How Can We Reduce Cancer Rates?
State of the Union Report
- The United States ranks 12th highest globally in cancer incidence at 362 cases per 100,000 people.
- Australia, Finland, and Denmark have the highest cancer survival rates through early detection programs.
- Countries with universal screening programs reduce cancer mortality by 20-40%.
- Tobacco control is responsible for 30% of cancer cases globally and is the single most effective intervention.
- The U.S. 5-year cancer survival rate of 67% ranks 7th globally but trails Australia (70%) and Japan (68%).
- National cancer prevention programs in Nordic countries have reduced incidence by 15% over 20 years.
Section 1: Top 35 Countries with the Lowest Cancer Rates
Source: GLOBOCAN 2022 (Global Cancer Observatory), World Health Organization (WHO). Data relates to the year 2022.
United States Rank: The United States does not appear on the list of the top 35 countries with the lowest cancer rates. According to GLOBOCAN 2022 data, the United States has an age-standardized cancer incidence rate of approximately 363.2 per 100,000 people, which is among the highest in the world.
The elevated rate in the United States is attributable to several factors: high rates of obesity and physical inactivity in the population; significant tobacco consumption, including historical rates that continue to manifest in cancer diagnoses; high consumption of processed and ultra-processed foods; environmental exposures to carcinogens including industrial pollutants and agricultural chemicals; heavy use of alcohol; and a healthcare system that, while conducting more cancer screenings than many lower-ranked countries (thereby detecting more cancers), faces disparities in access and preventive care.
The advanced age of the U.S. population also plays a role, as cancer rates rise with age. In the most recent year of data (2022), the United States recorded approximately 1,958,310 new cancer cases and 609,820 cancer deaths, maintaining its position well outside the lowest-rate grouping.
References for Section 1:
1. GLOBOCAN 2022 — Global Cancer Observatory, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC): (gco.iarc.fr)
2. World Health Organization — Cancer Fact Sheets: (www.who.int)
3. National Cancer Institute — U.S. Cancer Statistics: (www.cancer.gov)
Section 2: What Other Countries Have Done to Decrease Their Cancer Rates
The 8 Top Rated Countries with the Lowest Cancer Rates
Niger
Niger's extremely low cancer incidence rate is linked to a combination of demographic, dietary, and environmental factors reinforced by limited but targeted public health interventions. The population is predominantly young, reducing age-related cancer risks.
The national diet is largely plant-based, centered on millet, sorghum, and legumes, with minimal processed food consumption.
The Ministry of Public Health has implemented a National Cancer Control Plan under the guidance of the WHO Africa region, focusing on prevention education at the community level, training of primary health workers to recognize early signs of cancer, and the establishment of referral pathways to regional hospitals.
www.aortic-africa.orgKey organizations include the Ministry of Public Health (www.sante.gouv.ne), WHO Niger Country Office (www.afro.who.int/countries/niger), and the African Organisation for Research and Training in Cancer (AORTIC) ().
Government-funded campaigns target tobacco avoidance and encourage traditional dietary practices.
www.gavi.orgVaccination programs against Hepatitis B, which causes liver cancer, have been scaled up through GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance ().
Environmental carcinogen exposure remains low due to limited industrial activity.
افغانستان (Afghanistan)
Afghanistan's low measured cancer rate largely reflects challenges in detection and reporting rather than uniquely protective national policies; however, certain structural and lifestyle factors contribute.
The population is young, the diet is predominantly whole-food and low in processed products, and tobacco use, while present, has historically been less prevalent than in high-income nations in certain demographics.
The Afghanistan's Ministry of Public Health (moph.gov.af) has partnered with WHO and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to integrate cancer awareness into community health programs.
Hepatitis B vaccination efforts, supported by UNICEF Afghanistan (www.unicef.org/afghanistan), have reduced liver cancer risk.
The National Cancer Control Program includes training of healthcare providers and development of essential cancer medicines lists. Carcinogen exposure from industrial sources remains low due to limited industry.
