science

I'm convinced the reason they only look at 5-year survival rates is because this drops precipitously after 5 years because they induced chemo resistance.

Cancer is an evolutionary disease and we don't treat it as such. In cases where a tumor isn't immediately life threatening, it may be more helpful to maintain a treatment that only stops the growth of a tumor and maintains it at that level rather than nuking it from orbit. It would allow us to mitigate treatment resistance by rotating through therapeutics and have reduced side effects on the patient.

If the typical chemo nuke doesn't kill ALL of the cancer, it's going to come back stronger. We have other models where we treat this way for evolutionary threats and it's proven effective.