Knowledge transfer as a tool towards improvement of cancer care in low- and middle-income countries. 6th European Roundtable Meeting (ERTM), June 14th, 2019, Berlin, Germany.

PURPOSE: To identify key factors for the best practice of knowledge transfer from high-income settings to low- and middle-income settings. RESULTS: Interactive sessions led to the identification of European learnings that can and should be shared beyond Europe. Furthermore, methods were characterised which may lead to successful knowledge transfer with subsequent quality improvement. CONCLUSION: To ensure successful implementation of knowledge and new methods, political support is extremely important. A strong focus should be an improvement of collaboration and network development. Rehabilitation, early and late pallative care, cost effectiveness and long-term follow-up are priorities. Limitations are budget constraints which limit the execution of NCCPs.

ESMO International Consortium Study on the availability, out-of-pocket costs and accessibility of antineoplastic medicines in countries outside of Europe.

BACKGROUND: The availability and affordability of safe, effective, high-quality, affordable anticancer therapies are a core requirement for effective national cancer control plans. METHOD: Online survey based on a previously validated approach. The aims of the study were to evaluate (i) the availability on national formulary of licensed antineoplastic medicines across the globe, (ii) patient out-of-pocket costs for the medications, (iii) the actual availability of the medication for a patient with a valid prescription, (iv) information relating to possible factors adversely impacting the availability of antineoplastic agents and (v) the impact of the country's level of economic development on these parameters. A total of 304 field reporters from 97 countries were invited to participate. The preliminary set of data was posted on the ESMO website for open peer review and amendments have been incorporated into the final report. RESULTS: Surveys were submitted by 135 reporters from 63 countries and additional peer-review data were submitted by 54 reporters from 19 countries. There are substantial differences in the formulary availability, out-of-pocket costs and actual availability for many anticancer medicines. The most substantial issues are in lower-middle- and low-income countries. Even among medications on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) the discrepancies are profound and these relate to high out-of-pocket costs (in low-middle-income countries 32.0% of EML medicines are available only at full cost and 5.2% are not available at all, and for low-income countries, the corresponding figures are even worse at 57.7% and 8.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There is wide global variation in formulary availability, out-of-pocket expenditures and actual availability for most licensed anticancer medicines. Low- and low-middle-income countries have significant lack of availability and high out-of-pocket expenditures for cancer medicines on the WHO EML, with much less availability of new, more expensive targeted agents compared with high-income countries.

ESMO European Consortium Study on the availability, out-of-pocket costs and accessibility of antineoplastic medicines in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The management of cancer is predicated on the availability and affordability of anticancer therapies, which may be either curative or noncurative. AIM: The primary aims of the study were to evaluate (i) the formulary availability of licensed antineoplastic medicines across Europe; (ii) patient out-of-pocket costs for the medications and (iii) the actual availability of the medication for a patient with a valid prescription. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey tool was based on the previous ESMO studies that addressed the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain. A total of 185 field reporters from 49 countries were invited to participate. The preliminary set of data was posted on the ESMO website for open peer-review, and amendments have been incorporated into the final report. RESULTS: There are substantial differences in the formulary availability, out-of-pocket costs and actual availability for many anticancer medicines. The most profound lack of availability is in countries with lower levels of economic development, particularly in Eastern Europe, and these are largely related to the cost of targeted agents approved in the last 10 years. Discrepancies are less profound among medications on the WHO model essential medicines list (EML) for cancer and in curative settings. However, medicine shortages also affect WHO EML medicines, with relevant therapeutic implications for many patients. CONCLUSIONS: The cost and affordability of anticancer treatments with recent market approval is the major factor contributing to inequity of access to anticancer medications. This is especially true with regards to new medications used in the management of EGFR- or ALK-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer, metastatic melanoma, metastatic renal cell cancer, RAS/RAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, HER2 overexpressed breast cancer and castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer.

Improving structural development in oncology: transformation of theoretical health care standards and knowledge into a practical approach -- 2nd European Roundtable Meeting (ERTM), May 8, 2015, Berlin, Germany.

PURPOSE: It is widely accepted that National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs) are essential to improve cancer care. They often describe the structural requirements such as cancer centers, clinical cancer registries and quality control. During the 2nd European roundtable meeting, the implementation processes were analyzed and discussed. RESULTS: Communication strategies between cancer registries and cancer centers need to be developed. Analyses and discussion of collected data have to be performed by multidisciplinary teams. This has to be followed by appropriate actions to improve quality of care. It is essential to describe the clinical procedures, organizational processes and communication between individuals and professional teams. The patients' perspectives have to be included in the development of cancer care networks. The patients' feedback on cancer care is a routine quality indicator. CONCLUSION: NCCPs that include the description of structural requirements are important. In addition, it is essential to develop cancer care networks including multidisciplinary organizational processes to guarantee high quality. These have to consider patients preferences.

Improving cancer care in Europe: Which institutional health structures might be beneficial and why? 1. European Roundtable Meeting (ERTM), 16th May 2014, Berlin, Germany.

PURPOSE: Bringing the knowledge and expertise of different European countries and the European Commission together for an analysis of the different factors being beneficent or rather opposing for high quality in cancer care. A specific focus is set on the structures and views in European nations on implementation processes. RESULTS: Due to the variation of National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs) the preferences for implementation strategies differ. For quality achievement the involvement of the different stakeholders is beneficial. Common sense was the importance of NCCPs. However, it was consensus between participants that a bottom-up approach that considers the needs of different professional groups involved in cancer care and also the views of patients is of critical importance for successful implementation. Functioning cancer registries and evidence-based guidelines with standard of care are fundamental for quality measurement. CONCLUSIONS: There is consensus between participants of the meeting that NCCPs are essential for improvement of cancer care. However, national preferences and the views of patients and caregivers have to be included to guarantee successful implementation.

