On Wednesday 4th February 2026, World Cancer Day, Wes Streeting, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, launched the long-awaited National Cancer Plan for England.  The 10-year plan was created in consultation with multiple organisations and clinicians, including Perci Health partner Macmillan Cancer Support, and 11,000 patients and carers.

The plan is built on three central goals, each supported by specific actions.

1. Restoring performance: Meeting all three cancer waiting-time standards by March 2029.

2. Transforming survival: Ensuring 75% of people diagnosed with cancer from 2035 survive for five years or more.

3. Improving quality of life: Shifting care from hospitals to local neighbourhoods and improving patient experience.  

As the UK’s largest multidisciplinary cancer clinic, we gathered perspectives from our professionals and lived experience board members, as well as charity partners, clinical specialists, insurers, GPs and experts in healthcare technology and policy, to offer a truly cross-sector and collaborative response to the National Cancer Plan. 

When asked whether voices like hers have been listened to, Dr Melissa Philips, Consultant Medical Oncologist at the Barts Cancer Institute, said, ‘In many ways, yes. The emphasis on early diagnosis, innovation and sustainability reflects what clinicians have been calling for. The recognition of multidisciplinary working and the value of CNS roles is also welcome. But there remains a gap between recognising these pressures and changing how care is delivered day to day. Frontline teams see first-hand how traditional clinic structures struggle to support long-term, complex patients, and that reality needs to be more central to implementation..’

With this in mind, we’ve collected the group’s responses under four core questions, each one highlighting strengths and potential weaknesses of the Plan’s content.

Question 1

Does the plan cover the entire cancer pathway? 

While Perci Health’s Medical Director, Dr Matt Brown, applauds the Plan’s focus on early detection ‘As a way to achieve better outcomes’, Dr Melissa Philips says, ‘What I see in clinic every day is that when we diagnose cancer earlier, everything changes, for patients and for the system. I really welcome the Plan’s strong focus on earlier detection and genomics, because earlier diagnosis often means less intensive treatment, fewer long-term side effects and better quality of life, as well as improved survival. It also reduces pressure across the NHS by avoiding prolonged treatment pathways and preventable complications. This is one of the most effective ways to improve outcomes for patients while making better use of limited NHS capacity.’ 

Dr Lucy Davidson, Director of Psycho-oncology Services at Perci Health confirms the value in her practice, too: ‘Early and quicker diagnosis is such an important part of an individual’s cancer narrative and experience, and can make a huge difference in how they cope psychologically further down the line – whether they were listened to, whether action was taken quickly, how long they had to wait and what the consequences of this was.’ 

The plan makes welcome commitments on screening. However, with around 35% of screening appointments currently missed, there is an opportunity to go further in setting out how uptake will be improved consistently across programmes and populations. Vanessa Sallows, Claims & Clinical Development Director – Group Protection at L&G, highlights the role of education and personalised support in improving uptake:

“Improving early diagnosis isn’t just about expanding screening — it’s about addressing why people don’t attend the screening that already exists. Non-attendance cuts across all demographics, and in our experience, education supported by digital tools that help people understand their personal risk has been shown to improve engagement. When people feel informed and in control, they are more likely to take action.”

When it comes to treatment optimisation, Georgina Geibner, Advanced Specialist Oncology Dietitian at Perci Health, is grateful to see the Plan’s inclusion of ‘New standards for managing treatment-related side-effects for people with more complex needs during or after therapy’ as well as ‘A universal, digital-first prehabilitation programme, offering all cancer patients structured preparation and rehabilitation support through standardised cancer manuals and technology-enabled services.’ 

However, the group was disappointed to see that recovery has not been offered the same level of focus. Workplace Trainer (who is living with and beyond cancer) Sharron Moffat believes that ‘The plan is strong on diagnosis and treatment, but far less developed when it comes to the realities people face alongside and after cancer, especially work, income, mental health and long-term functioning. These factors often shape recovery more than treatment itself.’

Melanie Costas is a member of Perci’s Lived Experience Board, Professional Speaker and Inclusion Specialist. She’s positive about the plan’s focus on survivorship via personal cancer plans and neighbourhood support, but agrees that the Plan neglects the practical realities of the entire cancer journey: ‘Chronic fatigue, mental health challenges, employment barriers, and fragmented care leave too many people rebuilding their lives alone,’ she says. ‘Earlier, more proactive support needs equal priority to earlier diagnosis.’  

