# 02 - 73 Approach to the Patient with Cancer

### 73 Approach to the Patient with Cancer

Section 1	 Neoplastic Disorders
Dan L. Longo

Approach to the Patient 

with Cancer
The application of current treatment techniques (surgery, radiation 
therapy, chemotherapy, and biologic therapy) results in the cure of 
nearly two of three patients diagnosed with cancer. Nevertheless, 
patients experience the diagnosis of cancer as one of the most trau­
matic and revolutionary events that has ever happened to them. Inde­
pendent of prognosis, the diagnosis brings with it a change in a person’s 
self-image and in their role in the home and workplace. The prognosis 
of a person who has just been found to have pancreatic cancer is the 
same as the prognosis of the person with aortic stenosis who develops 
the first symptoms of congestive heart failure (median survival, 
~8 months). However, the patient with heart disease may remain 
functional and maintain a self-image as a fully intact person with just 
a malfunctioning part, a diseased organ (“a bum ticker”). By contrast, 
the patient with pancreatic cancer has a completely altered self-image 
and is viewed differently by family and anyone who knows the 
diagnosis. The patient is being attacked and invaded by a disease 
that could be anywhere in the body. Every ache or pain takes on 
TABLE 73-1  Distribution of Cancer Incidence and Deaths for 2021
MALE
FEMALE
SITES
%
NUMBER
SITES
%
NUMBER
Cancer Incidence
Prostate

299,010
Breast

310,720
Lung

116,310
Lung

118,270
Colorectal

81,540
Colorectal

71,270
Bladder

63,070
Endometrial

67,880
Melanoma

59,170
Melanoma

41,470
Kidney

52,380
Lymphoma

36,030
Lymphoma

44,590
Pancreas

31,910
Oral cavity

41,510
Thyroid

31,520
Leukemia

36,450
Kidney

29,230
Pancreas

34,530
Leukemia

26,320
All others

200,520
All others

207,440
All sites

1,029,080
All sites

972,060
Cancer Deaths
Lung

65,790
Lung

59,280
Prostate

35,250
Breast

42,250
Colorectal

28,700
Pancreas

24,480
Pancreas

25,270
Colorectal

24,310
Liver

19,120
Endometrial

13.250
Leukemia

13,640
Ovary

12,740
Esophagus

12,880
Liver

10,720
Bladder

12,290
Leukemia

10,030
Lymphoma

11,780
Lymphoma

8,360
CNS

10,690
CNS

8,070
All others

87,390
All others

75,4330
All sites

322,800
All sites

288,920
Source: From RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:12, 2024. Reproduced John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Oncology and Hematology
PART 4
desperate significance. Cancer is an exception to the coordinated 
interaction among cells and organs. In general, the cells of a multicel­
lular organism are programmed for collaboration. Many diseases occur 
because the specialized cells fail to perform their assigned task. Cancer 
takes this malfunction one step further. Not only is there a failure of the 
cancer cell to maintain its specialized function, but it also strikes out 
on its own; the cancer cell competes to survive using natural mutability 
and natural selection to seek advantage over normal cells in a reca­
pitulation of evolution. One consequence of the traitorous behavior of 
cancer cells is that the patient feels betrayed by their body. The cancer 
patient feels that they, and not just a body part, are diseased.
THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROBLEM
No nationwide cancer registry exists; therefore, the incidence of cancer 
is estimated on the basis of the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, 
Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, which tabulates 
cancer incidence and death figures from 13 sites, accounting for about 
10% of the U.S. population, and from population data from the U.S. 
Census Bureau. In 2024, 2.001 million new cases of invasive cancer 
(1,029,080 men and 927,060 women) were diagnosed, and 611,720 per­
sons (322,800 men and 288,920 women) died from cancer. The percent 
distribution of new cancer cases and cancer deaths by site for men and 
women is shown in Table 73-1. Cancer mortality continues to decline; 
however, 6 of the 10 most common cancers have increased in incidence 
by 1–3% in recent years, and troubling disparities among different 
racial/ethnic groups persist. Mortality is twice as high in black people 
than white people for cancers of the prostate, stomach, and uterine 
corpus. Cancer is the cause of one in four deaths in the United States.

Male

Prostate

Rate per 100,000 population

Lung & bronchus

Colorectum

Urinary bladder
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology

Thyroid
Livera
Melanoma of the skin
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year of diagnosis
2005 2010 2015 2020

