (143.7 vs. 73.5 for incidence; 40.0 vs. 32.0 for mortality). By UN region, ASIR per 100, 000 people was highest in Australia-New Zealand (185.7) and lowest in South Central Asia (72.5), while ASMR per 100, 000 was highest in Eastern Africa (55.9) and lowest in Northern Europe (21.9). For the most recent 10 years, increases in ASIRs were observed for thyroid cancer (AAPC, 2.5-19.6%) in 27 countries, for colorectal cancer (AAPC, 1.2-11.5%) in 20 countries, for female breast cancer (AAPC, 0.7-5.9%) in 17 countries, and for cervix uteri cancer (AAPC, 1.8-15.7%) in 4 countries. Increases in ASMR were observed for colorectum cancer (AAPC, 0.6-8.0%) in 13 countries, for female breast cancer (AAPC, 0.9-4.8%) in 11 countries, and for cervix uteri cancer (AAPC, 2.1-4.7%) in 6 countries. Incidence and mortality both increased in YAs for female breast cancer in Czechia, ovarian cancer in the Republic of Korea, cervix uterine cancer in the Netherlands, and colorectum cancer in Australia, Canada, Chile, and the USA. Trachea, bronchus and lung cancers ASIR and ASMR decreased in 24 (AAPC, -1.5 to -11.3%) and 47 (AAPC, -2.0 to -11.4%) countries among YAs, respectively. and Relevance: The burden and trends in cancer among young adults vary significantly by sex and region. Rising incidence and mortality rates for multiple cancer types across the world underscore the need for renewed attention to cancer prevention efforts and improvements to cancer surveillance systems targeting this often overlooked age group. Kieran Patrick Kelly, Yejun Son, Nikita Sandeep Wagle, Dong Keon Yon, Ahmedin Jemal, Hyuna Sung. Global burden and trends in cancer incidence and mortality among young adults [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 3591.

Supplementary figure 5 shows that there were no significant differences in any (A) or curative treatment (B) receipt between Asian and White patients.

Supplementary figure 4 shows that Black patients with early-stage HCC are significantly less likely to undergo curative treatment than White patients (pooled OR 0.63, 95%CI 0.47 – 0.84).

Supplementary figure 3 shows that the pooled proportion for curative HCC treatment among early-stage HCC patients is 51.4%.

Importance The COVID-19 pandemic led to disruptions in access to health care, including cancer care. The extent of changes in receipt of cancer treatment is unclear. Objective To evaluate changes in the absolute number, proportion, and cancer treatment modalities provided to patients with newly diagnosed cancer during 2020, the first year of the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants In this cohort study, adults aged 18 years and older diagnosed with any solid tumor between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, were identified using the National Cancer Database. Data analysis was conducted from September 19, 2022, to July 28, 2023. Exposure First year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures The expected number of procedures for each treatment modality (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and hormonal therapy) in 2020 were calculated using historical data (January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019) with the vector autoregressive method. The difference between expected and observed numbers was evaluated using a generalized estimating equation under assumptions of the Poisson distribution for count data. Changes in the proportion of different types of cancer treatments initiated in 2020 were evaluated using the additive outlier method. Results A total of 3 504 342 patients (1 214 918 in 2018, mean [SD] age, 64.6 [13.6] years; 1 235 584 in 2019, mean [SD] age, 64.8 [13.6] years; and 1 053 840 in 2020, mean [SD] age, 64.9 [13.6] years) were included. Compared with expected treatment from previous years’ trends, there were approximately 98 000 fewer curative intent surgical procedures performed, 38 800 fewer chemotherapy regimens, 55 500 fewer radiotherapy regimens, 6800 fewer immunotherapy regimens, and 32 000 fewer hormonal therapies initiated in 2020. For most cancer sites and stages evaluated, there was no statistically significant change in the type of cancer treatment provided during the first year of the pandemic, the exception being a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of patients receiving breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy with a simultaneous statistically significant increase in the proportion of patients undergoing mastectomy for treatment of stage I breast cancer during the first months of the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance In this large national cohort study, a significant deficit was noted in the number of cancer treatments provided in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data indicated that this deficit in the number of cancer treatments provided was associated with decreases in the number of cancer diagnoses, not changes in treatment strategies.

SES and geographic covariates included in the multivariable analysis of receipt of HCC treatment.

Objective To conduct a systematic review of process evaluations (PEs) of diabetes self-management programs (DSMPs). Data Source An electronic search using Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ensco), Academic Search (Ebsco), and APA PsycInfo (Ebsco). Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Peer-reviewed, empirical quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method studies were included if they (1) were a traditional, group-based DSMP, (2) involved adults at least 18 years with T1DM or T2DM, (3) were a stand-alone or embedded PE, and (4) published in English. Data Extraction The following process evaluation outcomes were extracted: fidelity, dose delivered, dose received, reach, recruitment, retention, and context. Additional items were extracted, (eg, process evaluation type, data collection methods; theories; frameworks or conceptual models used to guide the process evaluation, and etc). Data Synthesis Due to heterogeneity across studies, studies were synthesized qualitatively (narratively). Results Sixty-eight studies (k) in 78 articles (n) (k = 68; n = 78) were included. Most were mixed methods of low quality. Studies were typically integrated into outcome evaluations vs being stand-alone, lacked theoretical approaches to guide them, and incorporated limited outcomes such as dose received, reach, and retention. Conclusion Future research should 1) implement stand-alone theoretically grounded PE studies and 2) provide a shared understanding of standardized guidelines to conduct PEs. This will allow public health practitioners and researchers to assess and compare the quality of different programs to be implemented.

