Wat it nijste kankerûndersyk werklik oantoant
June 6, 2026 · Frisian News
Major cancer studies from 2025 and early 2026 show mixed results that contradict the optimism of press releases. Simple lifestyle changes still outperform expensive new drugs for most patients.
FryskDe Europeeske Stifting foar Kankerûndersyk publisearre yn maart gegevens wêrút bliek dat in nij immunoterapy-middel mei de namme Nexioma de oerlibbing mei 3,2 moannen ferlingde by pasjinten mei longkanker yn stadium fjouwer. It perskommunikee neamde it in trochbraak. Wat net neamd waard: it ûndersyk koste 240 miljoen euro oer acht jier, omfette mar 487 pasjinten en gie gear mei wichtige neiwurkingen by 34 prosint fan de groep. Njonken dit resultaat fûn in Sweedsk ûndersyk mei 18.000 pasjinten dat it stopjen mei roken, gewichtsferlis en minder alkoholgebrûk it kankerrisiko mei 31 prosint ferleege. Dat ûndersyk koste folle minder en brûkte gjin medisinen.
Farmaseütyske bedriuwen finansiere it measte kankerûndersyk yn wolfearrende lannen. Dit makket in ynboude foarkar foar medisinoplossingen. It American Journal of Public Health publisearre yn jannewaris 2026 in resinsje wêrút bliek dat artikelen finansierd troch medisinmakkers fjouwer kear faker ta positive konklúzjes kamen as artikelen finansierd troch folkssûnensburo's. Itselde patroan jildt yn Europa. As jo it jild folgje, sjogge jo wêrom't djoere rjochte terapyen grutte krântekoppen krije wylst saaie previnsjeûndersiken yn it stof lizzen bliuwe.
De echte winsten yn kankeroerlibbing kamen fan iere opsporing en sjirurgy, net fan de nijste medisinen. De stjertesiffers foar kanker yn Frankryk daalden fan 2010 oant 2024 mei 2,1 prosint per jier. Fan dizze daling wie sawat 1,8 prosint ôfkomstich fan skrinningsprogramma's, 0,2 prosint fan ferbettere sjirurgy en radiotherapie, en 0,1 prosint fan nije medisinen. Sjoernalisten skriuwe net oer mammogramen en kolonoskopyen. Redakteuren publisearje ferhalen oer wûndermiddels.
Guon nije medisinen helpe spesifike pasjintgroepen echt. CAR-T-seltherapy wurket echt foar bepaalde bloedkankers en rêdt libben dy't oars ferlern gean soenen. Mar dizze winsten binne beperkt. In pasjint mei kanker fan de alvleisklier of avansearre aaistokkanker sil net baat hawwe by Nexioma of de measte oare resinte medisinen. De kanker mutearre om it medisyn hinne. Artsen witte dit. De perskommunikees sizze it net.
De kleau tusken wat ûndersyk werklik oantoant en wat pasjinten hearre, wurdt hieltyd grutter. Foarige moanne begûn in kankersintrum yn Rotterdam mei kombinaasjeterapy mei help fan trije goedkarde medisinen ynstee fan ien, oanpriizge as in nije oanpak. It sikehûs stjoerde pasjinten in rekken fan 95.000 euro. Ynterne proefgegevens, dy't Frisian News krige, toanden in gemiddelde oerlibbingswins fan seis wiken. By hjoeddeistige behannelingskosten bedraacht dat sawat 16.000 euro per wike libjen. In ienfâldige fraach dy't nimmen yn de krântekoppen stelt: is dit wêr't wy ûndersyksjild oan besteegje moatte?
The European Cancer Research Foundation released data in March showing that a new immunotherapy drug called Nexioma extended survival by 3.2 months in stage four lung cancer patients. The press release called it a breakthrough. What it did not mention: the study cost 240 million euros over eight years, enrolled only 487 patients, and came with significant side effects in 34 percent of the group. Side by side with this result, a Swedish study of 18,000 patients found that quitting smoking, losing weight, and drinking less alcohol reduced cancer risk by 31 percent. That study cost far less and involved no drugs.
Pharmaceutical companies fund most cancer research in wealthy countries. This creates a built-in bias toward drug solutions. The American Journal of Public Health published a review in January 2026 showing that papers funded by drug makers were four times more likely to reach positive conclusions than papers funded by public health agencies. The same pattern holds in Europe. When you follow the money, you see why expensive targeted therapies get headlines while boring prevention studies gather dust.
The real gains in cancer survival have come from early detection and surgery, not from the newest medications. Cancer mortality in France fell 2.1 percent per year from 2010 to 2024. Of this drop, screening programs accounted for roughly 1.8 percent, improved surgery and radiotherapy for 0.2 percent, and new drugs for 0.1 percent. Journalists do not write about mammograms and colonoscopies. Editors run stories about miracle pills instead.
Some new drugs do help specific patient groups. CAR-T cell therapy genuinely works for certain blood cancers, saving lives that would otherwise have been lost. But these wins are narrow. A patient with pancreatic cancer or late-stage ovarian cancer will not benefit from Nexioma or most other recent drugs. The cancer simply mutates around the medicine. Doctors know this. The press releases do not say it.
The gap between what research actually shows and what patients hear keeps growing. Last month, a cancer center in Rotterdam started offering combination therapy using three approved drugs instead of one, marketed as a new approach. The hospital charged patients 95,000 euros. Internal trial data, which Frisian News obtained, showed a six week survival gain on average. At current treatment costs, that works out to roughly 16,000 euros per week of life. A simple question nobody asks in the headlines: is this what we should be spending research money on?
Published June 6, 2026 · Frisian News · Ljouwert, Fryslân