Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The distinctive biology of cancer in adolescents and young adults

Nature Reviews Cancer volume 8, pages 288–298 (2008)Cite this article

Key Points

  • The relative lack of progress in treating cancer in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) is in part due to a lack of appreciation of differences in the biology of malignant diseases in this age group relative to younger and older persons.

  • Molecular, epidemiological and therapeutic outcome comparisons offer clues to this distinctiveness in most of the common cancers of AYAs, including leukaemias, lymphomas, sarcomas, melanoma, and carcinomas of the breast, colon, rectum and nasopharynx.

  • Translational and clinical research should not assume that the biology of cancers and AYA hosts is the same as in other age groups, even if the diseases seem the same clinically and histopathologically.

  • A systematic review of previously reported biological and therapeutic outcomes, that combines older adolescent and young adult patients with younger and older persons, should be made of biological differences if the numbers of subjects or samples permit an adequate assessment.

  • In addition, prospective studies evaluating potential biological differences should be incorporated into investigations that include patients across the age spectrum.

  • Therapeutic strategies tailored to the AYA age group, based on the distinct biology of the cancer and the host, might improve outcomes and prognosis.

Abstract

One explanation for the relative lack of progress in treating cancer in adolescents and young adults is that the biology of malignant diseases in this age group is different than in younger and older persons, not only in the spectrum of cancers but also within individual cancer types and within the patient (host). Molecular, epidemiological and therapeutic outcome comparisons offer clues to this distinctiveness in most of the common cancers of adolescents and young adults. Translational and clinical research should not assume that the biology of cancers and patients is the same as in other age groups, and treatment strategies should be tailored to the differences.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Relative occurrence of the most common types of cancer in 15–39-year-olds.
Figure 2: Incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) as a function of age at diagnosis and gender.
Figure 3: Cancers with 5-year relative survival rates that are lower in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) than in younger or older patients.
Figure 4: Other cancers with 5-year relative survival rates that have different patterns in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) from those in younger or older patients.
Figure 5: Breast cancer survival rates in US women, by age at diagnosis.
Figure 6: Survival by age of diagnosis 1993–1998.
Figure 7: Tumour bank specimens versus incidence of cancer as a function of patient age.

References

  1. Schmidt, C. Lack of progress in teen and young adult cancers concerns researchers, prompts study. J. Natl Cancer Inst 98, 1760–1761 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Closing the gap: Research and care imperatives for adolescents and young adults with cancer. A report of the Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology Progress Review Group. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute and the LiveStrong Young Adult Alliance. National Cancer Institute [online], (2006). The final report from the Progress Review Group convened by the National Institutes of Health to address the challenges of adolescent and young adult oncology.

  3. Bleyer, A. Young adult oncology: The patients and their survival challenges. CA Cancer J. Clin. 57, 242–255 (2007). A recent overview of the particular issues faced by adolescents and young adults with cancer.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bleyer, W. A., O'Leary, M., Barr, R. & Ries, L. A. G. (eds). Cancer Epidemiology in Older Adolescents and Young Adults 15 to 29 Years of Age, including SEER Incidence and Survival, 1975–2000. (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, 2006). Also available at http://www.seer.cancer.gov/publications/aya. The epidemiological foundation for the initiative in adolescent and young adult oncology in North America.

    Google Scholar 

  5. LiveStrong Young Adult Alliance. Closing the Gap: A Strategic Plan. Addressing the Recommendations of the Adolescent and Young Adult Progress Review Group. (Lance Armstrong Foundation, Austin 2007). The response from the Young Adult Alliance to the recommendations of the Progress Review Group, in the form of a strategic plan for implementation.

