Mapping of Radiation Oncology and Gynecologic Oncology Services Available to Treat the Growing Burden of Cervical Cancer in Africa.

PURPOSE: To meet the demand for cervical cancer care in Africa, access to surgical and radiation therapy services needs to be understood. We thus mapped the availability of gynecologic and radiation therapy equipment and staffing for treating cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We collected data on gynecologic and radiation oncology staffing, equipment, and infrastructure capacities across Africa. Data was obtained from February to July 2021 through collaboration with international partners using Research Electronic Data Capture. Cancer incidence was taken from the International Agency for Research on Cancer's GLOBOCAN 2020 database. Treatment capacity, including the numbers of radiation oncologists, radiation therapists, physicists, gynecologic oncologists, and hospitals performing gynecologic surgeries, was calculated per 1000 cervical cancer cases. Adequate capacity was defined as 2 radiation oncologists and 2 gynecologic oncologists per 1000 cervical cancer cases. RESULTS: Forty-three of 54 African countries (79.6%) responded, and data were not reported for 11 countries (20.4%). Respondents from 31 countries (57.4%) reported access to specialist gynecologic oncology services, but staffing was adequate in only 11 countries (20.4%). Six countries (11%) reported that generalist obstetrician-gynecologists perform radical hysterectomies. Radiation oncologist access was available in 39 countries (72.2%), but staffing was adequate in only 16 countries (29.6%). Six countries (11%) had adequate staffing for both gynecologic and radiation oncology; 7 countries (13%) had no radiation or gynecologic oncologists. Access to external beam radiation therapy was available in 31 countries (57.4%), and access to brachytherapy was available in 25 countries (46.3%). The number of countries with training programs in gynecologic oncology, radiation oncology, medical physics, and radiation therapy were 14 (26%), 16 (30%), 11 (20%), and 17 (31%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We identified areas needing comprehensive cervical cancer care infrastructure, human resources, and training programs. There are major gaps in access to radiation oncologists and trained gynecologic oncologists in Africa.

Moving forward through consensus: a national Delphi approach to determine the top research priorities in prostate cancer in Uganda.

OBJECTIVE: To identify key areas for research in prostate cancer (PC) in the Ugandan context by establishing the major health system, socioeconomic and clinical barriers to seeking, reaching and receiving high-quality cancer care. DESIGN: Modified Delphi Technique. SETTING: Government and private-not-for-profit hospitals. METHODS: We applied a two-stage modified Delphi technique to identify the consensus view across cancer experts. In round 1, experts received a questionnaire containing 21 statements drawn from a systematic review identifying the reason for the delay in accessing cancer care. Each statement was scored out of 20. Statements scoring ≥15 from over 70% of participants were prioritised for inclusion while statements for which <30% of participants gave a score of ≥15 were excluded. Sixteen statements were included in round 2 as they did not receive consensus for inclusion or exclusion. RESULTS: We found that the top six research priority areas arise from challenges including: (1) lack of diagnostic services-ultrasound, laboratory tests and biopsy facilities; (2) high costs of services, for example, surgery, radiotherapy, hormone therapy are unaffordable to most patients, (3) lack of essential medicines, (4) limited radiotherapy capacity, (5) lack of awareness of cancer as a disease and low recognition of symptoms, (6) low healthcare literacy. The lack of critical surgical supplies, high diagnostic and treatment costs were ranked highest in order of importance in round 1. Round 2 also revealed lack of diagnostic services, unavailability of critical medicines, lack of radiotherapy options, high costs of treatments and lack of critical surgical supplies as the top priorities. CONCLUSION: These research priority areas ought to be addressed in future research to improve prompt PC diagnosis and care in Uganda. There is need to improve the supply of high-quality affordable anticancer medicines for PC patients so as to improve the survivorship from the cancer.

Oesophageal cancer cases recorded in the Zambia National Cancer Registry: a cross-sectional study.

