Choosing Wisely in oncology in Latin America: what SLACOM does not recommend in the care of cancer patients in Latin America: Ten essential recommendations to avoid harmful onclogy procedures in Latin America.

Choosing Wisely is an initiative by the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) and ABIM Foundation to deter unnecessary medical treatments and procedures. Faced with the burden of modern technologies and treatments, it is crucial to identify practices lacking value in daily care. The Latin American and Caribbean Society (SLACOM), comprising cancer control experts, deems it vital to tailor this initiative for enhancing cancer care in the region. Through a modified DELPHI methodology involving two rounds of electronic questionnaires and a hybrid meeting to discuss key points of contention, ten essential recommendations were identified and prioritised to avoid harmful oncology procedures in our region. These consensus-based recommendations, contextualised for Latin America, have been compiled and shared to benefit patients. The Scientific Committee, consisting of prominent oncologists and health experts, collaborates remotely to drive this project forward.

Quality improvement intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening at the primary care setting: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 81% of deaths in Argentina are from chronic non-communicable diseases and 21% caused by cancer. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most frequent cancer in Argentina. Even though CRC screening has been recommended for adults from 50 to 75 years old by using a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) annually, screening rates remain below 20% in the country. METHODS: We conducted an 18-month, two-arm, pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial evaluating the effect of a quality improvement intervention, based on the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, considering barriers and catalysts to articulate theory and practice, to increase CRC screening rates using FITs at primary care level. The study involved ten public primary health centres in Mendoza province, Argentina. The primary outcome measure was the rate of effective CRC screening. Secondary outcomes were the rate of participants with a positive FIT, tests with invalid results and the rate of participants referred for colonoscopy. RESULTS: Screening was effective in 75% of the participants in the intervention arm vs 54.2% in the control arm, OR 2.5 (95% CI 1.4 to 4.4, p=0.001). These results remained unchanged after adjusting for individual demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Regarding secondary outcomes, the overall prevalence of positive tests was 17.7% (21.1% in the control arm and 14.7% in the intervention arm, p=0.3648). The overall proportion of participants with inadequate test results was 5.2% (4.9% in the control arm vs 5.5% in the intervention arm, p=0.8516). All the participants with positive tests were referred for colonoscopy in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: An intervention based on quality improvement strategies proved to be highly successful in increasing effective CRC screening in Argentina's primary care setting within the public healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04293315.

Smoking cessation knowledge and perceptions of cancer care providers at six Latin American cancer institutions.

Objective: To assess the characteristics, self-reported tobacco use, knowledge, and perceptions about smoking cessation among cancer care providers (CCPs), as well as perceived barriers to inform interventions that can potentially improve quitting rates and the prognosis of cancer patients in Latin America. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 996 CCPs in six cancer institutions located in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. An online survey consisting of 28 close-ended questions adapted from the 2012 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer survey and the Global Adult Tobacco Survey was administered. Results: The majority of CCPs, ranging from 86.1% in Mexico to 95.9% in Brazil, agreed or strongly agreed that smoking cessation should be integrated into cancer treatment. However, inadequate training on smoking cessation was reported by 66.9%, 69.4%, 70.4%, 72.9%, 85.8%, and 86.4% in Mexico, Colombia (Floridablanca), Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Colombia (Medellín), respectively, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Moreover, current cigarette smoking prevalence among CCPs was 2.5% in Brazil, 4.6% in Peru, 6.3% in Colombia (Floridablanca), 10.4% in Colombia (Medellín), 11.5% in Mexico, and 15.1% in Argentina, showing a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Efforts in Latin America should be geared toward assisting CCPs with their quitting efforts and training in smoking cessation practices aimed at achieving a better prognosis and improving cancer patients' quality of life.