Al-Yaman (Yemen)
Al-Yaman's recorded low cancer incidence is substantially affected by diagnostic limitations; nonetheless, several factors reduce rates.
Dietary patterns are largely traditional, featuring legumes, vegetables, whole grains, and limited processed foods.
The Ministry of Public Health and Population, in coordination with WHO Al-Yaman (www.emro.who.int/yem/), has maintained basic cancer screening and awareness programs despite severe infrastructure challenges.
Hepatitis B and HPV vaccination programs supported by international organizations including Doctors Without Borders (www.msf.org) and UNICEF reduce virus-related cancers.
Community health education programs emphasize avoidance of tobacco, particularly the traditional use of qat, which has carcinogenic properties.
The WHO's Essential Medicines Program ensures basic cancer treatment drugs are distributed in accessible areas.
Soomaaliya (Somalia)
Soomaaliya maintains a low age-standardized cancer rate due to demographic youth, traditional dietary patterns, and ongoing international public health efforts.
The Federal Ministry of Health and Human Services (moh.gov.so), with WHO Soomaaliya (www.emro.who.int/som/), has established cancer education programs within primary healthcare. GAVI-supported vaccination against Hepatitis B has reduced liver cancer incidence.
Community health workers trained by UNICEF Soomaaliya (www.unicef.org/somalia) provide outreach on cancer prevention including sun protection, avoidance of tobacco, and nutrition guidance.
Physicians for Human Rights (www.phr.org) has supported health worker capacity building.
The traditional plant-rich diet, combined with high physical activity levels due to pastoral livelihoods, contributes to lower obesity-related cancer risks.
Ityop'iya (Ethiopia)
Ityop'iya has implemented a structured National Cancer Control Strategy coordinated through the Ministry of Health (www.moh.gov.et) and the Ethiopian Public Health Institute (www.ephi.gov.et). The strategy encompasses primary prevention through population-wide campaigns against tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and unhealthy diets; secondary prevention through expansion of cervical cancer screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and HPV testing; and tertiary care through establishment of specialized oncology units at referral hospitals.
Ityop'iya has one of Africa's more developed cancer registries, the Addis Ababa Cancer Registry, contributing to improved surveillance.
The HPV vaccination program, rolled out in collaboration with GAVI (www.gavi.org), targets adolescent girls.
The African Cancer Registry Network (AFCRN) (www.afcrn.org) supports data collection. Traditional diet rich in injera (teff-based), legumes, and vegetables provides nutritional cancer-protective factors. The government has also enacted tobacco control laws aligned with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) (www.who.int/fctc).
Guatemala
www.ligacancerguatemala.orgGuatemala's National Cancer Control Program operates under the Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (www.mspas.gob.gt) in partnership with the Liga Nacional Contra el Cancer (National League Against Cancer) ().
Key initiatives include the National Cervical Cancer Screening Program, which has expanded VIA and colposcopy services to rural areas; an HPV vaccination program for adolescent girls integrated into the national immunization schedule; and public education campaigns on tobacco cessation.
The Instituto de Cancerologia (INCAN) (www.incan.edu.gt) serves as the national cancer referral center and conducts clinical research.
Guatemala has ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and implemented smoke-free environment laws.
Partnerships with the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) (www.paho.org) support capacity building and data collection.
The traditional Guatemalan diet, rich in corn, beans, and fresh vegetables, contributes to lower rates of certain diet-related cancers.
Kampuchea (Cambodia)
www.wpro.who.int/cambodiaKampuchea's National Strategic Plan for Cancer Prevention and Control is coordinated by the Ministry of Health (www.moh.gov.kh) with technical support from WHO Kampuchea ().
Key programs include the National Cervical Cancer Prevention Program offering free screening and treatment for precancerous lesions; Hepatitis B vaccination integrated into the childhood immunization program with GAVI support (www.gavi.org); and HPV vaccination for adolescent girls.
The Khmer Soviet Friendship Hospital's oncology department and Siem Reap Provincial Hospital serve as main cancer treatment centers.
The National Cancer Registry, established with WHO support, tracks incidence trends. Kampuchea has enacted comprehensive tobacco control legislation including pictorial health warnings, smoke-free zones, and advertising restrictions.
