Agenda item - Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment July 2026 Update

Report of the Chair, Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee (copy attached)

7.1      This item was presented by Nigel Kee, Chief Delivery Officer, and by Dr Sarah Westwell, Lead Cancer Clinician, UHSx. Mr Kee and Dr Westwell outlined recent performance across a number of cancer metrics, including the national waiting times targets. Issues highlighted included:

• A focus on better data collection which supports earlier diagnosis and holistic support
• A multi-disciplinary team approach is key to effective cancer care in many instances, but needs to be used appropriately as it can slow the delivery of care for people with relatively straightforward treatment pathways
• Recent improvement in access for endoscopy
• A focus on patient follow-ups, with personalised follow-up offers that fit around individual patients’ lives
• Better use of Patient Recorded Outcome Measures to drive service improvement
• The development of the Sussex Cancer Centre is on track and will deliver many benefits, including a consolidation of radiotherapy machines, with the 6 units currently situated across Sussex being based at the centre plus an additional unit that has recently been purchased
• The consolidation of LGI surgery at Worthing has been very successful
• The introduction of analytical AI for diagnosis of non-malignant skin cancers has been successful, increasing capacity. There is further potential for this technology to be accessed through primary care.

7.2      Cllr Evans asked about people from the most deprived communities tending to present for treatment at a later point. Dr Westwell replied that this is a complex issue, with multiple factors impacting screening rates. Services need a detailed understanding of individual communities in order to understand what specific improvements need to be made.

7.3      Cllr Parrott noted that skin cancer rates are particularly high in over-75s, which is also the group with the highest levels of digital exclusion. Making access to these services digitally is consequently risky. It can also be very difficult for people to manage complex treatment regimes; having a named nurse can really help. Dr Westwell replied that cancer pathways have traditionally been designed around the needs of doctors and nurses and need instead to be designed around the needs and abilities of patients.

7.4      Cllr Simon asked for more information about improvements to patient follow-ups. Dr Westwell responded that the standard approach is often based around annual appointments with consultants irrespective of whether this makes sense in each individual case. A more stratified approach to follow-up will adopt approaches that are appropriate to each individual’s needs.

7.5      Cllr Simon asked why skin cancer performance is an outlier and queried why AI was being used to drive improvement. Dr Westwell replied that there are increasing numbers of skin cancer due to climate change and poor understanding of the risk of developing melanoma. Improving services is particularly challenging because there is a marked variation in presentation across the seasons, with many more people discovering and presenting with potential melanomas in the summer months which can lead to services being overwhelmed. Using AI in this context is appropriate: AI is significantly better and much quicker than humans for some purposes, for example in the identification of unambiguously non-malignant growths. Around 93% of patients seeking diagnosis do not have malignant growths.

7.6      Cllr Winder asked about public confidence in screening. Dr Westwell acknowledged that this is an issue. There is scope to do more, for example by looking to bundle screening for different cancers and by doing focused engagement with low take-up communities.

7.7      Mr Bowden asked why there is no screening programme for prostate cancer. Dr Westwell replied that there is no reliable test for prostate cancer. In addition, prostate cancer is not a single disease; some cancers are very aggressive, but others are not. Identifying and treating non-aggressive cancers may not always be the best option.

7.8      Cllr Hill asked whether the messaging on screening and on prevention was always effective, noting that different approaches may need to be taken for the TNBI population or for young people. Sr Westwell agreed. Services have much to learn from the success of the HPV vaccination programme.

7.9      RESOLVED – that the report be noted.