News from Around the Globe

Research is constant.  Every day we are learning more about how to fight cancer in all of its forms.  Here are the latest news articles from some of the leading cancer organizations.  Check back often to stay up to date.

news from around the world

Photo by brotiN biswaS from Pexels

Stronger Than Cancer has shared these news articles for information purposes only.  It is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.


UK could lose up to £7.8 billion of medical research funding because of COVID-19 pandemic 

8 hours 45 minutes hence

News report

New figures from the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) suggest that the UK could lose up to £7.8 billion of investment in lifesaving research by 2027 because of the COVID-19 pandemic, mainly due to lost charity income. 

The latest analysis predicts that UK charities are set to lose 38% of their fundraising income this year and over 25% next year, which will dramatically affect how much they can invest in research.

Chris Thomas, a senior health fellow at IPPR, said the £7.8 billion figure is £1 in every £10 of UK medical research spend and would be a devastating blow for the country. 

“The impact of COVID-19 on the fundraising income of this country’s medical research charities is the most pressing problem,” said Thomas. “Though their work is sometimes unseen, research charities are the lifeblood of UK life sciences.” 

The IPPR is urging the UK Government to take steps to support the life sciences sector. 

An enormous shortfall

The £7.8 figure is the combined effect of the pandemic on medical research charities and the private sector.

  • Up to £4.1 billion less being invested in health research by medical research charities.
  • Up to £3.8 billion lost due to less investment from the private sector, with £1.3 billion of that figure coming as a knock-on effect of reduced charity investment. 

According to the IPPR, charities provide the foundation for private investment, with the UK’s medical research charities acting as a long-standing draw for global businesses. 

“The enormity of the loss of funding predicted by IPPR is equivalent to supporting 55,000 PhD students – the future generation of leaders in areas like cancer research – or keeping all 4 of Cancer Research UK’s cutting-edge research institutes running for almost 30 years,” says Michelle Mitchell, Cancer Research UK's chief executive.  

“But the impact of research cuts goes further than medical research charities not being able to fund as much life-saving research as we need to. We could also be facing countless missed opportunities to work with industry to develop new diagnostics and treatments for future patients.”

The £7.8 billion figure is a reasonable worst-case scenario, highlighting what could happen if medical research charities aren’t supported to get back on their feet and echoing estimates from other sources. In September, the UK’s National Cancer Research Institute projected a 24% drop in the UK’s overall cancer research spending this year.  

The UK Government must act now

Cancer Research UK has already been forced to cut £44 million of planned research because of the pandemic. Without support, we will need to reduce our annual research spend by £150 million a year over the next 3-4 years. 

Along with the Association of Medical Research Charities and other medical charities, we’re calling on the Government to set up a Life Sciences-Charity Partnership Fund with at least £310m in the first year. The Fund would provide a bridge to protect the vital contribution of charity research and development to the health and wealth of the country.

“The IPPR report provides strong evidence for the need for quick, decisive action from the Government to protect our vital research by creating a Life-Sciences Charity Partnership Fund. If the Government is committed to making the UK a global science superpower, then it needs to act now before we are at the point of no return.” – Michelle Mitchell  Read more

70% Taking Common Antidepressants Suffer Sexual Side Effects

17 hours 28 minutes ago
What’s the latest on treating depression with the spice saffron? Years ago, I covered a head-to-head comparison of saffron versus Prozac for the treatment of […]

The UK Government’s spending review: Time to invest in the future of cancer care

2 days 10 hours ago

Science blog

This autumn the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, will go to Parliament and set out the UK Government’s spending priorities.

It comes during a difficult time for the UK, and as this Government’s first spending review, it will be an opportunity for setting the future direction of the NHS, research and cancer care.

The challenge ahead is immense, but must be faced head on.

In recent years Government spending reviews haven’t tackled the fundamental challenges facing cancer services. The result has been worsening cancer waiting times and people with cancer in the UK still facing lower survival rates than similar countries around the world.

In the 2019 General Election, the Conservatives committed to increase cancer survival rates and boost early cancer diagnosis. NHS England has a more specific ambition – to see 3 in 4 cancers diagnosed at an early stage by 2028.

Sadly, we weren’t on track to meet these ambitions even before COVID-19. And the pandemic has only increased the pressure on cancer services and made it even more vital to accelerate progress now, to make sure that people with cancer can get the diagnosis and treatment they deserve, today and in the future.