FIGURE 73-1  Trends in cancer incidence for men and women, 1975–2020. Incidence data for 2020 are indicated by color dots separate from the trend lines. (Reproduced 
with permission from RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:1, 2024.)
The most significant risk factor for cancer overall is age; 58% of all 
cases were in those aged >65 years, down from 61% in 1995, despite an 
increase in this age group from 13% to 17% of the population. Cancer 
incidence increases as the third, fourth, or fifth power of age in differ­
ent sites. For the interval between birth and age 49 years, 1 in 29 men 
and 1 in 19 women will develop cancer; for the interval between ages 
50 and 59 years, 1 in 15 men and 1 in 17 women will develop cancer; 
for the interval between ages 60 and 69 years, 1 in 6 men and 1 in 
10 women will develop cancer; and for people aged ≥70, 1 in 3 men 
and 1 in 4 women will develop cancer. Overall, men have a 40.5% risk 
of developing cancer at some time during their lives; women have a 
38.9% lifetime risk.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death behind heart disease. 
Deaths from heart disease have declined 45% in the United States since 
1950 and continue to decline. Cancer has overtaken heart disease as the 
number one cause of death in persons aged <85 years. Incidence trends 
over time are shown in Fig. 73-1. After a 70-year period of increase, 
cancer deaths began to decline in 1990–1991 (Fig. 73-2). Between 
1990 and 2010, cancer deaths decreased by 21% among men and 12.3% 
among women. The incidence has been steady since 2013. The magni­
tude of the decline is illustrated in Fig. 73-3. The five leading causes 
of cancer deaths are shown for various populations in Table 73-2. 
The 5-year survival for white patients was 39% in 1960–1963 and 68% 
in 2010–2016. Cancers are more often deadly in blacks; the 5-year 
survival was 63% for the 2010–2016 interval; however, the racial dif­
ferences are narrowing over time. Incidence and mortality vary among 
racial and ethnic groups (Table 73-3). The basis for these differences 
is unclear.
Advances in cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment since the 
early 1990s have averted millions of cancer deaths based on projec­
tions from the slopes of the mortality curves leading up to the 1990s 
(Fig. 73-4).
■
■CANCER AROUND THE WORLD
In 2022, nearly 20 million new cancer cases and 9.7 million can­
cer deaths were estimated worldwide, according to estimates of 
GLOBOCAN 2022, developed by the International Agency for 
Research on Cancer (IARC). Rates are increasing worldwide. When 

Female

Breast

Lung & bronchus
Colorectum

Uterine corpus

Thyroid
Livera
Melanoma of the skin
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year of diagnosis
2005 2010 2015 2020

broken down by region of the world, almost half of cases were in Asia 
(which has 59.2% of the world’s population), 26% in Europe (9.6% of 
the world’s population), 13.1% in North America, 7.1% in Central/
South America (the Americas, North and South, account for 13.3% of 
the world’s population), 6% in Africa (16.6% of the world’s population), 
and 1% in Australia/New Zealand (0.5% of the world’s population) 
(Fig. 73-5). Lung cancer is the most common cancer and the most 
common cause of cancer death in the world. Its incidence is highly 
variable, affecting only 2 per 100,000 African women but as many 
as 61 per 100,000 North American men. Breast cancer is the second 
most common cancer worldwide; however, it ranks fourth as a cause 
of death behind lung, stomach, and liver cancer. Among the eight 
most common forms of cancer, lung (2-fold), breast (3-fold), prostate 
(2.5-fold), and colorectal (3-fold) cancers are more common in more 
developed countries than in less developed countries. By contrast, liver 
(2-fold), cervical (2-fold), and esophageal (2- to 3-fold) cancers are more 
common in less developed countries. Stomach cancer incidence is simi­
lar in more and less developed countries but is much more common in 
Asia than North America or Africa. The most common cancers in Africa 
are cervical, breast, and liver cancers. It has been estimated that nine 
modifiable risk factors are responsible for more than one-third of cancers 
worldwide. These include smoking, alcohol consumption, obesity, physical 
inactivity, low fruit and vegetable consumption, unsafe sex, air pollution, 
indoor smoke from household fuels, and contaminated injections.
PATIENT MANAGEMENT
Important information is obtained from every portion of the routine 
history and physical examination. The duration of symptoms may 
reveal the chronicity of disease. The past medical history may alert the 
physician to the presence of underlying diseases that may affect the 
choice of therapy or the side effects of treatment. The social history 
may reveal occupational exposure to carcinogens or habits, such as 
smoking or alcohol consumption, that may influence the course of dis­
ease and its treatment. The family history may suggest an underlying 
familial cancer predisposition and point out the need to begin surveil­
lance or other preventive therapy for unaffected siblings of the patient. 
The review of systems may suggest early symptoms of metastatic dis­
ease or a paraneoplastic syndrome.

All sites combined

Deaths per 100,000 population

Males, by site

Stomach
Colorectum
Liver & intrahepatic bile duct
Pancreas
Lung & bronchus
Prostate
Leukemia
Deaths per 100,000 males

Females, by site

Stomach
Colorectum
Liver & intrahepatic bile duct
Pancreas
Lung & bronchus
Breast
Uterus (corpus and cervix combined)
Deaths per 100,000 females