Introduction: the aim of this study was to determine what proportion of patients with confirmed esophageal cancer at the largest hospital in the country were recorded in the Zambia National Cancer Registry (ZNCR). Methods: we reviewed esophageal cancer records at the University Teaching Hospital (UTH) and ZNCR, between 2015 and 2017. Using Stata version 15, data were summarised and the Kruskal-Wallis was used to compute comparisons, Kaplan-Meier curves for survival estimates and Cox regression for associated factors. Results: included in the final analysis were records for 222 patients with confirmed esophageal cancer and of these 51/222 (41%) were appearing in the ZNCR. The mean age of the patients was 56.2 years (SD, 13.0) and only 2/222 (1%) were confirmed alive at the time of data analysis. The median time from endoscopic diagnosis to histological confirmation was 12.5 days (IQR 7.5 - 21.5) and arrival at the Cancer Diseases Hospital (CDH) for treatment was 20 days (IQR 10 - 34). The overall median survival time in the study was 259 days (CI 95%; 151 - 501). Age, sex, time to diagnosis, histological classification and grade of tumour did not show any evidence of predicting survival in both the univariate and multivariable cox regression model (p>0.05). Conclusion: a significant proportion of esophageal cancer cases seen at UTH were not included in the national registry suggesting that official figures for the prevalence of esophageal cancer in Zambia are underestimated. There is an urgent need to improve the collection of data on esophageal cancer in Zambia.

Delays in seeking, reaching and access to quality cancer care in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Late presentation and delays in diagnosis and treatment consistently translate into poor outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The aim of this study was to collate and appraise the factors influencing diagnostic and treatment delays of adult solid tumours in SSA. DESIGN: Systematic review with assessment of bias using Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Exposures (ROBINS-E) tool. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase, for publications from January 1995 to March 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria: quantitative or mixed-method research, publications in English, on solid cancers in SSA countries. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: paediatric populations, haematologic malignancies, and assessments of public perceptions and awareness of cancer (since the focus was on patients with a cancer diagnosis and treatment pathways). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers extracted and validated the studies. Data included year of publication; country; demographic characteristics; country-level setting; disease subsite; study design; type of delay, reasons for delay and primary outcomes. RESULTS: 57 out of 193 full-text reviews were included. 40% were from Nigeria or Ethiopia. 70% focused on breast or cervical cancer. 43 studies had a high risk of bias at preliminary stages of quality assessment. 14 studies met the criteria for full assessment and all totaled to either high or very high risk of bias across seven domains. Reasons for delays included high costs of diagnostic and treatment services; lack of coordination between primary, secondary and tertiary healthcare sectors; inadequate staffing; and continued reliance on traditional healers and complimentary medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Robust research to inform policy on the barriers to quality cancer care in SSA is absent. The focus of most research is on breast and cervical cancers. Research outputs are from few countries. It is imperative that we investigate the complex interaction of these factors to build resilient and effective cancer control programmes.

Cancer medicines on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines: processes, challenges, and a way forward.

The selection of cancer medicines for national procurement requires deliberate evaluation of population benefit, budget impact, sustainability, and health system capacity. However, this process is complicated by numerous challenges, including the large volume and rapid pace of newly developed therapies offering marginal gains at prohibitively high prices. The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) and Model List of Essential Medicines for Children (EMLc) have undergone a series of evidence-based updates to ensure recommended cancer medicines offer meaningful clinical benefit. This Health Policy paper describes how cancer medicines are listed on the EML and EMLc, including two updated WHO processes: (1) the formation of the Cancer Medicines Working Group, and (2) additional selection principles for recommending cancer medicines, including a minimum overall survival benefit of 4-6 months with improvement to quality of life compared with standard treatment. These updates, along with proposals to include formal price considerations, additional selection criteria, and multisectoral collaboration (eg, voluntary licensing) promote procurement of high-value essential cancer medicines on national formularies in the context of supporting sustainable health systems to achieve universal health coverage.

