Men over 65 face highest risk of little-known cancer that is often diagnosed late
One type of cancer is most common in men over the age of 65, and it is too often diagnosed late due to a lack of awareness. In fact, you've probably never heard of this type of cancer that sees around 12,700 diagnoses in the UK each year, 70 per cent of which are in men.
The Medical Negligence team for legal firm Simpson's Millar is urging older men to be aware of head and neck cancer, that sees over half of its cases (53 per cent) diagnosed late. Delayed diagnosis leads to more invasive treatment and a lower survival rate for this cancer that is 2.8 times more likely to affect men aged 65 - 69 than women of the same age.
Head and neck cancer affects the throat, nose and mouth, and its symptoms can often be brushed off or ignored. This is why awareness of this little-known disease is so important.
Kate McCue, Senior Associate Medical Negligence Solicitor at Simpson Millar, explains: 'Head and neck cancer is one of the most preventable types of cancer we see, which makes awareness all the more important.
'Many of the risks such as smoking, alcohol use, and HPV are well understood, yet the public conversation around them is still far too limited. With better education, more people could take steps to reduce their risk, and crucially, spot early warning signs before the disease progresses.
'When cancer is caught early, the outcomes are often significantly better as it can mean simpler treatment, less disruption to the day-to-day life, and a better chance of recovery.'
When caught early, head and neck cancer has a survival rate of up to 80 per cent. But if diagnosed late, the chances of survival can drop to just 20 per cent, so knowing how to spot the signs is crucial.
Symptoms of head and neck cancer
Older men should watch for the following symptoms:
Mouth ulcers or sores that haven't healed after three weeks
A persistent sore throat or hoarseness
A lump in the neck, lip or mouth
Difficulty or pain when chewing or swallowing
Loose teeth or dentures that no longer fit
Earache, facial pain or numbness
Speech changes or unexplained weight loss
Making healthier lifestyle choices, such as stopping smoking, drinking less, exercising regularly and opting for a balanced diet can reduce the risks of head and neck cancer.
Risk factors for head and neck cancer
While men over 65 have the biggest risk of developing the condition, certain lifestyle choices and other health factors can also increase the chances that an individual will develop head and neck cancer.
Cancer Research shares an extensive list of the risk factors for head and neck cancer on their website.
These include:
Age and sex (men over 65 being at the highest risk)
Smoking
Drinking alcohol
Infections including HPV, EBV and HIV or AIDS
Autoimmune conditions
Those who have had organ transplants
High processed meat intake
Those who have previously had cancer
Those with a family history of cancer
Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community!
Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today.
You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland.
No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team.
All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in!
If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'.
We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like.
To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
2 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Woman, 26, told she might have a cold doesn't know how long she has to live
Chelsea Jones noticed a lump on her neck around two and half years ago which doctor told her could be down to various issues, from her grinding her teeth to just having a cold A woman who was told she might just have a cold has been given a devastating diagnosis that she has cancer, more than two years after first going to see a doctor. Chelsea Jones, 26, from West Derby, noticed a lump on her neck around two and half years ago. During numerous visits to the doctors, Chelsea was told it could be down to various issues, from her grinding her teeth to just having a cold. It was only last month that she was told she had acinic cell carcinoma and a parotid gland tumour and now she doesn't know how long she's got left to live. According to Cancer Research, acinic cell carcinoma is a form of cancer that develops in the acinar cells which produce saliva. It is a rare form of cancer that accounts for a small percentage of all salivary gland tumours, typically between 1% and 6%. The organisation adds there is a 'small risk of a cancer developing within the tumour'. Macmillan Cancer Support says there are several types of cancerous salivary tumours, but this type of cancer tends to develop in younger people more than most other salivary gland cancers. The most common symptom of salivary gland cancer is swelling on the side of your face. Even so, the diagnosis on July 10 came as a huge shock to Chelsea. She said: 'I collapsed. It was a good job my mum was with me. It's insane, I've never heard of anything like it. "It's a rare form of cancer. They did say it is slow growing, but they don't know for certain until I get another MRI scan on Saturday. "Then I will find out if it's spread to anywhere else in my body and find out what stage the cancer is at, but I've been told it's 100% not curable. 'I will get the tumour removed in a few weeks and then I will start radiotherapy. They don't know how long I'm going to live for because it's that rare.' Chelsea is frustrated that her cancer was undetected for years. She is now urging others to trust their instincts and get any symptoms fully checked out. Chelsea said: 'I just want to raise awareness, get people to check their lumps and not take no for an answer. Feel your lumps and bumps, study your own body. Since my diagnosis, I've actually found another lump at the back of my neck that I need to mention when I next go into hospital. "You know your own body, you know when something's not right. If I can help one person, that's my job done.'