Year of death

FIGURE 73-2  Trends in cancer mortality rates in men and women, 1930–2021. (Reproduced with permission 
from RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:1, 2024.)
■
■DIAGNOSIS
The diagnosis of cancer relies most heavily on invasive tissue biopsy 
and should never be made without obtaining tissue; no noninvasive 
diagnostic test is sufficient to define a disease process such as cancer 
(one exception to this rule may be hepatocellular carcinoma, which 
may be reliably diagnosed based on computed tomography [CT] 
or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] showing the characteristic 
dynamic perfusion pattern of arterial hyperenhancement and venous 
or delayed phase washout). Although in rare clinical settings (e.g., thy­
roid nodules), fine-needle aspiration is an acceptable diagnostic proce­
dure, the diagnosis generally depends on obtaining adequate tissue to 
permit careful evaluation of the histology of the tumor, its grade, and 
its invasiveness and to yield further molecular diagnostic information, 
such as the expression of cell-surface markers or intracellular proteins 
that typify a particular cancer, or the presence of a molecular marker, 
such as the t(8;14) translocation of Burkitt’s lymphoma. Increasing 
evidence links the expression of certain genes with the prognosis and 
response to therapy (Chaps. 76 and 77).
Occasionally, a patient will present with a metastatic disease process 
that is defined as cancer on biopsy but has no apparent primary site of 

disease. Efforts should be made to define the pri­
mary site based on age, sex, sites of involvement, 
histology and tumor markers, and personal and 
family history. Particular attention should be 
focused on ruling out the most treatable causes 
(Chap. 97).

Male
Once the diagnosis of cancer is made, the 
management of the patient is best undertaken 
as a multidisciplinary collaboration among the 
primary care physician, medical oncologists, sur­
gical oncologists, radiation oncologists, oncology 
nurse specialists, pharmacists, social workers, 
rehabilitation medicine specialists, and a number 
of other consulting professionals working closely 
with each other and with the patient and family.
Female
■
■DEFINING THE EXTENT OF 
DISEASE AND THE PROGNOSIS
The first priority in patient management after the 
diagnosis of cancer is established and shared with 
the patient is to determine the extent of disease. 
The curability of a tumor usually is inversely pro­
portional to the tumor burden. Ideally, the tumor 
will be diagnosed before symptoms develop or as 
a consequence of screening efforts (Chap. 75). 
A very high proportion of such patients can be 
cured. However, most patients with cancer pres­
ent with symptoms related to the cancer, caused 
either by mass effects of the tumor or by altera­
tions associated with the production of cytokines 
or hormones by the tumor.
CHAPTER 73
Approach to the Patient with Cancer 
For most cancers, the extent of disease is 
evaluated by a variety of noninvasive and inva­
sive diagnostic tests and procedures. This process 
is called staging. There are two types. Clinical 
staging is based on physical examination, radio­
graphs, isotopic scans, CT scans, and other 
imaging procedures; pathologic staging takes into 
account information obtained during a surgical 
procedure, which might include intraoperative 
palpation, resection of regional lymph nodes 
and/or tissue adjacent to the tumor, and inspec­
tion and biopsy of organs commonly involved 
in disease spread. Pathologic staging includes 
histologic examination of all tissues removed 
during the surgical procedure. Surgical proce­
dures performed may include a simple lymph 
node biopsy or more extensive procedures such 
as thoracotomy, mediastinoscopy, or laparotomy. 
Surgical staging may occur in a separate procedure or may be done at 
the time of definitive surgical resection of the primary tumor. A subset 
of pathologic staging is the examination of tissue obtained at initial 
surgery that occurs after the delivery of some treatment, which is called 
neoadjuvant therapy. Stage of disease determined after neoadjuvant 
therapy is designated with the prefix y.
Knowledge of the predilection of particular tumors for spreading to 
adjacent or distant organs helps direct the staging evaluation.
Information obtained from staging is used to define the extent of 
disease as localized, as exhibiting spread outside of the organ of origin 
to regional but not distant sites, or as metastatic to distant sites. The 
most widely used system of staging is the tumor, node, metastasis 
(TNM) system codified by the International Union Against Cancer and 
the American Joint Committee on Cancer. The TNM classification is 
an anatomically based system that categorizes the tumor on the basis 
of the size of the primary tumor lesion (T1–4, where a higher number 
indicates a tumor of larger size), the presence of nodal involvement 
(usually N0 and N1 for the absence and presence, respectively, of 
involved nodes, although some tumors have more elaborate systems 
of nodal grading), and the presence of metastatic disease (M0 and M1

Male

Rate per 100,000

Lung & bronchus

Colorectum
Leukemia

Brain & other nervous system
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

7,000
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
6,000
5,000
Lung & bronchus
Number of deaths
4,000
3,000
Colorectum
Leukemia
2,000
1,000
Brain & other nervous system
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year of death
2005 2010 2015 2020

FIGURE 73-3  Trends in cancer incidence and death rates. (Reproduced with permission from RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:1, 2024.)
TABLE 73-2  The Five Leading Primary Tumor Sites for Patients Dying of Cancer Based on Age and Sex in 2018
RANK
SEX
ALL AGES
UNDER 20
20–39
40–49
50-64
65–79
>80

M
Lung
CNS
Colorectal
Colorectal
Lung
Lung
Lung
F
Lung
CNS
Breast
Breast
Lung
Lung
Lung

M
Prostate
Leukemia
CNS
Lung
Colorectal
Prostate
Prostate
F
Breast
Leukemia
Cervix
Colorectal
Breast
Breast
Breast

M
Colorectal
Bone sarcoma
Leukemia
CNS
Pancreas
Liver
Colorectal
F
Colorectal
Soft tissue sarcoma
Colorectal
Lung
Colorectal
Pancreas
Colorectal

M
Pancreas
Soft tissue sarcoma
Testis
Pancreas
Liver
Colorectal
Bladder
F
Pancreas
Bone sarcoma
CNS
Cervix
Pancreas
Colorectal
Pancreas

M
Liver
Lymphoma
Lymphoma
Esophagus
Esophagus
Liver
Pancreas
F
Ovary
Kidney
Leukemia
Ovary
Ovary
Ovary
Leukemia
Abbreviations: CNS, central nervous system; F, female; M, male.
Source: From RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:12, 2024.

