Cancer is a large group of diseases that can start in almost any organ or tissue of the body when abnormal cells grow uncontrollably, and go beyond their usual boundaries to invade adjoining parts of the body. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is the second most common cause of death globally, accounting for millions of deaths every year. Lung, prostate, colorectal, stomach and liver cancer are the most common types of cancer in men, while breast, colorectal, lung, cervical and thyroid cancer are the most common among women. However, these are not necessarily the deadliest forms of cancer.

What makes cancer the deadliest depends upon how many people have it and what percentage of those people actually survive. Cancer researchers determine this on the basis of five-year relative survival. This is the percentage of people who are expected to survive the effects of a given cancer, excluding their risk of other possible causes of death, for five years past a diagnosis. It is also important to note that what makes cancer really deadly is that practically no cure for it. A cure for cancer would imply that there are no cancerous cells remaining in the body.

Here are the 5 deadliest cancers in the U.S., according to SEER five-year relative survival data for cases diagnosed between 2014 and 2020.

1. Pancreatic cancer occurs when cells in your pancreas, a gland in your abdomen that aids digestion, mutate and multiply out of control, forming a tumour. Major risk factors include smoking, obesity, diabetes, chronic pancreatitis, certain genetic mutations and environmental chemical exposure.

2. Esophageal cancer develops in the oesophagus, which is the tube that connects your throat to your stomach.

3. Liver cancer and intrahepatic bile duct cancer originate in the liver or bile ducts, often linked to hepatitis infections, heavy alcohol use, obesity, and aflatoxin exposure.

4. Lung and bronchus cancer primarily caused by smoking, secondhand smoke, and environmental pollutants, affects the lungs and airways, making it the leading cause of cancer death in the US.

5. Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is an aggressive blood and bone marrow cancer that progresses rapidly, often linked to genetic mutations, radiation exposure, and certain chemicals.

ALSO READ: Why Are Lifestyle Factors Making Millennials Vulnerable To Cancer?

During a recent sweep of cancer hospitals in Karnataka where high-cost drugs are used, the Karnataka's Food Safety and Drug Administration (FSDA) found massive price disparity between institutional (landing) prices and the maximum retail price (MRP).

The Karnataka Government urged Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) to intervene and curb the large gaps between prices hospitals pay and what they charge patients.

The concern is significant for patients admitted to hospitals who may have limited time and opportunity to compare and opt for cheaper alternatives.

Difference Between Landing Costs & MRPs

Also read: US To Face Nearly 28,000-Surgeon Shortfall By 2038: What Could This Mean For Patients?

The food and drug regulator has spotted pricing discrepancies of 256 medicines, medical devices and hospital consumables and has asked the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) and the Department of Pharmaceuticals to intervene.

It involves Gufipol, that has an institutional acquisition cost was ₹86, while its MRP was ₹4,528, making the MRP about 52.6 times the reported acquisition cost.

Another example is Guficycline-50 injection, reportedly acquired for ₹160 but carrying an MRP of ₹7,110, or about 44 times the acquisition cost.

The gap was also seen with expensive medicines. Taxocare 120 mg, a cancer drug, had a reported acquisition cost of ₹1,000 against an MRP of about ₹21,618.

Across the 256 products examined, the average MRP-to-acquisition-cost multiple was 9.23 times, while the median was 7.58 times. Seventy-three products had MRPs at least 10 times their reported acquisition costs.

The FSDA said, “MRP operates as a ceiling on retail sale to a consumer, but it does not by itself ensure that the MRP is a fair patient-facing price in an institutional setting.”

The regulator added, “The issue is not merely a commercial discount. It is an information-asymmetry and captive-patient problem. The patient, who is generally unable to obtain an immediate substitute during admission, bears the entire benefit of the manufacturer-hospital discount being retained within the supply chain. The patient neither knows the institutional acquisition cost nor possesses an effective choice at the point of use.”

This becomes relevant in emergency care, intensive care, cancer treatment, and other situations where patients may need medicines or medical consumables immediately.

Also read: Chewing Tobacco Linked To 2.5 Lakh Deaths Globally: India Among Top 10 Worst-Hit Countries

What Has The State Proposed?

The state has suggested a framework under which the amount charged to a hospital patient would take into account the actual net acquisition cost, a prescribed service margin and applicable taxes.

It has also proposed that hospital bills disclose details like the MRP, institutional acquisition cost, permitted service margin, taxes and final amount charged to the patient.

The proposal would also consider discounts, rebates, credit notes, free supplies, and other benefits when calculating the hospital's actual acquisition cost.

Current Drug Pricing Rules In India

Drug prices in India are regulated under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013. The NPPA fixes ceiling prices for medicines listed under the National List of Essential Medicines and monitors drug prices.

Manufacturers cannot increase the MRP by more than 10% over the previous 12 months for formulations not covered by price control.

The government also says no person can sell a formulation above the applicable current price or labelled MRP, whichever is lower.

The boom in GLP-1 drugs for diabetes and obesity management is not without its drawbacks. From vision loss to hair fall, researchers are increasingly assessing the side effects of popular weight loss medicines, which include semaglutide (Ozempic and Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro and Zepbound).

Recently, a new side effect among GLP-1 users was reported which entails detachment of the nails. Experts believe that using weight loss injections may cause the patient’s fingernails to fall off, raising fresh concerns about the short as well as long-term side effects of these medicines.

Risk Of Fingernails Falling Off In GLP-1 Users

Nail detachment, clinically known as onycholysis, is a condition in which nails separate from the skin underneath it.

A new study has found that the risk of fingernails falling off in people taking GLP-1 receptor agonists was almost four times more common than non-users. The findings were presented at the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Congress 2026.

Researchers, led by Dr. Charles Taïeb, found that 39% of GLP-1 users reported nail detachment, compared to 9% of people in the comparison group. Overall, 66% of people taking GLP-1 drugs experienced at least one nail disorder.

Apart from nail falling off, nail discolouration was also seen frequently among users, affecting 46% compared to 17% of non-users.

Researchers described this as the first controlled study specifically examining the possible effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists on nail health.

Also read: New Experimental Drug May Preserve Muscle Mass During Weight Loss From Ozempic

Could Your Nails Be Affected By GLP-1 Weight Loss Drugs?

GLP-1 medicines like semaglutide and tirzepatide reduce appetite, which can lead people to eat way less than they normally do. Rapid or significant weight loss can sometimes affect the body's supply of protein and other nutrients needed for healthy hair and nail growth.

But the increased number of nail detachment cases seen among GLP-1 drug users could not be solely attributed to weight loss.

“Until now, nail changes associated with GLP-1 therapies had essentially been anecdotal,” said study author Dr Charles Taïeb. “Our findings show a clear association, but they also underline an important point: not everything that happens during GLP-1 treatment is necessarily caused by the treatment itself.”

The researchers stress that the study cannot establish that GLP-1 receptor agonists caused changes to the nails. Around half of users already had nail problems before the treatment began.

After adjusting dermatological conditions and nutritional deficiencies, the strength of some associations reduced. However, nail detachment and nail discolouration remained around two to three times more frequent among users after adjustment.

Dermatologists already recognise that GLP-1 treatment can cayuse brittle nails and slower nail growth, especially in people who lose substantial weight loss. The American Academy of Dermatology notes that these effects may occur alongside other changes to the skin and hair.

Also read: 2 Indians Charged In US Over Fake Ozempic Scheme: How To Spot Counterfeit GLP-1 Drugs

Hair Loss Was Also Reported By 50% Of GLP-1 Users

A companion study also identified unusual changes on the hair and scalp among GLP-1 users. Unusual hair loss was reported by 50% of GLP-1 users compared to 34% of controls.

The study also reported loss of hair volume or density affected 42% versus 19% among controls. Hair loss after the treatment was also more than twice as common among users, i.e. 26% among users compared to 12% in non-users. Redness of the scalp was also around three times more frequent.

Study author Dr Bruno Halioua explained, “This suggests that what is happening on the scalp may go beyond the classical shedding seen after rapid weight loss and involve an inflammatory component.”

The author added, “Scalp inflammation was the rule rather than the exception, which clinicians do not currently look for and which may be treatable. Taken together, our findings suggest that factors beyond weight loss alone may contribute to the hair, scalp and nail changes observed among GLP-1 users.”

He also said that these changes could be temporary and that one should not stop the treatment without discussing it with their doctor.

“These changes are frequent, usually benign, and are not a reason to stop an effective treatment on one’s own initiative,” he said. “Anyone who notices hair shedding, an itchy or red scalp or nail changes should mention it to their doctor rather than discontinue therapy.”

Chewing tobacco contributed to an estimated 251,000 deaths globally in 2023, according to a new study from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME).

The analysis, part of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023 (GBD 2023) and published in The Lancet Global Health, found that more than 90% of the health burden was concentrated in 10 countries, with India accounting for the largest share.

"Chewing tobacco is not a uniform public health problem, and our findings show that a relatively small number of countries bear an overwhelming share of its health burden," said Gabriela Gil, lead author and research scientist at IHME.

South Asia Bears 84% Of Global Deaths: India Leads

Also read: Trying For A Baby? Tobacco Smoking Hurting Male And Female Fertility, Warns WHO

South Asia accounted for an estimated 210,000 chewing tobacco-related deaths, or about 84% of the global total.

Nearly 15% of people aged 15 and older in the region used chewing tobacco in 2023.

The highest age-standardized prevalence was reported in:

• Palau: 24.4%
• Bangladesh: 23.4%
• Nepal: 17.5%

India recorded the highest number of chewing tobacco-related deaths among both males and females.

More than 90% of the male death and disability burden was concentrated in:

• India
• Bangladesh
• China
• Pakistan
• Myanmar
• US
• Nepal
• Sri Lanka
• Philippines
• Madagascar

Among females, the countries were:

• India
• Bangladesh
• Pakistan
• Indonesia
• Myanmar
• China
• Thailand
• Cambodia
• Vietnam
• Nepal

Chewing Tobacco Use Highest Among Elderly Females

Read More: Trying to Quit Tobacco? Yoga Could Improve Your Chances, Suggests Study

Globally, use was higher among males than females and increased with age before peaking at 60–64 years.

In South Asia:

• Nearly 1 in 5 males used chewing tobacco.
• Around 1 in 10 females used it.
• Male use peaked at 60–64 years.
• Female use peaked at 80 years and older.

Bangladesh showed a different pattern, with female use higher than male use across age groups older than 30.

"These findings show why chewing tobacco control cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach," said Dr. Emmanuela Gakidou, senior author and professor in the Department of Health Metrics Sciences at IHME.

"Prevention and cessation strategies need to reflect how patterns of use differ by country, age and sex, as well as the cultural and social factors that shape tobacco use in each setting," Dr Gakidou added.

Stroke, Oral Cancer Among Key Health Risks

Researchers assessed chewing tobacco-related burden across six outcomes:

• Stroke
• Lip and oral cavity cancer
• Esophageal cancer
• Other pharyngeal cancer
• Laryngeal cancer
• Nasopharyngeal cancer

Stroke accounted for the largest share of health loss, at 55.9 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100,000 people, followed by lip and oral cavity cancer at 17.4 DALYs per 100,000.

Chewing tobacco accounted for 17.3% of lip and oral cavity cancer DALYs globally, rising to 30.5% in South Asia.

Global Burden More Than Doubled Since 1990

Chewing tobacco-related DALYs increased 116% between 1990 and 2023, reaching 6.48 million. Of this:

• 6.17 million years were lost to premature death.
• Total DALYs reached 6.48 million in 2023.

The researchers noted that chewing tobacco has received less attention than smoked tobacco in global tobacco-control efforts.

They said stronger prevention and cessation measures, tailored to age, sex, country and local patterns of use, are needed to reduce the burden.