To get on track, the UK Government needs to use the Spending Review to set out investment in key areas we know will make the most difference for cancer patients by:

  • Giving our NHS the investment it needs to recruit and train enough staff to diagnose and treat every cancer patient and relieve growing pressures on cancer services
  • Invest in more diagnostic equipment, so that Government can deliver on its commitment to diagnose more cancers earlier
  • Help medical research charities protect their life-saving research from the impact of COVID-19 with a Life Sciences Charity Partnership Fund

And while the Government has just announced that they will only set out spending for 1 year, there are areas like the NHS where they may make more long-term commitments. In any case, we believe this is a critical opportunity to put us on the right track.

Here’s why these areas are so important.

Growing the cancer workforce to meet demand

A leap forward in our ability to diagnose cancer at an early stage is critical to improving survival. People diagnosed at the earliest stages of cancer have the best chances of accessing curative treatment, which dramatically improves their chances of long-term survival.

Put simply, early diagnosis saves lives.

But in the UK, we only diagnose just over half of patients at an early stage, and right now we’re way off track to meet NHS England’s ambition to diagnose 3 in 4 cancers at an early stage by 2028.

Copy this link and share our graphic. Credit: Cancer Research UK

This means there’s still a lot of progress we need to make.

And crucial to making this progress will be investing to recruit and train more staff to diagnose, treat and care for people with cancer. Last week, we published new estimates for how many more staff the NHS in England will need to diagnose and treat cancer in the next 10 years.

Health Education England (HEE) – the organisation responsible for workforce planning and training – estimates that we need 45% growth in the number of staff in 7 roles key to diagnosing and treating cancer to meet cancer ambitions.

Copy this link and share our graphic. Credit: Cancer Research UK

To see that growth and make sure the NHS has the cancer workforce it needs, we estimate that HEE will need at least £142 million but possibly as much as £260 million more than it already invests over the next 3-5 years.

This investment would not only help to ‘future-proof’ cancer care, but because many of these professions work on other conditions too, the whole NHS would benefit.

Giving the NHS the kit it needs to diagnose and treat cancer patients

In early October, NHS England published a review of diagnostic services. The report made clear that without a major expansion and reform of how we diagnose diseases like cancer, efforts to improve cancer outcomes would be put at risk.

The UK is well behind other similar countries when it comes to how much diagnostic kit we have. For example, we have the lowest number of CT scanners – vital for diagnosing many cancers as well as other conditions – per million people compared to 23 major economies.

The impact of COVID-19 has only made the challenges greater, with diagnostic services hit hard and important new infection control measures making it difficult to see the same number of patients as before.

NHS England’s review suggested setting up new ‘Community Diagnostic Hubs’, a great idea that could not only be implemented in a COVID-19 safe way, but could also build on current work to create ‘one stop shops’ for cancer patients to get all of their diagnostic tests at once.

To make these changes, be it having enough equipment or implementing new models for diagnostic services, we’ll need Government to significantly invest.

Invest to protect life-saving research

Medical research charities like Cancer Research UK invest around £1.9 billion a year into life-saving research, playing a vital part in improving outcomes for people with cancer and a range of other diseases. Just in the case of cancer, charities fund half of all publicly funded cancer research.

But the impact of COVID-19 has been devastating. The Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC) estimates that this year alone, medical research charities will spend between £252 to £368 million less on research.

The picture is just as bleak for cancer research.

New figures from the National Institute of Cancer Research estimate charities will spend £167 million less on cancer research this year due to the financial impact of COVID-19. In our case, a 30% reduction in fundraising income this year has meant we’ve already been forced to cut £44 million of planned research. In the very worst case, we could have to cut our spending on research by £150 million a year by 2024.

Our vision for beating cancer is underpinned by funding life-saving research into the causes and treatment of every type of cancer. And the reality is that, without Government support, our shortfall in income, will set our research back by years, with fewer scientists supported and fewer clinical trials being funded.

That’s why, along with the AMRC and other members, we’re calling on the Government to set up a 3-year Life Sciences-Charity Partnership Fund. The Fund would protect medical research charities through the worst of the impact of COVID-19 by investing at least £310 million in the first year to maintain ongoing research projects. The investment would then gradually reduce as charities strive to recover and build back stronger in later years.

