Every year, people around the world stand before the "emperor of maladies" in fear and reverence and ask: How far have we come in the fight to eradicate this disease? How much longer will it continue to take our lives and instill fear in our hearts? What progress has science made in recent years?
The scientific knowledge we have accumulated so far allows for curing all cancer patients at a rate of 65%. It also enables us to prevent 70% of cancer cases. However, when the disease reaches advanced stages, the chances of a complete recovery drop significantly- how significantly depends on the type of cancer and the quality of treatment.
On this World Cancer Day, we have come together to discuss the importance of high-quality treatment and new concepts that are revolutionizing traditional approaches to cancer treatment and significantly increasing rates of recovery.
The first concept: contrary to what we had previously believed, not all of a patient’s cancer cells are the same. They vary in shape, function, and how they respond to treatment. Some may respond to chemotherapy, some to immunotherapy, and others to targeted therapy. Accordingly, it makes sense to treat the patient with a combination of these three therapies.
Recent research has proven that using a combination of treatments destroys a significantly larger number of cancer cells than traditional treatments that rely on a single approach. These findings have led to a substantial increase in recovery rates. Moreover, each of these three treatments eliminates cancer cells in a different way. While chemotherapy kills both cancerous and healthy cells, targeted therapy focuses only on cancer cells. Immunotherapy, on the other hand, stimulates the patient’s immune system, enabling it to identify and destroy malignant cells.
The second concept: no two cancer patients suffer from the exact same disease. Each patient’s cancer is fundamentally different from others, even when the cancer emerges from the same organ and the same anatomical diagnosis is given after it is analyzed under the microscope. We have learned that identifying the disease through its biological identity, at the cellular level, yields better results than relying on its appearance under the microscope. We have also come to understand that each cancer’s biological identity is unique, meaning that no two patients share the exact same disease profile.
This has led us to a new conception of the disease and to the view that treating hundreds of patients using the same treatment is not logical. That is the essence of the recent shift away from the traditional treatment approaches. In this new strategy, treatment is tailored to individual patients and their disease. This strategy also treats each patient with a combination of the three therapies, but in different ways for each of them; each of the treatments relies on a large number of different medications.
The essence of this shift is that no two patients receive the exact same treatment. This new approach, which focuses on the biological identity of the disease, represents the future of cancer treatment. Treatments based solely on anatomical diagnosis will soon become obsolete. Moreover, this strategy can be applied to all types of cancer, with the exception of leukemia. Recent research has demonstrated that in every case that this approach was used, the patient responded significantly better than those who had received traditional treatments.
The third concept: a doctor should treat their patient with what they believe to be the best possible therapy, not the treatment covered by health insurance providers, which often favor so-called "standard therapy." While standard treatments can be effective, they are not always the best option. The key takeaway is that, in cancer treatment, using the best treatment instead of standard therapy can mean the difference between life and death.
A major problem is that doctors are reluctant to use the best available treatment because insurance companies may refuse to cover the costs. It is essential to remember that the primary goal of these companies is to make a profit, not to ensure that the patient recovers. As a result, they constantly seek to avoid paying the high costs of the most effective treatments.
During my time as a member of a healthcare advisory committee under President George H.W. Bush, I fought to free doctors from the dominance of insurance companies but soon realized that these companies wield more power than the state itself. Doctors also hesitate to use optimal treatments for fear of legal action. In the United States, a physician can be sued by their patients or their families if they prescribe a treatment that is not considered "standard therapy."
That is the shift. This is the path to giving advanced-stage cancer patients the best chance to fully recover: using a combination of chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy, tailoring treatment to the individual patient and their specific type of cancer, and allowing doctors to choose the best available therapy without restrictions.
The right to life is the most fundamental human right. This right is inseparable from the right to good health, as one’s health is the gateway to life itself. All other rights enshrined in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights pale in comparison to the right to life. This right should be a top priority. Yet, thousands of people die every day because it is denied to them, under the pretext that it is not affordable. They claim there isn’t enough money to fund the battle against disease. However, they always seem to have more than enough money to manufacture and purchase the most destructive weapons.
When will the world see leaders who believe that true strength lies in preserving and uplifting human life, rather than humiliating and destroying it? The Holy Quran tells us: "Whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely" (Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:32).