Formulary availability and regulatory barriers to accessibility of opioids for cancer pain in Africa: a report from the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI).

With nearly 1.1 billion inhabitants living in more than 50 countries, Africa is the world's poorest and most socioeconomically underdeveloped continent. Despite some advances for individual states, many African countries have very low opioid consumption and, overall, the continent has the lowest consumption per capita of any in the world. This article presents the findings of the first systematic study of the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain across the continent. Data are reported on the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in 25 of 52 countries, with 744 million of the region's 1127 million people (66%) covered by the survey. Many countries had severely restricted formularies of opioids and only 15 of 25 had morphine available in oral IR, CR and injectable formulations. Even when opioids are on formulary they are often unavailable, and access is significantly impaired by widespread over-regulation that is pervasive across the region.

Formulary availability and regulatory barriers to accessibility of opioids for cancer pain in Asia: a report from the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI).

Asia is a heterogeneous region with substantial variability in economic, social and palliative care development. While the global consumption of opioids has increased, the consumption in most Asian countries has not increased at the same rate. This is the first comprehensive study of opioid availability and accessibility for cancer patients in Asia. Data are reported on the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in 20 of 28 countries. The countries in the report represent 2515 million of the region's 2612 million people (96%). With the exception of Japan and South Korea, opioid availability continues to be low throughout most of Asia. Formulary deficiencies are severe in several countries, in particular Bangladesh, Myanmar, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan and Laos. Even when opioids are on formulary, they are often unavailable, particularly in the same countries. Access is significantly impaired by widespread over-regulation that continues to be pervasive across the region.

Formulary availability and regulatory barriers to accessibility of opioids for cancer pain in India: a report from the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI).

India is the world's largest democracy with control of opioids divided between the national and state governments. While the global consumption of opioids has increased, the consumption has not increased at the same rate. This is the first comprehensive study of opioid availability and accessibility for cancer patients in India. Data are reported on the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in 24 of the states that make up India and the Administrative area around Delhi. About 1061 million of the nation's 1189 million people (89%) are covered by this survey. Without exception, opioid availability continues to be low throughout all of India. Even when opioids are on formulary, they are often unavailable. Access is significantly impaired by widespread over-regulation that continues to be pervasive across the nation.

Formulary availability and regulatory barriers to accessibility of opioids for cancer pain in Latin America and the Caribbean: a report from the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI).

The nations of the Caribbean, Central America and South America form a heterogeneous region with substantial variability in economic, social and palliative care development. Palliative care provision is at varied stages of development throughout the region. The consumption of opioids in Latin America and the Caribbean is variable with moderate levels of consumption by international standards (1-10 mg morphine equivalents/capita/year) observed in Argentine, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, Costa Rica, Uruguay and most of the Caribbean but relatively low levels of consumption in other countries particularly Guatemala, Honduras and Bolivia. Data for Latin American and Caribbean is reported on the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in 24 of the 33 countries surveyed. The results of this survey are relevant to 560 million of the region's 595 million people (94%). Opioid availability continues to be low throughout most of Latin America and the Caribbean. While formularies in this region generally include all recommended morphine formulations, access is significantly impaired by widespread over-regulation that continues to be pervasive across the region.

Formulary availability and regulatory barriers to accessibility of opioids for cancer pain in the Middle East: a report from the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI).

The Middle East is a heterogeneous region with substantial variability in social development, wealth and palliative care development. The region has few democracies, strong but diverse religious affiliations, and many of the region's counties are involved in political upheavals or regional conflicts. While the global consumption of opioids has increased throughout the last 30 years, there has been little increase in opioid consumption in the Middle East. This is the first comprehensive study of opioid availability and accessibility of opioids in the Middle East. Data are reported on the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in 16 of 24 countries. The data are relevant to 329 million of the region's 403 million people (82%). The survey found that with the exception of Israel, opioid availability continues to be low throughout most of the Middle East. Formulary deficiencies are severe in several countries in particular Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine and Tunisia. Even when opioids are on formulary, they are often unavailable, particularly in these same countries. Access is also significantly impaired by widespread over-regulation that is pervasive across the region.

Next steps in access and availability of opioids for the treatment of cancer pain: reaching the tipping point?

The reports of the Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI) project to evaluate the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East, together with the previous 2010 European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)/European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) report from Europe, have provided critical data in demonstrating the deficiencies in many countries throughout the world. Formulary deficiencies and over-regulation are pandemic and must be addressed. This process is challenging and will require concerted and sustained efforts by clinical leaders and advocacy groups partnering with international and regional organizations and, of course, with national governments and their competent authorities. There is a growing international expertise and infrastructure to coordinate advocacy and strategic planning based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Model of Education, Policy Reform and Medication Availability.

The Global Opioid Policy Initiative (GOPI) project to evaluate the availability and accessibility of opioids for the management of cancer pain in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Middle East: introduction and methodology.

Opioid analgesics are critical to the effective relief of cancer pain. Effective treatment is predicated on sound assessments, individually tailored analgesic therapy, and the availability and accessibility of the required medications. In some countries, pain relief is hampered by the lack of availability or barriers to the accessibility of opioid analgesics. As the follow-up to a successful project to evaluate the availability and accessibility of opioids and regulatory barriers in Europe, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) undertook to expand their research to those parts of the world where data were lacking regarding these aspects of care, in particular Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the states of India. This project has been undertaken in collaboration with the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC), the Pain and Policy Studies Group (PPSG) of the University of Wisconsin, and the World Health Organization (WHO), together with a consortium of 17 international oncology and palliative care societies. This article describes the study methodology.