Quality indicators for evaluating cancer care in low-income and middle-income country settings: a multinational modified Delphi study.

This Policy Review sourced opinions from experts in cancer care across low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to build consensus around high-priority measures of care quality. A comprehensive list of quality indicators in medical, radiation, and surgical oncology was identified from systematic literature reviews. A modified Delphi study consisting of three 90-min workshops and two international electronic surveys integrating a global range of key clinical, policy, and research leaders was used to derive consensus on cancer quality indicators that would be both feasible to collect and were high priority for cancer care systems in LMICs. Workshop participants narrowed the list of 216 quality indicators from the literature review to 34 for inclusion in the subsequent surveys. Experts' responses to the surveys showed consensus around nine high-priority quality indicators for measuring the quality of hospital-based cancer care in LMICs. These quality indicators focus on important processes of care delivery from accurate diagnosis (eg, histologic diagnosis via biopsy and TNM staging) to adequate, timely, and appropriate treatment (eg, completion of radiotherapy and appropriate surgical intervention). The core indicators selected could be used to implement systems of feedback and quality improvement.

Barriers and facilitators for breast cancer early diagnosis in an indigenous community in Mexico: voices of otomí women.

BACKGROUND: Literature on barriers and facilitators for early detection of Breast Cancer (BC) among indigenous women is very scarce. This study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators for BC early diagnosis as perceived by women of the otomí ethnic group in Mexico. METHODS: We performed an exploratory qualitative study. Data was collected in 2021 through three focus group interviews with 19 otomí women. The interview transcripts were analyzed using the constant comparison method and guided by a conceptual framework that integrates the Social Ecological Model (SEM), the Health Belief Model and the Institute of Medicine's Healthcare Quality Framework. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were identified at several levels of the SEM. Among the main barriers reported by the study participants were: beliefs about illness, cancer stigma, cultural gender norms, access barriers to medical care, and mistreatment and discrimination by health care personnel. Our participants perceived as facilitators: information provided by doctors, social support, perceived severity of the disease and perceived benefits of seeking care for breast symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare policies need to be responsive to the particular barriers faced by indigenous women in order to improve their participation in early detection and early help-seeking of care for breast symptoms. Measures to prevent and eradicate all forms of discrimination in healthcare are required to improve the quality of healthcare provided and the trust of the indigenous population in healthcare practitioners.

Capacidad de colonoscopías diagnósticas en la Ciudad de México.

No disponible.

Developing a collaborative international partnership for cancer control in Mexico.

In 2014, a partnership was established between the Univer-sity of California and Mexico, which subsequently catalyzed formation of collaborations between cancer researchers at University of California, San Francisco and in Mexico. Over the past two decades cancer burden has dramatically increased in Mexicans on both sides of the California - Mexico border. Together, we face a growing burden of cancer in the context of globalized economies, diverse migration patterns, and dynamic immigration policies. Our partnership aims to: (1) understand the life course impact of cancer risk factors and interactions with changing environments; (2) address cancer disparities within Mexico, in Mexican migrants to the United States, and in naturalized Mexican-Americans; and (3) identify effective cancer screening strategies and cancer control policies that are tailored to existing healthcare systems and social and cultural factors. Herein, we describe the principles of partner-ship and early successes and challenges of this collaboration.

The role of dissemination and implementation science in global breast cancer control programs: Frameworks, methods, and examples.

Global disparities in breast cancer outcomes are attributable to a sizable gap between evidence and practice in breast cancer control and management. Dissemination and implementation science (D&IS) seeks to understand how to promote the systematic uptake of evidence-based interventions and/or practices into real-world contexts. D&IS methods are useful for selecting strategies to implement evidence-based interventions, adapting their implementation to new settings, and evaluating the implementation process as well as its outcomes to determine success and failure, and adjust accordingly. Process models, explanatory theories, and evaluation frameworks are used in D&IS to develop implementation strategies, identify implementation outcomes, and design studies to evaluate these outcomes. In breast cancer control and management, research has been translated into evidence-based, resource-stratified guidelines by the Breast Health Global Initiative and others. D&IS should be leveraged to optimize the implementation of these guidelines, and other evidence-based interventions, into practice across the breast cancer care continuum, from optimizing public education to promoting early detection, increasing guideline-concordant clinical practice among providers, and analyzing and addressing barriers and facilitators in health care systems. Stakeholder engagement through processes such as co-creation is critical. In this article, the authors have provided a primer on the contribution of D&IS to phased implementation of global breast cancer control programs, provided 2 case examples of ongoing D&IS research projects in Tanzania, and concluded with recommendations for best practices for researchers undertaking this work.