The National AIDS, STI and Hepatitis Program (NCHADS) (www.nchads.org) manages viral hepatitis, a key liver cancer risk. Traditional Cambodian diet incorporating vegetables, herbs, and fish provides protective dietary elements.
Bolivia
Bolivia's cancer prevention framework is administered through the Ministry of Health (www.minsalud.gob.bo) and the National Cancer Program (Programa Nacional de Control del Cancer).
www.paho.org/boliviaThe cervical cancer prevention program is among the most developed, offering VIA screening and cryotherapy at primary care facilities nationwide, with technical support from PAHO ().
Bolivia has implemented the HPV vaccine for girls aged 9 to 13 in the national immunization schedule. The Hepatitis B vaccine is part of the routine childhood schedule, reducing liver cancer risk.
Tobacco control measures adopted under the WHO FCTC include smoke-free environment laws and advertising bans.
The Instituto Nacional de Laboratorios de Salud (INLASA) (www.inlasa.gob.bo) supports diagnostic capacity.
Bolivia has adopted the Essential Medicines List to ensure access to cancer treatment drugs.
Community health education programs delivered by rural health promoters (Agentes Comunitarios de Salud) target cancer awareness. Traditional Andean dietary patterns featuring potatoes, quinoa, and legumes contribute to lower obesity-related cancer risks.
Other Countries with Low Cancer Rates
Australia
Australia reduced cancer mortality through aggressive tobacco taxation, plain cigarette packaging laws, and strict advertising bans enforced by the Australian Department of Health . (www.health.gov.au)
The country also runs the SunSmart program which educates citizens about ultraviolet radiation exposure and encourages protective clothing and sunscreen use.
National bowel, breast, and cervical cancer screening programs detect disease earlier and improve treatment outcomes.
Nippon (Japan)
Nippon expanded municipal cancer screening programs administered through the Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare . (www.mhlw.go.jp)
High participation rates in stomach and colorectal screening allow physicians to detect cancers at earlier stages.
Public health policy encourages diets rich in fish, vegetables, and fermented foods which may lower certain cancer risks.Suomi (Finland)
Suomi established a comprehensive national cancer registry operated by the Suomi Cancer Registry . (www.cancerregistry.fi)
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health coordinates organized national screening invitations for breast and cervical cancer.
Strict occupational safety regulations reduce exposure to industrial carcinogens in workplaces.
Sverige (Sweden)
The Sverige Public Health Agency implements a national cancer control strategy focusing on prevention and early detection. (www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se)
Regional Cancer Centers coordinate treatment quality improvements and screening programs.
Nationwide HPV vaccination significantly lowers cervical cancer risk in younger populations.
Norge (Norway)
The Norge Directorate of Health manages prevention programs including colorectal and breast cancer screening. (www.helsedirektoratet.no)
The Cancer Registry of Norge provides detailed epidemiological data used to guide national health policy.
Government nutrition campaigns promote physical activity and reduced tobacco use.
Singapore
Singapore's Ministry of Health developed a centralized cancer prevention strategy emphasizing screening and lifestyle change. (www.moh.gov.sg)
The Health Promotion Board subsidizes mammography and colorectal screening services.
Strict tobacco control laws limit smoking through taxation, retail restrictions, and advertising bans.
Hanguk (South Korea)
Hanguk operates a large National Cancer Screening Program coordinated by the National Cancer Center . (www.ncc.re.kr)
The Ministry of Health and Welfare subsidizes screening for stomach, liver, breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers.
Public awareness campaigns encourage routine medical examinations and early diagnosis.
Schweiz (Switzerland)
The Federal Office of Public Health oversees preventive health policies including cancer screening guidance. (www.bag.admin.ch)
Environmental regulations limit industrial carcinogenic emissions.
The healthcare system emphasizes preventive medicine through routine physician consultations
Cancer Rates by World Region (Approximate Age-Standardized Rates per 100,000)
Source: GLOBOCAN 2022 / WHO Global Health Observatory. Rates are age-standardized incidence rates per 100,000 population.