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
Mapped: The UK regions where smoking is most common after stark new figures released
The number of cigarettes smoked in Britain every year has been revealed in a shocking new study from Cancer Research UK and University College London (UCL). Smokers are getting through an estimated 28.6 billion cigarettes each year on average, equating to 78 million every day. The study draws on data from the Smoking Toolkit Study between 2022 and 2024. It estimates that adults who smoke consume an average of 10.4 cigarettes daily, with 5.5 per cent of smokers exceeding 20 cigarettes a day The figures are also broken down by region, showing which areas in the UK have the highest proportion of smokers, and which region has the highest average number of cigarettes smoked. The data shows that it is the South West that has the highest proportion of smokers at 15 per cent of the adult population. Meanwhile, Scotland and Yorkshire are joint-lowest at 13.3 per cent. Amongst all adults, the average is 13.9 per cent. However, smokers in southern regions smoke proportionally less cigarettes a year than those in the north and Scotland. Smokers in the North East average 598 cigarettes a year – the highest of any region – while London is the lowest at 423. The analysis finds that this points to significant inequalities in cigarette consumption, with individuals from more deprived backgrounds smoking an average of 11 cigarettes daily, compared to 9.4 per day among those in wealthier areas. In light of the figures, charities are calling on the government to speed up its upcoming Tobacco and Vapes Bill which is currently passing through Parliament. The legislation aims to create a 'smoke-free generation' by preventing the sale of tobacco products to anyone born on or after January 1, 2009, effectively raising the legal smoking age each year. Cancer Research UK's executive director of policy, Dr Ian Walker, said: 'While great strides have been made to bring down smoking rates, we can't afford to be complacent. Every week, around 550 million cigarettes are still smoked in Britain – that's enough to fill an Olympic sized swimming pool. It's vital that everyone, wherever they live, can access the support they need to quit smoking for good. 'The Tobacco and Vapes Bill is a historic opportunity to help stub out the harms of smoking, but it's frustrating that the legislation isn't progressing through Parliament as quickly as it should be. 'Tobacco is a toxic product that should have no place in our future, and I urge all parliamentarians to back a smoke-free UK and prioritise this Bill when it returns to the House of Lords. This world-leading legislation has strong political and public support that can't be ignored.'
