Cancer survival in Africa, central and south America, and Asia (SURVCAN-3): a population-based benchmarking study in 32 countries.

BACKGROUND: Population-based cancer survival is a key measurement of cancer control performance linked to diagnosis and treatment, but benchmarking studies that include lower-income settings and that link results to health systems and human development are scarce. SURVCAN-3 is an international collaboration of population-based cancer registries that aims to benchmark timely and comparable cancer survival estimates in Africa, central and south America, and Asia. METHODS: In SURVCAN-3, population-based cancer registries from Africa, central and south America, and Asia were invited to contribute data. Quality control and data checks were carried out in collaboration with population-based cancer registries and, where applicable, active follow-up was performed at the registry. Patient-level data (sex, age at diagnosis, date of diagnosis, morphology and topography, stage, vital status, and date of death or last contact) were included, comprising patients diagnosed between Jan 1, 2008, and Dec 31, 2012, and followed up for at least 2 years (until Dec 31, 2014). Age-standardised net survival (survival where cancer was the only possible cause of death), with 95% CIs, at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years after diagnosis were calculated using Pohar-Perme estimators for 15 major cancers. 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year net survival estimates were stratified by countries within continents (Africa, central and south America, and Asia), and countries according to the four-tier Human Development Index (HDI; low, medium, high, and very high). FINDINGS: 1 400 435 cancer cases from 68 population-based cancer registries in 32 countries were included. Net survival varied substantially between countries and world regions, with estimates steadily rising with increasing levels of the HDI. Across the included cancer types, countries within the lowest HDI category (eg, CÔte d'Ivoire) had a maximum 3-year net survival of 54·6% (95% CI 33·3-71·6; prostate cancer), whereas those within the highest HDI categories (eg, Israel) had a maximum survival of 96·8% (96·1-97·3; prostate cancer). Three distinct groups with varying outcomes by country and HDI dependant on cancer type were identified: cancers with low median 3-year net survival (<30%) and small differences by HDI category (eg, lung and stomach), cancers with intermediate median 3-year net survival (30-79%) and moderate difference by HDI (eg, cervix and colorectum), and cancers with high median 3-year net survival (≥80%) and large difference by HDI (eg, breast and prostate). INTERPRETATION: Disparities in cancer survival across countries were linked to a country's developmental position, and the availability and efficiency of health services. These data can inform policy makers on priorities in cancer control to reduce apparent inequality in cancer outcome. FUNDING: Tata Memorial Hospital, the Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Guideline Concordance of Treatment and Outcomes Among Adult Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Multinational, Population-Based Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Although non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is the 6th most common malignancy in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), little is known about its management and outcome. Herein, we examined treatment patterns and survival among NHL patients. METHODS: We obtained a random sample of adult patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2015 from 11 population-based cancer registries in 10 SSA countries. Descriptive statistics for lymphoma-directed therapy (LDT) and degree of concordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines were calculated, and survival rates were estimated. FINDINGS: Of 516 patients included in the study, sub-classification was available for 42.1% (121 high-grade and 64 low-grade B-cell lymphoma, 15 T-cell lymphoma and 17 otherwise sub-classified NHL), whilst the remaining 57.9% were unclassified. Any LDT was identified for 195 of all patients (37.8%). NCCN guideline-recommended treatment was initiated in 21 patients. This corresponds to 4.1% of all 516 patients, and to 11.7% of 180 patients with sub-classified B-cell lymphoma and NCCN guidelines available. Deviations from guideline-recommended treatment were initiated in another 49 (9.5% of 516, 27.2% of 180). By registry, the proportion of all patients receiving guideline-concordant LDT ranged from 30.8% in Namibia to 0% in Maputo and Bamako. Concordance with treatment recommendations was not assessable in 75.1% of patients (records not traced (43.2%), traced but no sub-classification identified (27.8%), traced but no guidelines available (4.1%)). By registry, diagnostic work-up was in part importantly limited, thus impeding guideline evaluation significantly. Overall 1-year survival was 61.2% (95%CI 55.3%-67.1%). Poor ECOG performance status, advanced stage, less than 5 cycles and absence of chemo (immuno-) therapy were associated with unfavorable survival, while HIV status, age, and gender did not impact survival. In diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, initiation of guideline-concordant treatment was associated with favorable survival. INTERPRETATION: This study shows that a majority of NHL patients in SSA are untreated or undertreated, resulting in unfavorable survival. Investments in enhanced diagnostic services, provision of chemo(immuno-)therapy and supportive care will likely improve outcomes in the region.

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers in Cameroon and Nigeria: a web-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the determinants of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Cameroon and Nigeria. METHODS: This analytic cross-sectional study was conducted from May to June 2021, including consenting HCWs aged ≥18 y identified using snowball sampling. Vaccine hesitancy was defined as indecisiveness or unwillingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Multilevel logistic regression yielded adjusted ORs (aORs) for vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: We included a total of 598 (about 60% women) participants. Little or no trust in the approved COVID-19 vaccines (aOR=2.28, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.20), lower perception of the importance of the vaccine on their personal health (5.26, 2.38 to 11.6), greater concerns about vaccine-related adverse effects (3.45, 1.83 to 6.47) and uncertainty about colleagues' acceptability of the vaccine (2.98, 1.62 to 5.48) were associated with higher odds of vaccine hesitancy. In addition, participants with chronic disease (aOR=0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.97) and higher levels of concerns about getting COVID-19 (0.40, 0.18 to 0.87) were less likely to be hesitant to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs in this study was high and broadly determined by the perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines on personal health, mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines and uncertainty about colleagues' vaccine acceptability.