Women’s cancers get 20% less funding than male cancers, despite much worse survival rates

New data reveals systemic gender bias in UK cancer funding. Notably, despite worse survival outcomes for women’s cancers, the funding for these fails to match up to the rates and reality. This is according to vital research from women’s bladder health brand Jude.

Women’s cancer funding: not enough, not equivalent

When it comes to cancer funding in the UK, you’d assume money goes where it’s needed most, to the cancers that are the deadliest or hardest to detect.

But the latest data from bladder health brand Jude tells a different story.

The public give male-specific cancers like prostate and testicular cancer significantly more funding per case than female-specific cancers, even when women’s survival rates are lower:

Jude’s determined this by reviewing charity financial information in the UK Charity Register. It also utilised public health data from Cancer Research UK.

Its research revealed that:

• Testicular cancer: 2,376 cases per year had a 91% survival rate and received £5,354 per case
• Prostate cancer: 55,093 cases had a 78% survival rate and received £1,288 per case.
• Ovarian cancer: 7,452 cases had a 35% survival rate and received £1,132 per case.
• Uterine cancer: nearly 10,000 cases, but received just £63 per case in funding.

Across the board, male-specific cancers receive 20% more funding per case than female-specific ones. This is despite having 21% higher average survival rates.

When cancer is ‘awkward’, it gets ignored

One of the key reasons female-specific cancers are so underfunded is that they affect parts of the body we still don’t talk about.

Gynaecological cancers, bladder issues, and anything involving women’s sex organs or bodily functions are often seen as taboo and that stigma has real consequences.

It means fewer charities, less public campaigning, and reduced awareness. While prostate and testicular cancers have benefitted from high-profile awareness drives like Movember, there is no mainstream equivalent for ovarian, uterine, or vulval cancer.

The result is a dangerous feedback loop: what feels “awkward” gets overlooked, and what gets overlooked doesn’t get funded.

Jude’s Founder Peony Li said:

As a female-led health brand, we did this research because no one else was asking the obvious question: why are the cancers affecting women’s bodies (particularly those below the waist) still so underfunded?

The answer was painfully clear: stigma, silence, and a system that doesn’t see these issues as urgent.

It’s time we had the equivalent of Movember for gynaecological cancers, something unapologetic, loud, and impossible to ignore.

This isn’t about taking anything away from male cancers. It’s about funding based on need, not noise. Because when women’s cancers are treated as taboo, lives are lost.”

Featured image via the Canary