> most cancer is still diagnosed and treated in a "classical" manner. This is half-true at best. As someone who's helped build FDA-approved genomic tests for

> most cancer is still diagnosed and treated in a "classical" manner. This is half-true at best. As someone who's helped build FDA-approved genomic tests for cancer treatment, a huge proportion of cancers (in the US) are treated by sequencing and informing treatment based on sequence results. Especially among stages 3 and 4. Diagnosis of early-stage (1 & 2) cancer via genomics is a difficult problem, because when the cancer is small, so is the amount of DNA it gives off. Liquid biopsy tests have a lot of trouble reliably distinguishing that small signal from noise, and it's not really cost-effective to test every single person for stage 3+ cancer via blood tests on a regular basis. Treatment of some early-stage cancers can suffer from the same problem, where it can be difficult to obtain a sufficient sample of cancer genetic material. But the treatment landscape for late-stage cancers looks utterly different than it did 20 years ago. The idea that most stage 4 cancer is still treated in a "classical" manner in the US is patently false.