Secondary Prevention of Cervical Cancer: ASCO Resource-Stratified Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To update resource-stratified, evidence-based recommendations on secondary prevention of cervical cancer globally. METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel to produce recommendations reflecting four resource-tiered settings. A review of existing guidelines, formal consensus-based process, and modified ADAPTE process to adapt existing guidelines was conducted. Other experts participated in formal consensus. RESULTS: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Five existing guidelines were identified and reviewed, and adapted recommendations form the evidence base. Cost-effectiveness analyses provided indirect evidence to inform consensus, which resulted in ≥ 75% agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is recommended in all resource settings; visual inspection with acetic acid may be used in basic settings. Recommended age ranges and frequencies vary by the following setting: maximal: age 25-65 years, every 5 years; enhanced: age 30-65 years, if two consecutive negative tests at 5-year intervals, then every 10 years; limited: age 30-49 years, every 10 years; basic: age 30-49 years, one to three times per lifetime. For basic settings, visual assessment is used to determine treatment eligibility; in other settings, genotyping with cytology or cytology alone is used to determine treatment. For basic settings, treatment is recommended if abnormal triage results are obtained; in other settings, abnormal triage results followed by colposcopy is recommended. For basic settings, treatment options are thermal ablation or loop electrosurgical excision procedure; for other settings, loop electrosurgical excision procedure or ablation is recommended; with a 12-month follow-up in all settings. Women who are HIV-positive should be screened with HPV testing after diagnosis, twice as many times per lifetime as the general population. Screening is recommended at 6 weeks postpartum in basic settings; in other settings, screening is recommended at 6 months. In basic settings without mass screening, infrastructure for HPV testing, diagnosis, and treatment should be developed.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines.

Cancer Medicines: What Is Essential and Affordable in India?

PURPOSE: The WHO essential medicines list (EML) guides selection of drugs for national formularies. Here, we evaluate which medicines are considered highest priority by Indian oncologists and the extent to which they are available in routine practice. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of an electronic survey developed by the WHO EML Cancer Medicine Working Group. The survey was distributed globally using a hierarchical snowball method to physicians who prescribe systemic anticancer therapy. The survey captured the 10 medicines oncologists considered highest priority for population health and their availability in routine practice. RESULTS: The global study cohort included 948 respondents from 82 countries; 98 were from India and 67 were from other low- and middle-income countries. Compared with other low- and middle-income countries, the Indian cohort was more likely to be medical oncologist (70% v 31%, P < .001) and work exclusively in the private health system (52% v 17%, P < .001). 14/20 most commonly selected medicines were conventional cytotoxic drugs. Universal access to these medicines was reported by a minority of oncologists; risks of significant out-of-pocket expenditures for each medicine were reported by 19%-58% of oncologists. Risk of catastrophic expenditure was reported by 58%-67% of oncologists for rituximab and trastuzumab. Risks of financial toxicity were substantially higher within the private health system compared with the public system. CONCLUSION: Most high-priority cancer medicines identified by Indian oncologists are generic chemotherapy agents that provide substantial improvements in survival and are already included in WHO EML. Access to these treatments remains limited by major financial burdens experienced by patients. This is particularly acute within the private health system. Strategies are urgently needed to ensure that high-quality cancer care is affordable and accessible to all patients in India.

Perspectives of Zambian Clinical Oncology Trainees in the MD Anderson and Zambia Virtual Clinical Research Training Program (MOZART).

BACKGROUND: African countries are underrepresented in cancer research, partly because of a lack of structured curricula on clinical research during medical education. To address this need, the MD Anderson and Zambia Virtual Clinical Research Training Program (MOZART) was developed jointly by MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDA) and the Cancer Diseases Hospital in Zambia (CDH) for Zambian clinical oncology trainees. We explored participant perspectives to provide insight for implementation of similar efforts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MD Anderson and Zambia Virtual Clinical Research Training Program consisted of weekly virtual lectures and support of Zambian-led research protocols through longitudinal mentorship groups that included CDH faculty and MDA peer and faculty mentors. Participants were contacted via email to take part in semi-structured interviews, which were conducted via teleconference and audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded. Emergent themes were extracted and are presented with representative verbatim quotations. RESULTS: Thirteen of the 14 (93%) trainees were interviewed. Emergent themes included (1) participants having diverse educational backgrounds but limited exposure to clinical research, (2) importance of cancer research specific to a resource-constrained setting, (3) complementary roles of peer mentors and local and international faculty mentors, (4) positive impact on clinical research skills but importance of a longitudinal program and early exposure to clinical research, and (5) challenges with executing research protocols. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first qualitative study of African clinical oncology trainees participating in a virtual clinical research training program. The lessons learned from semi-structured interviews with participants in MOZART provided valuable insights that can inform the development of similar clinical research training efforts and scale-up.

Defining Essential Childhood Cancer Medicines to Inform Prioritization and Access: Results From an International, Cross-Sectional Survey.