The Breast Health Global Initiative 2018 Global Summit on Improving Breast Healthcare Through Resource-Stratified Phased Implementation: Methods and overview.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) established a series of resource-stratified, evidence-based guidelines to address breast cancer control in the context of available resources. Here, the authors describe methodologies and health system prerequisites to support the translation and implementation of these guidelines into practice. METHODS: In October 2018, the BHGI convened the Sixth Global Summit on Improving Breast Healthcare Through Resource-Stratified Phased Implementation. The purpose of the summit was to define a stepwise methodology (phased implementation) for guiding the translation of resource-appropriate breast cancer control guidelines into real-world practice. Three expert consensus panels developed stepwise, resource-appropriate recommendations for implementing these guidelines in low-income and middle-income countries as well as underserved communities in high-income countries. Each panel focused on 1 of 3 specific aspects of breast cancer care: 1) early detection, 2) treatment, and 3) health system strengthening. RESULTS: Key findings from the summit and subsequent article preparation included the identification of phased-implementation prerequisites that were explored during consensus debates. These core issues and concepts are key components for implementing breast health care that consider real-world resource constraints. Communication and engagement across all levels of care is vital to any effectively operating health care system, including effective communication with ministries of health and of finance, to demonstrate needs, outcomes, and cost benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Underserved communities at all economic levels require effective strategies to deploy scarce resources to ensure access to timely, effective, and affordable health care. Systematically strategic approaches translating guidelines into practice are needed to build health system capacity to meet the current and anticipated global breast cancer burden.

Breast cancer early detection: A phased approach to implementation.

When breast cancer is detected and treated early, the chances of survival are very high. However, women in many settings face complex barriers to early detection, including social, economic, geographic, and other interrelated factors, which can limit their access to timely, affordable, and effective breast health care services. Previously, the Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) developed resource-stratified guidelines for the early detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. In this consensus article from the sixth BHGI Global Summit held in October 2018, the authors describe phases of early detection program development, beginning with management strategies required for the diagnosis of clinically detectable disease based on awareness education and technical training, history and physical examination, and accurate tissue diagnosis. The core issues address include finance and governance, which pertain to successful planning, implementation, and the iterative process of program improvement and are needed for a breast cancer early detection program to succeed in any resource setting. Examples are presented of implementation, process, and clinical outcome metrics that assist in program implementation monitoring. Country case examples are presented to highlight the challenges and opportunities of implementing successful breast cancer early detection programs, and the complex interplay of barriers and facilitators to achieving early detection for breast cancer in real-world settings are considered.

Breast cancer treatment: A phased approach to implementation.

Optimal treatment outcomes for breast cancer are dependent on a timely diagnosis followed by an organized, multidisciplinary approach to care. However, in many low- and middle-income countries, effective care management pathways can be difficult to follow because of financial constraints, a lack of resources, an insufficiently trained workforce, and/or poor infrastructure. On the basis of prior work by the Breast Health Global Initiative, this article proposes a phased implementation strategy for developing sustainable approaches to enhancing patient care in limited-resource settings by creating roadmaps that are individualized and adapted to the baseline environment. This strategy proposes that, after a situational analysis, implementation phases begin with bolstering palliative care capacity, especially in settings where a late-stage diagnosis is common. This is followed by strengthening the patient pathway, with consideration given to a dynamic balance between centralization of services into centers of excellence to achieve better quality and decentralization of services to increase patient access. The use of resource checklists ensures that comprehensive therapy or palliative care can be delivered safely and effectively. Episodic or continuous monitoring with established process and quality metrics facilitates ongoing assessment, which should drive continual process improvements. A series of case studies provides a snapshot of country experiences with enhancing patient care, including the implementation of national cancer control plans in Kenya, palliative care in Romania, the introduction of a 1-stop clinic for diagnosis in Brazil, the surgical management of breast cancer in India, and the establishment of a women's cancer center in Ghana.

