Establishing Cancer Treatment Programs in Resource-Limited Settings: Lessons Learned From Guatemala, Rwanda, and Vietnam.

Purpose The global burden of cancer is slated to reach 21.4 million new cases in 2030 alone, and the majority of those cases occur in under-resourced settings. Formidable changes to health care delivery systems must occur to meet this demand. Although significant policy advances have been made and documented at the international level, less is known about the efforts to create national systems to combat cancer in such settings. Methods With case reports and data from authors who are clinicians and policymakers in three financially constrained countries in different regions of the world-Guatemala, Rwanda, and Vietnam, we examined cancer care programs to identify principles that lead to robust care delivery platforms as well as challenges faced in each setting. Results The findings demonstrate that successful programs derive from equitably constructed and durable interventions focused on advancement of local clinical capacity and the prioritization of geographic and financial accessibility. In addition, a committed local response to the increasing cancer burden facilitates engagement of partners who become vital catalysts for launching treatment cascades. Also, clinical education in each setting was buttressed by international expertise, which aided both professional development and retention of staff. Conclusion All three countries demonstrate that excellent cancer care can and should be provided to all, including those who are impoverished or marginalized, without acceptance of a double standard. In this article, we call on governments and program leaders to report on successes and challenges in their own settings to allow for informed progression toward the 2025 global policy goals.

The future of global health education: training for equity in global health.

BACKGROUND: Among academic institutions in the United States, interest in global health has grown substantially: by the number of students seeking global health opportunities at all stages of training, and by the increase in institutional partnerships and newly established centers, institutes, and initiatives to house global health programs at undergraduate, public health and medical schools. Witnessing this remarkable growth should compel health educators to question whether the training and guidance that we provide to students today is appropriate, and whether it will be applicable in the next decade and beyond. Given that "global health" did not exist as an academic discipline in the United States 20 years ago, what can we expect it will look like 20 years from now and how can we prepare for that future? DISCUSSION: Most clinicians and trainees today recognize the importance of true partnership and capacity building in both directions for successful international collaborations. The challenge is in the execution of these practices. There are projects around the world where this is occurring and equitable partnerships have been established. Based on our experience and observations of the current landscape of academic global health, we share a perspective on principles of engagement, highlighting instances where partnerships have thrived, and examples of where we, as a global community, have fallen short. CONCLUSIONS: As the world moves beyond the charity model of global health (and its colonial roots), it is evident that the issue underlying ethical global health practice is partnership and the pursuit of health equity. Thus, achieving equity in global health education and practice ought to be central to our mission as educators and advisors when preparing trainees for careers in this field. Seeking to eliminate health inequities wherever they are ingrained will reveal the injustices around the globe and in our own cities and towns.

A Vision for Global Cancer Medicine: Pursuing the Equity of Chance.

At the turn of the century, some claimed that HIV/AIDS was a disease that could not be managed in low-income settings. It was argued that "poor people would not comply with treatment," and that treatment was too expensive and too complicated to deliver. But over the past two decades, data on outcomes have thoroughly disproved this myth. Similar arguments have more recently been made about cancer treatment: chemotherapy was said to be too toxic and too costly and that it required administration expertise beyond that available in low-income settings. We argue that these claims are similarly rooted in ideology rather than evidence. Fortunately, such claims are starting to be refuted by a diverse set of global cancer partnerships around the world that are documenting progress and positive results. In this review article, we provide examples of programs that can give us reason to hope that the treatment playing field is being leveled such that birthplace does not determine survival prognosis. We believe that through strong collaborative efforts and solidarity, the equity of chance can be achieved for patients with cancer worldwide.

Proposing Essential Medicines to Treat Cancer: Methodologies, Processes, and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: A great proportion of the world's cancer burden resides in low- and middle-income countries where cancer care infrastructure is often weak or absent. Although treatment of cancer is multidisciplinary, involving surgery, radiation, systemic therapies, pathology, radiology, and other specialties, selection of medicines that have impact and are affordable has been particularly challenging in resource-constrained settings. In 2014, at the invitation of the WHO, the Union for International Cancer Control convened experts to develop an approach to propose essential cancer medicines to be included in the WHO Model Essential Medicines Lists (EML) for Adults and for Children, as well as a resulting new list of cancer medicines. METHODS: Experts identified 29 cancer types with potential for maximal treatment impact, on the basis of incidence and benefit of systemic therapies. More than 90 oncology experts from all continents drafted and reviewed disease-based documents outlining epidemiology, diagnostic needs, treatment options, and benefits and toxicities. RESULTS: Briefing documents were created for each disease, along with associated standard treatment regimens, resulting in a list of 52 cancer medicines. A comprehensive application was submitted as a revision to the existing cancer medicines on the WHO Model Lists. In May 2015, the WHO announced the addition of 16 medicines to the Adult EML and nine medicines to the Children's EML. CONCLUSION: The list of medications proposed, and the ability to link each recommended medicine to specific diseases, should allow public officials to apply resources most effectively in developing and supporting nascent or growing cancer treatment programs.