Smoking cessation knowledge and perceptions of cancer care providers at six Latin American cancer institutions / Conocimientos e impresiones acerca de dejar de fumar entre prestadores de atención a pacientes con cáncer de seis instituciones oncológicas de América Latina / Conhecimento e percepções de profissionais de atenção oncológica sobre o abandono do tabagismo em seis instituições de oncologia da América Latina

ABSTRACT Objective. To assess the characteristics, self-reported tobacco use, knowledge, and perceptions about smoking cessation among cancer care providers (CCPs), as well as perceived barriers to inform interventions that can potentially improve quitting rates and the prognosis of cancer patients in Latin America. Methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 996 CCPs in six cancer institutions located in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. An online survey consisting of 28 close-ended questions adapted from the 2012 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer survey and the Global Adult Tobacco Survey was administered. Results. The majority of CCPs, ranging from 86.1% in Mexico to 95.9% in Brazil, agreed or strongly agreed that smoking cessation should be integrated into cancer treatment. However, inadequate training on smoking cessation was reported by 66.9%, 69.4%, 70.4%, 72.9%, 85.8%, and 86.4% in Mexico, Colombia (Floridablanca), Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Colombia (Medellín), respectively, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Moreover, current cigarette smoking prevalence among CCPs was 2.5% in Brazil, 4.6% in Peru, 6.3% in Colombia (Floridablanca), 10.4% in Colombia (Medellín), 11.5% in Mexico, and 15.1% in Argentina, showing a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). Conclusions. Efforts in Latin America should be geared toward assisting CCPs with their quitting efforts and training in smoking cessation practices aimed at achieving a better prognosis and improving cancer patients' quality of life.

RESUMEN Objetivo. Evaluar entre los prestadores de atención a pacientes con cáncer las características, el consumo de tabaco referido por la misma persona, sus conocimientos y sus impresiones acerca de dejar de fumar, así como los obstáculos percibidos, para sustentar las intervenciones que puedan mejorar las tasas de abandono del consumo y el pronóstico de los pacientes con cáncer en América Latina. Métodos. Se realizó un estudio transversal con 996 prestadores de atención oncológica en seis instituciones oncológicas ubicadas en Argentina, Brasil, Colombia, México y Perú. Se realizó una encuesta en línea con 28 preguntas cerradas adaptadas de la encuesta de la Asociación Internacional para el Estudio del Cáncer de Pulmón del 2012 y la Encuesta Mundial de Tabaquismo en Adultos. Resultados. La mayoría de los prestadores de atención oncológica, del 86,1% en México al 95,9% en Brasil, estuvieron de acuerdo o muy de acuerdo con que el abandono del tabaco debería integrarse en el tratamiento del cáncer. Sin embargo, 66,9%, 69,4%, 70,4%, 72,9%, 85,8% y 86,4% en México, Colombia (Floridablanca), Argentina, Perú, Brasil y Colombia (Medellín), respectivamente, dieron parte de una formación inadecuada en cuanto al abandono del tabaco, y esta diferencia fue estadísticamente significativa (p < 0,001). Además, la prevalencia actual del consumo de tabaco entre los proveedores de atención oncológica fue de 2,5% en Brasil, 4,6% en Perú, 6,3% en Colombia (Floridablanca), 10,4 % en Colombia (Medellín), 11,5% en México y 15,1% en Argentina, y mostró una diferencia estadísticamente significativa (p < 0,001). Conclusiones. En América Latina, deben canalizarse los esfuerzos para ayudar a los prestadores de atención oncológica a abandonar el consumo de tabaco y apoyarlos en la capacitación acerca de las prácticas de abandono del tabaco dirigidas a lograr un pronóstico más favorable y mejorar la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer.