Barriers and Explanatory Mechanisms of Delays in the Patient and Diagnosis Intervals of Care for Breast Cancer in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Most breast cancer patients in low- and middle-income settings are diagnosed at advanced stages due to lengthy intervals of care. This study aimed to understand the mechanisms through which delays occur in the patient interval and diagnosis interval of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey including 886 patients referred to four major public cancer hospitals in Mexico City. Based in a conceptual model of help-seeking behavior, a path analysis strategy was used to identify the relationships between explanatory factors of patient delay and diagnosis delay. RESULTS: The patient and the diagnosis intervals were greater than 3 months in 20% and 65% of participants, respectively. We present explanatory models for each interval and the interrelationship between the associated factors. The patient interval was longer among women who were single, interpreted their symptoms as not worrisome, concealed symptoms, and perceived a lack of financial resources and the difficulty of missing a day of work as barriers to seek care. These barriers were more commonly perceived among patients who were younger, had lower socioeconomic status, and lived outside of Mexico City. The diagnosis interval was longer among those who used several different health services prior to the cancer hospital and perceived medical errors in these services. More health services were used among those who perceived errors and long waiting times for appointments, and who first consulted private services. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the relevance of strengthening early cancer diagnosis strategies, especially the improvement of quality of primary care and expedited referral routes to cancer services. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study's findings suggest that policy in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) should be directed toward reducing delays in diagnosis, before the implementation of mammography screening programs. The results suggest several factors susceptible to early diagnosis interventions. To reduce patient delays, the usually proposed intervention of awareness promotion could better work in LMIC contexts if the message goes beyond the advertising of screening mammography to encourage the recognition of potential cancer symptoms and sharing of symptoms with significant others. To reduce diagnosis delay, efforts should focus on strengthening the quality of public primary care services and improving referral routes to cancer care centers.

Progress and remaining challenges for cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Cancer is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide, and an increasing threat in low-income and middle-income countries. Our findings in the 2013 Commission in The Lancet Oncology showed several discrepancies between the cancer landscape in Latin America and more developed countries. We reported that funding for health care was a small percentage of national gross domestic product and the percentage of health-care funds diverted to cancer care was even lower. Funds, insurance coverage, doctors, health-care workers, resources, and equipment were also very inequitably distributed between and within countries. We reported that a scarcity of cancer registries hampered the design of credible cancer plans, including initiatives for primary prevention. When we were commissioned by The Lancet Oncology to write an update to our report, we were sceptical that we would uncover much change. To our surprise and gratification much progress has been made in this short time. We are pleased to highlight structural reforms in health-care systems, new programmes for disenfranchised populations, expansion of cancer registries and cancer plans, and implementation of policies to improve primary cancer prevention.

Health system delay and its effect on clinical stage of breast cancer: Multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine the correlation between health system delay and clinical disease stage in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 886 patients who were referred to 4 of the largest public cancer hospitals in Mexico City for the evaluation of a probable breast cancer. Data on time intervals, sociodemographic factors, and clinical stage at diagnosis were retrieved. A logistic regression model was used to estimate the average marginal effects of delay on the probability of being diagnosed with advanced breast cancer (stages III and IV). RESULTS: The median time between problem identification and the beginning of treatment was 7 months. The subinterval with the largest delay was that between the first medical consultation and diagnosis (median, 4 months). Only 15% of the patients who had cancer were diagnosed with stage 0 and I disease, and 48% were diagnosed with stage III and IV disease. Multivariate analyses confirmed independent correlations for the means of problem identification, patient delay, health system delay, and age with a higher probability that patients would begin cancer treatment in an advanced stage. CONCLUSIONS: In the sample studied, the majority of patients with breast cancer began treatment after a delay. Both patient delays and provider delays were associated with advanced disease. Research aimed at identifying specific access barriers to medical services is much needed to guide the design of tailored health policies that go beyond the promotion of breast care awareness and screening participation to include improvements in health services that facilitate access to timely diagnosis and treatment.

Planning cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Non-communicable diseases, including cancer, are overtaking infectious disease as the leading health-care threat in middle-income and low-income countries. Latin American and Caribbean countries are struggling to respond to increasing morbidity and death from advanced disease. Health ministries and health-care systems in these countries face many challenges caring for patients with advanced cancer: inadequate funding; inequitable distribution of resources and services; inadequate numbers, training, and distribution of health-care personnel and equipment; lack of adequate care for many populations based on socioeconomic, geographic, ethnic, and other factors; and current systems geared toward the needs of wealthy, urban minorities at a cost to the entire population. This burgeoning cancer problem threatens to cause widespread suffering and economic peril to the countries of Latin America. Prompt and deliberate actions must be taken to avoid this scenario. Increasing efforts towards prevention of cancer and avoidance of advanced, stage IV disease will reduce suffering and mortality and will make overall cancer care more affordable. We hope the findings of our Commission and our recommendations will inspire Latin American stakeholders to redouble their efforts to address this increasing cancer burden and to prevent it from worsening and threatening their societies.

Operationalizing patient-centered cancer care in low- and middle-income countries.

Rising cancer survival rates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) necessitate a paradigm shift to holistic, patient-driven care, focusing on meaningful outcomes aligned with individual values. Data, co-creation, continuous improvement, and collaboration are key. By prioritizing patient-defined metrics and patient empowerment, LMICs can transform cancer care, fostering sustained well-being beyond disease control.

