Envisioning Academic Global Oncologists: Proposed Competencies for Global Oncology Training From ASCO.

Recognizing the rising incidence, prevalence, and mortality of cancer in low- and middle-resource settings, as well as the increasingly international profile of its membership, ASCO has committed to expanding its engagement at a global level. In 2017, the ASCO Academic Global Oncology Task Force sought to define the potential role for ASCO in supporting global oncology as an academic field. A set of recommendations to advance the status of global oncology as an academic discipline were created through a consensus-based process involving participation by a diverse group of global oncology and global health practitioners; these recommendations were then published. The recommendations included developing a set of global oncology competencies for trainees and faculty interested in a career in academic global oncology. Here, we describe the global oncology competencies developed by this task force. These competencies consist of knowledge and skills needed in general global health as well as cancer-specific care and research, including understanding global cancer health disparities, defining unique resources and needs in low- and middle-resource settings, and promoting international collaboration. Although the competencies were originally developed for US training programs, they are intended to be widely applicable globally. By formalizing the training of oncologists and supporting career pathways in the field of global oncology, we can make progress in achieving global equity in cancer care and control.

Remote Patient-Reported Outcomes and Activity Monitoring to Improve Patient-Clinician Communication Regarding Symptoms and Functional Status: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Routine collection of patient-generated health data (PGHD) may promote earlier recognition of symptomatic and functional decline. This trial assessed the impact of an intervention integrating remote PGHD collection with patient nudges on symptom and functional status understanding between patients with advanced cancer and their oncology team. METHODS: This three-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted from November 19, 2020, to December 17, 2021, at a large tertiary oncology practice. We enrolled patients with stage IV GI and lung cancers undergoing chemotherapy. Over 6 months, patients in two intervention arms received PROStep-weekly text message-based symptom surveys and passive activity monitoring using a wearable accelerometer. PGHD were summarized in dashboards given to patients' oncology team before appointments. One intervention arm received an additional text-based active choice prompt to discuss worsening symptoms or functional status with their clinician. Control patients did not receive PROStep. The coprimary outcomes patient perceptions of oncology team symptom and functional understanding at 6 months were measured on a 1-5 Likert scale (5 = high understanding). RESULTS: One hundred eight patients enrolled: 55% male, 81% White, and 77% had GI cancers. Patient-reported clinician understanding did not differ between control and intervention arms for symptoms (4.5 v 4.5; P = .87) or functional status (4.5 v 4.3; P = .31). In the intervention arms, combined patient adherence to weekly symptom reports and daily activity monitoring was 64% and 53%, respectively. Intervention patients in the PROStep versus PROStep + active choice arms reported low burden from wearing the accelerometer (mean burden [standard deviation], 2.7 [1.3] v 2.1 [1.3]; P = .15) and completing surveys (2.1 [1.2] v 1.9 [1.3]; P = .44). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving PROStep reported high understanding of symptoms and functional status from their oncology team, although this did not differ from controls.

Association Between Availability of Molecular Genotyping Results and Overall Survival in Patients With Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Current guidelines recommend molecular genotyping for patients newly diagnosed with metastatic nonsquamous (mNSq) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The association between availability of molecular genotyping before first line (1L) therapy and overall survival (OS) is not known. METHODS: We conducted a real-world cohort study using electronic health records in patients newly diagnosed with mNSq NSCLC. Cox proportional-hazards multivariable regression models were constructed to examine the association between OS and test result availability before 1L therapy, adjusting for covariates. Additional analyses were conducted to assess the consistency and strength of the relationship. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association between concurrent tissue and plasma testing (v tissue alone) and result availability. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-six patients were included, 80% (261/326) with results available before 1L (available testing group), and 20% (65/326) without results available (unavailable testing group). With 14.2-month median follow-up, patients in the available testing group had significantly longer OS relative to the unavailable testing group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.62; P < .0001). The adjusted odds of availability of results before 1L therapy was higher with concurrent tissue and plasma testing (v tissue testing alone; adjusted odds ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.09 to 3.90; P = .026). CONCLUSION: Among patients with mNSq NSCLC in a real-world cohort, availability of molecular genotyping results before 1L therapy was associated with significantly better OS. Concurrent tissue and plasma testing was associated with a higher odds of availability of results before 1L therapy. These findings warrant renewed attention to the completion of molecular genotyping before 1L therapy.

