{
  "abstract": "The WHO has long upheld health equity as a guiding principle, emphasising that every individual deserves the highest attainable standard of health regardless of geography or income.1 2 Yet this principle is not fully realised in its most influential product in oncology: the WHO Classification of Tumours, or the ‘Blue Books’. Over time, the WHO tumour classification has shifted towards a more granular, genetically driven framework where H&E microscopy is no longer sufficient to render a complete diagnosis. While this evolution reflects legitimate scientific progress, it risks deepening health disparities for most of the world’s population, which lacks the tools necessary to implement modern diagnostic approaches. The recent iterations of the WHO tumour classification, with their complexity and reliance on molecular criteria, are an unintended consequence of well-meaning efforts. They are designed to maintain a state-of-the-art, cutting-edge standard, but these classifications have instead produced a system that is resource intensive and difficult to operationalise. It is time to reframe WHO’s responsibility: the organisation has a moral mandate to lead structural change, not merely codify science. The classification can strike a balance between aspirational advances and pragmatic equity, serving as a bridge rather than a barrier.",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA"
      ],
      "name": "Vikram Deshpande"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Manipal Hospital Yeshwanthpur, Malleswaram Bangalore, India"
      ],
      "name": "Sanjay A Pai"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA"
      ],
      "name": "Benjamin L Mazer"
    }
  ],
  "title": "WHO is embedding inequality into cancer diagnostics",
  "uid": "6001e152-a4d5-52e4-ae71-ea2ed372f1fe"
}