References for Section 2:
1. WHO Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN): (gco.iarc.fr)
2. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO): (www.paho.org)
3. GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance: (www.gavi.org)
4. African Organisation for Research and Training in Cancer (AORTIC): (www.aortic-africa.org)
5. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: (www.who.int)
6. African Cancer Registry Network (AFCRN): (www.afcrn.org)
7. Instituto de Cancerologia de Guatemala (INCAN): (www.incan.edu.gt)
8. Ministry of Health Kampuchea: (www.moh.gov.kh)
9. Ministry of Health Bolivia: (www.minsalud.gob.bo)
10. Ethiopian Public Health Institute: (www.ephi.gov.et)
Section 3: What the U.S. Could Do to Decrease Its Cancer Rates
Expand nationwide access to preventive cancer screenings through Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance coverage mandates.
Increase federal tobacco excise taxes to discourage smoking and youth tobacco initiation.
Implement national plain packaging requirements for cigarette and tobacco products.
Expand federal funding for National Cancer Institute prevention and early detection research.
Strengthen Environmental Protection Agency regulation of carcinogenic industrial emissions.
Require chemical manufacturers to disclose carcinogenic risks associated with products.
Expand occupational exposure monitoring programs through OSHA.
Increase funding for community health clinics providing cancer screening services.
Promote nationwide HPV vaccination to prevent cervical and other cancers.
Expand hepatitis B vaccination coverage to reduce liver cancer risk.
Launch national campaigns encouraging healthy dietary habits and reduced processed food consumption.
Promote physical activity through urban planning that supports walking and cycling.
Increase funding for early detection technology research including imaging and biomarker testing.
Improve rural healthcare infrastructure to provide access to screening services.
Expand cancer registry systems to improve national epidemiological data collection.
Provide tax incentives to employers implementing workplace wellness programs.
Strengthen air pollution standards linked to cancer risk factors.
Regulate exposure to carcinogenic chemicals in consumer products.
Expand genetic counseling and testing for high risk individuals.
Increase federal grants supporting cancer prevention research.
Improve food labeling requirements related to carcinogenic substances.
Expand funding for survivorship and long term cancer care programs.
Support innovation in cancer diagnostics through public private partnerships.
Increase federal support for behavioral health programs targeting smoking cessation.
Encourage state health departments to develop cancer reduction action plans.
Expand school health education addressing cancer risk behaviors.
Improve coordination between federal research agencies studying cancer causes.
Fund national public awareness campaigns explaining cancer prevention strategies.
Encourage pharmaceutical innovation targeting early stage cancers.
Establish a national interagency task force to coordinate cancer prevention policies
The United States records among the highest cancer incidence rates in the world, with approximately 363.2 new cases per 100,000 people annually. Reducing this burden requires a sustained, fully funded, and accountable national strategy addressing every dimension of cancer risk: primary prevention, early detection, equitable access to care, environmental regulation, dietary reform, occupational safety, and research investment.
The following describes, in general terms, what could be done and who could do it, across government agencies, government officials, corporations, and private individuals.
A. What Government Agencies Could Do
The National Cancer Institute (NCI) could substantially increase funding for cancer prevention research, expand the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program to track all cancer types and modifiable risk factors, and disseminate findings to state and local health departments.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) could expand the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program to every state, territory, and tribal entity; launch sustained national campaigns against tobacco use, obesity, alcohol consumption, and physical inactivity; and strengthen the National Cancer Registry to capture complete, timely incidence and mortality data.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could finalize regulations reducing nicotine in combustible tobacco products to non-addictive levels, require premarket review of all electronic cigarette and heated tobacco products, remove known carcinogens from the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) food list, mandate front-of-package cancer risk warnings on food products containing carcinogenic additives, and accelerate approval of cancer prevention drugs and vaccines.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could update permissible exposure limits for all International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Group 1 and Group 2A carcinogens in air, water, and soil; implement an Environmental Cancer Justice Program requiring health impact assessments for industrial facilities in low-income and minority communities; and expand the Toxics Release Inventory to cover all priority carcinogens.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) could update permissible occupational exposure limits for asbestos, benzene, formaldehyde, silica, heavy metals, and other workplace carcinogens; require annual carcinogen exposure assessments in high-risk industries; and mandate health screenings for workers in occupations with documented cancer risk.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) could revise the Dietary Guidelines for Americans to explicitly address cancer prevention, expand subsidies for fresh fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and phase out subsidies for commodities primarily processed into ultra-processed food products linked to elevated cancer risk.