Cluster Randomized Pragmatic Clinical Trial Testing Behavioral Economic Implementation Strategies to Improve Tobacco Treatment for Patients With Cancer Who Smoke.

PURPOSE: Few cancer centers systematically engage patients with evidence-based tobacco treatment despite its positive effect on quality of life and survival. Implementation strategies directed at patients, clinicians, or both may increase tobacco use treatment (TUT) within oncology. METHODS: We conducted a four-arm cluster-randomized pragmatic trial across 11 clinical sites comparing the effect of strategies informed by behavioral economics on TUT engagement during oncology encounters with cancer patients. We delivered electronic health record (EHR)-based nudges promoting TUT across four nudge conditions: patient only, clinician only, patient and clinician, or usual care. Nudges were designed to counteract cognitive biases that reduce TUT engagement. The primary outcome was TUT penetration, defined as the proportion of patients with documented TUT referral or a medication prescription in the EHR. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate the parameters of a linear model. RESULTS: From June 2021 to July 2022, we randomly assigned 246 clinicians in 95 clusters, and collected TUT penetration data from their encounters with 2,146 eligible patients who smoke receiving oncologic care. Intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis showed that the clinician nudge led to a significant increase in TUT penetration versus usual care (35.6% v 13.5%; OR = 3.64; 95% CI, 2.52 to 5.24; P < .0001). Completer-only analysis (N = 1,795) showed similar impact (37.7% clinician nudge v 13.5% usual care; OR = 3.77; 95% CI, 2.73 to 5.19; P < .0001). Clinician type affected TUT penetration, with physicians less likely to provide TUT than advanced practice providers (ITT OR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.88; P = .004). CONCLUSION: EHR nudges, informed by behavioral economics and aimed at oncology clinicians, appear to substantially increase TUT penetration. Adding patient nudges to the implementation strategy did not affect TUT penetration rates.

Real-World Adherence to Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring as a Cancer Care Quality Metric.

PURPOSE: Routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for patients with advanced solid malignancies is an evidence-based practice and critical component of high-quality cancer care, but real-world adherence is poorly characterized. We sought to describe real-world adherence to PRO monitoring and its potential predictors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study using deidentified electronic health record data from a National Cancer Institute Cancer Center, encompassing one academic and two community sites. Participants included individuals with lung cancer receiving systemic therapy from January 1 to December 31, 2019. The primary outcome was patient-level adherence, defined as the proportion of treatment visits during which a PRO questionnaire (spanning symptoms, functional status, and global quality-of-life domains) was completed within 30 days. Practice-level performance was calculated as unadjusted mean patient-level adherence. We modeled patient-level adherence using multivariable ordinary least squares regression and identified covariates associated with adherence using a significance threshold of P < .05. RESULTS: In 2019, there were 18,604 encounters for 1,105 patients with lung cancer (mean [standard deviation] age 65.8 [10.2] years; 621 [56.2%] female; 216 [19.6%] Black) receiving systemic therapy. The mean patient-level PRO adherence ranged from 27.2% to 70.0% across sites and was 49.4% overall. Advanced age (≥ 65 years) and Black or African American race were negatively associated with PRO adherence (P < .01). CONCLUSION: Across this real-world cohort of patients undergoing treatment for lung cancer, adherence to PRO monitoring lagged that achieved in seminal clinical trials, with potential age- and race-based disparities, demonstrating an implementation gap that could be addressed with standardized reporting of an adherence-based quality metric.