A ‘cancer reset’

The spending review is an opportunity for a ‘cancer reset’.

An opportunity for the Government to make good on its 2019 manifesto commitments, and to give each part of the UK the funding they need to improve cancer outcomes.

An opportunity to give the health system the people and the kit it needs to reduce the heartbreak of lengthening cancer waiting times and growing demand for cancer diagnosis and treatment.

An opportunity to drive investment in future medical breakthroughs.

Now it’s up to Rishi Sunak and the Government to seize this opportunity to deliver for people with cancer and invest to dramatically improve cancer survival across the UK.

Matt Sample is a policy advisor at Cancer Research UK

Read more

Sugar and cancer – what you need to know

2 days 14 hours ago

Science blog

This post was first published in 2017 but has been reviewed and updated in October 2020.

There’s a lot of confusing information and advice out there around sugar.

Does it cause cancer? Does sugar feed cancer cells, making them grow more aggressively? And how does the sugar we consume through food and drink affect our health, and what can be done about this?

In this post we’re taking a long hard look at sugar.

We’ll focus specifically on sugar and cancer, busting some myths and covering what researchers are studying in the hopes of finding new ways to treat people with cancer.

And we’ll cover why the amount of sugar in our diets is cause for concern. A high-sugar diet can be bad news when it comes to cancer risk, but not for the reasons that often appear in the headlines.

But first the basics, what our bodies need sugar for and where it comes from in our diet.

Glucose – the fuel of life

Search for sugar and cancer on the internet and it doesn’t take long to find alarming warnings that sugar is the “white death” and “cancer’s favourite food”.

But this idea that sugar is responsible for kick-starting or fuelling a cancer’s growth is an over-simplification of some complicated biology. Let’s start with what sugar actually is.

Sugar comes in many different forms. The simplest form is just as a single molecule, such as glucose and fructose. These molecules of simple sugars can also stick together, either in pairs or as longer chains of molecules. All of these combinations of molecules are carbohydrates, and are our body’s main source of energy.

The form of sugar most of us will be familiar with is table sugar, which is a simple sugar that dissolves in water and gives things a sweet taste. Its proper name is sucrose, and it’s made up of crystals of glucose and fructose. Table sugar is refined, meaning it’s been processed to extract it from a natural source (usually sugar beet). Unprocessed foods can be high in simple sugars too, for example honey (also made mostly of glucose and fructose) is nearly pure sugar.

As chains of sugar get longer, they lose their sweet taste and won’t dissolve in water anymore. These chains are called polysaccharides and form a large component of starchy foods. Starchy foods such as rice, bread, pasta and vegetables like potatoes might not taste sweet, but they are high in carbohydrate too.

Sugar, in some form, is in many things we eat. And this is good, because our bodies rely heavily on it to work.

Nearly every single part of our body is made of living cells. And it’s these cells that help us see, breathe, feel, think and much more.

While their jobs in the body may differ, one thing all these cells have in common is that they need energy to survive and perform their duties.

Cells somehow need to turn nutrients in our diet into a form of energy that they can use, called ATP. It would take a long time to explain this (if you’re interested you might want to read more), but simplistically the process starts with glucose.

Glucose is the basic fuel that powers every single one of our cells. If we eat or drink things that are high in glucose, such as fizzy drinks, the glucose gets absorbed straight into our blood ready for our cells to use. If a starchy food, such as pasta, is on the menu, the enzymes in our saliva and digestive juices break it down and convert it into glucose. And if for some reason there’s no carbohydrate in our diet, cells can turn fat and protein into glucose as a last resort, because they need glucose to survive.

It’s here that sugar and cancer start to collide, because cancer is a disease of cells.

Sugar and cancer

Cancer cells usually grow quickly, multiplying at a fast rate, which takes a lot of energy. This means they need lots of glucose. Cancer cells also need lots of other nutrients too, such as amino acids and fats; it’s not just sugar they crave.

Here’s where the myth that sugar fuels cancer was born: if cancer cells need lots of glucose, then cutting sugar out of our diet must help stop cancer growing, and could even stop it developing in the first place. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. All our healthy cells need glucose too, and there’s no way of telling our bodies to let healthy cells have the glucose they need, but not give it to cancer cells.

There’s no evidence that following a “sugar-free” diet lowers the risk of getting cancer, or boosts the chances of surviving if you are diagnosed. 

