The earlier the better. Depending on the cancer type early diagnosis of e.g. skin cancer has almost 100% survival( cure) rates. Early diagnosis of lung cancer gives the option of removing the whole section of the lung. Decreases the maximum oxygen supply rate but not enough to affect daily life.
Generally speaking if it's early we can cut it more easily, radiate the specific area instead of many different ones that cause more side effects and we can target it more effectively with drugs before it metastasizes and spirals into too many different types.
Some new immunotherapy and blocker options offer significantly increased survival rates for advanced stages of cancer as well. Nivolumab is an example that offers a 20-30% 5 year survival rate on advanced non small cell lung cancer. This isn't cure but it isn't a slow burn either. The cancer masses seem to just not grow- but not shrink either and the patients just keep chugging along. The interesting part is that the reason why the rate is 20-30% is because that's the percentage of people who respond to it. A combination of nivolumab and another drug that I forget it's name that failed as a solo option seems to increase it's rate to 40%. Keep in mind this is advanced lung cancer, the type that a couple decades ago had a couple months survival rates.
So are there some specific symptoms one should look out for? Some comprehensive periodic tests? Maybe combined with some genetic pre-screening?
Given how important it can be to diagnose these things early, I think most people have no idea how they could or should do it - apart from maybe breast and testicular cancer.
If you were to design a policy for someone that wanted to maximize their survival probability with regards to potential cancers while still leading a normal life, and money was no object, what would that policy look like?
>So are there some specific symptoms one should look out for?
Not something overly specific. And it also depends on cancer type. Lung cancer is mostly without any symptoms until it's very advanced and you start coughing blood.
>If you were to design a policy for someone that wanted to maximize their survival probability with regards to potential cancers while still leading a normal life, and money was no object, what would that policy look like?
I would say the best bang for your buck would be an annual MRI test. It won't show absolutely everything but it would show most stuff.
I was diagnosed with colorectal cancer. I found out when I saw blood in my stool. I went to the doc and the rest is history. When I was diagnosed it was already at stage 2. Honestly, unless you're getting CT scans twice a year, there's really no cheap and easy way to stay ahead of the game. My docs have had me get CT scans every 3-6 months and have caught subsequent metastases early by doing so. However, unless you are currently under treatment or at the age that requires a specific type of cancer screening, it'd be hard to get that approved by an insurance company. It's worth asking though.