PURPOSE: Access to essential cancer medicines is a major determinant of childhood cancer outcomes globally. The degree to which pediatric oncologists deem medicines listed on WHO's Model List of Essential Medicines for Children (EMLc) essential is unknown, as is the extent to which such medicines are accessible on the front lines of clinical care. METHODS: An electronic survey developed was distributed through the International Society of Pediatric Oncology mailing list to members from 87 countries. Respondents were asked to select 10 cancer medicines that would provide the greatest benefit to patients in their context; subsequent questions explored medicine availability and cost. Descriptive and bivariate statistics compared access to medicines between low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs), upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), and high-income countries (HICs). RESULTS: Among 159 respondents from 44 countries, 43 (27%) were from LMICs, 79 (50%) from UMICs, and 37 (23%) from HICs. The top five medicines were methotrexate (75%), vincristine (74%), doxorubicin (74%), cyclophosphamide (69%), and cytarabine (65%). Of the priority medicines identified, 87% (27 of 31) are represented on the 2021 EMLc and 77% (24 of 31) were common to the lists generated by LMIC, UMIC, and HIC respondents. The proportion of respondents indicating universal availability for each of the top medicines ranged from 9% to 46% for LMIC, 25% to 89% for UMIC, and 67% to 100% for HIC. Risk of catastrophic expenditure was more common in LMIC (8%-20%), compared with UMIC (0%-28%) and HIC (0%). CONCLUSION: Most medicines that oncologists deem essential for childhood cancer treatment are currently included on the EMLc. Barriers remain in access to these medicines, characterized by gaps in availability and risks of catastrophic expenditure for families that are most pronounced in low-income settings but evident across all income contexts.

COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer, a rapid review.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine development and administration have become global priorities since the beginning of the pandemic, particularly for special populations at higher risk of complications and mortality, such as patients with haematologic and solid organ malignancies. This review aims to summarise the current data for COVID-19 vaccine efficacy in patients with cancer, suggest priority areas for future research and look at potential disparities at a global level. Although patients diagnosed with or receiving therapy for cancer were excluded from the initial vaccine trials, emerging evidence now supports vaccine safety with potentially diminished immune response in this group. Several studies that evaluated antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination found that patients with solid malignancies had lower serologic response rates compared to healthy controls, but better than patients with haematologic malignancies, who had the lowest seroconversion rates and antibody titres. As anticipated, poor serologic responses have been particularly observed among patients receiving B-cell depleting therapies. The data on cellular response are scarce and conflicting since not all studies have showed a difference between patients with malignancies and healthy subjects. Several questions concerning vaccination remain unanswered and require further exploration, such as response duration, need for response monitoring and rates of breakthrough infections.

Building Capacity for Cancer Research in the Era of COVID-19: Implementation and Results From an International Virtual Clinical Research Training Program in Zambia.

PURPOSE: The incidence of cancer in sub-Saharan Africa is increasing rapidly, yet cancer research in the region continues to lag. One contributing factor is limited exposure to clinical research among trainees. We describe implementation and results of a virtual clinical research training program for Zambian clinical oncology fellows developed jointly by the Cancer Diseases Hospital in Zambia and the MD Anderson Cancer Center to address this need. METHODS: The clinical research training program consisted of 14 weekly virtual lectures, development of research questions by Zambian clinical oncology fellows, assignment of faculty and peer mentors, longitudinal mentorship of research protocols, and anonymous precourse and postcourse surveys. The paired t-test was used to analyze the change in academic self-efficacy scores. RESULTS: Fourteen Zambian clinical oncology fellows participated. Senior fellows were paired with research mentors, leading to the development of eight research protocols. A total of 70 meetings and 126 hours of mentorship occurred with a median of seven meetings and 15 hours per pairing. The precourse and postcourse survey response rates were 86% and 79%, respectively. There were statistically significant increases in nine of 12 academic self-efficacy domains. The largest gains were in ability to independently perform research (P < .001) and research mentorship (P = .02) with an average increase of 1.5 points on a five-point scale in both domains. CONCLUSION: The Cancer Diseases Hospital MD Anderson Cancer Center clinical research training program for Zambian clinical oncology fellows led to increases in multiple academic self-efficacy domains among participants, formation of longitudinal mentorship groups with both faculty and peer mentors, and development of Zambian-led research protocols, demonstrating the feasibility of implementing a virtual model. This may be especially relevant because of shifting international collaboration paradigms after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Contingency planning for cancer care in low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid assessment for future disaster resilience.

