Is it time to remove the cancer label from low-risk conditions?

August 13, 2018 by Brooke Nickel, The Conversation
Many people associate the word cancer with major illness or death. Credit: Shutterstock

Over the past few decades, our understanding of cancer has changed. We now know some cancers don't grow or grow so slowly that they'll never cause medical problems.

But the way we label disease can harm. The use of more medicalised labels, including cancer, can increase levels of anxiety and the desire for more invasive treatments.

Given this growing evidence, my colleagues and I argue in The BMJ today that it may be time to stop telling people with very low-risk conditions that they have "cancer" if they're unlikely to be harmed by it.

Our understanding of cancer has changed

Cancer screening for people who have no symptoms and the use of increasingly sensitive technologies can lead to overdiagnosis – a diagnosis that causes more harm than good. Overdiagnosis is most common in breast, prostate and thyroid cancer.

Thyroid cancer diagnoses, for example, have dramatically increased in developing countries. This has mainly been driven by an increase in the detection of papillary thyroid cancers. These are a sub-type of thyroid cancer which are often small (less than 2cm in size) and slow-growing.

But death rates from thyroid cancer remain largely unchanged. And tumour growth and spread in patients with small papillary who choose surgery are similar to those who just monitor their condition.

In fact, autopsy studies spanning over 60 years show "cancers" have always been common but often went undetected and didn't cause harm.

Impact of the cancer label

Many people associate the word cancer with major illness or death. It can be frightening to hear. This association has been ingrained by public health messaging that saves lives.

Although this promotion has had the best of intentions, it has also induced feelings of fear and vulnerability in the population. It has then offered hope, through screening.

After decades, this messaging has resulted in highly positive attitudes towards cancer screening and early treatment. It has also led to an increased, sometimes unwarranted, desire for surgery.

Several studies show the cancer label, and the use of medicalised labels in various other conditions, leads to higher levels of anxiety and perceived severity of the condition, as well as a greater preference for invasive treatments.

The increased desire for more aggressive treatments has been shown clinically in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast (sometimes known as stage O ). Women are increasingly choosing mastectomy and bilateral mastectomy (removal of one or both breasts) rather than lumpectomy (removal of the lump), even though these treatments do not change their odds of dying of breast cancer.

Similarly, in localised prostate cancer, active surveillance has been a recommended management option for a number of years, which means monitoring the condition and not providing immediate treatment. But men are only beginning to avoid immediate treatment and follow active surveillance at similar rates to men who choose surgery or radiation.

There is also evidence and informed speculation that melanoma in situ (also called stage 0 melanoma), small lung cancers, and some small kidney cancers may similarly be considered low risk and subject to overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

A strategy to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment

Removing the cancer label is one strategy that has been proposed in recent years by international cancer experts to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment in some low-risk conditions.

The cancer label has previously been removed when there was clear evidence the condition was low-risk and very unlikely to cause harm. In 1998, "papilloma and grade 1 carcinoma of the bladder" was re-labelled to "papillary urothelial neoplasia of low malignant potential". The word carcinoma, which is another way of saying cancer, was dropped.

More recently, reference to "cancer" was removed from a sub-type of papillary thyroid cancer, which is identified after surgery. This was done to eliminate the need for ongoing follow-up and reduce any potential patient anxiety.

It's vital we learn from these past examples. We also need to establish a formal evaluation of the impact that removing the cancer label will have on clinical practice and patient outcomes, to drive effective reform.

Ultimately, removing the cancer label will create controversy and take time. But the end result should better support appropriate evidence-based care for both future and current patients.

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Researchers identify a mechanism that fuels cancer cells' growth

November 14, 2018
Scientists at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center have identified sodium glucose transporter 2, or SGLT2, as a mechanism that lung cancer cells can utilize to obtain glucose, which is key to their survival and promotes ...

A new approach to detecting cancer earlier from blood tests: study

November 14, 2018
Cancer scientists led by principal investigator Dr. Daniel De Carvalho at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre have combined "liquid biopsy", epigenetic alterations and machine learning to develop a blood test to detect and classify ...

New antibody breakthrough to lead the fight against cancer

November 14, 2018
Scientists at the University of Southampton have developed a new antibody that could hold the key to unlocking cancer's defence against the body's immune system.

Photoacoustic imaging may help doctors detect ovarian tumors earlier

November 14, 2018
Ovarian cancer claims the lives of more than 14,000 in the U.S. each year, ranking fifth among cancer deaths in women. A multidisciplinary team at Washington University in St. Louis has found an innovative way to use sound ...

Pancreatic cancer's addiction could be its end

November 13, 2018
Cancer cells are often described as cells "gone bad" or "renegade." New research reveals that in some of the deadliest cases of pancreatic cancer, these rebellious cells have an unexpected addiction. Now, scientists are investigating ...

Solving the mystery of NPM1 in acute myeloid leukemia

November 13, 2018
Although it has long been recognized that mutations of gene NPM1 play an important role in acute myeloid leukemia, no one has determined how the normal and the mutated forms of the protein NPM1 function.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.