Cancer clinical trials in the Philippines.

In this Commentary, we discuss disparities in resources for and access to cancer trials from the perspective of the Philippines, a lower-middle-income country in Southeast Asia, where cancer is the fourth leading cause of death. Geographic disparities play out such that academic institutions and clinical trials are centralized in the island of Luzon, particularly in the capital, Manila. These disparities are compounded by the lack of comprehensive cancer patient and clinical trial registries in the Philippines. Additionally, sociocultural considerations influence clinical trial implementation. Providers must consider the role of a patient's family in the decision to participate in clinical trials; a patient's degree of health literacy; and the economic burden of cancer care, with attention to both the direct and indirect financial toxicities associated with cancer care. Our call to action is threefold. (1) Bolster locally led trials and encourage international collaboration to improve diversity in trial participation and trials' generalizability. (2) Strengthen national trial registries to improve awareness of trials for which patients are eligible. (3) Integrate cultural competency frameworks that move beyond parachutism and parasitism in research and instead promote trust, reciprocity, and collaboration. These challenges may yet evolve, but in emphasizing these barriers, we hope to kindle further dialogue, new insights, and innovative action towards solving these disparities in cancer research, not just in the Philippines, but also in other low- and middle-income countries.

Access to Surgical Treatment for Breast Cancer in the Philippines.

Female breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide; however, while high-income countries have the highest incidence rates, lower-middle income countries have the highest mortality rates. In this article, we describe the landscape of disparities in access to surgical care for patients with breast cancer in the Philippines, a lower-middle income country in Southeast Asia. We describe the payment landscape that allows access to care for patients with non-metastatic disease, and draw attention to the fact that despite some degree of insurance for most Filipinos, great barriers to access remain in the form of a low number of surgical providers, geographic disparities, and persistent socioeconomic barriers. Lastly, we suggest steps forward to improve equity in access to surgical care for Filipino patients with breast cancer.

End-of-life care for Filipino patients with cancer.

Providing end-of-life care within the cultural context of a Filipino patient in the United States is a complex process for clinicians, patients, and their families. An inclusive approach is crucial, especially because a significant proportion of patients belong to minority groups such as Filipinos, who represent the fourth largest group of immigrants in the United States as of data available in 2019. The case provided in this paper highlights the importance of family, religion, and finances in guiding the best possible way of providing end-of-life care for Filipino patients with cancer. At the end of this review, we discuss concrete action points that may give a non-Filipino physician a deeper understanding of end-of-life care for Filipinos.

Radiotherapy resources in the Philippines: A 2022 update.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the third leading cause of death in the Philippines. Radiotherapy (RT) is integral to the treatment and palliation of cancer. Therefore, RT resources across the country must be surveyed and optimized. METHODS: Online surveys were sent to the heads of all 50 RT facilities in the Philippines. The survey included items regarding the facility itself, personnel, and available services. FINDINGS: The survey had a 98% response rate. 76% of RT facilities in the Philippines are privately owned; 12 are government/public institutions and 8 are academic centers. Over a third are in the National Capital Region; three regions are without a single RT facility. For a population of >110 million, the Philippines has 53 linear accelerators, 125 radiation oncologists, 56 residents, 114 medical physicists, 113 radiation oncology nurses, and 343 radiation therapists. Nine radiation oncology residency programs are active. All facilities are capable of 3D conformal radiotherapy, and 96% are capable of intensity modulated radiotherapy. <30% offer stereotactic radiotherapy, and <50% offer HDR brachytherapy. CONCLUSION: While there has been significant expansion of RT resources over the years, RT remains inaccessible for many in the Philippines. Urgent investment in training and retaining RT personnel is needed as well. Policy summary: With its current cancer burden, the Philippines needs at least 170 linear accelerators, 300 radiation oncologists, and 150 medical physicists. Public/government cancer centers must be built, with priority given to regions without RT facilities. HDR brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy services must also be expanded. A national RT task force must be created to ensure the quality, availability, and accessibility of RT in the Philippines. Further work exploring payment schemes that improve access to RT and mitigate financial toxicity is needed, as well as integration of radiation oncology providers and health policy experts into national health system decision making.

Palliative and Supportive Care in the Philippines: Systems, Barriers, and Steps Forward.