BACKGROUND: Many countries appear to be ill-prepared in their emergency responses towards the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, particularly in managing chronic diseases such as cancer. We aimed to gain insight on the preparedness of health systems within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in maintaining delivery of cancer care amid the pandemic. METHODS: We performed a rapid review of publications focusing on emergency contingency plans for cancer care during the pandemic in LMICs. An online desk research was conducted to identify relevant policy documents, guidelines or scientific publications. RESULTS: Very few LMICs had readily accessible documents to ensure continuity in delivery of cancer care during the pandemic. A majority of publications were focused on delivery of cancer treatment whereas early detection, diagnosis and delivery of supportive and survivorship care received very little attention. Far fewer of the published guidelines appear to have been formulated at the national level by governmental agencies. A vast majority of publications constituted consensus guidelines from professional societies, followed by sharing of best practices from local institutions. Overall, three main strategies have been recommended to maintain delivery of cancer care amid the pandemic in LMICs: 1) Modification of cancer treatment regimens, 2) Changes in methods of administration of curative and supportive cancer care and 3) Implementation of generic measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection in healthcare settings. CONCLUSION: All LMICs should consider collating best practices from the current pandemic and translating them into an explicit cancer preparedness plan, which can be escalated during future disasters.

The state of gynecologic radiation therapy in low- and middle-income countries.

A disproportionate burden of gynecologic malignancies occurs in low- and middle-income countries. Radiation therapy is an integral component of treatment for gynecologic malignancies both from a curative (locally advanced cervical cancer) and palliative (bleeding cervical or pelvic mass) standpoint. Critical to understanding how better to serve patients in this regard is understanding both the extent of disease epidemiology and the radiotherapy infrastructure to treat these diseases. In this review, we explore various geographic regions and how they address a unique set of challenges specific to the peoples and culture of the region. We identify common threads across regions, including sparse distribution of radiation equipment, geographic access, and specialized training. We also highlight examples of success in the use of telemedicine and cross-cultural partnerships to help bolster access to training to ensure increased access to adequate and appropriate treatment of gynecologic malignancies.

Gynecologic radiation therapy in low and middle income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forever affected healthcare and posed an incredible challenge to our society to care for our sick. Patients with cancer were found early on to have higher rates of complications with COVID-19. Radiation therapy is an integral part of treatment for many types of gynecologic cancer and adaptation on its utilization during the pandemic varied across the globe. In this review, we detail certain guidelines for the use of radiation in gynecologic cancers during the pandemic as well as real world accounts of how different countries adapted to these guidelines or created their own based on individualized resources, staffing, government restrictions, and societal norms. Critically, this review demonstrates the breadth of fractionation schemes and technologies used when resources were limited but highlights the importance of long term follow-up for many of our patients during this time.

Gynecological radiation oncology in sub-Saharan Africa: status, problems and considerations for the future.

