Cancer In Common
online social network
Cancer In Common was a social network connecting cancer survivors, patients and their friends. It enables users to search then communicate privately with other members, based on their type of cancer, age and location.
History
In an interview, Chris Geiger stated he was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. When first diagnosed he wanted to read stories from other cancer patients who had fought the same cancer as him. This was his thinking behind The Cancer Survivors Club book. A common request he got from readers was about various treatments, side effects or wanting to be put in contact with others who had the same type of cancer.
Features
Cancer In Common features social network services such as cancer specific discussion groups, geographically specific events, fundraising, social interaction, and photo sharing. The network does not allow anonymous or pseudonymous interactions. Members must create profiles and can invite others to join their circle of friends.
On 1 August 2015, it was announced CancerInCommon would be closed on 1 September 2015.
The public source identifies “Cancer In Common” as online social network. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Cancer, Common and online.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Cancer In Common”, the useful work is to connect “online social network” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q16927772. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2015.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Cancer In Common”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Cancer In Common primary sources, Cancer In Common archive and Cancer research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cancer In Common”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Cancer In Common” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.