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) could fund a national network of mobile cancer screening units for rural and underserved populations and require federally qualified health centers to offer comprehensive cancer screening services.
B. What Government Officials Could Do
The Secretary of Health and Human Services could serve as the principal federal official responsible for a National Cancer Reduction Plan, convene an interagency Cancer Reduction Task Force, and submit annual progress reports to Congress.
The Director of the NCI could oversee the national cancer research investment and coordinate federal research priorities across prevention, early detection, health disparities, and precision medicine.
The Surgeon General could issue a Surgeon General’s Report on Cancer Prevention and lead a sustained national public education campaign on modifiable cancer risk factors.
The Commissioner of Food and Drugs could exercise all statutory authority to reduce food-borne and tobacco-related carcinogen exposure across the American population.
The Administrator of the EPA could deploy all available regulatory tools under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce population-level carcinogen exposure.
The Secretary of Agriculture could integrate cancer prevention objectives into all USDA nutrition assistance programs and dietary guidance. Governors and state health commissioners who accept federal funding could incorporate cancer reduction targets into state health improvement plans and submit biennial implementation reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
C. What Corporations Could Do
Food and beverage manufacturers could reformulate products to eliminate or reduce carcinogenic additives and display front-of-package cancer risk information on high-risk items.
Fast food and restaurant chains with 20 or more locations could provide cancer risk information for high-risk menu items on menus and menu boards.
Tobacco and electronic cigarette manufacturers could be prohibited from marketing reduced-risk claims without prior FDA authorization, could contribute no less than $500,000,000 annually into a federally administered National Smoking Cessation Fund, and could cease adding flavoring agents that increase product appeal to minors.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers could maintain adequate national supplies of all essential cancer medicines, could not increase prices on those medicines beyond the Consumer Price Index plus two percent per year, and could share clinical trial data with the NCI within twelve months of drug approval.
Chemical manufacturers could submit cancer risk assessments for all new substances before commercial distribution, fund cleanup of contaminated sites linked to elevated community cancer rates, and invest in development of non-carcinogenic alternatives to IARC Group 1 carcinogens currently in production.
Health insurers could cover all USPSTF Grade A and Grade B cancer screening recommendations without cost-sharing and could cover FDA-approved cancer prevention medications for high-risk individuals.
Employers with fifty or more employees could provide health insurance covering comprehensive cancer prevention and screening, enforce smoke-free workplace policies, offer employee wellness programs that include cancer prevention education and cessation support, and conduct annual health screenings for workers in carcinogen-exposed roles at employer expense.
D. What Private Individuals Could Do
Individual Americans play a critical role in reducing cancer rates.
Every person is strongly encouraged to receive HPV and Hepatitis B vaccinations in accordance with CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations; to adhere to USPSTF cancer screening guidelines for their age group and risk profile;
to avoid all tobacco products and seek free or low-cost cessation support through federally funded programs;
to limit alcohol consumption in accordance with federal dietary guidelines;
to maintain a healthy body weight through regular physical activity and a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes while limiting processed meats and ultra-processed foods; and
to adopt sun-protective behaviors including use of sunscreen, protective clothing, and avoidance of tanning beds.
Individuals who become aware of potential carcinogen releases into the environment are encouraged to report such incidents to the EPA or state environmental agencies, with full whistleblower protections applying to good-faith reports.
Participation in federally funded cancer prevention and screening research studies is encouraged but entirely voluntary, and no individual may be coerced or penalized for declining.
Community-based organizations, faith institutions, and schools are encouraged to deliver culturally competent cancer prevention education with support from federal and state public health programs.
