Essential medicines list in national cancer control plans: a secondary analysis from a global study.

With the advent of innovative therapeutics for and the rising costs of cancer management, low-income and middle-income countries face increasing challenges to deliver effective and sustainable health care. Understanding of how countries are selecting and prioritising essential cancer interventions is poor, including in the formulation of policies for essential medicines. We did an in-depth subanalysis from a global dataset of national cancer control plans (NCCPs), aiming to identify possible determinants of inclusion of policies related to essential medicines in the NCCP. The results showed poor global comprehensiveness of NCCPs, and substantial deficits in policies for financial hardships due to cancer care, specifically for access to cancer medicines. Specification of budget allocations, policy of protection from catastrophic health expenditure, and national treatment guidelines in the NCCPs contributed to more consistent policies on essential cancer medicines. The bedrock to deliver effective cancer programmes resides in the assurance of comprehensive, consistent, and coherent policy formulation, to orient resource selection and health investments, ultimately delivering equitable health for all.

National health system characteristics, breast cancer stage at diagnosis, and breast cancer mortality: a population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: In some countries, breast cancer age-standardised mortality rates have decreased by 2-4% per year since the 1990s, but others have yet to achieve this outcome. In this study, we aimed to characterise the associations between national health system characteristics and breast cancer age-standardised mortality rate, and the degree of breast cancer downstaging correlating with national age-standardised mortality rate reductions. METHODS: In this population-based study, national age-standardised mortality rate estimates for women aged 69 years or younger obtained from GLOBOCAN 2020 were correlated with a broad panel of standardised national health system data as reported in the WHO Cancer Country Profiles 2020. These health system characteristics include health expenditure, the Universal Health Coverage Service Coverage Index (UHC Index), dedicated funding for early detection programmes, breast cancer early detection guidelines, referral systems, cancer plans, number of dedicated public and private cancer centres per 10 000 patients with cancer, and pathology services. We tested for differences between continuous variables using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test, and for categorical variables using the Pearson χ2 test. Simple and multiple linear regression analyses were fitted to identify associations between health system characteristics and age-standardised breast cancer mortality rates. Data on TNM stage at diagnosis were obtained from national or subnational cancer registries, supplemented by a literature review of PubMed from 2010 to 2020. Mortality trends from 1950 to 2016 were assessed using the WHO Cancer Mortality Database. The threshold for significance was set at a p value of 0·05 or less. FINDINGS: 148 countries had complete health system data. The following variables were significantly higher in high-income countries than in low-income countries in unadjusted analyses: health expenditure (p=0·0002), UHC Index (p<0·0001), dedicated funding for early detection programmes (p=0·0020), breast cancer early detection guidelines (p<0·0001), breast cancer referral systems (p=0·0030), national cancer plans (p=0·014), cervical cancer early detection programmes (p=0·0010), number of dedicated public (p<0·0001) and private (p=0·027) cancer centres per 10 000 patients with cancer, and pathology services (p<0·0001). In adjusted multivariable regression analyses in 141 countries, two health system characteristics were significantly associated with lower age-standardised mortality rates: higher UHC Index levels (ß=-0·12, 95% CI -0·16 to -0·08) and increasing numbers of public cancer centres (ß=-0·23, -0·36 to -0·10). These findings indicate that each unit increase in the UHC Index was associated with a 0·12-unit decline in age-standardised mortality rates, and each additional public cancer centre per 10 000 patients with cancer was associated with a 0·23-unit decline in age-standardised mortality rate. Among 35 countries with available breast cancer TNM staging data, all 20 that achieved sustained mean reductions in age-standardised mortality rate of 2% or more per year for at least 3 consecutive years since 1990 had at least 60% of patients with invasive breast cancer presenting as stage I or II disease. Some countries achieved this reduction without most women having access to population-based mammographic screening. INTERPRETATION: Countries with low breast cancer mortality rates are characterised by increased levels of coverage of essential health services and higher numbers of public cancer centres. Among countries achieving sustained mortality reductions, the majority of breast cancers are diagnosed at an early stage, reinforcing the value of clinical early diagnosis programmes for improving breast cancer outcomes. FUNDING: None.