Implementation Science for Global Oncology: The Imperative to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Cancer Care Delivery.

PURPOSE: The development of cancer care treatment facilities in resource-constrained settings represents a challenge for many reasons. Implementation science-the assessment of how services are set up and delivered; contextual factors that affect delivery, treatment safety, toxicity, and efficacy; and where adaptations are needed-is essential if we are to understand the performance of a treatment program, know where the gaps in care exist, and design interventions in care delivery models to improve outcomes for patients. METHODS: The field of implementation science in relation to cancer care delivery is reviewed, and the experiences of the integrated implementation science program at the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence in Rwanda are described as a practical application. Implementation science of HIV and tuberculosis care delivery in similar challenging settings offers some relevant lessons. RESULTS: Integrating effective implementation science into cancer care in resource-constrained settings presents many challenges, which are discussed. However, with carefully designed programs, it is possible to perform this type of research, on regular and ongoing bases, and to use the results to develop interventions to improve quality of care and patient outcomes and provide evidence for effective replication and scale-up. CONCLUSION: Implementation science is both critical and feasible in evaluating, improving, and supporting effective expansion of cancer care in resource-limited settings. In ideal circumstances, it should be a prospective program, established early in the lifecycle of a new cancer treatment program and should be an integrated and continual process.

Successive introduction of four new vaccines in Rwanda: High coverage and rapid scale up of Rwanda's expanded immunization program from 2009 to 2013.

As the pace of vaccine uptake accelerates globally, there is a need to document low-income country experiences with vaccine introductions. Over the course of five years, the government of Rwanda rolled out vaccines against pneumococcus, human papillomavirus, rotavirus, and measles & rubella, achieving over 90% coverage for each. To carry out these rollouts, Rwanda's Ministry of Health engaged in careful review of disease burden information and extensive, cross-sectoral planning at least one year before introducing each vaccine. Rwanda's local leaders, development partners, civil society organizations and widespread community health worker network were mobilized to support communication efforts. Community health workers were also used to confirm target population size. Support from Gavi, UNICEF and WHO was used in combination with government funds to promote country ownership and collaboration. Vaccination was also combined with additional community-based health interventions. Other countries considering rapid consecutive or simultaneous rollouts of new vaccines may consider lessons from Rwanda's experience while tailoring the strategies used to local context.

Capacity building for oncology programmes in sub-Saharan Africa: the Rwanda experience.

Despite an estimated 456,000 deaths caused by cancer in sub-Saharan Africa in 2012 and a cancer burden that is predicted to double by 2030, the region accounts for only 0·3% of worldwide medical expenditure for cancer. Challenges to cancer care in sub-Saharan Africa include a shortage of clinicians and training programmes, weak healthcare infrastructure, and inadequate supplies. Since 2011, Rwanda has developed a national cancer programme by designing comprehensive, integrated frameworks of care, building local human resource capacity through partnerships, and delivering equitable, rights-based care. In the 2 years since the inauguration of Rwanda's first cancer centre, more than 2500 patients have been enrolled, including patients from every district in Rwanda. Based on Rwanda's national cancer programme development, we suggest principles that could guide other nations in the development of similar cancer programmes.

Bringing cancer care to the poor: experiences from Rwanda.

The knowledge and tools to cure many cancer patients exist in developed countries but are unavailable to many who live in the developing world, resulting in unnecessary loss of life. Bringing cancer care to the poor, particularly to low-income countries, is a great challenge, but it is one that we believe can be met through partnerships, careful planning and a set of guiding principles. Alongside vaccinations, screening and other cancer-prevention efforts, treatment must be a central component of any cancer programme from the start. It is also critical that these programmes include implementation research to determine programmatic efficacy, where gaps in care still exist and where improvements can be made. This article discusses these issues using the example of Rwanda's expanding national cancer programme.