Taken together, consistent action at the individual level, supported by robust government policy and corporate accountability, has the demonstrated potential to reduce U.S. cancer incidence and mortality by 30 to 40 percent over the next two decades.
Section 4: References
1. National Cancer Institute (NCI): (www.cancer.gov)
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — Cancer: (www.cdc.gov)
3. American Cancer Society: (www.cancer.org)
4. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF): (www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org)
5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — Cancer Risk: (www.epa.gov)
6. GLOBOCAN 2022 — Global Cancer Observatory: (gco.iarc.fr)
7. World Health Organization — Cancer: (www.who.int)
8. World Health Organization (WHO) FCTC Secretariat: (www.who.int)
9. Pan American Health Organization: (www.paho.org)
10. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) — Tobacco: (www.fda.gov)
11. National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)): (www.cdc.gov)
12. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA): (www.hrsa.gov)
13. USDA Dietary Guidelines: (www.dietaryguidelines.gov)
14. OSHA — Occupational Carcinogens: (www.osha.gov)
15. GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance: (www.gavi.org)
Section 5: U.S. Organizations Advocating to Improve Cancer Rates
| Organization Name | Contact Information | Primary Activity in This Area |
|---|---|---|
| American Cancer Society (ACS) |
www.cancer.org 1-800-227-2345 |
Nation's leading cancer fighting organization, funding research, providing patient services, and advocating for policies to reduce cancer rates through prevention, early detection, and access to treatment. Manages the nation's most comprehensive cancer information database and lobbies for tobacco control, cancer screening coverage, and FDA regulatory authority. |
| National Cancer Institute (NCI) |
www.cancer.gov 1-800-422-6237 |
Federal agency conducting and funding the world's largest cancer research program, translating scientific discoveries into prevention guidelines, screening protocols, and treatments that reduce cancer mortality. The NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program provides the definitive national cancer statistics used to track progress in reducing cancer rates. |
| American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) |
www.aacr.org aacr@aacr.org (215) 440-9300 |
World's oldest and largest cancer research organization, funding laboratory and clinical cancer research and advocating for federal research investment. Publishes Cancer Discovery, Cancer Research, and the Cancer Progress Report documenting annual advances in reducing cancer incidence and mortality. |
| Susan G. Komen |
www.komen.org 1-877-465-6636 |
Nation's largest breast cancer organization, funding research, supporting patients, and advocating for policies improving early detection and treatment access that reduce breast cancer mortality. Has invested $3 billion in cancer research and community health programs since its founding. |
| National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) |
www.nccn.org nccn@nccn.org (215) 690-0300 |
Alliance of 33 leading cancer centers developing and distributing clinical practice guidelines that establish the evidence-based standards for cancer screening, prevention, and treatment across the U.S. NCCN guidelines are used by oncologists, payers, and policymakers as the authoritative source for best practices in reducing cancer morbidity and mortality. |
| Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids |
www.tobaccofreekids.org info@tobaccofreekids.org (202) 296-5469 |
National advocacy organization working to reduce tobacco use — the leading preventable cause of cancer — through youth prevention, policy reform, and marketing restrictions. Has led successful campaigns for FDA tobacco regulation, state tobacco tax increases, and graphic warning labels that collectively reduce lung cancer rates. |
| Prevent Cancer Foundation |
www.preventcancer.org pcf@preventcancer.org (703) 836-4412 |
Nonprofit focused exclusively on cancer prevention and early detection through public education, research funding, and policy advocacy for expanded screening coverage. Advocates for coverage of recommended cancer screenings under all health insurance plans, including ACA-compliant plans and Medicare. |
Section 6: Individuals Advocating to Improve Cancer Rates
| Name, Title & Contact | Selected Publications on Cancer Rates |
|---|---|
| Otis W. Brawley, MD Bloomberg Distinguished Professor, Johns Hopkins University; Former Chief Medical and Scientific Officer, American Cancer Society obrawley@jhu.edu |