  6. Nachman, J., Masera, G. & Bleyer, A. In Cancer in Adolescents and Young Adults (eds Bleyer, A., Barr, R. D., Albritton, K. H., Phillips, M. & Siegel, S.) 83–98 (Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelburg New York, 2007). The first textbook dealing specifically and comprehensively with the topic of cancer in adolescents and young adults.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. LaQuaglia, M. P. et al. Prognostic factors and outcome in patients 21 years and under with colorectal carcinoma. J. Pediatr. Surg. 27, 1085–1089 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cotterill, S. J. et al. Prognostic factors in Ewing's tumor of bone: analysis of 975 patients from the European Intergroup Cooperative Ewing's Sarcoma Study Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 18, 3108–3114 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Scurr, M. & Judson, I. How to treat the Ewing's family of sarcomas in adult patients. Oncologist 11, 65–72 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Verrill, M. W. et al. The use of paediatric chemotherapy protocols at full dose is both a rational and feasible treatment strategy in adults with Ewing's family tumours. Ann. Oncol. 8, 1099–1105 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Paulussen, M. et al. Localized Ewing tumor of bone: final results of the cooperative Ewing's Sarcoma Study CESS 86. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 1818–1829 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Grier, H. E. et al. Addition of ifosfamide and etoposide to standard chemotherapy for Ewing's sarcoma and primitive neuroectodermal tumor of bone. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 694–701 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Womer, R. B., West, D. C., Krailo, M. D., Dickman, P. S. & Pawel, B. Chemotherapy intensification by interval compression in localized Ewing sarcoma family of tumors (ESFT). Proc. 13th Ann. Meeting Connective Tissue Oncol. Soc. 31 October–3 November 2008, Seattle, Washington, USA. Abstract 855.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kalapurakal, J. A. et al. Treatment outcomes in adults with favorable histologic type Wilms tumor-an update from the National Wilms Tumor Study Group. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 60, 1379–1384 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kushner, B. H., Kramer, K., LaQuaglia, MP., Modak, S. & Cheung, N. K. Neuroblastoma in adolescents and adults: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering experience. Med. Pediatr. Oncol. 41, 508–515 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ferrari, A. et al. Rhabdomyosarcoma in adults. A retrospective analysis of 171 patients treated at a single institution. Cancer 98, 571–580 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Anders, C. K. et al. Molecular signatures characterize early stage breast cancer arising in young women and have prognostic and therapeutic implications independent of ER status. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 18S, 522a (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cleator, S., Heller, W. & Coombes, R. C. Triple-negative breast cancer: therapeutic options. Lancet Oncol. 8, 235–244 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Antoniou, A. et al. Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 72, 1117–1130 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lalloo, F. et al. BRCA1, BRCA2 and TP53 mutations in very early-onset breast cancer with associated risks to relatives. Eur. J. Cancer 42, 1143–1150 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Anderson, W. F., Brinton, L. A., Chen, B. & Devesa, S. S. Qualitative age interactions (or effect modification) suggest divergent pathways for early-onset and late-onset breast cancers. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 21036a (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rajagopalan, H., Nowak, M. A., Vogelstein, B. & Lengauer, C. The significance of unstable chromosomes in colorectal cancer. Nature Rev. Cancer 3, 695–701 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Popat, S., Hubner, R. & Houlston, R. S. Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 609–618 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Chiang, J. M. et al. Favorable influence of age on tumor characteristics of sporadic colorectal adenocarcinoma: patients 30 years of age or younger may be a distinct patient group. Dis. Colon Rectum 46, 904–910 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Datta, R. V., LaQuaglia, M. P. & Paty, P. B. Genetic and phenotypic correlates of colorectal cancer in young patients. N. Engl. J. Med. 342, 137–138 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kam, M. H., Eu, K. W., Barben, C. P. & Seow-Choen, F. Colorectal cancer in the young: a 12-year review of patients 30 years or less. Colorectal Dis. 6, 191–194 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Al-Jaberi, T. M., Yaghan, R. J., El-Heis, H. A. Colorectal cancer in young patients under 40 years of age. Comparison with old patients in a well defined Jordanian population. Saudi Med. J. 8, 871–874 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hill AD et al. Colorectal carcinoma in childhood and adolescence: A clinicopathological review. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007; 25, 5808–5814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ferrari A et al. Colorectal carcinoma in children and adolescents: The experience of the Istituto Nazionale Tumori of Milan, Italy. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 50, 588–593 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kanerva, J. et al. Reemphasis on lymphoblast L2 morphology as a poor prognostic factor in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Med. Pediatr. Oncol. 33, 388–394 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Möricke, A. et al. Prognostic impact of age in children and adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Data from the Trials ALL-BFM 86, 90, and 95. Klin. Pädiatr 217, 310–320 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hoelzer, D. Advances in the management of Ph-positive ALL. Clin. Adv. Hematol. Oncol. 4, 804–805 (2006).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Baldus, C. D. et al. High expression of the ETS transcription factor ERG predicts adverse outcome in acute T-lymphoblastic leukemia in adults. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 4714–4720 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Gutierrez, M. I., Siraj, A. K., Ibrahim, M. M., Hussain, A. & Bhatia, K. Childhood and adult ALL: differences in epigenetic lesions associated with cell cycle genes. Am. J. Hematol. 80, 158–160 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Stock, W. et al. Outcome of adolescents and young adults with ALL: A comparison of Children's Cancer Group and Cancer and Leukemia Group B Regimens. Blood 96, 467a (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Boissel, N. et al. Should adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia be treated as old children or young adults? Comparison of the French FRALLE-93 and LALA-94 trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 760–761 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. de Bont, J. M. et al. Significant difference in outcome for adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated on pediatric vs adult protocols in the Netherlands. Leukemia 18, 2032–2035 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Schroeder, H. et al. Prognosis of ALL in 10–20 year old patients in Denmark 1992–2001. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 45, 578a (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Testi, A. et al. Difference in outcome of adolescents (14–17 years) with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) enrolled in the Italian pediatric (AIEOP) an adult (GIMEMA) multicenter treatment protocols. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 9024a (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ramanujachar, R. et al. Adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: Outcome on UK national paediatric (ALL97) and adult (UKALLXII/E2993) trials. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 48, 254–261 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ramanujachar, R., Richards, S., Hann, I. & Webb, D. Adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: Emerging from the shadow of paediatric and adult treatment protocols. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 43, 748–756 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Oschlies, I. et al. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in pediatric patients belongs predominantly to the germinal-center type B-cell lymphomas: A clinicopathologic analysis of cases included in the German BFM (Berlin–Frankfurt–Münster) Multicenter Trial. Blood. 107, 4047–4052 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hattinger, C. M. et al. Prognostic impact of chromosomal aberrations in Ewing tumours. Br. J. Cancer 86, 1763–1769 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Prakash, S. et al. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors in children and young adults: a clinicopathologic, molecular, and genomic study of 15 cases and review of the literature. J. Pediatr. Hematol. Oncol. 27, 179–187 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pappo, A. S., Helman, I. J. & Furman, W. L. Rare cancers in children: When adult tumors occur in children. ASCO 2006 Education Book (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Prokurat, A. et al. Transitional liver cell tumors in older children and adolescents: A novel group of aggressive hepatic tumors expressing b-catenin. Med. Pediatr. Oncol. 39, 510–518 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Strouse, J. J., Fears, T. R., Tucker, M. A. & Wayne, A. S. Pediatric melanoma: risk factor and survival analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Database. J. Clin. Oncol. 23, 4735–4741 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lange, J. R., Palis, B. E., Chang, D. C., Soong, S. J. & Balch, C. M. Melanoma in children and teenagers: An analysis of patients from the National Cancer Data Base. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 1363–1368 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Liu, W. et al. Distinct clinical and pathological features are associated with the BRAFT1799A(V600E) mutation in primary melanoma. J. Invest. Dermatol. 127, 900–905 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Lu, K. et al. Prospective determination of prevalence of Lynch Syndrome in young women with endometrial cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 5158–5164 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Butturini, A. M. et al. Obesity and outcome in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 2063–2069 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Lange, B. J. et al. Mortality in overweight and underweight children with acute myeloid leukemia. JAMA 293, 203–211 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Haim, N. et al. Full dose vincristine (without 2-mg dose limit) in the treatment of lymphomas. Cancer 73, 2515–2519 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Roberson, J. R., Raju, S., Shelso, J., Pui, C. H. & Howard, S. C. Diabetic ketoacidosis during therapy for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Pediatr. Blood Cancer. 11 Feb 2008 (doi:10.1002/pbc.21505).