Gynecological malignancies in Africa form a significant part of the burden of disease. The high prevalence of HIV in some countries creates a heightened risk for development of human papilloma virus related cancers such as cervical, vulval and vaginal cancers. Radiotherapy is an important modality of treatment for cancer and in Africa compensates for the lack of adequate surgical services for a large proportion of cancers as well as being a cornerstone of treatment for locally advanced cancers and palliation. In this review we look at the status of radiotherapy services in sub-Saharan Africa and critical factors that influence its delivery with a focus on gynecological malignancies. This unveils that radiotherapy for gynecological cancers in sub-Saharan Africa is a significant example of the need for a holistic development approach across different sectors of the economy and different disciplines of medicine. The complexity of its management continues to expose the underdevelopment of health and financial systems and the lack of universal health coverage and social systems as we continue to see unnecessary morbidity and mortality due to the lack of organization. More systematic and scientifically robust investigations tailored to the various sub-Saharan Africa countries need to be conducted to elicit disruptive local solutions to the status quo.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Researchers in 2020: A Qualitative Study of Events to Inform Mitigation Strategies.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on global health systems and economies. With ongoing and future challenges posed to the field due to the pandemic, re-examining research priorities has emerged as a concern. As part of a wider project aiming to examine research priorities, here we aimed to qualitatively examine the documented impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer researchers. Materials and Methods: We conducted a literature review with the aim of identifying non-peer-reviewed journalistic sources and institutional blog posts which qualitatively documented the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer researchers. We searched on 12th January 2021 using the LexisNexis database and Google, using terms and filters to identify English-language media reports and blogs, containing references to both COVID-19 and cancer research. The targeted search returned 751 results, of which 215 articles met the inclusion criteria. These 215 articles were subjected to a conventional qualitative content analysis, to document the impacts of the pandemic on the field of cancer research. Results: Our analysis yielded a high plurality of qualitatively documented impacts, from which seven categories of direct impacts emerged: (1) COVID measures halting cancer research activity entirely; (2) COVID measures limiting cancer research activity; (3) forced adaptation of research protocols; (4) impacts on cancer diagnosis, cases, and services; (5) availability of resources for cancer research; (6) disruption to the private sector; and (7) disruption to supply chains. Three categories of consequences from these impacts also emerged: (1) potential changes to future research practice; (2) delays to the progression of the field; and (3) potential new areas of research interest. Discussion: The COVID-19 pandemic had extensive practical and economic effects on the field of cancer research in 2020 that were highly plural in nature. Appraisal of cancer research strategies in a post-COVID world should acknowledge the potential for substantial limitations (such as on financial resources, limited access to patients for research, decreased patient access to cancer care, staffing issues, administrative delays, or supply chain issues), exacerbated cancer disparities, advances in digital health, and new areas of research related to the intersection of cancer and COVID-19.

Access to cancer medicines deemed essential by oncologists in 82 countries: an international, cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The WHO Essential Medicines List (EML) identifies priority medicines that are most important to public health. Over time, the EML has included an increasing number of cancer medicines. We aimed to investigate whether the cancer medicines in the EML are aligned with the priority medicines of frontline oncologists worldwide, and the extent to which these medicines are accessible in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This international, cross-sectional survey was developed by investigators from a range of clinical practice settings across low-income to high-income countries, including members of the WHO Essential Medicines Cancer Working Group. A 28-question electronic survey was developed and disseminated to a global network of oncologists in 89 countries and regions by use of a hierarchical snowball method; each primary contact distributed the survey through their national and regional oncology associations or personal networks. The survey was open from Oct 15 to Dec 7, 2020. Fully qualified physicians who prescribe systemic anticancer therapy to adults were eligible to participate in the survey. The primary question asked respondents to select the ten cancer medicines that would provide the greatest public health benefit to their country; subsequent questions explored availability and cost of cancer medicines. Descriptive statistics were used to compare access to medicines between low-income and lower-middle-income countries, upper-middle-income countries, and high-income countries. FINDINGS: 87 country-level contacts and two regional networks were invited to participate in the survey; 46 (52%) accepted the invitation and distributed the survey. 1697 respondents opened the survey link; 423 were excluded as they did not answer the primary study question and 326 were excluded because of ineligibility. 948 eligible oncologists from 82 countries completed the survey (165 [17%] in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 165 [17%] in upper-middle-income countries, and 618 [65%] in high-income countries). The most commonly selected medicines were doxorubicin (by 499 [53%] of 948 respondents), cisplatin (by 470 [50%]), paclitaxel (by 423 [45%]), pembrolizumab (by 414 [44%]), trastuzumab (by 402 [42%]), carboplatin (by 390 [41%]), and 5-fluorouracil (by 386 [41%]). Of the 20 most frequently selected high-priority cancer medicines, 19 (95%) are currently on the WHO EML; 12 (60%) were cytotoxic agents and 13 (65%) were granted US Food and Drug Administration regulatory approval before 2000. The proportion of respondents indicating universal availability of each top 20 medication was 9-54% in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 13-90% in upper-middle-income countries, and 68-94% in high-income countries. The risk of catastrophic expenditure (spending >40% of total consumption net of spending on food) was more common in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, with 13-68% of respondents indicating a substantial risk of catastrophic expenditures for each of the top 20 medications in lower-middle-income countries versus 2-41% of respondents in upper-middle-income countries and 0-9% in high-income countries. INTERPRETATION: These data demonstrate major barriers in access to core cancer medicines worldwide. These findings challenge the feasibility of adding additional expensive cancer medicines to the EML. There is an urgent need for global and country-level policy action to ensure patients with cancer globally have access to high priority medicines. FUNDING: None.

