From your link and I would agree with it.

"Science Feedback addressed viral cancer cure claims related to ivermectin and fenbendazole in earlier reviews, explaining that preclinical studies showed promising results, but that this isn’t sufficient to draw conclusions about the drugs’ effectiveness against cancer in people".

I whole heartedly agree with that statement. It is likely they can still make the same statement ten years from now. The reason? There is no money to be made spending millions of dollars to run clinical trials on drugs that are off patent and might even be detrimental to profits of currently available drug therapies should they be proven effective. Unfortunately, just the world we live in. If we are lucky there will be some smaller studies that are crowd or privately funded to at least get a better idea of the efficacy.

The way I look at it is "first do no harm". Will they damage me if I take them? If the answer is no or extremely unlikely then I don't see much downside in trying something that is cheap and easy to get even though it may or may not be helpful. IF I had cancer. Risk vs potential return on investment.