The Herald Scotland
3 days ago
- The Herald Scotland
British state has a shameful record of moral cowardice
Consider the infected blood scandal, victims of which are only now able to access the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme. From the 1970s to the 1990s, over 30,000 NHS patients were infected with HIV and hepatitis C by infected blood or clotting factor products, killing at least 3,000 people. The history of this scandal is marked by stubbornness and cover-ups from the outset. In the 1970s, American scientists, including Judith Graham Pool, a pioneer in haematology, were characterising the products infecting patients with hepatitis C as 'dangerous' and 'unethical'. The World Health Organization was warning the UK not to import blood from countries with a high prevalence of hepatitis. They were ignored. So too were doctors like Spence Galbraith, the founding director of the Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre in England and Wales, who warned the Government in 1983 that blood products may be transmitting HIV. An NHS pamphlet for blood donors distributed in September 1983 stated that HIV could 'almost certainly' be transmitted by blood products, and the consensus among haemophilia physicians by this point was that blood products were spreading AIDS. Despite that, Ken Clarke, then the Health and Social Care Secretary, made statements to the House of Commons that the evidence was inconclusive and maintained the policy of importing untreated blood products. In the decades since the Government settled out of court, in 1990, with claimants who had been infected with HIV by untreated blood products, inquiries were repeatedly denied and evidence destroyed. In 2000, Caroline Flint revealed to Parliament that papers had been destroyed related to both the HIV litigation and the litigation over hepatitis C infections. In 2009, the Archer Report – a privately-funded investigation into the scandal chaired by Lord Archer, a former Solicitor General – reported that 'some of those who gave evidence to us suspected that there was an exercise in suppressing evidence of negligence or misconduct,' and that one witness, Lord Jenkin, Health Secretary from 1979 to 1981, had been 'left with the clear impression […] that all the files bearing upon the issue of contaminated blood products had been destroyed, and that this had been done 'with intent, in order to draw a line under the disaster.'' Read more by Mark McGeoghegan The 2015 Scottish Government-commissioned Penrose Inquiry into the scandal north of the Border was branded a whitewash by victims and campaigners, after it concluded that little could have been done differently, which is untrue, looking at the timeline of warnings, and refused to apportion any blame. Even when a full inquiry was undertaken, it was discovered that hundreds of documents related to the scandal had been removed from archives by Department of Health and Social Care staff and not returned, sparking renewed concerns about a cover-up. As recently as 2023, the Government was still attempting to prevent the implementation of a compensation scheme. The final inquiry report was published last May, concluding that the scandal could have been avoided, that patients were knowingly exposed to 'unacceptable risks', and that the Government and NHS did indeed attempt a cover-up by 'hiding the truth'. It would be easy to say that these scandals are relatively rare, if not for the fact that we've just lived through the culmination of the Horizon IT scandal, in which Post Office officials displayed the same stubbornness and aversion to accountability that the NHS did over infected blood products. This sense of entitlement, to a right to avoid scrutiny and accountability, to a prerogative to avoid paying the price for its screw-ups and those of its staff, manifests in other ways, too. Shamima Begum, stripped of her British citizenship despite having been born and raised in London (Image: BBC/PA Wire) What, for example, is the case of Shamima Begum, stripped of her British citizenship despite having been born and raised in London, if not an attempt by the British state to wash its hands of a teenage girl, groomed online by terrorists, who was ultimately our responsibility as a society and the UK's responsibility as a government? And what of efforts to protect British soldiers from being held accountable for war crimes, committed in Northern Ireland, Iraq, and now Afghanistan? Which brings us back to Afghanistan. We know, for example, that in one instance, a UK Special Forces officer who may have been connected to alleged SAS war crimes personally rejected 1,585 resettlement applications from Afghans who may have witnessed those alleged crimes. When Johnny Mercer, then Veterans Minister, raised his concerns with senior officers, one UK Special Forces officer told him that his concerns were offensive – either 'lying to my face', as Mr Mercer put it, or 'so deeply incompetent that he didn't know.' The super-injunction granted to the Government over the Ministry of Defence data leak of the details of thousands of Afghans is an unprecedented, but logical escalation of the British state's tendency towards avoiding scrutiny of its errors. It prevented MPs from holding the Government accountable for the error or overseeing its spending on the secret relocation scheme for those affected. It meant the victims of that leak had no awareness that their personal information was in the hands of people willing to publish those details online, and potentially to sell them to the Taliban. The argument that the super-injunction was needed to prevent the Taliban finding out about the leak doesn't hold water, given reporting this week showing that it continued long past the point it was clear that the Taliban were aware of it. As journalists affected by the super-injunction, like Lewis Goodall, have argued this week, such a super-injunction should never have been granted and should never be granted again. It undermined Parliamentary democracy to cover up a scandal. However, there's a wider, deeply ingrained set of practices in the British state that need to be examined and, ultimately, abandoned to secure a government that's transparent and accountable to those it governs. Mark McGeoghegan is a Glasgow University researcher of nationalism and contentious politics and an Associate Member of the Centre on Constitutional Change. He can be found on BlueSky @