Cancer Control at the District Hospital Level in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Educational and Resource Needs Assessment of General Practitioners.

PURPOSE: The WHO framework for early cancer diagnosis highlights the need to improve health care capacity among primary care providers. In Rwanda, general practitioners (GPs) at district hospitals (DHs) play key roles in diagnosing, initiating management, and referring suspected patients with cancer. We sought to ascertain educational and resource needs of GPs to provide a blueprint that can inform future early cancer diagnosis capacity-building efforts. METHODS: We administered a cross-sectional survey study to GPs practicing in 42 Rwandan DHs to assess gaps in cancer-focused knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as delays in the referral process. Responses were aggregated and descriptive analysis was performed to identify trends. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 76% (73 of 96 GPs). Most responders were 25 to 29 years of age (n = 64 [88%]) and 100% had been practicing between 3 and 12 months. Significant gaps in cancer knowledge and physical exam skills were identified-88% of respondents were comfortable performing breast exams, but less than 10 (15%) GPs reported confidence in performing pelvic exams. The main educational resource requested by responders (n = 59 [81%]) was algorithms to guide clinical decision-making. Gaps in resource availability were identified, with only 39% of responders reporting breast ultrasound availability and 5.8% reporting core needle biopsy availability in DHs. Radiology and pathology resources were limited, with 52 (71%) reporting no availability of pathology services at the DH level. CONCLUSION: The current study reveals significant basic oncologic educational and resource gaps in Rwanda, such as physical examination skills and diagnostic tools. Capacity building for GPs in low- and middle-income countries should be a core component of national cancer control plans to improve accurate and timely diagnosis of cancer. Continuing professional development activities should address and focus on context-specific educational gaps, resource availability, and referral practice guidelines.

Defining priority medical devices for cancer management: a WHO initiative.

Medical devices are indispensable for cancer management across the entire cancer care continuum, yet many existing medical interventions are not equally accessible to the global population, contributing to disparate mortality rates between countries with different income levels. Improved access to priority medical technologies is required to implement universal health coverage and deliver high-quality cancer care. However, the selection of appropriate medical devices at all income and hospital levels has been difficult because of the extremely large number of devices needed for the full spectrum of cancer care; the wide variety of options within the medical device sector, ranging from small inexpensive disposable devices to sophisticated diagnostic imaging and treatment units; and insufficient in-country expertise, in many countries, to prioritise cancer interventions and to determine associated technologies. In this Policy Review, we describe the methods, process, and outcome of a WHO initiative to define a list of priority medical devices for cancer management. The methods, approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee, can be used as a model approach for future endeavours to define and select medical devices for disease management. The resulting list provides ready-to-use guidance for the selection of devices to establish, maintain, and operate necessary clinical units within the continuum of care for six cancer types, with the goal of promoting efficient resource allocation and increasing access to priority medical devices, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries.

National cancer control plans: a global analysis.

There is increasing global recognition that national cancer plans are crucial to effectively address the cancer burden and to prioritise and coordinate programmes. We did a global analysis of available national cancer-related health plans using a standardised assessment questionnaire to assess their inclusion of elements that characterise an effective cancer plan and, thereby, improve understanding of the strengths and limitations of existing plans. The results show progress in the development of cancer plans, as well as in the inclusion of stakeholders in plan development, but little evidence of their implementation. Areas of continued unmet need include setting of realistic priorities, specification of programmes for cancer management, allocation of appropriate budgets, monitoring and evaluation of plan implementation, promotion of research, and strengthening of information systems. We found that countries with a non-communicable disease (NCD) plan but no national cancer control plan (NCCP) were less likely than countries with an NCCP and NCP plan or an NCCP only to have comprehensive, coherent, or consistent plans. As countries move towards universal health coverage, greater emphasis is needed on developing NCCPs that are evidence based, financed, and implemented to ensure translation into action.

World Health Organization List of Priority Medical Devices for Cancer Management to Promote Universal Coverage.