RESUMO Objetivo. Avaliar as características, o uso autorrelatado de tabaco, o conhecimento e as percepções sobre o abandono do tabagismo entre os profissionais da área de oncologia (PAO), bem como as barreiras percebidas, a fim de guiar intervenções que possam melhorar as taxas de abandono e o prognóstico de pacientes com câncer na América Latina. Métodos. Realizou-se um estudo transversal com 996 PAO em seis instituições de oncologia localizadas na Argentina, no Brasil, na Colômbia, no México e no Peru. Administrou-se uma pesquisa on-line com 28 perguntas fechadas, adaptadas do levantamento realizado em 2012 pela Associação Internacional para o Estudo do Câncer de Pulmão e do Global Adult Tobacco Survey (Levantamento Global do Tabagismo em Adultos). Resultados. A maioria dos PAO, variando de 86,1% (no México) a 95,9% (no Brasil), concordou parcial ou totalmente com a necessidade de integrar o abandono do tabagismo ao tratamento do câncer. Entretanto, o treinamento inadequado sobre o abandono do tabagismo foi relatado por 66,9% no México, 69,4% na Colômbia (Floridablanca), 70,4% na Argentina, 72,9% no Peru, 85,8% no Brasil e 86,4% na Colômbia (Medellín), e essa diferença foi estatisticamente significante (p < 0,001). Além disso, a prevalência atual de consumo de cigarro entre os PAO foi de 2,5% no Brasil, 4,6% no Peru, 6,3% na Colômbia (Floridablanca), 10,4% na Colômbia (Medellín), 11,5% no México, e 15,1% na Argentina, mostrando uma diferença estatisticamente significante (p < 0,001). Conclusões. Os esforços na América Latina devem ser direcionados para o auxílio aos PAO em seus esforços de abandonar o tabagismo e para o treinamento sobre métodos para abandono do tabagismo, com o objetivo de melhorar o prognóstico e a qualidade de vida dos pacientes com câncer.

Cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean: recent advances and opportunities to move forward.

The increasing burden of cancer represents a substantial problem for Latin America and the Caribbean. Two Lancet Oncology Commissions in 2013 and 2015 highlighted potential interventions that could advance cancer care in the region by overcoming existing challenges. Areas requiring improvement included insufficient investment in cancer control, non-universal health coverage, fragmented health systems, inequitable concentration of cancer services, inadequate registries, delays in diagnosis or treatment initiation, and insufficient palliative services. Progress has been made in key areas but remains uneven across the region. An unforeseen challenge, the COVID-19 pandemic, strained all resources, and its negative effect on cancer control is expected to continue for years. In this Series paper, we summarise progress in several aspects of cancer control since 2015, and identify persistent barriers requiring commitment of additional resources to reduce the cancer burden in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in the public health subsector, province of Santa Fe, Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and the measures taken to lessen its impact have had side effects affecting timely care of other diseases. The aim of this paper is to quantify the impact of the pandemic on the cancer care line in the province of Santa Fe, Argentina. METHOD: It is an observational cross-sectional study comparing the impact on selected variables of the pre-pandemic and intra-pandemic periods. The formula of percentage variation was used to show the differences. The positivity index was calculated and expressed as a percentage. The proportions of both periods were compared through the chi-squared test and its p-value. RESULTS: Reductions were observed in all the variables under study. However, the deeper impact was evident in screening, with 56%-87% decreases in the number of procedures carried out. A 26% reduction was seen in diagnosis. Treatment was the variable with the least impact, with a 3% decrease. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 as well as the measures taken to reduce its impact caused alterations in the cancer care line in the province, with clear differences according to the variable under study. Measures related to cancer screening were displaced, prioritising the care of patients already diagnosed and treated. CONCLUSION: Considering the new increase in the number of COVID-19 cases, it is essential to adapt the healthcare system, and design new innovative strategies to reduce long-term consequences.

Social Distancing and Economic Crisis During COVID-19 Pandemic Reduced Cancer Control in Latin America and Will Result in Increased Late-Stage Diagnoses and Expense.

Since December 2019, the world has been mired in an infectious pandemic that has displaced other health priorities for 21st century populations. Concerned about this situation, Latin American experts on cancer decided to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on cancer control in the region. The analysis was based on information obtained from public sources and scientific publications and included the characteristics of the health care and cancer control prior to the pandemic, the COVID-19 pandemic and measures implemented by the governments of the region, and the regional impact of the pandemic on cancer control together with the costs of cancer care and possible impact of the pandemic on cancer expense. We compared 2019 and 2020 data corresponding to the period March 16-June 30 and found a significant reduction in the number of first-time visits to oncology services (variable depending on the country between -28% and -38%) and a corresponding reduction in pathology (between -6% and -50%), cancer surgery (between -28% and -70%), and chemotherapy (between -2% and -54%). Furthermore, a significant reduction in cancer screening tests was found (PAP smear test studies: between -46% and -100%, mammography: between -32% and -100%, and fecal occult blood test: -73%). If this situation becomes a trend, the health and economic impact will be compounded in the postpandemic period, with an overload of demand on health services to ensure diagnostic tests and consequent treatments. On the basis of this information, a set of prevention and mitigation measures to be immediately implemented and also actions to progressively strengthen health systems are proposed.