And following severely restricted diets with very low amounts of carbohydrate could damage health in the long term by eliminating foods that are good sources of fibre and vitamins.

This is particularly important for cancer patients, because some treatments can result in weight loss and put the body under a lot of stress. So poor nutrition from restrictive diets could also hamper recovery, or even be life-threatening.

A sticky end for sugar research?

Although there’s no evidence that cutting carbohydrates from our diet will help treat cancer, important research has shown that understanding the abnormal ways that cancer cells make energy could lead to new treatments.

Back in the 50s, a scientist called Otto Warburg noticed that cancer cells use a different chemical process from normal cells to turn glucose into energy.

Healthy cells use a series of chemical reactions in small cellular ‘batteries’ called mitochondria. The Warburg Effect, as it was dubbed following Otto’s discovery, describes how cancer cells bypass their ‘batteries’ to generate energy more rapidly to meet demand.

This shortcut for making energy might be a weakness for some cancers that gives researchers an advantage for developing new treatments.

Firstly, it opens up the potential for developing drugs that shut down cancer cells’ energy-making processes but don’t stop healthy cells making energy. And researchers are testing drugs that work in this way.

Secondly, the abnormal processes in cancer cells can also leave them less able to adapt when faced with a lack of other nutrients, like amino acids. These potential vulnerabilities could lead to treatments too.

But these approaches are still experimental, and we don’t know yet if treatments that starve cancer cells are safe or if they work.

It’s certainly not grounds for cancer patients to try and do it themselves by restricting their diet during treatment – and going back to our earlier point, it could be dangerous to do so.

If sugar doesn’t cause cancer, why worry about it?

If cutting out sugar doesn’t help treat cancer, why then do we encourage people to cut down on sugary foods in our diet advice?

That’s because there is an indirect link between cancer risk and sugar. Eating lots of sugar over time can cause you to gain weight, and robust scientific evidence shows that being overweight or obese increases the risk of 13 different types of cancer. In fact, obesity is the single biggest preventable cause of cancer after smoking, which we’ve written about many times before.

Copy this link and share our graphic. Credit: Cancer Research UK

And a study published in 2019 suggested there could be something else going on. Researchers found that people who drank more sugary drinks had a slightly increased risk of cancer, regardless of body weight. The study took weight in to account, but there are still lots of answered questions. More studies will be needed to investigate this.

How can I cut down on free sugar?

It’s free (or added) sugar we’re mainly concerned with when it comes to weight gain, not sugar that is naturally found in foods like fruits and milk or healthy starchy foods like wholegrains and pulses (which people should be eating more of*).

One of the easiest ways to lower your added sugar is to cut down on sugary drinks, which are the largest source of sugar in the UK diet.

Some sugary drinks, such as fizzy drinks and energy drinks, can have more than the recommended daily maximum amount of free sugar in one serving alone. And while these extra calories promote weight gain, they offer no other nutritional benefits.

Other obviously sugary foods such as sweets, chocolate, cakes and biscuits are all best kept as treats too. But some foods that have hidden high amounts of added sugar may surprise you. Some breakfast cereals, ready meals (including ‘healthy’ ones), pasta sauces and yoghurts can have shocking amounts of sugar added to them. Reading nutrition information labels and checking the ingredients list can help you choose lower sugar options.

While there are steps you and your family can take to cut down on added sugar, making these changes can be easier said than done. And it’s here that governments need to lend a hand.

“Multiple cues push us as customers to stack junk food into our shopping baskets, even if we weren’t planning to,” says Professor Linda Bauld, our cancer prevention champion based at the University of Edinburgh. “That’s why we want the Government to help create a better food environment where the healthy choice is the easy choice for everyone.”

A 2020 success story – the UK Government’s obesity strategy

We’re delighted that the sugar tax (Soft Drinks Industry Levy), which came into effect in April 2018, has been successful in removing a huge amount of sugar from fizzy drinks and our diets. This – alongside other measures announced in the UK Government’s 2020 obesity strategy – should help to prevent millions of cases of overweight and obesity, and cancers linked to excess weight in the future, by reducing the amount of sugar the nation consumes.

But the Government hasn’t made much progress in its plan to reduce the amount of sugar in the types of foods that are very popular with children. Four years into the programme, industry has failed to meet the voluntary targets set by Government, showing that a voluntary approach just isn’t effective. This is also true for front-of-pack nutrition labelling where we want to see a consistent and mandatory approach.