(1) "How We Do Harm: A Doctor Breaks Ranks About Being Sick in America," St. Martin's Press, 2011 — Exposed the overdiagnosis and overtreatment epidemic in American cancer care and advocated for evidence-based prevention and screening standards that reduce harm while improving outcomes.. (2) "Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Facts and Figures," American Cancer Society (annual), 2022 — Annual flagship report documenting cancer incidence, mortality, and prevention trends, providing the standard reference for cancer reduction advocacy and policy analysis.. (3) "Screening for Prostate Cancer with Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing: American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion," Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2012 — Established evidence-based guidelines for PSA screening that reduced overdiagnosis while preserving the benefits of early detection, balancing cancer prevention with avoiding harm.. |
| Graham A. Colditz, MD, DrPH Niess-Gain Professor and Associate Director for Prevention and Control, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis colditzg@wustl.edu |
(1) "The World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Report on Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer," WCRF/AICR, 2007 — Comprehensive review of global evidence on lifestyle factors and cancer risk that established the modern framework for cancer prevention recommendations worldwide.. (2) "Epidemiology: An Introduction," Oxford University Press, 2002 — Standard epidemiology textbook used to train cancer researchers and public health practitioners who design population-level cancer prevention programs.. (3) "Using Evidence to Address Population-Based Cancer Prevention," Cancer Prevention Research, 2018 — Proposed a prevention implementation framework that bridges epidemiological evidence and community-level cancer reduction programs, addressing the research-to-practice gap.. |
| Karen M. Emmons, PhD Professor and Chair, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health kemmons@hsph.harvard.edu |
(1) "Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance in Cancer Prevention," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2008 — Documented gaps in behavioral risk factor surveillance for cancer and proposed improved monitoring systems to track the effectiveness of population-level prevention programs.. (2) "Cancer Prevention in Communities of Color," Cancer Prevention Research, 2009 — Reviewed evidence on cancer disparities and effective community-based interventions that reduce cancer rates in underserved minority populations through culturally tailored prevention programs.. (3) "Community-Based Participatory Research for Cancer Prevention," JNCI Monographs, 2010 — Showed that community-partnered research models achieve better uptake of cancer prevention behaviors — including screening and tobacco cessation — than top-down public health interventions.. |
| Barnett Kramer, MD, MPH Former Director, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute; Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University |
(1) "The Science of Early Detection," Urologic Oncology, 2004 — Analyzed the evidence for cancer screening across multiple organ sites, identifying the conditions under which screening reduces cancer mortality versus causing net harm through overdiagnosis.. (2) "Cancer Screening: The Journey from Epidemiology to Policy," Annals of Internal Medicine, 2010 — Traced the scientific and policy journey of cancer screening recommendations, documenting the challenges of translating population-level evidence into practice guidelines.. (3) "Do We Have the Tools to Translate Progress in Cancer Biology into Clinical Practice?," Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 2009 — Evaluated the pipeline from cancer biology discoveries to prevention and early detection interventions, identifying investment priorities for reducing cancer rates.. |
| Harold Varmus, MD Lewis Thomas University Professor, Weill Cornell Medicine; Former Director, National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health; Nobel Laureate hev2006@med.cornell.edu |
(1) "The Art and Politics of Science," W.W. Norton and Company, 2009 — Reflective account of science leadership and advocacy that shaped federal cancer research investment, including the National Cancer Act and the expansion of NCI research programs.. (2) "Viruses, Genes, and Cancer," American Journal of Cancer Research, 2016 — Reviewed the foundational discoveries linking viral oncogenes to human cancer that opened the era of targeted cancer therapy and informed prevention strategies for virus-associated cancers.. (3) "Ten Years On — The Human Genome and Medicine," New England Journal of Medicine, 2010 — Assessed the impact of the Human Genome Project on cancer biology and personalized medicine, outlining how genomic insights would reshape cancer prevention and treatment.. |
| Robert A. Hiatt, MD, PhD Professor and Chair, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF robert.hiatt@ucsf.edu |
