Dear Colleagues! This is Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #1312 for Pharma Veterans. Pharma Veterans Blogs are published by Asrar Qureshi on its dedicated site https://pharmaveterans.com. Please email to pharmaveterans2017@gmail.com for publishing your contributions here.
Preamble
This post is based on a McKinsey article. The core McKinsey source is Bob Li’s August 31, 2026 conversation, which outlines the MARS approach around next-generation evidence generation, community education, cancer networks, and international acceleration/collaboration. The wider cancer-burden figures and prevention/early-detection context come from WHO and IARC. Link at the end.
Can We Eliminate Cancer? The Real Revolution May Be Access, Not Discovery
Cancer has long been portrayed as an enemy that science must defeat through better drugs, better diagnostics and better technology. And there is good reason for that optimism. Cancer research is advancing rapidly, with new therapies, precision medicine, immunotherapy, artificial intelligence and increasingly sophisticated diagnostic technologies transforming what is possible.
Yet one of the most provocative arguments emerging from the oncology community is that the biggest obstacle to eliminating cancer may no longer be scientific discovery. It may be access.
That is the central message of Bob Li, AstraZeneca’s Senior Vice President and Global Head of Medical Affairs, Oncology, in a recent McKinsey conversation about what he calls the “MARS” mission—the Medical Affairs Revolution Spirit. His argument is deceptively simple: the world already possesses many of the technologies and scientific capabilities needed to transform cancer care, but too many patients remain disconnected from them. The challenge, therefore, is to move from isolated breakthroughs to system-wide access at scale.
The uncomfortable reality of access
Cancer remains one of the world’s leading causes of death. According to the World Health Organization’s latest global cancer data, cancer caused nearly 10 million deaths in 2024, almost one in six deaths worldwide. The International Agency for Research on Cancer estimates that 20.6 million people were diagnosed with cancer in 2024, and the global number of new cases is projected to rise substantially in coming decades.
But the global cancer crisis is not simply a story about the number of patients. It is also a story about who gets access to the best science.
Li points to a striking figure: in the United States, despite decades of investment in clinical research, fewer than 7 percent of cancer patients participate in clinical trials. That means that the overwhelming majority of patients are excluded from opportunities to access investigational treatments and from contributing to the evidence base that determines tomorrow’s cancer care.
The disparity becomes even more consequential internationally. Patients living in rural, remote or resource-constrained communities may face long journeys to specialist centres, shortages of oncologists, limited diagnostic capacity, inadequate infrastructure and financial barriers. A breakthrough that cannot reach the patient is, ultimately, an unrealized breakthrough.
From centralized medicine to distributed care
For decades, advanced cancer care has been concentrated in major academic and comprehensive cancer centres. These institutions remain indispensable because they concentrate expertise, technology, research infrastructure and multidisciplinary teams. But the model has a limitation: patients are geographically dispersed while expertise is concentrated. The emerging alternative is to distribute aspects of cancer care without compromising quality.
Telemedicine, remote monitoring, digital diagnostics and connected healthcare platforms make it increasingly possible for specialists to support patients without requiring every patient to travel repeatedly to a major centre. Instead of asking patients to travel to the system, bring more of the system to the patient.
Local clinics can undertake appropriate laboratory tests and imaging. Digital platforms can connect community physicians with specialists. Remote monitoring can reduce unnecessary hospital visits. Specialist centres can concentrate on the interventions that genuinely require advanced facilities. The result could be a healthcare system that is both more accessible and more efficient.
Clinical trials need a revolution too
The same principle applies to clinical research. Traditional clinical trials often depend on patients travelling to specialized research centres. That creates an invisible selection mechanism: people who live nearby, have financial resources, flexible employment, transportation and strong social support are more likely to participate.
Decentralized clinical trials challenge this model. Instead of conducting every component of a trial at a major academic centre, appropriate elements can be performed closer to where patients live. Local laboratories, imaging centres, community physicians and digital monitoring tools can become part of the research infrastructure.
This could dramatically broaden the diversity of trial participants. A more geographically and socially diverse trial system can therefore produce better evidence while simultaneously improving equity.
Early detection may be the biggest opportunity
Perhaps the most transformative possibility lies even earlier in the cancer pathway.
Treating advanced cancer is enormously complex. Detecting cancer, or even identifying high-risk biological changes, before the disease becomes advanced could radically improve outcomes.
This is particularly important because cancer prevention and early detection can reach far more people than expensive late-stage treatment. WHO notes that many cancers can be prevented, and that early detection followed by effective treatment can cure many cancers.
The future of oncology, therefore, may not be simply about inventing stronger medicines. It may be about finding disease earlier, preventing it where possible and matching patients to the right intervention before irreversible damage occurs.
International collaboration is not optional
Another major lesson from the MARS vision is that cancer cannot be solved through isolated national systems. Cancer research is global, but regulatory systems, clinical-trial requirements, data standards and healthcare infrastructures often operate in national silos. Greater international alignment could allow clinical trials to recruit patients across borders, generate evidence more rapidly and make promising treatments available to diverse populations.
This is particularly important for lower- and middle-income countries, where cancer burdens are growing while health systems may have fewer resources. Inequality in cancer outcomes is not simply a technological problem. It is a systems problem.
The role of pharmaceutical companies must evolve
One of the more interesting ideas in Li’s argument is his rejection of the traditional divide between academia and industry. The pharmaceutical industry is sometimes viewed primarily as a commercial actor, while universities and public health institutions are regarded as the guardians of scientific and social objectives. That distinction is becoming increasingly inadequate.
Drug companies possess resources, global networks, data, development expertise and the ability to scale innovations. Academic institutions provide scientific independence, specialized expertise and deep clinical knowledge. Governments create policy and regulatory frameworks. Community health systems provide proximity to patients.
None can solve the cancer problem alone. The emerging model is therefore one of co-creation.
Can cancer really be eliminated?
The phrase “eliminate cancer” can sound almost impossibly ambitious. Cancer is not one disease but hundreds of biologically different diseases. New cancers will continue to emerge, populations are ageing and risk factors remain widespread. Yet the ambition should not be dismissed simply because it is difficult.
The WHO’s 2026 Global Status Report on Cancer emphasizes both the scale of the global burden and the persistent gap between what is scientifically possible and what health systems actually deliver. That gap is precisely where the MARS vision is focused.
The next great cancer revolution may not come from one miraculous drug. It may emerge from the convergence of prevention, early detection, precision medicine, decentralized clinical trials, AI, telemedicine, real-world evidence and international collaboration.
From breakthrough science to breakthrough access
The history of medicine repeatedly demonstrates that discovery alone does not transform population health. A vaccine must reach people. A diagnostic test must be affordable and available. A medicine must move through regulatory and supply systems. A clinical trial must recruit representative patients. A specialist must be accessible to someone who lives hundreds of kilometres away.
The ultimate measure of innovation is therefore not what science can do in a laboratory. It is what an ordinary patient can actually receive.
Concluded.
Disclaimers: Pictures in these blogs are taken from free resources at Pexels, Pixabay, Unsplash, and Google. Credit is given where available. If a copyright claim is lodged, we shall remove the picture with appropriate regrets.
For most blogs, I research from several sources which are open to public. Their links are mentioned under references. There is no intent to infringe upon anyone’s copyrights. If, any claim is lodged, it will be acknowledged and duly recognized immediately.
Reference:
