Introduction
Cancer garners significant attention in the public spotlight especially when a high-profile individual reveals a cancer diagnosis, treatment, related complications, or is reported posthumously. News articles report relevant details—or a lack thereof—on individuals such as politicians, athletes, actors and actresses, or family members of those who are publicly known for their private or public lives. Such news stories can potentially influence public opinion and perceptions about cancer, its treatment, cost, and prognosis. 1 , 2 For example, a Hollywood actress reported undergoing prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in 2016 after testing positive for BRCA1 gene alterations. The news led to a surge in BRCA testing amounting to $14 million within the subsequent 2 weeks, with downstream effects including clinical consultations, imaging studies, and prophylactic surgeries. 3
While some public figures have disclosed significant details regarding their diagnosis, treatment, and other pertinent aspects, others have chosen to remain private by limiting details during what is sure to be a tremendously challenging time. For example, two prominent members of the British royal family disclosed a cancer diagnosis in early 2024. 4 , 5 However, the official announcements did not discuss details such as cancer type, prognosis, staging, or complications. Although such public disclosures of a cancer diagnosis may help to further mitigate stigma surrounding cancer, a lack of details may also lead to increased confusion and apprehension about cancer among the public. Given that individuals with cancer as well as the general public may look to news stories on public figures to learn more about the aspects of cancer and its treatment, it is unknown how cancer in public figures is reported and what details are focused on in articles. Therefore, we sought to assess details related to cancer in recent news stories and characterize how the information is delivered.
Materials and methods
News stories with a cancer headline that were published between 1 January 2010 and 1 January 2020 were identified using Google News. We utilized Google News as it is a publicly available database of news articles extracted from over 50 000 global news sources. 6 Specific search terms and results are available in the Supplementary Material , available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmorw.2025.100119 . The search for news articles was conducted on 17 February 2024.
Each relevant news article was analyzed for an individual’s occupation, cancer type, prognosis, staging, treatment, whether scientific or educational information on the aspects of cancer care were discussed, interview or testimonies from individuals with cancer or from the individual’s family or friends, cost of treatment, utilization of palliative care or hospice services, diet, complications, and type of news source. These data were extracted from each news article and collected using Microsoft Excel (version 16.44, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA). Due to policies at the authors’ respective institutions related to the use of publicly available data for research studies, the study was exempt from institutional review board review and approval.
Statistical analysis
Our results were primarily descriptive, so data are presented as frequencies and percentages. We used Pearson correlation to determine the association between the number of times a tumor was mentioned for public figures and the number of tumor representation according to the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Statistics, 2024. 7 As the incidence of pancreatic neuroendocrine islet cell tumors and leptomeningeal carcinomatosis are not specifically reported by the American Cancer Society, other sources were utilized for this data. 8 , 9
Results
We identified 4135 news articles with a cancer headline published between 2010 and 2020, of which 254 articles specifically discussed a public figure diagnosed with cancer. Among these articles, a total of 157 public figures were identified including actors and actresses ( n = 24, 15.3%), TV or radio newscasters ( n = 22, 14.0%), politicians ( n = 21, 13.4%), family members of public figures ( n = 18, 7.0%), musicians ( n = 18, 7.0%), and athletes or coaches ( n = 18, 7.0%). Other occupations of public figures include: a Nobel laureate ( n = 1), reality TV personalities ( n = 5), a social media personality ( n = 1), writers ( n = 2), fashion models ( n = 2), a televangelist ( n = 1), businessmen ( n = 4), a poker player ( n = 1), and criminals ( n = 3).
A total of 255 cancers were described in the identified news articles, with one individual being diagnosed with two cancers. Many articles did not specify the type of cancer ( n = 37, 14.5%). When the cancer type was specified, breast cancer ( n = 35, 13.7%) was most commonly described followed by glioblastoma or brain cancer ( n = 19, 7.5%), throat cancer ( n = 14, 5.5%), prostate cancer ( n = 14, 5.5%), lung cancer ( n = 13, 5.1%), and pancreatic cancer ( n = 13, 5.1%). A comprehensive list of specified cancers can be found in Table 1 . There was a high correlation between the tumors mentioned for public figures and the incidence of tumors in the US population (r = 0.58; P < 0.0001) as shown in Figure 1 . Table 1 Type of cancer identified in public figures, 2010-2020 Cancer type Number (%) Unknown/not specified 37 (14.5%) Breast 35 (13.73%) Glioblastoma/brain cancer 19 (7.45%) Throat 14 (5.49%) Prostate 14 (5.49%) Lung 13 (5.09%) Pancreatic 13 (5.09%) Cervical 11 (4.31%) Colon 8 (3.14%) Melanoma 8 (3.14%) Thyroid 6 (2.35%) Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis 6 (2.35%) Esophageal 5 (1.96%) Liver 5 (1.96%) Testicular 4 (1.57%) Hodgkin lymphoma 4 (1.57%) Multiple myeloma 3 (1.18%) Kidney 3 (1.18%) Pancreatic neuroendocrine islet cell 3 (1.18%) Peritoneal 3 (1.18%) Lymphoma 3 (1.18%) Liposarcoma 2 (0.78%) Tongue 2 (0.78%) Neuroblastoma 2 (0.78%) Oral 2 (0.78%) Blood 2 (0.78%) Uterine 2 (0.78%) Ovarian 2 (0.78%) Ewing’s sarcoma 2 (0.78%) Non-Hodgkin lymphoma 2 (0.78%) Nasopharyngeal carcinoma 1 (0.39%) Endometrial 1 (0.39%) Parotid cancer 1 (0.39%) Sinonasal 1 (0.39%) ‘Blood and lung cancers’ 1 (0.39%) Gastric 1 (0.39%) Ocular melanoma 1 (0.39%) Tonsil 1 (0.39%) Anal 1 (0.39%) Eye 1 (0.39%) Meningioma 1 (0.39%) Bowel 1 (0.39%) Pleomorphic sarcoma 1 (0.39%) Larynx 1 (0.39%) Squamous-cell carcinoma 1 (0.39%) Osteosarcoma 1 (0.39%) Mantle cell lymphoma 1 (0.39%) Acute myeloid leukemia 1 (0.39%) BRCA carrier 1 (0.39%) Head and neck 1 (0.39%) Figure 1 Cancer incidence in the United States compared with incidence of tumors in public figures. AML, acute myeloid leukemia; CHL, classical Hodgkin lymphoma; HNSSCC, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; LC, leptomeningeal carcinomatosis; MCL, mantle cell lymphoma; NHL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma; PNIC, pancreatic neuroendocrine islet cell.
Table 1
Type of cancer identified in public figures, 2010-2020
| Cancer type | Number (%) |
| Unknown/not specified | 37 (14.5%) |
| Breast | 35 (13.73%) |
| Glioblastoma/brain cancer | 19 (7.45%) |
| Throat | 14 (5.49%) |
| Prostate | 14 (5.49%) |
| Lung | 13 (5.09%) |
| Pancreatic | 13 (5.09%) |
| Cervical | 11 (4.31%) |
| Colon | 8 (3.14%) |
| Melanoma | 8 (3.14%) |
| Thyroid | 6 (2.35%) |
| Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis | 6 (2.35%) |
| Esophageal | 5 (1.96%) |
| Liver | 5 (1.96%) |
| Testicular | 4 (1.57%) |
| Hodgkin lymphoma | 4 (1.57%) |
| Multiple myeloma | 3 (1.18%) |
| Kidney | 3 (1.18%) |
| Pancreatic neuroendocrine islet cell | 3 (1.18%) |
| Peritoneal | 3 (1.18%) |
| Lymphoma | 3 (1.18%) |
| Liposarcoma | 2 (0.78%) |
| Tongue | 2 (0.78%) |
| Neuroblastoma | 2 (0.78%) |
| Oral | 2 (0.78%) |
| Blood | 2 (0.78%) |
| Uterine | 2 (0.78%) |
| Ovarian | 2 (0.78%) |
| Ewing’s sarcoma | 2 (0.78%) |
| Non-Hodgkin lymphoma | 2 (0.78%) |
| Nasopharyngeal carcinoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Endometrial | 1 (0.39%) |
| Parotid cancer | 1 (0.39%) |
| Sinonasal | 1 (0.39%) |
| ‘Blood and lung cancers’ | 1 (0.39%) |
| Gastric | 1 (0.39%) |
| Ocular melanoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Tonsil | 1 (0.39%) |
| Anal | 1 (0.39%) |
| Eye | 1 (0.39%) |
| Meningioma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Bowel | 1 (0.39%) |
| Pleomorphic sarcoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Larynx | 1 (0.39%) |
| Squamous-cell carcinoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Osteosarcoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Mantle cell lymphoma | 1 (0.39%) |
| Acute myeloid leukemia | 1 (0.39%) |
| BRCA carrier | 1 (0.39%) |
| Head and neck | 1 (0.39%) |
The specific staging of a public figure’s cancer was not specified or was otherwise unknown in the majority of news articles ( n = 160, 63%). However, when specified, the majority of individuals were described as having stage IV or metastatic disease ( n = 56, 22.0%) followed by recurrent disease ( n = 15, 5.9%). Few public figures were described as having a stage I ( n = 4, 1.6%) or II ( n = 5, 2%) malignancy, or a localized cancer ( n = 9, 3.5%).
The prognosis of an individual’s cancer was most often not known or not specified in news articles ( n = 93, 36.6%). When a public figure’s prognosis was specified, the individual was described as already deceased ( n = 52, 20.5%) or was portrayed as being incurable or having a poor prognosis ( n = 42, 16.9%). In ∼25% of instances, an individual was described as having either a good prognosis, in remission, or having a curable malignancy.
Many news articles did not specify the type of cancer-directed therapy that an individual received or was expected to receive ( n = 96, 37.8%). When a therapeutic intervention was mentioned, surgery was commonly described ( n = 67, 26.4%) followed by chemotherapy alone ( n = 20, 7.9%); chemotherapy and radiation ( n = 16, 6.3%); and chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery ( n = 12, 4.7%). Although an estimated 44% of individuals diagnosed with cancer may be eligible for treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, immunotherapy was only mentioned in three articles. 10
Most articles ( n = 199, 78%) did not provide scientific or educational information on pertinent aspects regarding the cancer described in a news article. Conversely, most articles ( n = 169, 67%) provided personal testimonies or interviews from an individual experiencing cancer or from the individual’s family or friends.
Most news articles did not mention hospice care ( n = 188, 74%). Thirty-seven articles described public figures enrolling in a hospice, with an additional 12 articles describing a public figure dying in hospice care. Of note, seven articles portrayed an individual pursuing ‘palliative care’ although the news article content was more suggestive of the public figure enrolling in hospice care, thus equating palliative care and hospice care. Six additional articles described a family member declining hospice on behalf of a patient.
Treatment and other costs related to cancer care were not mentioned in most news articles ( n = 250, 98.4%). One article specifically estimated the cost of cancer treatment as well as imaging studies such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography for the family member of a public figure. Another article’s headline stated that the cost of 1 week of cancer-directed treatment was $10 000.
Although diet is becoming a contested topic in oncology, most articles did not discuss the topic ( n = 231, 90.9%). Eight articles described a social media personality who claimed that raw food and vegan diet had cured her cancer, while another article described a public figure eating more ‘nuts, greens, and fresh produce’ following a cancer diagnosis. Another article conveyed that a public figure had been told by an oncologist to eat at the same time of the day.
While cancer and its treatment can lead to complications, most articles did not mention this ( n = 235, 92.5%). However, several complications were described including sepsis, infection, ‘normal side-effects of cancer therapy’, pneumonia, ‘lung inflammation’ from a cancer therapy, veno-occlusive disease (VOD), hemorrhage, and neuropathy. Two articles described a public figure ‘in and out of the hospital’ but did not specify why.
The most common news source for news articles was national television/radio broadcasters ( n = 64, 25%) followed by entertainment websites and magazines ( n = 42, 17%), national newspapers ( n = 40, 16%), news websites ( n = 31, 12%), and local newspapers ( n = 27, 11%). Tabloid websites and newspapers comprised only 7% of news sources ( n = 17). Less common sources include sports magazines or websites ( n = 8), local news websites ( n = 4), international news agencies ( n = 2), universities ( n = 2), sports teams ( n = 2), political news websites ( n = 2), women’s magazines ( n = 2), public news website ( n = 1), national radio broadcaster’s website ( n = 2), science magazines ( n = 1), and a religious denomination’s website ( n = 1).
Discussion
Most news articles describing cancer in a public figure between 2010 and 2020 did not specify the cancer type, its prognosis, or treatment. Moreover, the majority of articles did not describe the costs or complications associated with cancer, nor did they discuss diet related to cancer. The lack of details regarding key aspects of cancer such as prognosis and treatment may lead to more doubt than clarity to readers.
There was a correlation between breast cancer being commonly diagnosed among public figures and in the general population per American Cancer Society statistics. It is unclear why there was not a similar correlation seen in prostate cancer, although the possible sexual health consequences and stigma associated with hormonal therapy may be a possible cause for underreporting among public figures.
Despite not being a common cancer, glioblastoma and unspecified brain cancer were the second most commonly specified cancer in news articles mostly due to the diagnosis, treatment, and death of a prominent US senator. Such news articles may skew public opinion on the frequency of a rare malignancy and have clinical implications for patients seeking evaluation or testing after reading about the cancer in these articles as demonstrated by several examples of celebrities’ diagnosis or death from cancer. 11 , 12
Commonly used therapeutics including immune checkpoint inhibitors in modern day oncology were seldom mentioned in news articles, except in three pieces describing the treatment of metastatic melanoma in a former US president. Yet, almost half of patients in the United States with advanced or metastatic cancers are eligible for these types of therapies. 10 No articles mentioned precision oncology or targeted therapies based on genomic aberrations. Only three articles described clinical trials or experimental therapies, which is unexpected given that participation is estimated to be 6.3%. 13 As most articles did not specify the type of treatment that an individual received, cancer therapeutics may appear ambiguous to news readers and create anxiety regarding cancer given prior psychological studies surrounding fear of the unknown and intolerance of uncertainty. 14 , 15
While the most common news source was a national television/radio broadcaster, entertainment magazines and websites compromised the second most common source. While acknowledging entertainment sources are not intended to provide educational content to readers, we found that most articles did not provide any scientific or educational information. The lack of concrete data such as background information on the etiology, epidemiology, staging, treatment, and prognosis of a cancer described in the article may leave readers with more questions than answers. Moreover, most articles provided personal testimonies or interviews from an individual experiencing cancer or from the individual’s family or friends, providing a more emotional or subjective description of cancer rather than factual information. The juxtaposition of these aspects to cancer care may provide readers with an individual’s perspective on cancer rather than providing a broader, more population-based approach to a cancer type.
In addition, the prognosis of most public figures was unclear in the majority of articles with an additional half of news articles describing an individual being deceased from cancer or having an incurable or aggressive malignancy. Such descriptions of cancer may further create anxiety and apprehension regarding cancer to the general public reading such articles. 11
The study had several limitations such as not including other forms of news media such as television, radio, or social media reporting. Moreover, it is possible that the data source may not have indexed or otherwise stored all major publications about public figures with cancer during the study time period. In addition, several articles were omitted from the results due to being inaccessible owing to a paywall. Finally, it is likely that not all news articles regarding cancer in public figures were captured in the source used for the study. Alternatively, these results may not be generalizable to news stories at other times. The number of news stories on a given tumor type could be higher during times when there is greater coverage of a more prominent public figure.
Most recent news articles describing cancer, its prognosis, treatment, or other pertinent aspects in public figures did not provide granular details, and therefore may create anxiety to readers. Public figures may justifiably choose to keep specifics of their health diagnosis in privacy. In order to avoid unnecessary worry about cancer, the public should be cognizant that news articles about high-profile individuals with cancer often contain a noteworthy lack of details about cancer.
References
1 Myrick J.G. Public perceptions of celebrity cancer deaths: how identification and emotions shape cancer stigma and behavioral intentions Health Commun 32 11 2017 1385 1395 27739882 10.1080/10410236.2016.1224450
2 Biancovilli P. Makszin L. Amer F. Csongor A. Celebrities and breast cancer: a multidimensional quali-quantitative analysis of news stories shared on social media Int J Environ Res Public Health 19 15 2022 9676 35955028 10.3390/ijerph19159676 PMC9368231
3 Belluz J. Angelina Jolie’s Breast Cancer op-ed may have Cost the Health System $14 Million in Unnecessary Tests. Vox Available at https://www.vox.com/2016/12/14/13954260/angelina-jolie-breast-cancer-brca-health-research December 14, 2016
4 Reuters Buckingham Palace Statement on King Charles’s Cancer Diagnosis Available at https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/buckingham-palace-statement-king-charless-cancer-diagnosis-2024-02-05/ February 5, 2024
5 NBC News Princess Kate undergoing Treatment for Cancer, says Chemotherapy Caused Prolonged Absence Available at https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/princess-kate-middleton-cancer-chemotherapy-absence-royals-uk-rcna144671 March 22, 2024
6 Filloux F. Google News: The Secret Sauce. The Guardian Available at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/feb/25/1 February 25, 2013
7 Siegel R.L. Giaquinto A.N. Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2024 CA Cancer J Clin 74 1 2024 12 49 38230766 10.3322/caac.21820
8 Nayar G. Ejikeme T. Chongsathidkiet P. Leptomeningeal disease: current diagnostic and therapeutic strategies Oncotarget 8 42 2017 73312 73328 29069871 10.18632/oncotarget.20272 PMC5641214
9 PDQ Adult Treatment Editorial Board Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (Islet Cell Tumors) Treatment (PDQ®): Health Professional Version PDQ Cancer Information Summaries 2002 National Cancer Institute (US) Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK65870/ 26389309
10 Haslam A. Prasad V. Estimation of the percentage of US Patients with cancer who are eligible for and respond to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy drugs JAMA Netw Open 2 5 2019 e192535 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.2535 PMC6503493 31050774
11 Boudioni M. Mossman J. Jones A.L. Leydon G. McPherson K. Celebrity’s death from cancer resulted in increased calls to CancerBACUP Br Med J 317 7164 1998 1016 10.1136/bmj.317.7164.1016 PMC1114026 9765182
12 Chapman S. McLeod K. Wakefield M. Holding S. Impact of news of celebrity illness on breast cancer screening: Kylie Minogue’s breast cancer diagnosis Med J Aust 183 5 2005 247 250 16138798 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb07029.x
13 Unger J.M. Fleury M. Nationally representative estimates of the participation of cancer patients in clinical research studies according to the commission on cancer J Clin Oncol 39 suppl 28 2021 74
14 Carleton R.N. Fear of the unknown: one fear to rule them all? J Anxiety Disord 41 2016 5 21 27067453 10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.03.011
15 Jacoby R.J. Intolerance of uncertainty Clinical Handbook of Fear and Anxiety: Maintenance Processes and Treatment Mechanisms 2020 American Psychological Association 45 63
Supplementary data
Supplementary Material
Funding
None declared.
Disclosure
DJB has the following disclosures: consulting/advisory role: AIMED BIO, Astellas, AVEO Oncology, Bayer, Eisai, EMD Serono, Exelixis, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Janux, and Seagen; speakers’ bureau: Merck; travel and accommodations: DAVA Oncology, Merck, and Seagen. MPL has received advisory fees from Clovis Oncology. JTM has the following disclosures: advisory board: Replimune; speakers’ bureau: Clinical Care Options. ARK has the following disclosures: stock and other ownership interests: ECOM Medical; consulting or advisory role: Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Immunomedics, and Gilead Sciences; speakers’ bureau: Janssen, Astellas Medivation, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi, Genentech/Roche, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Exelixis, EMD Serono, Merck, Seattle Genetics/Astellas, Myovant Sciences, Gilead Sciences, and AVEO; research funding: Genentech, Exelixis, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Macrogenics, Astellas Pharma, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, BioClin Therapeutics, Clovis Oncology, Bavarian Nordic, Seattle Genetics, Immunomedics, and Epizyme; travel, accommodations, expenses: Genentech, Prometheus, Astellas Medivation, Janssen, Eisai, Bayer, Pfizer, Novartis, Exelixis, AstraZeneca. VP receives research funding from Arnold Ventures through a grant made to UCSF, and royalties for books and writing from Johns Hopkins Press, MedPage, and the Free Press. He declares consultancy roles with UnitedHealthcare and OptumRX; He hosts the podcasts, Plenary Session, VPZD, Sensible Medicine, writes the newsletters, Sensible Medicine, the Drug Development Letter and VP’s Observations and Thoughts, and runs a YouTube channel, which collectively earn revenue on the platforms Patreon, YouTube, and Substack. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.