Female
Breast
Lung & bronchus
Colorectum
Uterine cervix
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Breast
Lung & bronchus
Colorectum
Uterine cervix
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year of death
2005 2010 2015 2020
AGE, YEARS

TABLE 73-3  Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Racial and Ethnic Groups, United States, 2016–2020
SITE
SEX
WHITE
BLACK
Incidence per 100,000 Population
All
M
511.2
533.9
299.0
504.1
377.2
F
499.3
409.9
307.3
465.5
351.3
Breast
134.9
129.6
104.6
115.5
100.7
Colorectal
M
40.4
48.8
33.4
57.8
38.2
F
30.5
35.0
23.7
43.7
27.2
Kidney
M
24.3
26.4
11.6
43.9
23.5
F
12.1
13.7
5.5
23.9
13.3
Liver
M
11.2
17.0
18.4
27.3
20.4
F
4.2
5.5
6.7
12.3
8.4
Lung
M
765.7
72,4
40.8
67.2
34.3
F
54.8
45.8
28.1
58.6
24.0
Prostate
110.7
186.1
60.9
91.9
90.9
Stomach
M
7.1
13.0
11.8
13.1
11.4
F
3.4
7.4
6.9
7.8
7.7
Cervix
7.2
8.6
6.0
11.4
9.7
Endometrial
27.9
28.9
21.7
30.4
25.8
Deaths per 100,000 Population
All
M
183.3
217.4
111.6
221.6
130.2
F
133.6
150.2
83.7
157.9
93.5
Breast
19.7
27.8
11.8
21.1
13.7
Colorectal
M
15.5
22.4
11.0
23.1
13.6
F
11.1
14.4
7.8
16.0
8.5
Kidney
M
5.3
5.2
2.4
9.9
4.8
F
2.3
2.2
1.0
4.2
2.1
Liver
M
8.5
13.0
12.6
19.9
13.1
F
3.7
4.8
5.2
8.8
6.0
Lung
M
44.9
51.3
25.9
52.3
21.-
F
32.9
28.0
15.6
37.0
11.4
Prostate
17.9
37.9
8.7
22.5
15.4
Stomach
M
2.9
7.2
6.0
7.7
5.9
F
1.5
3.5
3.7
4.1
3.9
Cervix
2.0
3.3
1.7
2.3
2.5
Endometrial
4.6
9.1
3.5
4.9
4.3
aBased on Indian Health Service delivery areas.
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male.
Source:  From RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:12, 2024. Reproduced  of John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
for the absence and presence, respectively, of metastases). The various 
permutations of T, N, and M scores (sometimes including tumor histo­
logic grade [G]) are then broken into stages, usually designated by the 
roman numerals I through IV. Tumor burden increases and curability 
decreases with increasing stage. Other anatomic staging systems are 
used for some tumors, e.g., the Dukes classification for colorectal can­
cers, the International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians 
classification for gynecologic cancers, and the Ann Arbor classification 
for Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Certain tumors cannot be grouped on the basis of anatomic con­
siderations. For example, hematopoietic tumors such as leukemia, 
myeloma, and lymphoma are often disseminated at presentation and 
do not spread like solid tumors. For these tumors, other prognostic 
factors have been identified (Chaps. 109–116).
In addition to tumor burden, a second major determinant of 
treatment outcome is the physiologic reserve of the patient. Patients 
who are bedridden before developing cancer are likely to fare worse, 
stage for stage, than fully active patients. Physiologic reserve is a 
determinant of how a patient is likely to cope with the physiologic 
stresses imposed by the cancer and its treatment. This factor is dif­
ficult to assess directly. Instead, surrogate markers for physiologic 

ASIAN/PACIFIC 
ISLANDER
AMERICAN INDIANa
HISPANIC
CHAPTER 73
Approach to the Patient with Cancer 
reserve are used, such as the patient’s age or Karnofsky performance 
status (Table 73-4) or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 
performance status (Table 73-5). Older patients and those with a 
Karnofsky performance status <70 or ECOG performance status ≥3 
have a poor prognosis unless the poor performance is a reversible 
consequence of the tumor. Some have advocated for using one of the 
geriatric assessment tools to gauge physiologic reserve. See ASCO’s 
video for an example of a geriatric assessment tool (https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=jnaQIjOz2Dw).
Increasingly, biologic features of the tumor are being related to 
prognosis. The expression of particular oncogenes, drug-resistance 
genes, apoptosis-related genes, and genes involved in metastasis is 
being found to influence response to therapy and prognosis. The 
presence of selected cytogenetic abnormalities may influence sur­
vival. Tumors with higher growth fractions, as assessed by expression 
of proliferation-related markers such as proliferating cell nuclear 
antigen (detectable by staining with Ki67 antibody), behave more 
aggressively than tumors with lower growth fractions. Information 
obtained from studying the tumor itself will increasingly be used to 
influence treatment decisions. Host genes involved in drug metabo­
lism can influence the safety and efficacy of particular treatments.

