Standard Treatment, Clinical Trials, and Second Opinions: Making Informed Choices
In earlier parts of this series, we looked at the overall framework of cancer treatment, differences in “curability” among cancer types, and how to think about recurrence and metastasis as part of a longer-term journey.
In this Part 7, we focus on three key topics that directly shape real-life treatment decisions:
- What “standard treatment” (standard of care) actually means
- How clinical trials fit into the picture
- How to make good use of second opinions
On the internet, you may encounter strong statements such as:
- “Standard treatment can’t cure you.”
- “Only the newest immunotherapy really works.”
From a medical standpoint, however, standard treatments and clinical trials are not enemies. Rather, they stand in a relationship like:
- Standard treatment = the best-supported foundation based on current evidence
- Clinical trials = carefully designed attempts to go beyond that foundation
This article explains standard treatment, clinical trials, and second opinions from the perspective of helping patients and families make decisions they can feel comfortable with.
What you will learn in this article
- What “standard treatment” means and how it is determined
- How guidelines relate to “personalized” or “individualized” medicine
- The basic structure of clinical trials (Phase I, II, III)
- Potential benefits and risks of taking part in a clinical trial
- The role of second opinions and how to use them effectively
- Example questions that can help clarify treatment options
- Tips for thinking about which treatment is the best fit for you as a person
Chapter 1 What is “standard treatment” (standard of care)?
Not “just average care,” but “the best-supported care we have now”
The term “standard treatment” is sometimes misunderstood as:
- “the most ordinary, conservative option”
- “what doctors do when they don’t want to try anything special”
In medical practice, however, standard treatment means:
- the treatment that currently has the strongest overall evidence in terms of effectiveness and safety
based on clinical trials and large-scale studies.
In other words, it is not a “lowest common denominator,” but rather:
- a well-tested starting point or backbone around which individual care is built
for most patients in a given situation.
Why standard treatments are defined
Cancer care involves:
- many different possible treatment options
- significant potential benefits and serious side effects
To avoid large differences in care from one region or hospital to another, professional societies and expert groups develop guidelines that:
- summarize which treatments have the strongest evidence for each cancer type and stage
- help ensure that most people can receive a similar level of high-quality care
These guidelines are the basis for what is called “standard treatment.”
Chapter 2 Guidelines and individualized care
Guidelines as the “map,” individualized care as the “route choice”
Cancer treatment guidelines typically describe:
- recommended options for each cancer type and stage
- the main goals of each option (cure, long-term control, symptom relief, etc.)
You can think of guidelines as a map:
- they show which routes are generally safe and effective
- they warn against routes that are clearly risky or unhelpful
But the actual route chosen depends on factors such as:
- the patient’s age, fitness, and other medical conditions
- work, family responsibilities, and support at home
- personal values about how to balance length of life and quality of life
In this sense, guidelines set the framework, while individualized care determines the specific path within that framework.
Molecular profiling and personalized medicine
In recent years, “personalized medicine” has become more common. This often involves:
- testing tumor samples for specific genetic or molecular features
- using targeted therapies or immunotherapies when these features are present
Some of these strategies are already part of guidelines for certain situations. Others are still under investigation in clinical trials.
A useful way to think about it is:
- standard treatment provides the foundation, and
- molecular information helps further refine and tailor that treatment to the individual patient
Chapter 3 Clinical trials: basic concepts
Phase I, II, and III trials in simple terms
New drugs and treatment approaches are usually studied step by step:
- Phase I trials: small groups of patients; main goals are to assess safety, side effects, and appropriate dose
- Phase II trials: more patients; ask whether the treatment shows promising signs of effectiveness
- Phase III trials: large studies comparing the new treatment to the current standard, to see whether it truly offers more benefit
If a Phase III trial shows clear advantage and acceptable safety, the new treatment may be approved and eventually incorporated into guidelines as a new standard option.
“New” does not automatically mean “better”
Because clinical trials involve new or modified treatments, it is easy to assume they are automatically superior. In reality, especially in early-phase trials:
- whether the treatment is better, equal, or worse than standard options is still uncertain
That is precisely why the trial is being done.
So, clinical trials should be seen as:
- structured experiments to find out whether we can improve on standard treatment
rather than guaranteed upgrades.