Relative Dose Intensity and Pathologic Response Rates in Patients With Breast Cancer and With and Without HIV Who Received Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Patients who are HIV-positive and have breast cancer have worse overall survival (OS) compared with patients who are HIV-negative. Pathologic complete response (pCR) and relative dose intensity (RDI) of chemotherapy are associated with survival. We assessed whether pCR and RDI rates were lower for patients who are HIV-positive and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). METHODS: This was a prospective cohort analysis of patients initiating NACT in Botswana (February 2017 to September 2019). Primary outcomes were pCR and RDI; secondary outcomes were OS and toxicity. HIV status and zidovudine (ZDV) treatment were stratification factors. Multivariable analysis was used to control for confounding. RESULTS: In total, 26 of 110 enrolled individuals were HIV-positive. In univariable analysis, HIV-positive (odds ratio [OR] = 0.2; P = .048) and RDI < 0.85 (OR = 0.30; P = .025) were associated with pCR. In multivariable analysis, the magnitude of association decreased for HIV-positive (OR = 0.28; P = .11), but RDI < 0.85 remained independently associated with pCR (OR = 0.32; P = .035). Patients who are HIV-positive had significantly lower mean RDI, and those on ZDV had significantly lower RDI. Ninety-one (83%) were stage III with 2-year OS significantly worse for patients who are HIV-positive (58% v 74%). Hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 2.68 (95% CI, 1.17 to 6.13; P = .028) in patients who are HIV-positive compared with patients who are HIV-negative. Toxicity rates were similar despite patients who are HIV-positive receiving significantly lower dose intensity chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Patients who are HIV-positive and have breast cancer in Botswana have lower pCR rates and also receive lower dose intensity therapy, which may contribute to worse OS. Patients who are HIV-positive on ZDV-containing regimens received even lower dose intensity of NACT. Administering optimal dose intensity in patients who are HIV-positive remains a challenge, and targeted interventions that address modifiable risk factors are needed to improve therapy delivery and outcomes.

Gaps in completion and timeliness of breast surgery and adjuvant therapy: a retrospective cohort of Haitian patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on breast surgery completion rates and prevalence of care-continuum delays in breast cancer treatment programs in low-income countries. METHODS: This study analyzes treatment data in a retrospective cohort of 312 female patients with non-metastatic breast cancer in Haiti. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics; treatments received; and treatment delays of > 12 weeks. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to identify factors associated with receiving surgery and with treatment delays. Exploratory multivariate survival analysis examined the association between surgery delays and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Of 312 patients, 249 (80%) completed breast surgery. The odds ratio (OR) for surgery completion for urban vs. rural dwellers was 2.15 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.88) and for those with locally advanced vs. early-stage disease was 0.34 (95%CI: 0.16-0.73). Among the 223 patients with evaluable surgery completion timelines, 96 (43%) experienced delays. Of the 221 patients eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy, 141 (64%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, 66 of whom (47%) experienced delays in chemotherapy initiation. Presentation in the later years of the cohort (2015-2016) was associated with lower rates of surgery completion (75% vs. 85%) and with delays in adjuvant chemotherapy initiation (OR [95%CI]: 3.25 [1.50-7.06]). Exploratory analysis revealed no association between surgical delays and DFS. CONCLUSION: While majority of patients obtained curative-intent surgery, nearly half experienced delays in surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy initiation. Although our study was not powered to identify an association between surgical delays and DFS, these delays may negatively impact long-term outcomes.

Oncologist Peer Comparisons as a Behavioral Science Strategy to Improve Hospice Utilization.