Male
Female
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
Number of deaths
300,000
2,794,900
cancer deaths averted
250,000
200,000
150,000
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
100,000
50,000

Year of death
FIGURE 73-4  Cancer deaths averted in men and women since the early 1990s. Projections based on death continuing on the established trajectory. (Reproduced with 
permission from RL Siegel et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:1, 2024.)
Enormous heterogeneity has been noted by studying tumors; we 
have learned that morphology is not capable of discerning certain 
distinct subsets of patients whose tumors have different sets of abnor­
malities. Tumors that look the same by light microscopy can be very 
different. Similarly, tumors that look quite different from one another 
histologically can share genetic lesions that predict responses to treat­
ments. Furthermore, tumor cells vary enormously within a single 
patient even though the cells share a common origin.
■
■MAKING A TREATMENT PLAN
From information on the extent of disease and the prognosis and in 
conjunction with the patient’s wishes, it is determined whether the 
treatment approach should be curative or palliative in intent. Coop­
eration among the various professionals involved in cancer treatment 
is of the utmost importance in treatment planning. For some cancers, 
chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus radiation therapy delivered 
before the use of definitive surgical treatment (so-called neoadju­
vant therapy) may improve the outcome, as seems to be the case for 
locally advanced breast cancer, head and neck cancers, and lung can­
cers, among others. In certain settings in which combined-modality 
therapy is intended, coordination among the medical oncologist, 
radiation oncologist, and surgeon is crucial to achieving optimal 
results. Sometimes the chemotherapy and radiation therapy need to 
be delivered sequentially and other times concurrently. Surgical pro­
cedures may precede or follow other treatment approaches. It is best 
for the treatment plan either to follow a standard protocol precisely or 
else to be part of an ongoing clinical research protocol evaluating new 
treatments. Ad hoc modifications of standard protocols are likely to 
compromise treatment results.
The choice of treatment approaches was formerly dominated by the 
local culture in both the university and the practice settings. However, 
it is now possible to gain access electronically to standard treatment 

550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
1,344,600
cancer deaths averted
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000

Year of death
protocols and to every approved clinical research study in North 
America through a personal computer interface with the Internet.1
The skilled physician also has much to offer the patient for whom 
curative therapy is no longer an option. Often a combination of guilt and 
frustration over the inability to cure the patient and the pressure of a busy 
schedule greatly limit the time a physician spends with a patient who is 
receiving only palliative care. Resist these forces. In addition to the medi­
cines administered to alleviate symptoms (see below), it is important to 
remember the comfort that is provided by holding the patient’s hand, 
continuing regular examinations, and taking time to talk.
■
■MANAGEMENT OF DISEASE AND 

TREATMENT COMPLICATIONS
Although medicine has been guided through centuries by the aphorism 
“primum non nocere,” first do no harm, it fits modern medicine poorly. 
As a practical matter, nearly everything we do in patient care has risk 
of doing harm; diagnostic tests, therapeutic interventions, and even 
physical diagnosis can lead to patient harm. A more relevant guide to 
modern medicine is “primum succerrere”; first hasten to help. Because 
cancer therapies are toxic (Chap. 78), patient management involves 
addressing complications of both the disease and its treatment as well 
as the complex psychosocial problems associated with cancer. In the 
short term during a course of curative therapy, the patient’s functional 
1The National Cancer Institute maintains a database called PDQ (Physician 
Data Query) that is accessible on the Internet under the name CancerNet at 
https://www.cancer.gov/publications/pdq. Information can be obtained through 
a facsimile machine using CancerFax by dialing 301-402-5874. Patient information is also provided by the National Cancer Institute in at least three formats: on the Internet via CancerNet at www.cancer.gov, through the CancerFax 
number listed above, or by calling 1-800-4-CANCER. The quality control for 
the information provided through these services is rigorous.

Mortality, males
Colorectum (5)
Esophagus (3)
Kaposi sarcoma (2)
Lip, oral cavity (2)
Lung (89)
Prostate (52)
Liver (24)
Stomach (8)
A
Mortality, females
Colorectum (4)
Stomach (2)
Esophagus (1)
Breast (112)
Cervix uteri (37)
Lung (23)
Liver (6)
B
FIGURE 73-5  Global maps showing most common cause of cancer mortality by country in 2022 among (A) men and (B) women. (Reproduced with permission from F Bray 
et al: Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 74:229, 2024.)
TABLE 73-4  Karnofsky Performance Index
PERFORMANCE 
STATUS
FUNCTIONAL CAPABILITY OF THE PATIENT

Normal; no complaints; no evidence of disease

Able to carry on normal activity; minor signs or symptoms of 
disease

Normal activity with effort; some signs or symptoms of 
disease

Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity or do active 
work

Requires occasional assistance but is able to care for most 
needs

Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical 

care

Disabled; requires special care and assistance

Severely disabled; hospitalization is indicated, although death 
is not imminent

Very sick; hospitalization is necessary; active supportive 
treatment is necessary