Building workforce capacity for the surgical management of cervical cancer in a fragile, low-income African nation-Democratic Republic of the Congo.

OBJECTIVES: Surgery is a cornerstone of the management of cervical cancer. Women diagnosed with cervical cancer in sub-Saharan Africa have very little access to specialised (gynaecologic oncology) surgical services. We describe our experiences and challenges of training local general gynaecologists to surgically treat early stage invasive cervical cancer at a private sector healthcare facility in a fragile, low-income African nation. METHODS: Implementation of the training curriculum began with assigned self-directed learning. It continued with on-site training which consisted of preoperative surgical video reviews, pre- and intra-operative assessment of disease status, deconstruction of the designated surgical procedure into its critical subcomponents and trainees orally communicating the steps of the surgical procedure with the master trainers. High-volume repetition of a single surgical procedure over a short time interval, intra-operative bedside mentoring, post-operative case review and mental narration were critical to the process of surgical skills transfer. RESULTS: Nineteen radical abdominal hysterectomies were successfully performed over four training visits; trainees were able to perform the procedure alone after eight cases; surgical complications decreased over time. The trainees have continued to perform the surgical procedures independently. CONCLUSION: Life-saving surgical capacity for the treatment of cervical cancer has been established and sustained at a private sector healthcare facility in a fragile, low-income African setting, through an innovative model of surgical training.

Novel coronavirus mitigation measures implemented by radiotherapy centres in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to identify strategies adopted by radiotherapy centres in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to mitigate the effects of COVID-19. Studies summarising COVID-19 mitigation strategies designed and implemented by radiotherapy centres in LMICs to avoid delays, deferrments and interruptions of radiotherapy services are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis guideline. Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched for peer-reviewed articles that reported measures adopted by radiotherapy centres in LMICs to reduce the risk of COVID-19. Information on different strategies were extracted from the included studies and textual narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: Of 60 articles retrieved, eleven were included. Majority of the studies were conducted in China. Ten of the included studies employed a qualitative design. Four themes were identified: preparing and equipping staff; reinforcing infection prevention and control policies; strengthening coordination and communication; and maintaining physical distancing. Studies reported that radiotherapy centres had: formed COVID-19 response multidisciplinary team; maximised the use of telehealth; adjusted the layout of waiting areas; divided staff into teams; dedicated a room for isolating suspected cases; and adopted triage systems. CONCLUSIONS: Local adaptation of established global strategies coupled with timely development of guidelines, flexibility and innovation have allowed radiotherapy leaders to continue to deliver radiotherapy services to cancer patients in LMICs during the COVID-19 crisis. Robust data collection must be encouraged in LMICs to provide an evidence-based knowledge for use in the event of another pandemic.

Immune correlates of therapy outcomes in women with cervical cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Immune markers have been correlated with prognosis in a variety of solid tumors, including cervical cancer. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on hematologic and immune markers and their association with recurrence and survival among patients with cervical cancer treated with chemoradiation. EVIDENCE REVIEW: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines via searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library using keywords regarding cervical cancer, immune markers, and HIV. Studies involving patients treated with cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy were selected and reviewed by at least two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. FINDINGS: A total of 737 studies were identified, of which 314 assessed immune biomarkers in immunocompetent patients (30 included in the final analysis) and 327 studies in immunosuppressed patients (5 included in the final analysis). The strongest prognostic indicators were lymphopenia and elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Other potential markers included HPV-specific lymphocyte response, cytokine profile, expression of immune-blocking antigens on cell surfaces, and tumor-associated lymphocyte, macrophage, and neutrophil infiltration. Studies of immunosuppressed patients described more severe cytopenic changes overall and concluded that viral suppression led to improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The immunologic interplay at work in cervical cancer development, progression, and treatment is complex. Strong evidence was found in favor of lymphopenia and elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio being prognostic for worse outcomes with other markers showing potential associations as well. Although the interpretation of immune status with regard to treatment approach remains unclear, future studies should aim to tailor treatment that minimizes possible detrimental immune effects.