It’s also essential that reducing free sugars in our diets – alongside other public health considerations – be put at the forefront of the UK Government’s upcoming trade deal negotiations in 2020 and beyond.

No sweet endings

The story about sugar and cancer is complicated.

On the one hand, sugar itself doesn’t cause cancer, and there’s no way (at the moment) of specifically starving cancer cells of glucose without harming healthy cells too.

There’s also no evidence that adopting a diet very low in carbohydrate will lower your cancer risk or help as a treatment. And for patients, getting adequate nutrition is important for helping their bodies cope with treatment.

But we’re concerned about the amount of added sugar people are consuming because it’s promoting weight gain. And being overweight or obese increases the risk of least 13 types of cancer.

So the take home message is that although banishing sugar won’t stop cancer in its tracks, we can all reduce our risk of getting cancer by making healthy choices, and lowering the amount of added sugar in our diets is a good way to help maintain a healthy body weight.


*While foods like fruit, milk and healthy starchy foods are high in carbohydrate, they have other important nutritional benefits. We should all be eating more whole fruits, vegetables, wholegrains and pulses as these nutritious foods are also high in fibre – this not only helps your body digest the natural sugar more slowly (which helps you keep a healthy weight), it also reduces the risk of bowel cancer.

Read more

What About the Trans Fat in Animal Fat?

2 days 17 hours ago
The years of healthy life lost due to our consumption of trans fats are comparable to the impact of conditions like meningitis, cervical cancer, and […]

Children’s cancer research gets a boost with the SU2C–CRUK Paediatric Cancer New Discoveries Challenge awards

3 days 16 hours ago

Research Feature

The Stand Up To Cancer – Cancer Research UK (SU2C–CRUK) Paediatric Cancer New Discoveries Challenge awards will support three new research collaborations between UK and US labs. Each collaboration will receive $1 million over 2 years, with possible extensions of $5 million over 3–4 years for the most promising projects. The awards aim to spark fresh ideas that can lead to better treatments for children and young people with cancer.

The SU2C–CRUK Paediatric Cancer New Discoveries Challenge awards are designed to foster knowledge sharing across the Atlantic and across disciplines. Applicants were encouraged to form teams that include expertise beyond paediatric oncology. The initiative seeks to increase understanding of the drivers of paediatric cancers and support the development of novel or repurposed medicines, treatment approaches and technologies, especially in areas of acute patient need.

BRAINatomy, an atlas of brain damage after radiotherapy

Team leaders: Martin McCabe, University of Manchester, UK and Tom Merchant, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, US

More than 70% of children with brain tumours survive in the long term, often thanks to radiotherapy. However, children treated with radiotherapy are at risk of cognitive and endocrine problems and their quality of life can be low for years to come – and we don’t have enough information about which healthy brain structures should be avoided to make the treatment less toxic for them. Martin and Tom will lead an interdisciplinary team based at the University of Manchester and Manchester Cancer Research Centre, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and the University Medical Centre in Groningen, The Netherlands, to identify the regions of children’s brains that are most sensitive to radiotherapy damage. They will examine how radiotherapy with protons and X-rays causes damage to developing brain tissues, both at a whole-brain structural level and at a single-cell level.

Our research will make it possible to develop new clinical treatment paradigms to focus radiation beams primarily on tumour cells while minimising radiation to the structures that are most critical to brain development and function.

—Martin McCabe

R-loops under scrutiny in Ewing sarcoma

kevin-hiom._circle_crop.png Team leaders: Alexander Bishop, University Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, US and Kevin Hiom, University of Dundee, UK

Despite decades of work, Ewing sarcoma is still an enigma, with poorly understood biology and no targeted treatments in clinical use. Building on their teams’ previous basic research findings, Alexander and Kevin will lead an international collaboration between three labs – they will work with Chun-Wei (David) Chen at City of Hope, Duarte, US – to investigate the mechanisms of accumulation of the DNA-RNA hybrids known as R-loops in Ewing sarcoma. The teams will test whether pharmacological intervention could increase the levels of toxic R-loops in these tumours and, therefore, decrease the viability of cancer cells. The researchers’ goal is to lay a foundation for future pre-clinical work on a potential new class of targeted treatments.