Moribund, fatal processes progressing rapidly

Dead

CHAPTER 73
Approach to the Patient with Cancer 
status may decline. Treatment-induced toxicity is less acceptable if 
the goal of therapy is palliation. The most common side effects of 
treatment are nausea and vomiting (see below), febrile neutropenia 
(Chap. 79), and myelosuppression (Chap. 78). Tools are now available 
to minimize the acute toxicity of cancer treatment.
TABLE 73-5  The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 
Performance Scale
ECOG grade 0: Fully active, able to carry on all predisease performance without 
restriction
ECOG grade 1: Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and 
able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, e.g., light housework, 
office work
ECOG grade 2: Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out 
any work activities. Up and about >50% of waking hours
ECOG grade 3: Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair >50% of 
waking hours
ECOG grade 4: Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally 
confined to bed or chair
ECOG grade 5: Dead
Source: Reproduced with permission from MM Oken et al: Toxicity and response 
criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5:649, 1982.

New symptoms developing in the course of cancer treatment should 
always be assumed to be reversible until proven otherwise. The fatal­
istic attribution of anorexia, weight loss, and jaundice to recurrent or 
progressive tumor could result in a patient dying from a reversible 
intercurrent cholecystitis. Intestinal obstruction may be due to revers­
ible adhesions rather than progressive tumor. Systemic infections, 
sometimes with unusual pathogens, may be a consequence of the 
immunosuppression associated with cancer therapy. Some drugs used 
to treat cancer or its complications (e.g., nausea) may produce central 
nervous system symptoms that look like metastatic disease or may 
mimic paraneoplastic syndromes such as the syndrome of inappropri­
ate antidiuretic hormone. A definitive diagnosis should be pursued and 
may even require a repeat biopsy.

A critical component of cancer management is assessing the 
response to treatment. In addition to a careful physical examination 
in which all sites of disease are physically measured and recorded in 
a flow chart by date, response assessment usually requires periodic 
repeating of imaging tests that were abnormal at the time of staging. 
If imaging tests have become normal, repeat biopsy of previously 
involved tissue is performed to document complete response by patho­
logic criteria. Biopsies are not usually required if there is macroscopic 
residual disease. A complete response is defined as disappearance of all 
evidence of disease, and a partial response as >50% reduction in the 
sum of the products of the perpendicular diameters of all measurable 
lesions. The determination of partial response may also be based on a 
30% decrease in the sums of the longest diameters of lesions (Response 
Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST]). Progressive disease is 
defined as the appearance of any new lesion or an increase of >25% in 
the sum of the products of the perpendicular diameters of all measur­
able lesions (or an increase of 20% in the sums of the longest diameters 
by RECIST). Tumor shrinkage or growth that does not meet any of 
these criteria is considered stable disease. Some sites of involvement 
(e.g., bone) or patterns of involvement (e.g., lymphangitic lung or dif­
fuse pulmonary infiltrates) are considered unmeasurable. No response 
is complete without biopsy documentation of their resolution, but 
partial responses may exclude their assessment unless clear objective 
progression has occurred.
PART 4
Oncology and Hematology
For some hematologic neoplasms, flow cytometric and genetic assays 
may determine the presence of residual tumor cells that escape micro­
scopic detection. In general, these techniques can reliably detect as few 
as 1 tumor cell among 10,000 cells. If such tests do not detect tumor cells, 
the patient is said to have minimal residual disease negativity, a finding 
generally associated with more durable remissions. Accumulating data 
are defining interventions in patients with minimal residual disease 
positivity that can extend remission duration and survival.
Tumor markers may be useful in patient management in certain 
tumors. Response to therapy may be difficult to gauge with certainty. 
However, some tumors produce or elicit the production of markers 
that can be measured in the serum or urine, and in a particular patient, 
rising and falling levels of the marker are usually associated with 
increasing or decreasing tumor burden, respectively. Some clinically 
useful tumor markers are shown in Table 73-6. Tumor markers are not 
in themselves specific enough to permit a diagnosis of malignancy to 
be made, but once a malignancy has been diagnosed and shown to be 
associated with elevated levels of a tumor marker, the marker can be 
used to assess response to treatment.
The recognition and treatment of depression are important compo­
nents of management. The incidence of depression in cancer patients 
is ~25% overall and may be greater in patients with greater debility. 
This diagnosis is likely in a patient with a depressed mood (dysphoria) 
and/or a loss of interest in pleasure (anhedonia) for at least 2 weeks. In 
addition, three or more of the following symptoms are usually present: 
appetite change, sleep problems, psychomotor retardation or agitation, 
fatigue, feelings of guilt or worthlessness, inability to concentrate, and 
suicidal ideation. Patients with these symptoms should receive therapy. 
Medical therapy with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor such as fluoxetine 
(10–20 mg/d), sertraline (50–150 mg/d), or paroxetine (10–20 mg/d) 
or a tricyclic antidepressant such as amitriptyline (50–100 mg/d) or 
desipramine (75–150 mg/d) should be tried, allowing 4–6 weeks 