(1) "The Need for Multilevel Approaches in Cancer Prevention," Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 2000 — Proposed the social-ecological framework for cancer prevention that integrates individual behavior change with community and policy interventions, influencing the NCI's research portfolio design.. (2) "Cancer in North America: Incidence, Mortality, Survival, and Trends," Cancer (Journal of the American Cancer Society), 2019 — Comprehensive epidemiological assessment of cancer trends documenting progress and remaining challenges in reducing cancer rates across demographic groups.. (3) "Translating Cancer Research into Community-Level Prevention Practice," CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2011 — Outlined the challenges and strategies for moving evidence-based cancer prevention discoveries from clinical trials into widespread community-level implementation.. |
| Melissa M. Hudson, MD Director, Cancer Survivorship Division, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital; Professor of Pediatrics and Oncology melissa.hudson@stjude.org |
(1) "Childhood Cancer Survivor Study: A National Prospective Cohort Study," Annals of Internal Medicine, 1999 — Described the landmark childhood cancer survivor study cohort that has generated decades of evidence on late effects of cancer treatment and informed screening protocols for survivors.. (2) "Late Effects of Cancer Treatment in Childhood Cancer Survivors," CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 2010 — Comprehensive review of the long-term physical and psychological effects of childhood cancer treatment, driving the development of survivorship guidelines to reduce second cancers and chronic disease.. (3) "Improved Risk-Based Screening Guidelines for Secondary Cancers in Childhood Cancer Survivors," Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2015 — Established evidence-based surveillance protocols for childhood cancer survivors at elevated risk of secondary cancers, improving long-term outcomes through early detection.. |
Frequently Asked Questions
Where does the United States rank globally for cancer rates?
The United States does not rank among the top 35 countries with the lowest cancer rates. According to GLOBOCAN 2022 data, the US has an age-standardized cancer incidence rate of approximately 363.2 per 100,000 people, placing it among the highest in the world.
What are the main reasons the United States has such high cancer rates?
Key contributors include high rates of obesity and physical inactivity, significant tobacco use, heavy consumption of processed and ultra-processed foods, environmental exposure to industrial and agricultural carcinogens, and heavy alcohol use. Disparities in access to preventive healthcare also play a role.
Does the US perform more cancer screenings, and does that inflate its numbers?
Yes, the United States conducts more cancer screenings than many lower-ranked countries, which leads to higher detection rates. This means some of the elevated incidence numbers reflect cancers found early rather than a purely worse health environment, though lifestyle and environmental factors remain significant contributors.
How many new cancer cases and deaths does the US record each year?
In 2022, the United States recorded approximately 1,958,310 new cancer cases and 609,820 cancer deaths, according to National Cancer Institute statistics and GLOBOCAN 2022 data.
What strategies have low-cancer-rate countries like Niger used to keep rates down?
Countries like Niger benefit from a young population, plant-based diets low in processed foods, limited industrial carcinogen exposure, and targeted public health programs including Hepatitis B vaccination campaigns through GAVI. Community-level prevention education and training of primary health workers to detect early signs of cancer are also key strategies.
What steps could the US take to reduce cancer rates based on what other countries are doing?
The US could expand access to preventive care and screenings, strengthen Hepatitis B vaccination programs, reduce environmental carcinogen exposure through tighter industrial and agricultural regulations, and promote healthier diets while reducing processed food consumption. Public health campaigns targeting tobacco, alcohol, and obesity prevention would also meaningfully lower long-term cancer incidence.
About the Author
Ronald Bonfilio has devoted his career to public service spanning more than five decades. His service began with the U.S. Army from 1966 to 1968, where he conducted medical laboratory research at Fort Detrick and at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. He subsequently held a distinguished series of federal positions, including roles with the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Agency for International Development (Vietnam), the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, and the U.S. State Department (Iraq), where he served as a Senior Economic Advisor and Agricultural Advisor. He also served 15 years with the U.S. Government Accountability Office as a Program Analyst and Auditor.
Ronald Bonfilio holds a degree in Economics from the University of Maryland, and degrees in Chemistry and a Master of Business Administration from the University of Massachusetts. He is a former Certified Public Accountant.