  55. Bürger, B. et al. Osteonecrosis: a treatment related toxicity in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) — experiences from trial ALL-BFM 95. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 49, 764. (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Aricò, M. et al. Osteonecrosis: an emerging complication of intensive chemotherapy for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Haematologica 88, 747–753 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Juergens, C et al. Safety assessment of intensive induction with vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (VIDE) in the treatment of Ewing tumors in the EURO.-E.W.I.N.G. 99 clinical trial. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 47, 22–29 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Bleyer, A., Budd, T. & Montello, M. Adolescents and young adults with cancer: The scope of the problem and criticality of clinical trials. Cancer 107 (Suppl. 7), 1645–1655 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Barr, R. D., Holowaty, E. J., Birch, J. M. Classification schemes for tumors diagnosed in adolescents and young adults. Cancer 106, 1425–1430 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Author contributions are as follows: Study concept and design: A.B. Acquisition of data: A.B. Analysis and interpretation of data: A.B. Drafting of the manuscript: A.B., R.B. Critical revision of the manuscript for intellectual content: A.B., R.B., B.A., B.H.-L., D.T. and C.E. Statistical expertise: A.B. Obtained funding: A.B. Authors who are independent of any commercial funder and had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis: A.B., R.B., B.A., B.H.-L., D.T. and C.E. Administrative, technical or material support: A.B. Study supervision: A.B. This work was supported by grants from the Aflac Insurance Co., the National Cancer Institute (NCI U10 CA98543) and the Lance Armstrong Foundation. Presented in part at the Roundtable Meeting of the National Cancer Institute Progress Review Group, Denver, Colorado, 24–25 April, 2006. We are indebted to the members of the Children's Oncology Group Adolescent and Young Adult Committee and the Aflac Insurance Co. for their support of and contributions to this investigation. The Biology and Clinical Trials Subgroups of the US National Cancer Institute Progress Review Group in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology are M. Tewari, L. Balducci, C. Bloomfield, W. Carroll, D. Colaizzi, Robert Comis, G. D'Amato, M. Foti, J. Goldberg, D. Hawkins, M. L. Keohan, M. Link, C. Love, B. Rubin, P. Shaw, C. Somkin, W. Stock, J. Summers, D. Sussman, S. Wells, J. Whelan and B. Williams.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. St. Charles Medical Center, 2500 NE Neff Road, Bend, 97701, Oregon, USA

