Equity, diversity, and inclusion in the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer: a global membership survey.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are essential for healthcare organizations since they allow for the development of programs and initiatives that bring together diverse perspectives and knowledge. Global multidisciplinary organizations, such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), need to understand the perspective of their members regarding EDI to identify opportunities to enhance diversity and inclusiveness and to better meet the needs of members from different backgrounds and resources. The MASCC Health Disparities Committee designed a survey to identify issues related to disparities faced by MASCC members when providing supportive care to patients with cancer and to examine the EDI landscape within the organization. Here, we report results related to EDI initiatives within the organization. Two-hundred and eighteen MASCC members responded to the survey (response rate 10.2%). The results indicated that respondents were generally satisfied with how MASCC manages leadership, membership, and organization-related EDI issues. Opportunities for improvement noted by respondents included developing strategies to foster a more diverse membership, improving communication regarding diversity in the organization, and increasing EDI content in educational sessions and publications. The results of this survey represent the first attempt at understanding how to improve EDI within MASCC and will be utilized to guide further initiatives and programs.

Global disparities in cancer supportive care: An international survey.

BACKGROUND: The global cancer burden is rising, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), highlighting a critical research gap in understanding disparities in supportive care access. To address this, the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Health Disparities Committee initiated a global survey to investigate and delineate these disparities. This study aims to explore and compare supportive care access disparities between LMIC and High-Income Countries (HIC). METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among active members of MASCC. Members, representing diverse healthcare professions received email invitations. The survey, available for 3 weeks, comprised sections covering (1) sociodemographic information; (2) clinical service/practice-related disparities in their region/nation; (3) population groups facing disparities within their region or country. Chi-squared or Fisher's exact test for cross-sectional analyses, and a multivariable logistic regression model was employed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 218 active members participated, with one-quarter (26.6%) from LMIC and 18.4% ethnic minorities, timely cancer care (43.7%) and timely supportive care (45.0%) emerged as the most pressing disparities globally. Notably, participants from LMIC underscored cancer drug affordability (56.4%) and supportive care guideline implementation (56.4%) as critical issues. Economically disadvantaged populations were noted as more likely to face disparities by both LMIC and HIC (non-US-based) respondents, while US-based respondents identified racial/ethnic minorities as facing more disparities. CONCLUSION: This global survey reveals significant disparities in cancer supportive care between LMIC and HIC, with a particular emphasis on medication affordability and guideline implementation in LMIC. Addressing these disparities requires targeted intervention, considering specific regional priorities.

Financial Toxicity in Cancer Supportive Care: An International Survey.

PURPOSE: The study aims to explore unmet social needs and sources of financial toxicities in patients as noted by health care professionals and researchers in cancer supportive care, shedding light on potential health disparities. METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey, we anonymously surveyed active members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). The survey, structured in three sections, included questions regarding the routine assessment of social needs during patient consultations, sociodemographic aspects, factors influencing financial toxicity (FT), perceived support for managing FT, and available/desirable resources. RESULTS: A total of 218 MASCC members were included, predominantly from high-income countries (HIC, 73.4%), with many age 41-60 years (56.5%) and female (56.9%). Drug/treatment cost and insurance coverage were the main sources for FT among the HIC, whereas participants from low-middle-income countries (LMIC) considered transportation cost, loss of employment because of cancer diagnosis, and unavailability of return-to-work services as the top three sources of FT. Respondents from LMIC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.01 [95% CI, 1.15 to 7.93]) and physicians (aOR, 2.67 [95% CI, 1.15 to 6.21]) were more likely to routinely assess financial coverages. Socioeconomic status was consistently ranked as one of the top three sources of financial toxicities by participants from LMIC (34%), HIC excluding the United States (38%), those who do not self-identify as racial/ethnic minority (36%), and physicians (40%). CONCLUSION: This global survey of health care professionals and researchers in HIC and LMIC revealed varying approaches to assessing financial coverage and social needs. Socioeconomic status emerged as a consistent concern across countries, affecting financial toxicities. The study highlights the need for tailored approaches and improved resource visibility while emphasizing clinicians' pivotal role in addressing financial aspects of cancer care.