Chapter 4 Benefits and risks of joining a clinical trial
When participation may be especially worth considering
Potential advantages of joining a clinical trial include:
- access to promising new therapies not yet widely available
- close monitoring and follow-up built into the study design
- the opportunity to contribute to knowledge that may help future patients
Participation can be particularly worth exploring when:
- standard treatments have been tried and options are limited
- there is a trial that specifically targets the molecular profile of your cancer
Key points to clarify before deciding
At the same time, clinical trials also involve:
- uncertainty about how effective the new treatment will be
- possible side effects that are not yet fully understood
- additional tests and visits that may increase the burden on daily life
Before deciding, it is helpful to understand:
- the purpose of the trial and what treatments are being compared
- how the trial differs from standard treatment in terms of procedures and risks
- possible benefits and side effects
- how often you would need to visit the hospital and what tests are involved
- whether you can withdraw from the trial if you change your mind
These points are usually explained in a written consent form and by the research team.
Chapter 5 Second opinions: what they are and how to use them
Not a sign of mistrust, but a tool for clarity and confidence
A second opinion means consulting another specialist, usually at a different hospital, to obtain an independent view on diagnosis or treatment options.
Some people worry that asking for a second opinion will offend their current doctor. In modern oncology, however, it is generally recognized as:
- a normal, reasonable step to help patients make well-informed decisions
and many physicians support it.
What a second opinion can offer
By seeking a second opinion, you may:
- confirm that the current plan aligns with guidelines and expert practice
- learn about alternative strategies or clinical trials available at other centers
- gain new perspectives that help you clarify your own priorities
The outcome may be either:
- reassurance that your current plan is appropriate, or
- new information that leads you to adapt the plan with your primary team
In both scenarios, the main benefit is usually increased confidence and understanding.
Chapter 6 Questions that can help guide treatment decisions
Core questions to ask your care team
When discussing treatment options, some questions that often help include:
- Can you explain my cancer type and stage (and any important molecular features) in terms I can understand?
- What are the main standard treatment options for someone in my situation?
- For the treatment you are recommending now, is the main goal cure, long-term control, or symptom relief?
- What benefits can I reasonably expect, and what are the most important possible side effects?
- How would my outlook change if I chose a different option, or if I delayed or declined treatment?
- Are there any clinical trials I might be eligible for? If so, how do they differ from standard treatment?
- If I want a second opinion, how can I obtain my records and imaging, and can you help with a referral?
You do not need to ask all of these at once. The key is to understand, in your own words, the goals, options, and trade-offs of each choice.
Chapter 7 Balancing medical recommendations with personal values
“Best” from a medical view vs. “best” for your life
From a purely medical or statistical perspective, one treatment may look “best” because it offers:
- the longest average survival
- the lowest risk of recurrence
But in real life, people differ in what they value most:
- some may want to pursue the most intensive treatment possible, even with substantial side effects
- others may prioritize daily functioning, time with family, or the ability to continue working
The crucial step is to:
- understand the medical recommendations, and then
- consider how they align with your own goals and priorities
and to share those priorities openly with your care team.
Conversations with family and trusted people
It is common to feel that “no choice is perfect” and to worry about future regret. Talking with:
- family members or close friends
- counselors, social workers, or patient navigators
can help clarify what matters most to you.
The aim is not to find a “perfect” decision but to reach a point where you can say:
- “Given what we knew and what mattered to me at the time, this was the most honest choice I could make.”
Chapter 8 Summary and a preview of Part 8
In this Part 7, we have discussed:
- the meaning of standard treatment as an evidence-based foundation
- the relationship between guidelines and individualized care
- how clinical trials build on standard treatment and why they involve both potential benefits and uncertainties
- the role of second opinions in supporting informed, confident decisions
- example questions that can clarify treatment goals and options
- the importance of aligning medical recommendations with personal values and life circumstances
In short:
good cancer care is not only about “which treatment is best on paper,” but also about “which treatment fits best with who you are and what you want from life,” decided through open dialogue with your care team.
In the final Part 8 of this series, we will turn to:
- life after treatment (survivorship)
- living with fears of recurrence
- practical ideas for living well and meaningfully with and after cancer
to bring together the threads of this introductory-to-basic series.
This article was edited by the Morningglorysciences team.
The content is for general informational purposes only and is not a substitute for individual medical advice. For decisions about diagnosis or treatment, please always consult your treating physician.
Related Article
Comments