Universal coverage of basic laboratory services is fundamental to achieving sustainable development goals and attaining health for all. Yet, comprehensive laboratory services are unavailable to large percentages of the global population. To help policymakers identify a basic package of services for cancer, the World Health Organization (WHO) published Priority Medical Devices for Cancer Management. The package of services includes key interventions, associated devices and technologies, and the requirements for health workforce and infrastructure. These services must be linked to national strategic policies and plans and regulatory and quality assurance processes.

Global cancer surgery: delivering safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery.

Surgery is essential for global cancer care in all resource settings. Of the 15.2 million new cases of cancer in 2015, over 80% of cases will need surgery, some several times. By 2030, we estimate that annually 45 million surgical procedures will be needed worldwide. Yet, less than 25% of patients with cancer worldwide actually get safe, affordable, or timely surgery. This Commission on global cancer surgery, building on Global Surgery 2030, has examined the state of global cancer surgery through an analysis of the burden of surgical disease and breadth of cancer surgery, economics and financing, factors for strengthening surgical systems for cancer with multiple-country studies, the research agenda, and the political factors that frame policy making in this area. We found wide equity and economic gaps in global cancer surgery. Many patients throughout the world do not have access to cancer surgery, and the failure to train more cancer surgeons and strengthen systems could result in as much as US $6.2 trillion in lost cumulative gross domestic product by 2030. Many of the key adjunct treatment modalities for cancer surgery--e.g., pathology and imaging--are also inadequate. Our analysis identified substantial issues, but also highlights solutions and innovations. Issues of access, a paucity of investment in public surgical systems, low investment in research, and training and education gaps are remarkably widespread. Solutions include better regulated public systems, international partnerships, super-centralisation of surgical services, novel surgical clinical trials, and new approaches to improve quality and scale up cancer surgical systems through education and training. Our key messages are directed at many global stakeholders, but the central message is that to deliver safe, affordable, and timely cancer surgery to all, surgery must be at the heart of global and national cancer control planning.

Global cancer consortiums: moving from consensus to practice.

PURPOSE AND DESIGN: The failure to translate cancer knowledge into action contributes to regional, national, and international health inequities. Disparities in cancer care are the most severe in low-resource settings, where delivery obstacles are compounded by health infrastructure deficits and inadequate basic services. Global cancer consortiums (GCCs) have developed to strengthen cancer care expertise, advance knowledge on best practices, and bridge the cancer gap worldwide. Within the complex matrix of public health priorities, consensus is emerging on cost-effective cancer care interventions in low- and medium-resource countries, which include the critical role of surgical services. Distinct from traditional health partnerships that collaborate to provide care at the local level, GCCs collaborate more broadly to establish consensus on best practice models for service delivery. To realize the benefit of programmatic interventions and achieve tangible improvements in patient outcomes, GCCs must construct and share evidence-based implementation strategies to be tested in real world settings. REVIEW AND CONCLUSIONS: Implementation research should inform consensus formation, program delivery, and outcome monitoring to achieve the goals articulated by GCCs. Fundamental steps to successful implementation are: (1) to adopt an integrated, multisectoral plan with local involvement; (2) to define shared implementation priorities by establishing care pathways that avoid prescriptive but suboptimal health care delivery; (3) to build capacity through education, technology transfer, and surveillance of outcomes; and (4) to promote equity and balanced collaboration. GCCs can bridge the gap between what is known and what is done, translating normative sharing of clinical expertise into tangible improvements in patient care.

Breast cancer in low and middle income countries (LMICs): a shifting tide in global health.

Cancer control planning has become a core aspect of global health, as rising rates of noncommunicable diseases in low-resource settings have fittingly propelled it into the spotlight. Comprehensive strategies for cancer control are needed to effectively manage the disease burden. As the most common cancer among women and the most likely reason a woman will die from cancer globally, breast cancer management is a necessary aspect of any comprehensive cancer control plan. Major improvements in breast cancer outcomes in high-income countries have not yet been mirrored in low-resource settings, making it a targeted priority for global health planning. Resource-stratified guidelines provide a framework and vehicle for designing programs to promote early detection, diagnosis, and treatment using existing infrastructure and renewable resources. Strategies for evaluating the current state and projecting future burden is a central aspect of developing national strategies for improving breast cancer outcomes at the national and international levels.