    Archie Bleyer

  2. National Childhood Cancer Foundation, 40 E Huntington Avenue, Arcadia, 91006, California, USA

    Archie Bleyer

  3. McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, L8S 4J9, Ontario, Canada

    Ronald Barr

  4. Oregon Health and Science University Cancer Institute, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, 97239, Oregon, USA

    Brandon Hayes-Lattin

  5. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, St Andrew's Place, East Melbourne, 3002, Victoria, Australia

    David Thomas

  6. Cancer Centers Branch, National Cancer Institute, Suite 700, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, 20892–8345, Maryland, USA

    Chad Ellis

  7. Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, 6130 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, Maryland 20892–7436, USA. on behalf of the Biology and Clinical Trials Subgroups of the US National Cancer Institute Progress Review Group in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology,

    Barry Anderson

Authors
  1. Archie Bleyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald Barr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brandon Hayes-Lattin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chad Ellis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Barry Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

on behalf of the Biology and Clinical Trials Subgroups of the US National Cancer Institute Progress Review Group in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Archie Bleyer.

Related links

Related links

DATABASES

National Cancer Institute

acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

acute myeloid leukaemia

bladder cancer

brain tumour

breast cancer

cervical cancer

chronic myeloid leukaemia

colorectal cancer

endometrial cancer

Ewing sarcoma

gastrointestinal stromal tumour

Hodgkin lymphoma

Kaposi sarcoma

kidney cancer

leukaemia

liver cancer

lymphoma

melanoma

neuroblastoma

ovarian cancer

pancreatic cancer

prostate cancer

retinoblastoma

rhabdomyosarcoma

sarcomas

teratoma

testicular cancer

thyroid carcinoma

Wilms tumour

National Cancer Institute Drug Dictionary

dexamethasone

etoposide

ifosfamide

imatinib

tamoxifen

trastuzumab

FURTHER INFORMATION

A. Bleyer's homepage

LIVESTRONG Young Adult Alliance

US Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results

Glossary

Progress Review Group

(PRG). Panel of experts assembled by the US National Cancer Institute to assess the state of the science of a cancer or cancer group and make recommendations for future research.

Microsatellite instability

A condition manifested by damaged DNA due to defects in the normal DNA repair process and characterized by unstable sequences of repeating units of 1–4 base pairs in length.

Familial adenomatous polyposis

An inherited mutation in the APC or MUTYH gene results in numerous polyps in the large intestine that usually undergo malignant transformation into colon cancer when not treated.

Hereditary non-polyposis colon cancer

(HNPCC). Colon cancer emanating from inherited mutations known as Lynch syndrome that prevent self-repair capability of DNA and also increase risk of stomach, small intestine, liver, uterus, ovary, brain and skin cancer.

L2 morphology

A French–American–British (FAB) system histological type of leukaemic lymphoblast characterized by larger and more variable size, more cytoplasm and a worse prognosis than the L1 type.

Borderline tumour

Tumours of the ovary with epithelial (carcinoma) and stromal (non-epithelial) elements that are histologically of an intermediate grade between benign and malignant and of uncertain malignant potential.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bleyer, A., Barr, R., Hayes-Lattin, B. et al. The distinctive biology of cancer in adolescents and young adults. Nat Rev Cancer 8, 288–298 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2349

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2349

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing