For people with cancer, why can’t doctors just remove the affected body part(s) (with the exception of the brain, spine, and lungs, maybe)?

Question

I’ve got a grandpa in the hospital for bladder cancer (benign, fortunately) and I’m wondering why they can’t just remove his bladder and put in a nee one or an artificial one.

In: 0

Answer 1

I feel the need to clarify that benign tumors are by definition non-cancerous. I can elaborate if you would like.

To answer your main question, surgery to remove the mass and affected organ is the first line of treatment for many cancers. Transplants are risky, so it’s preferable to take out the cancerous part of the organ versus removing and replacing the whole organ. This can be organ specific, though. As other comments have mentioned, certain cancers like breast cancer are more commonly treated by removing the entire organ. In contrast, a patient with colon cancer will more likely just have the affected section of the colon removed. This is decided for cancers based on the importance of the organ, feasibility of transplant, and decades of statistics describing survival rate based on treatment type.

Removing the cancerous organ, however, does not always cure the cancer. If the cancer has metastasized or is beginning to metastasize (micrometastasis) then removing the organ will not be curative.