I’ve just accepted that there won’t be a cure anytime soon, and come to terms with it.
Would love to be proven wrong, but I think they’ll find a cure for tinnitus when they can cure baldness and cancer.
Other than that nitpick, sure.
As for creating a device to detect what the animal "hears", similar to how there's some research that used fmri with machine learning to "see dreams",it might be possible to do that for animal hearing.
We can try. Sometimes the cancer doesn't come back, and sometimes it does, and in no case do we understand why. This is not what most people mean by "cure".
If you take antibiotics-- sometimes it doesn't seem to work at all, and some other times the infection comes back after the cessation of treatment. This is true because of some reasons that are well-understood, and others that aren't.
Yes, most cancers are worse on these metrics than most uses of antibiotics, but not always ridiculously so. There are cancers with 5 year survival rates of >95%, and with very low recurrence rates after 5 years.
It's not like being cured normally means "and you'll never get that again ever".
Of course, people who get one cancer are, on average, more genetically and environmentally exposed to cancer risk. Cancer treatments themselves can even increase the risk of new cancer in some cases. So getting an entirely independent cancer is possible, too.
Rather, the usual model is that you physically extract the cancer, or you poison it, and you hope that you removed or killed all of the living cancer cells. If one is left, the cancer will grow back over time. This is why a metastatic cancer is so much worse than one that hasn't yet metastasized - after metastasis, cancer cells can be located pretty much anywhere in your body, but before metastasis, they are all localized to wherever the cancer originally developed, and if you remove enough tissue, it's plausible that you might get them all.
This model is somewhat in tension with (part of) the concept of partial remission, where the growth of a cancer becomes slower. But in such a case, it is even more obvious than usual that the cancer of the future is the same cancer as the cancer of the past, since we could observe it the whole time.
You might also consider the implications of the fact that the terminology for what appears to be a total absence of cancer is "cancer in remission". We say that because we can't know whether the cancer is actually gone. If it isn't gone, it will come back.
Others like herpes are lifelong afflictions whose symptoms can clear up, become inactive and eventually reactivate and flare up again.
Cancers can be like that too.