Nationwide implementation of integrated community case management of childhood illness in Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: Between 2008 and 2011, Rwanda introduced integrated community case management (iCCM) of childhood illness nationwide. Community health workers in each of Rwanda's nearly 15,000 villages were trained in iCCM and equipped for empirical diagnosis and treatment of pneumonia, diarrhea, and malaria; for malnutrition surveillance; and for comprehensive reporting and referral services. METHODS: We used data from the Rwanda health management information system (HMIS) to calculate monthly all-cause under-5 mortality rates, health facility use rates, and community-based treatment rates for childhood illness in each district. We then compared a 3-month baseline period prior to iCCM implementation with a seasonally matched comparison period 1 year after iCCM implementation. Finally, we compared the actual changes in all-cause child mortality and health facility use over this time period with the changes that would have been expected based on baseline trends in Rwanda. RESULTS: The number of children receiving community-based treatment for diarrhea and pneumonia increased significantly in the 1-year period after iCCM implementation, from 0.83 cases/1,000 child-months to 3.80 cases/1,000 child-months (P = .01) and 0.25 cases/1,000 child-months to 5.28 cases/1,000 child-months (P<.001), respectively. On average, total under-5 mortality rates declined significantly by 38% (P<.001), and health facility use declined significantly by 15% (P = .006). These decreases were significantly greater than would have been expected based on baseline trends. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate decreases in both child mortality and health facility use after implementing iCCM of childhood illness at a national level. While our study design does not allow for direct attribution of these changes to implementation of iCCM, these results are in line with those of prior studies conducted at the sub-national level in other low-income countries.

Enhancing formal educational and in-service training programs in rural Rwanda: a partnership among the public sector, a nongovernmental organization, and academia.

Global disparities in the distribution, specialization, diversity, and competency of the health workforce are striking. Countries with fewer health professionals have poorer health outcomes compared with countries that have more. Despite major gains in health indicators, Rwanda still suffers from a severe shortage of health professionals.This article describes a partnership launched in 2005 by Rwanda's Ministry of Health with the U.S. nongovernmental organization Partners In Health and with Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital. The partnership has expanded to include the Faculty of Medicine and the School of Public Health at the National University of Rwanda and other Harvard-affiliated academic medical centers. The partnership prioritizes local ownership and-with the ultimate goals of strengthening health service delivery and achieving health equity for poor and underserved populations-it has helped establish new or strengthen existing formal educational programs (conferring advanced degrees) and in-service training programs (fostering continuing professional development) targeting the local health workforce. Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's Hospital have also benefited from the partnership, expanding the opportunities for training and research in global health available to their faculty and trainees.The partnership has enabled Rwandan health professionals at partnership-supported district hospitals to acquire new competencies and deliver better health services to rural and underserved populations by leveraging resources, expertise, and growing interest in global health within the participating U.S. academic institutions. Best practices implemented during the partnership's first nine years can inform similar formal educational and in-service training programs in other low-income countries.

Rwanda 20 years on: investing in life.

Two decades ago, the genocide against the Tutsis in Rwanda led to the deaths of 1 million people, and the displacement of millions more. Injury and trauma were followed by the effects of a devastated health system and economy. In the years that followed, a new course set by a new government set into motion equity-oriented national policies focusing on social cohesion and people-centred development. Premature mortality rates have fallen precipitously in recent years, and life expectancy has doubled since the mid-1990s. Here we reflect on the lessons learned in rebuilding Rwanda's health sector during the past two decades, as the country now prepares itself to take on new challenges in health-care delivery.

Shared learning in an interconnected world: innovations to advance global health equity.

The notion of "reverse innovation"--that some insights from low-income countries might offer transferable lessons for wealthier contexts--is increasingly common in the global health and business strategy literature. Yet the perspectives of researchers and policymakers in settings where these innovations are developed have been largely absent from the discussion to date. In this Commentary, we present examples of programmatic, technological, and research-based innovations from Rwanda, and offer reflections on how the global health community might leverage innovative partnerships for shared learning and improved health outcomes in all countries.

Integration of comprehensive women's health programmes into health systems: cervical cancer prevention, care and control in Rwanda.

PROBLEM: Although it is highly preventable and treatable, cervical cancer is the most common and most deadly cancer among women in Rwanda. APPROACH: By mobilizing a diverse coalition of partnerships, Rwanda became the first country in Africa to develop and implement a national strategic plan for cervical cancer prevention, screening and treatment. LOCAL SETTING: Rwanda - a small, landlocked nation in East Africa with a population of 10.4 million - is well positioned to tackle a number of "high-burden" noncommunicable diseases. The country's integrated response to infectious diseases has resulted in steep declines in premature mortality over the past decade. RELEVANT CHANGES: In 2011-2012, Rwanda vaccinated 227,246 girls with all three doses of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Among eligible girls, three-dose coverage rates of 93.2% and 96.6% were achieved in 2011 and 2012, respectively. The country has also initiated nationwide screening and treatment programmes that are based on visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid, testing for HPV DNA, cryotherapy, the loop electrosurgical excision procedure and various advanced treatment options. LESSONS LEARNT: Low-income countries should begin to address cervical cancer by integrating prevention, screening and treatment into routine women's health services. This requires political will, cross-sectoral collaboration and planning, innovative partnerships and robust monitoring and evaluation. With external support and adequate planning, high nationwide coverage rates for HPV vaccination and screening for cervical cancer can be achieved within a few years.