A new life-years-saved methodology found blood cancer treatments saved million years of life since 1949, with future gains reliant on funding and access.
A retrospective analysis introducing a novel life-years-saved methodology found that advances in the treatment of blood cancers saved an estimated 25.8 million life-years in the United States (US) between 1949 and 2024, according to data published in Blood Advances.¹
From 2026 to 2040, blood cancer treatments are projected to add another 18.9 million life-years.2 While only a projection, the report noted that an additional 1 million life-years (range, 0.8-1.5) could be added to the projection with the help of focuses on accelerating scientific innovation and expansion of access.
“When we talk about progress for cancer in the US, we talk often talk about mortality rates…. A lot of deaths [in solid tumors] that have been averted have been averted because of prevention,” E. Anders Kolb, MD, explained in an exclusive interview with OncLive® in honor of Blood Cancer Awareness Month, which is observed annually in September, and World Leukemia Day, which is observed annually on September 4th. “[Conversely,] progress for blood cancers is almost exclusively because of therapeutic innovations and access to those innovative therapies. When we think about progress in blood cancers and how to measure that, we wanted to look at something different than mortality rates. We wanted to focus on this life-years saved analysis.”
Hodgkin lymphoma, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma accounted for the largest cumulative share of life-years saved, at approximately 32%, 25%, and 21% respectively. However, despite millions of saved life-years, the analysis underscored stagnation in other disease like acute myeloid leukemia (AML), as well as racial disparities in survival outcomes, especially in multiple myeloma.
“Survival [outcomes] in AML have not changed very much, and there are a couple reasons for that,” Kolb noted. “The incidence of AML is increasing as the population ages, and the older population doesn’t tolerate curative therapy. The other reason is more about the disease itself. The biology and the uniqueness of AML [makes it so] there has not been a highly effective targeted therapy like we’ve seen in chronic myeloid leukemia [CML]. It just highlights the work that is left to be done. It’s not just about reconfiguring effective therapies from other cancers and using them in AML, it’s about discovering something new.”
Kolb is president and chief executive officer of Blood Cancer United.
“We look at the life expectancy in the population based on social security and administrative data. Once a patient has been diagnosed with a blood cancer and you subtract the two, it’s a simple equation,” he added. “You’re comparing the life expectancy [of a patient] with the disease against the life expectancy [of a patient] without the disease. The difference between the two is the number of life-years lost, and then by age cohort, you look at the average life expectancy again, and that gives you the number of life-years saved.”
The analysis is a retrospective assessment of progress from 1949 through 2024 using cancer incidence, mortality, and US life expectancy data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program to calculate the amount of life restored by therapeutic innovation across blood cancers.
“I love the life-years saved [measurement] because it’s what matters to patients and their families. You can translate into that into something finite like birthdays, graduations or just celebrating moments,” he emphasized. “It also acknowledges that not all patients are cured. There are patients out there with indolent lymphomas and CML who may never be cured of their disease but can live a perfectly normal life. Cure sometimes comes at a great cost. A lot of bad [outcomes] can happen outside the context of clinical trials.Life-years saved acknowledges the fact that patients may carry with them life-limiting or life-ending adverse effects that manifest years after treatment.”
Life-Years Saved in Blood Cancer: Important Figures
Cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation, and transplantation, in addition to the introduction of monoclonal antibodies, kinase inhibitors, and other targeted therapies, were all important therapeutic advances that the analysis highlighted as notable contributors to the millions of life-years saved. Moreover, Kolb and coauthors shed light on specific developments, like the FDA approval of rituximab (Rituxan) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, the use of a multi-agent chemotherapy plus central nervous system prophylaxis for ALL, the integration of imatinib (Gleevec) for CML, and steady progress in diseases like multiple myeloma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
“It’s just a wonderful reminder of the impact of great science, great research funding, and making sure patients can access and afford care. Those inflection points wouldn’t have been possible without the great science, without the great funding, and without making sure patients have access to care,” he said.
Despite monumental progress, Kolb noted that certain populations of patients, like those who are Black or those with diseases like AML and myelodysplasia (MDS), remain waiting for their points of progress. “In contrast, [the analysis] shows us diseases where progress is lagging. There is no inflection for AML; progress for decades has stalled. There is a lot more work to do for AML, MDS, and some of the more aggressive blood cancers that are out there.”
In the analysis, for Black patients, survival outcomes were significantly worse vs White patients across most blood cancers included in the analysis, especially multiple myeloma. However, equitable or better outcomes were reported for Black patients when access to treatment was comparable with that of White patients.
“The fact that we’re still talking about [racial disparities in blood cancers] in 2026 is a tragedy. We have known these disparities exist for a long time. We are doing a lot to address these disparities, but we need to move the needle further, and we need to move the needle faster,” Kolb stressed.
Regarding immediate improvements to blood cancer disparities, the analysis focused on the importance of improving access for patients in a multifaceted manner.
“[Improving blood cancer disparities] is about access to innovative therapies, helping patients navigate to the care they need, and making sure patients can enroll in clinical trials, so we understand the impact of the next great [treatment]. The more clinical trials we can do, the more we can learn about new therapies and the diseases they’re targeting. We all need to engage in the clinical research and the challenges around access and care navigation,” Kolb explained.
In terms of reaching long-term life-years saved projections, continued funding for research and innovations is essential, according to Kolb.
“Imagine what happens to that projection [of life-years added by 2040] if millions of people lose access to Medicaid coverage and can no longer access or afford innovative therapies? Imagine what happens if we don’t make progress in AML and MDS because research funding is decreased? That next great innovation, that next first monoclonal antibody, that next first precision medicine, or CAR T-cell therapy, whatever it might be, what if that never happens?” he asked. “That’s what we risk when we threaten Medicaid coverage and benefits for patients who need those resources to survive their blood cancer. We know what we can accomplish. We want to measure each year how we’re doing, and we want to be able to understand how the changes that are on the horizon for patients and families, [affect] the numbers of birthdays and celebrations they see.”
