Dr. Amy Cripps on Why Precision Oncology Use Is Accelerating and Why Many Patients Still Miss Out

Dr. Amy Cripps of Innovation In Oncology has seen firsthand how the field of precision medicine is transforming cancer care, and where it still falls short. With a background in clinical trials and translational oncology, Dr. Cripps is part of a growing movement toward personalized treatment pathways that aim to reduce side effects, target specific mutations, and increase treatment efficacy. But despite the momentum, she is clear-eyed about the barriers that continue to prevent precision oncology from being truly accessible to all.

“Even though a lot of practitioners in the space are aware of precision medicine, it’s still not being used to the extent that we would like,” says Dr. Cripps. “Many patients still are not getting the precision medicine testing they need to receive the right therapies.”

This underutilization comes at a time when the field is experiencing a dramatic surge. According to Precedence Research, the global precision oncology market is projected to grow from $133 billion in 2025 to $312.33 billion by 2034, a testament to the confidence investors, institutions, and clinicians place in this approach. Yet, the gap between investment and implementation remains wide.

Part of the problem lies in the cost. While testing has become more affordable over time, it still runs into the thousands of dollars. “Insurance often covers it, but there are a lot of hoops to jump through,” Dr. Cripps explains. “You have to really fight for it.”

Timing also plays a critical role. Results from precision tests can take anywhere from 72 hours to 21 days to return, depending on the type. “When you’re diagnosed with cancer, it’s a very stressful time. Doctors want to get patients on treatment as quickly as possible,” says Dr. Cripps. The delay in waiting for genomic testing can feel like an obstacle rather than a benefit.

Nevertheless, the clinical rationale is compelling. Targeted therapies offer the possibility of fewer side effects than traditional chemotherapy. “There are still side effects, most definitely,” Dr. Cripps notes. “But they tend to be significantly lower because these therapies are more precise.” While long-term effectiveness data collection is ongoing, early signals suggest that matching patients to therapies based on specific mutations can improve outcomes for some.

Still, precision oncology is not a silver bullet. Tumors can mutate and develop resistance, or the wrong mutation may be targeted altogether. “There’s probably been a little disappointment in that space,” says Dr. Cripps. “We are still figuring out why some patients respond really well to targeted therapies, and others don’t.”

One major bright spot is the increased integration of AI tools in the oncology workflow. At this year’s ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) meeting, Dr. Cripps encountered new AI technologies designed to help doctors keep up with the overwhelming pace of research. “The amount of information and data coming out is almost impossible for a single human to stay on top of,” she says. “AI can enhance, not replace, the role of oncologists by increasing efficiency and helping surface relevant information faster.”

AI is also improving patient access to clinical trials. “Less than 1 in 20 eligible adult oncology patients are currently enrolled in clinical trials,” Dr. Cripps explains. “AI can help match patients to the right trial faster and based on real-time mutation data. That’s a big step forward.”

In fact, Dr. Cripps sees the future of oncology becoming increasingly defined by this synergy between data and treatment. “We are finding more mutations and developing more drugs for those mutations. I don’t see that slowing down anytime soon.”

As innovation accelerates, so too does the need for careful navigation. While precision oncology offers a path toward more personalized and potentially more effective cancer care, its success will depend on improving access, education, and infrastructure. For Dr. Cripps, the goal is to help oncology evolve, not just technologically, but equitably.

“We still have a long way to go,” she says. “But in my experience, the benefits continue to outweigh the downsides. We just need to keep closing the gap between what’s possible and what’s actually being practiced.”

This article is for informational purposes only and does not substitute for professional medical advice. If you are seeking medical advice, diagnosis or treatment, please consult a medical professional or healthcare provider.