Expert Discusses the Impact of Longer Survival After Cancer Diagnosis

A 2026 cancer statistics report from the American Cancer Society marks a turning point in the cancer landscape: approximately seven in 10 people diagnosed with cancer in the United States now live five years or longer after their diagnosis. The milestone, detailed in the group’s 2026 Cancer Facts & Figures report, reflects decades of progress in early detection, precision medicine and immunotherapy.

However, the data also highlight a more complex reality.Researchers project approximately 2.1 million new cancer diagnoses and 626,000 cancer-related deaths this year, with incidence rising in several disease types, including breast, prostate, pancreatic and endometrial cancers.

To better understand what is driving these data, and what gaps remain, Dr. Amrita Krishnan sat down for an interview with CURE. In the conversation, she discussed how advances such as cellular therapies and bispecific antibodies are transforming outcomes in care and why equitable access to these treatments remains a major challenge and how the definition of successful cancer care is evolving beyond survival alone.

Krishnan is the Nason-Hollingsworth Chair, Multiple Myeloma; executive medical director, Hematology; director, Judy and Bernard Briskin Multiple Myeloma Center; and professor, Department of Hematology and Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, all at City of Hope Orange County.

CURE: The 2026 American Cancer Society report shows that approximately 70% of patients now survive five years or longer after a cancer diagnosis. From your perspective, what are the most significant drivers behind this milestone?

Krishnan: This milestone reflects sustained advances across multiple fronts in cancer care. Precision medicine has allowed us to better understand disease biology and tailor therapies accordingly, while earlier detection has improved outcomes for many cancers.

In hematologic malignancies such as multiple myeloma, the introduction of T cell directed therapies, CAR T and bispecific antibodies has fundamentally changed survival expectations. Just as important has been the development of multidisciplinary care models that integrate clinical expertise, research and supportive care.

Although survival rates are improving, incidence continues to rise for several cancers. How should this dual trend influence research priorities and prevention strategies moving forward?

This dual trend highlights the need for a balanced research agenda. Rising incidence in certain cancers underscores the importance of understanding disease pathogenesis: why cancers develop, who is at risk, and how environmental, genetic, and lifestyle factors interact. That knowledge is critical to advancing early detection and prevention strategies.

Improving outcomes requires both stopping cancer earlier in its course and continuing to refine treatments for those with established disease.

As more patients live longer after treatment, how is the definition of “successful cancer care” evolving, particularly when it comes to survivorship and quality of life?

In diseases like multiple myeloma, the definition of successful cancer care is evolving rapidly. Historically, treatment often meant continuous therapy indefinitely. Today, the paradigm is shifting toward the goal of cure – or at least deep, durable remissions – with fixed-duration therapy rather than lifelong treatment.

Success is no longer just about prolonging survival, but about enabling patients to live well after cancer, with fewer long-term toxicities and greater quality of life. This shift reflects both scientific progress and a deeper commitment to survivorship as a central outcome of care.

What gaps remain in survivorship care, and where do you see the greatest opportunity to improve long-term outcomes for patients?

One of the most pressing gaps is access, particularly access to advanced therapies such as cellular therapies and bispecific antibodies. These treatments can be transformative, but availability remains uneven due to geographic, financial, and system-level barriers.

From a survivorship perspective, we also need better long-term planning for patients who receive these novel therapies, including monitoring for late effects and supporting recovery over time.

The greatest opportunity lies in expanding equitable access to cutting-edge treatments while building survivorship models that follow patients well beyond active therapy.

Looking ahead, what emerging areas of research or care delivery give you the most optimism for continued progress in cancer outcomes?

I’m particularly optimistic about the next generation of immunotherapies. Newer CAR T-cell approaches, including in vivo CAR T therapies, have the potential to simplify treatment and broaden access. At City of Hope, we are currently opening clinical trials investigating in vivo CAR T therapy in multiple myeloma.

We’ve also been part of phase 1 trials evaluating trispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma, as well as studies exploring entirely new therapeutic targets in this disease. These innovations represent a future where treatments are not only more effective, but more accessible, and ultimately more transformative for patients.

Transcript has been edited for clarity and conciseness.

References

1. “Cancer statistics, 2026,” by The American Cancer Society. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.

For more news on cancer updates, research and education, don’t forget to subscribe to CURE®’s newsletters here.