Although integral to alleviating serious health-related suffering, global palliative care remains systemically and culturally inaccessible to many patients living in low- and middle-income countries. In the Philippines, a lower-middle income country in Southeast Asia of over 110 million people, up to 75% of patients with cancer suffer from inadequate pain relief. We reviewed factors that preclude access to basic palliative care services in the Philippines. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched thoroughly; search terms included but were not limited to "palliative care," "supportive care," "end-of-life care," and "Philippines." We found that a limited palliative care workforce, high out-of-pocket healthcare costs, and low opioid availability all hinder access to palliative care in the archipelago. Religious fatalism, strong family-orientedness, and physician reluctance to refer to palliative care providers represent contributory sociocultural factors. Efforts to improve palliative care accessibility in the country must address health systems barriers while encouraging clinicians to discuss end-of-life options in a timely manner that integrates patients' unique individual, familial, and spiritual values. Research is needed to elucidate how Filipinos-and other global populations-view end-of-life, and how palliative care strategies can be individualised accordingly.

Pediatric cancers and family financial toxicity in the Philippines: insights for Southeast Asia and similarly resourced settings.

Cancer is a leading cause of death among children in the Philippines, a low-middle-income country of over 110 million people. In this Comment, we describe how financial toxicity affects families of pediatric patients with cancer in the Philippines. We explore direct costs of care, indirect costs such as transportation and lodging, and psychosocial sequelae, in the Filipino medical system and sociocultural contexts. We present examples of successful interventions in the Philippines and in similarly resourced settings, with the goal of galvanizing further research, clinical interventions, and policy-level changes, aimed at mitigating family financial toxicity for pediatric patients with cancer in the Philippines and globally.

Growing the global cancer care system: success stories from around the world and lessons for the future.

Despite major biomedical advancements in various realms of oncology, the benefits of these developments are not equitably distributed, particularly in underresourced settings. Although much work has described the challenges and systemic barriers in global cancer control, in this article we focus on success stories. This article describes clinical care delivered at Rwanda's Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence, the cancer research collaborations under India's National Cancer Grid, and the efforts of Latin America's Institute of Cancer of São Paulo in advancing cancer care and training. These examples highlight the potential of strategic collaborations and resource allocation strategies in improving cancer care globally. We emphasize the critical role of partnerships between physicians and allied health professionals, funders, and policy makers in enhancing access to treatment and infrastructure, advancing contextualized research and national guidelines, and establishing regional and global collaborations. We also draw attention to challenges faced in diverse global settings and outline benchmarks to measure success in the fight against cancer.

Access to surgical treatment for hepatopancreaticobiliary cancer in the Philippines.

Hepatopancreaticobiliary cancers are among the most diagnosed cancers in the world. However, although high-income countries have the highest incidence rates, low- and middle-income countries have the highest mortality rates. In this article, we describe the geographic distribution of board-certified hepatopancreaticobiliary surgeons who provide surgical management for patients with these diseases in the Philippines. We draw attention to the geographic disparities in the distribution of these surgeons and the other factors that contribute to the lack of access. Lastly, we suggest ways forward.

Leveraging national and global political determinants of health to promote equity in cancer care.

Health and politics are deeply intertwined. In the context of national and global cancer care delivery, political forces-the political determinants of health-influence every level of the cancer care continuum. We explore the "3-I" framework, which structures the upstream political forces that affect policy choices in the context of actors' interests, ideas, and institutions, to examine how political determinants of health underlie cancer disparities. Borrowing from the work of PA Hall, M-P Pomey, CJ Ho, and other thinkers, interests are the agendas of individuals and groups in power. Ideas represent beliefs or knowledge about what is or what should be. Institutions define the rules of play. We provide examples from around the world: Political interests have helped fuel the establishment of cancer centers in India and have galvanized the 2022 Cancer Moonshot in the United States. The politics of ideas underlie global disparities in cancer clinical trials-that is, in the distribution of epistemic power. Finally, historical institutions have helped perpetuate disparities related to racist and colonialist legacies. Present institutions have also been used to improve access for those in greatest need, as exemplified by the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence in Rwanda. In providing these global examples, we demonstrate how interests, ideas, and institutions influence access to cancer care across the breadth of the cancer continuum. We argue that these forces can be leveraged to promote cancer care equity nationally and globally.