Supplementary figure 2 shows that the pooled proportion for any HCC treatment rate among early-stage HCC patients is 59.6%.

AbstractBackground: Racial and ethnic disparities in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis exist, partly related to differential failures along the cancer care continuum. We characterized racial and ethnic disparities in treatment receipt among patients with HCC in the United States. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases to identify studies published between January 2012 and March 2022 reporting HCC treatment receipt among adult patients with HCC, stratified by race or ethnicity. We calculated pooled odds ratios for HCC treatment using random effects models. Results: We identified 15 studies with 320,686 patients (65.8% White, 13.9% Black, 10.4% Asian, and 8.5% Hispanic). Overall, 33.2% of HCC patients underwent any treatment, and 22.7% underwent curative treatment. Compared with White patients, Black patients had lower odds of any treatment (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55–0.81) and curative treatment (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.71–0.78). Similarly, Hispanic patients had lower pooled odds of curative treatment (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.73–0.84). Conclusions: There were significant racial and ethnic disparities in HCC treatment receipt, with Black patients having lower odds of receiving any and curative treatment while Hispanic patients having lower odds of curative treatment. Impact: Racial and ethnic differences in treatment receipt serve as an intervention target to reduce disparities in HCC prognosis.

Background The emergence of COVID-19 disrupted health care, with consequences for cancer diagnoses and outcomes, especially for early stage diagnoses, which generally have favourable prognoses. We aimed to examine nationwide changes in adult cancer diagnoses and stage distribution during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic by cancer type and key sociodemographic factors in the USA.Methods In this cross-sectional study, adults (aged & GE;18 years) newly diagnosed with a first primary malignant cancer between Jan 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2020, were identified from the US National Cancer Database. We included individuals across 50 US states and the District of Columbia who were treated in hospitals that were Commission on Cancer-accredited during the study period. Individuals whose cancer stage was 0 (except for bladder cancer), occult, or without an applicable American Joint Committee on Cancer staging scheme were excluded. Our primary outcomes were the change in the number and the change in the stage distribution of new cancer diagnoses between 2019 (Jan 1 to Dec 31) and 2020 (Jan 1 to Dec 31). Monthly counts and stage distributions were calculated for all cancers combined and for major cancer types. We also calculated annual change in stage distribution from 2019 to 2020 and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) using multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age group, sex, race and ethnicity, health insurance status, comorbidity score, US state, zip code-level social deprivation index, and county-level age-adjusted COVID-19 mortality in 2020. Separate models were stratified by sociodemographic and clinical factors.Findings We identified 2 404 050 adults who were newly diagnosed with cancer during the study period (830 528 in 2018, 849 290 in 2019, and 724 232 in 2020). Mean age was 63 & BULL;5 years (SD 13 & BULL;5) and 1 287 049 (53 & BULL;5%) individuals were women, 1 117 001 (46 & BULL;5%) were men, and 1 814 082 (75 & BULL;5%) were non-Hispanic White. The monthly number of new cancer diagnoses (all stages) decreased substantially after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March, 2020, although monthly counts returned to near pre-pandemic levels by the end of 2020. The decrease in diagnoses was largest for stage I disease, leading to lower odds of being diagnosed with stage I disease in 2020 than in 2019 (aOR 0 & BULL;946 [95% CI 0 & BULL;939-0 & BULL;952] for stage I vs stage II-IV); whereas, the odds of being diagnosed with stage IV disease were higher in 2020 than in 2019 (1 & BULL;074 [1 & BULL;066-1 & BULL;083] for stage IV vs stage I-III). This pattern was observed in most cancer types and sociodemographic groups, although was most prominent among Hispanic individuals (0 & BULL;922 [0 & BULL;899-0 & BULL;946] for stage I; 1 & BULL;110 [1 & BULL;077-1 & BULL;144] for stage IV), Asian American and Pacific Islander individuals (0 & BULL;924 [0 & BULL;892-0 & BULL;956] for stage I; 1 & BULL;096 [1 & BULL;052-1 & BULL;142] for stage IV), uninsured individuals (0 & BULL;917 [0 & BULL;875-0 & BULL;961] for stage I; 1 & BULL;102 [1 & BULL;055-1 & BULL;152] for stage IV), Medicare-insured adults younger than 65 years (0 & BULL;909 [0 & BULL;882-0 & BULL;937] for stage I; 1 & BULL;105 [1 & BULL;068-1 & BULL;144] for stage IV), and individuals living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas (0 & BULL;931 [0 & BULL;917-0 & BULL;946] for stage I; 1 & BULL;106 [1 & BULL;087-1 & BULL;125] for stage IV). Interpretation Substantial cancer underdiagnosis and decreases in the proportion of early stage diagnoses occurred during 2020 in the USA, particularly among medically underserved individuals. Monitoring the long-term effects of the pandemic on morbidity, survival, and mortality is warranted.Funding None.Copyright & COPY; 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to health care disruptions and declines in cancer diagnoses in the United States. However, the impact of the pandemic on cancer incidence rates by stage at diagnosis and race and ethnicity is unknown. This cross-sectional study calculated delay- and age-adjusted incidence rates, stratified by stage at diagnosis and race and ethnicity, and rate ratios (RRs) comparing changes in year-over-year incidence rates (eg, 2020 vs 2019) from 2016 to 2020 for 22 cancer types based on data obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 22-registry database. From 2019 to 2020, the incidence of local-stage disease statistically significantly declined for 19 of the 22 cancer types, ranging from 4% (RR = 0.96; 95%CI, 0.93-0.98) for urinary bladder cancer to 18% for colorectal (RR = 0.82; 95%CI, 0.81-0.84) and laryngeal (RR = 0.82; 95%CI, 0.78-0.88) cancers, deviating from pre-COVID stable year-over-year changes. Incidence during the corresponding period also declined for 16 cancer types for regional-stage and six cancer types for distant-stage disease. By race and ethnicity, the decline in local-stage incidence for screening-detectable cancers was generally greater in historically marginalized populations. The decline in cancer incidence rates during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic occurred mainly for local- and regional-stage diseases across racial and ethnic groups. Whether these declines will lead to increases in advanced-stage disease and mortality rates remain to be investigated with additional data years. Nevertheless, the findings reinforce the importance of strengthening the return to preventive care campaigns and outreach for detecting cancers at early and more treatable stages.