This transatlantic partnership is an exciting opportunity for us to collaborate internationally to develop new treatments for children and young adults with Ewing sarcoma.

—Kevin Hiom     

Combined therapies to overcome immune evasion

john_anderson.circle_crop.png Team leaders: John Anderson, University College London and Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK; Louis Chesler, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK and Paul Sondel, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, US

Immunotherapy has had limited success in childhood solid cancers, which usually lack infiltrating immune effector cells as a result of immune evasion, lack of tumour antigens or both. John, Louis and Paul will lead a collaborative project that will test the ability of different treatment combinations to overcome immune evasion in animal models of neuroblastoma and medulloblastoma. The researchers then plan to develop a clinical trials strategy to translate the most promising combinations into novel treatments for these types of childhood cancers. 

Previous treatments of neuroblastoma and medulloblastoma have focussed on chemotherapy. We’re interested in combining immunotherapy approaches with drugs that target the genes that cause these childhood tumours.

—John Anderson

Stand Up To Cancer

Satnd Up to Cancer(SU2C) is a charitable programme of the Entertainment Industry Foundation in the US that raises funds for translational cancer research. It was established in 2008 by media and entertainment leaders to engage the public in supporting a new, collaborative model of cancer research, to increase awareness about cancer prevention, and to highlight progress being made in the fight against the disease. As of August 2020, more than 1,950 scientists representing more than 210 institutions are involved in SU2C-funded research projects.

Following the success of Stand Up To Cancer in the US, the campaign was launched in the UK in 2012 as a joint fundraising initiative from Cancer Research UK and Channel 4, to bring the UK together to speed up progress in translational cancer research. To date, the campaign has raised more than £62 million, funding 52 clinical trials and projects, involving over 11,000 patients across the country.

We want to hear from researchers with an interest in moving into paediatric cancer research.

Contact our Paediatric Lead 

Read more

News digest – targeted radiation beam, precision medicine and our early detection roadmap

5 days 18 hours ago

Science blog

We’re challenging researchers to tackle 9 of the toughest cancer problems

We’ve partnered with the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in our most ambitious research initiative ever. Cancer Grand Challenges aims to bring scientists together to solve problems like, ‘how do some cells stay normal despite have mistakes in their DNA?’ and ‘why do some cancers return many years after treatment?’ Read all about the 9 challenges on our blog

Targeted radiation beams help cancer patients swallow 

A new technique has been developed to help reduce a common side effect of radiotherapy for people with throat cancer. Currently, around 3 in 4 people with this type of cancer are left with lifelong swallowing issues due to radiotherapy causing irreparable damage to healthy tissue and muscle surrounding the tumour. The new, more accurate radiotherapy technique could help around 12,000 people a year in the UK. Full story at The Daily Mail.

Pushing to detect cancer earlier 

Currently, just over half of all cancer cases are detected at the earliest stages. Our new roadmap outlines how researchers, pharmaceutical companies and governments can work together to build a future where no-one gets a late stage cancer diagnosis on our blog.

New precision treatment approach for pancreatic cancer  

Researchers from the University of Glasgow are developing new ways to predict who could benefit from treatments targeting damaged DNA in pancreatic cancer, reports The Scotsman. The study, which is linked to our Precision Panc platform used cells from people with pancreatic cancer to develop new molecular markers than can predict who will respond to which drug. Clinical trials using this strategy are set to begin shortly, as our news report explains.

Confusion over COVID and lung cancer symptoms 

Experts fear that many people experiencing cancer symptoms aren’t talking to their GP, as cases of COVID-19 increase across the country. Lung cancer is a particular area of concern, with experts worried that people may mistake possible lung cancer symptoms for the virus. Symptoms of lung cancer can include a cough that doesn’t go away after 2-3 weeks, breathlessness and lack of energy. BBC and The Guardian reveal more. 

Taming the cell cycle

Researchers at the our Manchester Institute have developed a new approach to synchronise the cell division cycle of an entire population of human cells in the lab. Read our researcher features article about how this technique could help cell biologists study cancer in more detail.

And finally…

Campaigner Patrick McGuire has written an open letter to Boris Johnson about honouring his manifesto commitments in the upcoming Comprehensive Spending Review. Read our blog post to hear from more of our campaigners on why the Government must uphold its promises, including to increase cancer survival rates and boost early cancer diagnosis.  

Scarlett Sangster is a writer for PA Media Group

Read more