TABLE 73-6  Tumor Markers
TUMOR 
MARKERS
CANCER
NONNEOPLASTIC 
CONDITIONS
Hormones
Human chorionic 
gonadotropin
Gestational trophoblastic disease, 
gonadal germ cell tumor
Pregnancy
Calcitonin
Medullary cancer of the thyroid
Catecholamines
Pheochromocytoma
Oncofetal Antigens
α Fetoprotein
Hepatocellular carcinoma, 
gonadal germ cell tumor
Cirrhosis, hepatitis
Carcinoembryonic 
antigen
Adenocarcinomas of the colon, 
pancreas, lung, breast, ovary
Pancreatitis, hepatitis, 
inflammatory bowel 
disease, smoking
Enzymes
Prostatic acid 
phosphatase
Prostate cancer
Prostatitis, prostatic 
hypertrophy
Neuron-specific 
enolase
Small-cell cancer of the lung, 
neuroblastoma
Lactate 
dehydrogenase
Lymphoma, Ewing’s sarcoma
Hepatitis, hemolytic 
anemia, many others
Tumor-Associated Proteins
Prostate-specific 
antigen
Prostate cancer
Prostatitis, prostatic 
hypertrophy
Monoclonal 
immunoglobulin
Myeloma
Infection, MGUS
CA-125
Ovarian cancer, some lymphomas
Menstruation, 
peritonitis, pregnancy
CA 19-9
Colon, pancreatic, breast cancer
Pancreatitis, ulcerative 
colitis
CD30
Hodgkin’s disease, anaplastic 
large-cell lymphoma
—
CD25
Hairy cell leukemia, adult T-cell 
leukemia/lymphoma
Hemophagocytic 
lymphohistiocytosis
Abbreviation: MGUS, monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance.
for response. Effective therapy should be continued at least 6 months 
after resolution of symptoms. If therapy is unsuccessful, other classes 
of antidepressants may be used. In addition to medication, psychoso­
cial interventions such as support groups, psychotherapy, and guided 
imagery may be of benefit.
Many patients opt for unproven or unsound approaches to treat­
ment when it appears that conventional medicine is unlikely to be 
curative. Those seeking such alternatives are often well educated and 
may be early in the course of their disease. Unsound approaches are 
usually hawked on the basis of unsubstantiated anecdotes and not only 
cannot help the patient but may be harmful. Physicians should strive to 
keep communications open and nonjudgmental, so that patients are 
more likely to discuss with the physician what they are actually doing. 
The appearance of unexpected toxicity may be an indication that a 
supplemental therapy is being taken.2
LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP/LATE 
COMPLICATIONS
At the completion of treatment, sites originally involved with tumor 
are reassessed, usually by radiography or imaging techniques, and any 
persistent abnormality is biopsied. If disease persists, the multidis­
ciplinary team discusses a new salvage treatment plan. If the patient 
has been rendered disease-free by the original treatment, the patient 
2Information about unsound methods may be obtained from the National 
Council Against Health Fraud, Box 1276, Loma Linda, CA 92354, or from the 
Center for Medical Consumers and Health Care Information, 237 Thompson 
Street, New York, NY 10012.

is followed regularly for disease recurrence. The optimal guidelines 
for follow-up care are not known. For many years, a routine practice 
has been to follow the patient monthly for 6–12 months, then every 
other month for a year, every 3 months for a year, every 4 months for 
a year, every 6 months for a year, and then annually. At each visit, a 
battery of laboratory and radiographic and imaging tests was obtained 
on the assumption that it is best to detect recurrent disease before it 
becomes symptomatic. However, where follow-up procedures have 
been examined, this assumption has been found to be untrue. Studies 
of breast cancer, melanoma, lung cancer, colon cancer, and lymphoma 
have all failed to support the notion that asymptomatic relapses are 
more readily cured by salvage therapy than symptomatic relapses. In 
view of the enormous cost of a full battery of diagnostic tests and their 
manifest lack of impact on survival, new guidelines are emerging for 
less frequent follow-up visits, during which the history and physical 
examination are the major investigations performed.
As time passes, the likelihood of recurrence of the primary cancer 
diminishes. For many types of cancer, survival for 5 years without 
recurrence is tantamount to cure. However, important medical prob­
lems can occur in patients treated for cancer and must be examined 
(Chap. 100). Some problems emerge as a consequence of the disease 
and some as a consequence of the treatment. An understanding of 
these disease- and treatment-related problems may help in their detec­
tion and management.
Despite these concerns, most patients who are cured of cancer 
return to normal lives.
■
■SUPPORTIVE CARE
In many ways, the success of cancer therapy depends on the success 
of the supportive care. Failure to control the symptoms of cancer and 
its treatment may lead patients to abandon curative therapy. Of equal 
importance, supportive care is a major determinant of quality of life. 
Even when life cannot be prolonged, the physician must strive to pre­
serve its quality. Quality-of-life measurements have become common 
endpoints of clinical research studies. Furthermore, palliative care has 
been shown to be cost-effective when approached in an organized 
fashion. A credo for oncology could be to cure sometimes, to extend 
life often, and to comfort always.
Management strategies for cancer pain, nausea, and other common 
side effects of cancer and its treatment are outlined in Chap. 74. An 
approach to end-of-life care is provided in Chap. 13.
Psychosocial Support 
The psychosocial needs of patients vary 
with their situation. Patients undergoing treatment experience fear, 
anxiety, and depression. Self-image is often seriously compromised 
by deforming surgery and loss of hair. Women who receive cosmetic 
advice that enables them to look better also feel better. Loss of control 
over how one spends time can contribute to the sense of vulnerability. 
Juggling the demands of work and family with the demands of treat­
ment may create enormous stresses. Sexual dysfunction is highly 
prevalent and needs to be discussed openly with the patient. An empa­
thetic health care team is sensitive to the individual patient’s needs and 
permits negotiation where such flexibility will not adversely affect the 
course of treatment.
Cancer survivors have other sets of difficulties. Patients may have 
fears associated with the termination of a treatment they associate with 
their continued survival. Adjustments are required to physical losses 
and handicaps, real and perceived. Patients may be preoccupied with 
minor physical problems. They perceive a decline in their job mobility 
and view themselves as less desirable workers. They may be victims 
of job and/or insurance discrimination. Patients may experience dif­
ficulty reentering their normal past life. They may feel guilty for hav­
ing survived and may carry a sense of vulnerability to colds and other 
illnesses. Perhaps the most pervasive and threatening concern is the 
ever-present fear of relapse (the Damocles syndrome).
Patients in whom therapy has been unsuccessful have other prob­
lems related to the end of life.
Death and Dying 
The most common causes of death in patients 
with cancer are infection (leading to circulatory failure), respiratory 

