A cancer researcher’s journey to becoming a patient advocate

Cindy Körner has spent her career studying breast cancer as a researcher at the German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ) in Heidelberg. Six years ago, she became a patient herself.

“I’m a mother of three, and I went through a breast cancer diagnosis six years ago,” she said in a video interview on the sidelines of the EUnetCCC symposium on de-escalation studies, which took place in Amsterdam on 5-6 March 2026.

“I had chemotherapy, several surgeries, radiation therapy… hormone therapy, and then oral therapy. At the moment, I’m disease-free, as far as one can say,” Cindy said.

That experience — moving through treatment both as a scientist and a patient — reshaped how she thinks about cancer care.

“I saw many, many situations where I thought maybe less (treatment) could have worked (just) as well. But since there is no evidence, and we need evidence to know if we can do less, I’m a strong advocate for de-escalation research,” Cindy said.

De-escalation studies explore whether some cancer patients can be cured with less intensive treatment — lower doses, fewer therapies, shorter duration — reducing the long-term side effects that patients live with long after becoming cancer-free.

More research is needed to identify which patients could safely receive less aggressive treatment. Cindy believes patients themselves have a central role to play in generating that evidence.

“I think it’s so important that we, as a community of cancer patients, work together to improve the situation for future patients,” she said.

“And on a very practical — and maybe also a bit self-interested — side, participation in a trial can usually offer more benefits than harms,” she added.

Taking part in a clinical trial, Cindy noted, usually means closer monitoring by a care team and — in a randomised trial — perhaps a fifty-fifty chance of receiving a novel treatment, or a treatment regime that may result in a better response than the standard approach.

Asked what doctors should tell patients to convince them to join a de-escalation study, she pushed back on the premise.

“I think the question is maybe not the right one,” Cindy said.

“Doctors shouldn’t tell their patients anything to convince them of doing something — because we, as patients, are very sensitive to that, and we’ll feel like someone is trying to convince us of something,” she said.

Her advice instead: get into a genuine dialogue with patients and show them — honestly — what the risks and benefits of participating, or of going for de-escalation, really are.

“Because usually there’s no free lunch. I think it’s really important to know what you’re signing up for,” she said.

Perhaps the most striking part of Cindy’s story is what her diagnosis taught her about her own expertise.

“Before my diagnosis, I tended to believe that I was an expert in breast cancer — that I knew everything, and that I knew everything that was important,” she recalled.

“With the diagnosis, and all the therapies, and all the moments I went through, I realised that I didn’t know much.”

It’s this realisation, she said, that now drives her work bridging two worlds: “researchers and physicians, and patients — trying to get a better understanding of each other.”