Test VPH en estrategia de screening primario para detección de cáncer cervicouterino / HPV test in a primary screening strategy for cervical cancer detection

El presente informe es producto del trabajo colaborativo de la Comisión Nacional de Evaluación de Tecnologías de Salud (CONETEC), dependiente del Ministerio de Salud de la Nación y creada por RM N° 623/2018. La CONETEC realiza evaluaciones y emite recomendaciones a la autoridad sanitaria sobre la incorporación, forma de uso, financiamiento y políticas de cobertura de las tecnologías sanitarias desde una perspectiva global del sistema de salud argentino. En sus evaluaciones y recomendaciones, la CONETEC tiene en cuenta criterios de calidad, seguridad, efectividad, eficiencia y equidad, evaluados bajo dimensiones éticas, médicas, económicas y sociales. Sus resultados son consensuados mediante discusiones públicas y ponderados a través de un marco de valor explícito, con la participación de todos los actores involucrados en el proceso de toma de decisiones en salud. Los informes y recomendaciones de esta comisión surgen de este proceso público, transparente y colaborativo, siendo de libre consulta y acceso para toda la sociedad

Multidisciplinary approach to COVID-19 and cancer: consensus from scientific societies in Argentina.

INTRODUCTION: The world is living through an outbreak of an acute respiratory syndrome caused by a new betacoronavirus known as coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2), which has been declared an international public health emergency by the World Health Organisation. Cancer patients are a very special population in this setting since they are more susceptible to viral infections than the general population. Several recommendations have been made on this issue, most of them based on expert opinion and institutional experience. It is essential to gather the evidence available for decision making. OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence available in order to create a multi-institutional position from the perspective of scientific societies in Argentina involved in the management of cancer patients. METHODOLOGY: The review included two phases: 1) search and systematic revision of the medical literature; 2) consensus and revision of the document drafted by national scientific societies involved in the management and care of cancer patients using the modified Delphi method. The final results were presented at a videoconference with all the participants. Also, additional comment and recommendations were discussed. The final document was revised and approved for publication by the members of the panel. RESULTS: The consensus panel included 18 representatives from scientific societies from Argentina who assessed the evidence and then made recommendations for the management of cancer patients in our country. International guidelines (CDC; ASCO, NCCN and ESMO) were considered as a background for analysis, as well as institutional guidelines and an open ad hoc survey administered to 114 healthcare professionals from the scientific societies involved in this study.The recommendations are grouped as follows: 1) general care interventions-training of the personnel, cleaning and disinfection of the hospital premises and patient scheduling; 2) treatment decisions-patient care, surgeries, immunosuppressive therapy, radiotherapy and screening; 3) ethical considerations-optimisation of resources, end-of-life care for critically-ill patients; 4) management of hospitalised patients; and 5) wellbeing of the healthcare team.The general recommendation arising from the study is that the management of cancer patients must adapt to the exceptional pandemic status quo without disregarding treatment or cure options. Moreover, healthcare professional accompaniment of all patients should not be neglected. All healthcare professionals must make a significant joint effort to create multidisciplinary teams to discuss the most appropriate measures for each particular situation. CONCLUSIONS: The scientific evidence available on this topic worldwide is in progress. This together with the epidemiologically shifting scenario poses unprecedented challenges in the management of cancer amidst this global pandemic. Furthermore, the key role of the healthcare structural organisation appears evident, such as the drafting of clear guidelines for all the stakeholders, adaptability to constant change and an interdisciplinary shared vision through consensus to provide adequate care to our cancer patients in the light of uncertainty and fast-paced change.