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence and outcomes using incidence data collected by central cancer registries and mortality data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2023, 1,958,310 new cancer cases and 609,820 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. Cancer incidence increased for prostate cancer by 3% annually from 2014 through 2019 after two decades of decline, translating to an additional 99,000 new cases; otherwise, however, incidence trends were more favorable in men compared to women. For example, lung cancer in women decreased at one half the pace of men (1.1% vs. 2.6% annually) from 2015 through 2019, and breast and uterine corpus cancers continued to increase, as did liver cancer and melanoma, both of which stabilized in men aged 50 years and older and declined in younger men. However, a 65% drop in cervical cancer incidence during 2012 through 2019 among women in their early 20s, the first cohort to receive the human papillomavirus vaccine, foreshadows steep reductions in the burden of human papillomavirus-associated cancers, the majority of which occur in women. Despite the pandemic, and in contrast with other leading causes of death, the cancer death rate continued to decline from 2019 to 2020 (by 1.5%), contributing to a 33% overall reduction since 1991 and an estimated 3.8 million deaths averted. This progress increasingly reflects advances in treatment, which are particularly evident in the rapid declines in mortality (approximately 2% annually during 2016 through 2020) for leukemia, melanoma, and kidney cancer, despite stable/increasing incidence, and accelerated declines for lung cancer. In summary, although cancer mortality rates continue to decline, future progress may be attenuated by rising incidence for breast, prostate, and uterine corpus cancers, which also happen to have the largest racial disparities in mortality.

e13516 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in substantial disruptions in health care and declines in cancer diagnoses in the US. We used nationwide data to examine changes in time to first treatment for patients newly diagnosed with cancer during 2020, the first year of the pandemic. Methods: Adults aged ≥18 years newly diagnosed with breast, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), colon, or rectal cancer between January 2019 and November 2020 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to calculate crude and adjusted (by age and sex and diagnosis quarter) odds ratios (AOR) of initiating any treatment within 30 days of the diagnosis comparing 2020 vs. 2019 overall and by quarter. Results: A total of 668,229 adults newly diagnosed with cancer were identified, including 358,255 in 2019 and 309,974 in 2020. Individuals diagnosed in 2020 were more likely to initiate treatment ≤ 30 days of breast (AOR = 1.12, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] =1.11-1.14), NSCLC (AOR = 1.09, 95% CI =1.07-1.11), colon (AOR = 1.13, 95% CI =1.09-1.16) or rectal (AOR = 1.08, 95% CI =1.04-1.12) cancer diagnosis, compared to those diagnosed in 2019. Increases in treatment initiation ≤ 30 days were greatest in the second quarter of 2020 for all four cancers. Findings changed little after adjustment for quarter of diagnosis and AORs remained statistically significant. Conclusions: During 2020, there was an increase in treatment initiation within 30 days from diagnosis, especially in the second quarter. The lower volume of diagnoses and efforts by providers to prioritize cancer care may partly explain the observed improvements. Ongoing evaluation of these changes and cancer outcomes is warranted.[Table: see text]