Perci Co-Founder and CEO Kelly McCabe also shares this stance. ‘While survivorship and whole-person impacts are acknowledged, there is limited detail on how these will be delivered at scale in everyday care. There is also little clarity on how return-to-work support, vocational rehabilitation and occupational health will be integrated early and proactively.’ Neighbourhood health hubs are a promising way to manage the non-complex, universal impacts of cancer at scale and closer to people's homes, but complex side effects requiring multidisciplinary input such as chronic fatigue, pain, peripheral neuropathy and fertility concerns will not be able to be effectively managed through charity services and signposting alone."

Yet good cancer outcomes begin with prevention and we are in strong consensus about this. Helen Aldis MBE,  founder of the award-winning Change + Check breast cancer awareness campaign and member of the Perci lived experience board, says that, ‘More needs to be done on early diagnosis and prevention. We are lagging far behind other comparable countries.’

Workplace Trainer, and member of the Perci lived experience board, Sharron Moffat would have liked to see a focus on ‘prevention with impact’: ‘The plan places considerable emphasis and responsibility on individual behaviour, while giving less weight to the broader conditions that influence cancer. Without a clearer systemic approach, prevention risks being interpreted as an issue of personal responsibility rather than collective action.’ 

The group’s conclusion is that, while the Plan touches on all stages of the cancer cycle and demonstrates a strong commitment to quality of life, more detail is required around delivery and consideration of life beyond cancer treatment.

Question 2.

Does the plan adequately address inequities in cancer care?

Both Perci Oncology Dietitian Georgina Geibner and Perci Oncology Physiotherapist and Head of Clinician Engagement Kat Tunnicliffe have concerns about the postcode lottery in access to rehabilitation and specialist support alongside and after cancer treatment. Reflecting on its inclusion in the Plan, Kat said: “These models of care are often only made available to people with the most complex needs, yet they should be accessible to everyone. This risks a large number of people with individual needs and challenges slipping through the net.” Georgina, meanwhile, suggested that, ‘Similar commitments across all four UK nations would help reduce the postcode lottery, especially around late effects and toxicity management after cancer treatment.’

Having been diagnosed with breast cancer and living with multiple disabilities, Melanie Costas believes that, ‘Accessibility and inclusion can't just be about data or diagnostics. They're about communication systems and processes that work for neurodivergent people, environments that accommodate disability, and trauma-aware support. The plan names inequalities but doesn't fully show how intersectionality such as disability, neurodivergence, poverty and ethnicity gets embedded across every stage of delivery.’

Cancer incidence rates are rising rapidly in the working age population, and Sharon Moffat is pleased that, ‘This plan reinforces the need to rethink how cancer is understood at work. Not as a short-term health event, but as a long-term condition requiring flexibility, understanding and sustained support. If workplaces are not part of this conversation, many people will continue to fall into the gap between clinical care and daily life.’ 

In short, there is across-the-board concern that the plan isn’t comprehensive enough to truly address all inequities in care. As Allan Harper Reid, Cancer Nurse Specialist at Perci Health states, ‘I hope there will be some sort of fail safe, so that those patients who really need follow up appointments cannot be missed.’

Question 3.

Does the plan use technology to personalise care?

Our response group unanimously praised the Plan’s investment in digital architecture. Kat Tunnicliffe pointed out that, ‘Investment in digital infrastructure, personalised, data-informed care, including risk-informed monitoring and digital PROMs, aligns well with my practice and existing successful service and care delivery models at Perci.’ But is the approach comprehensive enough?

Perci’s Chief Technology Officer Paddy Rehill, said that, ‘There’s a strong digital and data ambition, particularly around diagnostics, monitoring and patient empowerment, which is welcome. The opportunity now is to go further – using technology to enable genuinely personalised, risk-stratified and proactive interventions that innovate beyond existing pathways – not just digitising what currently exists. Outcomes should be measured in terms that matter to people’s lives and drive real, demonstrable improvement.’

Perci’s technology uses data to deliver personalised, human-led support across the full cancer pathway identifying risk, improving return to work rates, reducing anxiety and fatigue, and helping close postcode gaps in care. This is not ‘innovation for innovation’s sake’, this is technology delivering better outcomes, at scale.

Question 4.

Is the plan deliverable at scale and within today’s workforce constraints?

All the clinicians in the response group had strong concerns about whether the ambitions of the Plan are able to be delivered within the NHS’s current workforce constraints. This is from Dr Melissa Philips;

‘Capacity is the biggest challenge on the ground. Clinics are increasingly filled with patients living longer with more complex needs – managing late effects, treatment consequences and psychological impacts – but we are trying to do this within already overstretched outpatient services. While the Plan acknowledges whole-person care, there is less clarity on how these growing follow-up and survivorship needs will be met in practice, without adding further strain to clinicians or reducing access for patients who need timely review.’