failure, hepatic failure, and renal failure. Intestinal blockage may lead 
to inanition and starvation. Central nervous system disease may lead 
to seizures, coma, and central hypoventilation. About 70% of patients 
develop dyspnea preterminally. However, many months usually pass 
between the diagnosis of cancer and the occurrence of these compli­
cations, and during this period, the patient is severely affected by the 
possibility of death. The path of unsuccessful cancer treatment usually 
occurs in three phases. First, there is optimism at the hope of cure; 
when the tumor recurs, there is the acknowledgment of an incurable 
disease, and the goal of palliative therapy is embraced in the hope of 
being able to live with disease; finally, at the disclosure of imminent 
death, another adjustment in outlook takes place. The patient imagines 
the worst in preparation for the end of life and may go through stages 
of adjustment to the diagnosis. These stages include denial, isola­
tion, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance, and hope. Of course, 
patients do not all progress through all the stages or proceed through 
them in the same order or at the same rate. Nevertheless, developing 
an understanding of how the patient has been affected by the diagnosis 
and is coping with it is an important goal of patient management.

It is best to speak frankly with the patient and the family regarding 
the likely course of disease. These discussions can be difficult for the 
physician as well as for the patient and family. The critical features of 
the interaction are to reassure the patient and family that everything 
that can be done to provide comfort will be done. They will not be 
abandoned. Many patients prefer to be cared for in their homes or in a 
hospice setting rather than a hospital. The American College of Physi­
cians has published a book called Home Care Guide for Cancer: How 
to Care for Family and Friends at Home that teaches an approach to 
successful problem-solving in home care. With appropriate planning, 
it should be possible to provide the patient with the necessary medical 
care as well as the psychological and spiritual support that will prevent 
the isolation and depersonalization that can attend in-hospital death.
CHAPTER 73
Approach to the Patient with Cancer 
The care of dying patients may take a toll on the physician. A “burn­
out” syndrome has been described that is characterized by fatigue, dis­
engagement from patients and colleagues, and a loss of self-fulfillment. 
Efforts at stress reduction, maintenance of a balanced life, and setting 
realistic goals may combat this disorder.
End-of-Life Decisions 
Unfortunately, a smooth transition in 
treatment goals from curative to palliative may not be possible in all 
cases because of the occurrence of serious treatment-related compli­
cations or rapid disease progression. Vigorous and invasive medical 
support for a reversible disease or treatment complication is assumed 
to be justified. However, if the reversibility of the condition is in doubt, 
the patient’s wishes determine the level of medical care. These wishes 
should be elicited before the terminal phase of illness and reviewed 
periodically. Information about advance directives can be obtained 
from the American Association of Retired Persons, 601 E Street, NW, 
Washington, DC 20049, 202-434-2277, or Choice in Dying, 250 West 
57th Street, New York, NY 10107, 212-366-5540. Some states allow 
physicians to assist patients who choose to end their lives. This subject 
is challenging from an ethical and a medical point of view. Discussions 
of end-of-life decisions should be candid and involve clear informed 
consent, waiting periods, second opinions, and documentation. A full 
discussion of end-of-life management is provided in Chap. 13. 
■
■FURTHER READING
Bray F et al: Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of 
incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. 
CA Cancer J Clin 74:229, 2024.
Hesketh PJ et al: Antiemetics: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol 
38:2782, 2020.
Kelley AS, Morrison RS: Palliative care for the seriously ill. N Engl J 
Med 373:747, 2015.
Martini RS et al: Integrative approaches for cancer pain management. 
Curr Oncol Rep 26:691, 2024.
Samala RV et al: Frequently asked questions about managing cancer 
pain: An update. Cleve Clin Med J 88:183, 2021.
Siegel RL et al: Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 74:12, 2024.