Understanding breast cancer patient pathways and their impact on survival in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patient pathways from discovery of breast symptoms to treatment start can aid in identifying ways to improve access to timely cancer care. This study aimed to describe the patient pathways experienced by uninsured women from detection to treatment initiation for breast cancer in Mexico City and estimate the potential impact of earlier treatment on patient survival. METHODS: We used process mining, a data analytics technique, to create maps of the patient pathways. We then compared the waiting times and pathways between patients who initially consulted a private service versus those who sought care at a public health service. Finally, we conducted scenario modelling to estimate the impact of early diagnosis and treatment on patient survival. RESULTS: Our study revealed a common pathway followed by breast cancer patients treated at the two largest public cancer centres in Mexico City. However, patients who initially sought care in private clinics experienced shorter mean wait times for their first medical consultation (66 vs 88 days), and diagnostic confirmation of cancer (57 vs 71 days) compared to those who initially utilized public clinics. Our scenario modelling indicated that improving early diagnosis to achieve at least 60% of patients starting treatment at early stages could increase mean patient survival by up to two years. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the potential of process mining to inform healthcare policy for improvement of breast cancer care in Mexico. Also, our findings indicate that reducing diagnostic and treatment intervals for breast cancer patients could result in substantially better patient outcomes. POLICY SUMMARY: This study revealed significant differences in time intervals along the pathways of women with breast cancer according to the type of health service first consulted by the patients: whether public primary care clinics or private doctors. Policies directed to reduce these inequities in access to timely cancer care are desperately needed to reduce socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer survival.

Mammography prevalence in Mexico from 2001-2018: Results from the Mexican Health and Aging study.

After introducing guidelines for breast cancer screening in 2003, Mexico began to prioritize the implementation of mammography screening nationally. Since then, there have been no studies assessing changes in mammography in Mexico using the two-year prevalence interval that corresponds to national guidelines for screening frequency. The present study analyzes the Mexican Health and Aging Study (MHAS), a national population-based panel study of adults aged 50 and older, to evaluate changes in 2-year mammography prevalence among women aged 50 to 69 across five survey waves from 2001 to 2018 (n = 11,773). We calculated unadjusted and adjusted mammography prevalence by survey year and health insurance type. Overall prevalence increased substantially from 2003 to 2012 and leveled off in the period from 2012 to 2018 (2001: 20.2 % [95 % CI 18.3, 22.1]; 2003: 22.7 % [20.4, 25.0]; 2012: 56.5 % [53.2, 59.7]; 2015: 62.0 % [58.8, 65.2]; 2018: 59.4 % [56.7,62.1]; unadjusted prevalence). Prevalence was higher among respondents with social security insurance, who are more likely to work in the formal economy, than among respondents without social security, who are more likely to work in the informal economy or be unemployed. The overall prevalence estimates observed were higher than previously published estimates of mammography prevalence in Mexico. More research is needed to confirm findings regarding two-year mammography prevalence in Mexico and to better understand the causes of observed disparities.

Breast cancer survival in Mexico between 2007 and 2016 in women without social security: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Essential indicators of health system performance for breast cancer are lacking in Mexico. We estimated survival and clinical stage distribution for women without social insurance who were treated under a health financing scheme that covered 60% of the Mexican population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study cross-linking reimbursement claims for 56,847 women treated for breast cancer between 2007 and 2016 to a mortality registry. We estimated overall- and clinical stage-specific survival and breast cancer survival according to patient age, state of residence, marginalization, type of treatment facility, and patient volume of the treatment facility. We also explored the distribution of clinical stage according to age, year of treatment initiation, and state where the woman was treated. We used log-rank tests and estimated 95% CIs to compare differences between patient groups. Findings: Median age was 52 years (interquartile range [IQR] 45, 61) (Sixty five percent patients (36,731/56,847) had advanced disease at treatment initiation. Five-year overall survival was 72.2% (95% CI 71.7, 72.6). For early disease (excluding stage 0), 5-year overall survival was 89.0% (95% CI 88.4, 89.5), for locally advanced disease 69.9% (95% CI 69.0, 70.2) and for metastatic 36.9% (95% CI 35.4, 38.4). Clinical stage at treatment initiation and breast cancer survival remained unchanged in the period analyzed. Clinical stage and survival differed across age groups, state of residence, and type of facility where women received treatment. Interpretation: In the absence of population-based cancer registries, medical claims data may be efficiently leveraged to estimate essential cancer-related performance indicators. Funding: The authors received no financial support for this research.