‘Staff shortages remain one of the most significant barriers to delivery,’ confirmed Kelly McCabe, Perci Health CEO. 

The new plan makes a strong commitment that every patient should have the universal right to a personalised care plan which takes into account their physical, psychological and social needs, using a holistic needs assessment. However, every patient receiving personalised care plans and end-of-treatment summaries are not new ambitions. They were central commitments in the 2015 Achieving World-Class Cancer Outcomes strategy published a decade ago, with the aim that every person with cancer would receive a holistic needs assessment, a personalised care plan and a treatment summary by 2020.

In practice, progress over the past decade has been incredibly slow. While these interventions can be transformative when delivered well, implementation has been inconsistent and highly variable across the country. Even where personalised care plans are in use, there is a lack of supportive care services and cancer trained clinicians (nurses and allied health professionals) across the country that properly address patients' needs. Identifying need is only the first step; meeting that need with the right clinical support is far more challenging.

The stronger commitments in the new National Cancer Plan are therefore very welcome. Making personalised care plans a "universal entitlement", supported by digital infrastructure and neighbourhood models of care, is a meaningful step forward.

But as Kat Tunnicliffe explains “a care plan is still just the starting point. For many people, the holistic needs assessment will surface ongoing physical, psychological, vocational and social needs that require active support over months and years. Delivering on those needs will continue to require additional capacity and new models of care for the foreseeable future as there is a workforce shortage within the NHS.”

Delivering the ambition of this strategy will require sustained collaboration across the NHS, private insurance, innovators, employers and the voluntary sector. There is still a great deal of work to do.”

Georgina Geibner, meanwhile, is particularly disappointed at the lack of acknowledgement in the Plan for Allied Health Professionals (AHPs), who are ‘Essential for helping people live well and stay cancer free’. This perspective was seconded by Dr Lucy Davidson, who said, ‘The cohort of people living post-cancer will need AHP support, in particular psychological support, to live well and ensure recovery and rehabilitation. This group of patients is the largest cohort on my caseload as the psychological impacts of recovering post-cancer can be complex and enduring. 

Lisa Punt, Centre Head of Maggie’s Cambridge, says, ‘I feel there should be a broader view of what other services are currently in place that could partner with the NHS to provide holistic care, in particular relating to survivorship and support to return to the workplace.’

Dr Anthony Cunliffe confirms that, ‘The Government and NHS won’t be able to deliver this plan on their own. Professionals are under huge pressure, and the current financial situation is as challenging as it has ever been.’ Perhaps, Sir, there might be a bigger role for the private sector in delivering this ambitious project? 

Perci Co-Founder and CCO, Morgan Fitzsimons agrees that, ‘The direction of travel is right, but workforce capacity is the constraint, and ambition alone won’t deliver neighbourhood models and personalised support at scale. Our experience shows that technology can meaningfully extend NHS capacity. We have 90+ NHS-trained cancer specialists delivering care virtually across the UK, showing how technology and workforce innovation can go hand in hand. To meet the ambitions of the plan, we must support existing NHS teams with flexible, expert-led services that reduce bottlenecks and reach more people, faster.’

In the words of Macmillan’s Dr. Anthony Cunliffe, ‘It is going to take a relentless commitment to delivering the changes needed to truly breathe life into what right now are simply “words on a page”. The delivery will be everything. That is why Macmillan is beginning to invest in companies like Perci Health. With hundreds of thousands of lives being turned upside down by cancer every year, and with healthcare systems facing increasing pressure right across the UK. New solutions, new technologies and new ways of doing things need to be explored.’

We’ve seen the power of connected care to change lives and reduce costs. Indeed, the National Cancer Plan, with its golden thread of patient empowerment, only reinforces the need for whole-person, whole-pathway models like Perci Health, that support people beyond treatment and into survivorship, and return to life and work. 88% of our participants return to work within six months and 84% report improved quality of life. This strengthens the case for scalable, technology-enabled care and for closer partnership with private providers, insurers and employers to turn ambition into impact.

We’re pioneering a model of tech-enabled, performance-led oncology that combines digital innovation with human care, using data to personalise support, reduce variation, and proactively address the full impact of cancer on people’s lives. And we believe this must become the norm, not the exception. Now is the time to embed whole-person, data-driven cancer care that goes beyond treatment alone. So, to Mr Streeting we say: Let’s work together, across sectors, specialisms and settings, to build a future where everyone affected by cancer has access to the right support, at the right time, for the best possible outcomes.