PURPOSE: Hospice utilization metrics are essential for any serious effort to improve end-of-life care in oncology. However, oncologists do not routinely receive these personalized reports. We evaluated whether a behavioral science intervention, using peer comparisons coupled with social norms, was associated with improvements in hospice use. METHODS: Oncologists at two academic practices of Johns Hopkins Medicine were randomly assigned to receive a peer comparison report by e-mail displaying individual hospice utilization metrics compared with top-performing peers or to receive no report. The data accrued for the intervention represented hospice utilization for the previous calendar year. The intervention period was from June 1, 2020, to December 30, 2020, and included oncologists from both the solid and hematologic malignancies programs. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients between groups with short hospice length of stay (LOS; defined as ≤ 7 days) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included hospice referral rate, enrollment rate, and median LOS. RESULTS: Forty-seven oncologists participated. The percent of patients with a short hospice stay in the intervention group was lower (17.4%) compared with patients treated by physicians in the usual care group (46.3%, difference = 21.8%; 95% CI, 16.0 to 41.6; P < .001). Receipt of peer comparisons was associated with a greater likelihood of enrolling in hospice (73.7% v 42.8%; difference = 31.1%; 95% CI, 20.4 to 41.7; P < .001) and a longer hospice LOS (37.2 v 18.3 days; difference = 17.2; 95% CI, 8.8 to 25.7 days; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Peer comparisons improved hospice utilization metrics among a group of academic oncologists. Behavioral science offers one pragmatic strategy to overcome suboptimal oncologist decision-making biases related to hospice use.

Automated Text-Based Symptom Monitoring With Rapid Clinician Triage for Patients With Cancer and Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer are at greater risk of developing severe symptoms from COVID-19 than the general population. We developed and tested an automated text-based remote symptom-monitoring program to facilitate early detection of worsening symptoms and rapid assessment for patients with cancer and suspected or confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a feasibility study of Cancer COVID Watch, an automated COVID-19 symptom-monitoring program with oncology nurse practitioner (NP)-led triage among patients with cancer between April 23 and June 30, 2020. Twenty-six patients with cancer and suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled. Enrolled patients received twice daily automated text messages over 14 days that asked "How are you feeling compared to 12 hours ago? Better, worse, or the same?" and, if worse, "Is it harder than usual for you to breathe?" Patients who responded worse and yes were contacted within 1 hour by an oncology NP. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 62.5 years. Seventeen (65%) were female, 10 (38%) Black, and 15 (58%) White. Twenty-five (96%) patients responded to ≥ 1 symptom check-in, and overall response rate was 78%. Four (15%) patients were escalated to the triage line: one was advised to present to the emergency department (ED), and three were managed in the outpatient setting. Median time from escalation to triage call was 11.5 minutes. Four (15%) patients presented to the ED without first escalating their care via our program. Participant satisfaction was high (Net Promoter Score: 100, n = 4). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an intensive remote symptom monitoring and rapid NP triage program for outpatients with cancer and suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection is possible. Similar tools may facilitate more rapid triage for patients with cancer in future pandemics.

Time to Treatment Initiation for Breast Cancer During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant pressures on healthcare systems, raising concern that related care delays will result in excess cancer-related deaths. Because data regarding the impact on patients with breast cancer are urgently needed, we aimed to provide a preliminary estimate of the impact of COVID-19 on time to treatment initiation (TTI) for patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer cared for at a large academic center. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer between January 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, a time period during which care was affected by COVID-19, and an unaffected cohort diagnosed between January 1, 2018 and May 15, 2018. Outcomes included patient volume, TTI, and initial treatment modality. Adjusted TTI was compared using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-six patients were included. There was an 18.8% decrease in patient volume in 2020 (n = 164) versus 2018 (n = 202). There was no association between time of diagnosis (pre-COVID-19 or during COVID-19) and adjusted TTI (P = .926). There were fewer in situ diagnoses in the 2020 cohort (P = .040). There was increased use of preoperative systemic therapy in 2020 (43.9% overall, 20.7% chemotherapy, and 23.2% hormonal therapy) versus 2018 (16.4% overall, 12.4% chemotherapy, and 4.0% hormonal therapy) (P < .001). CONCLUSION: TTI was maintained among patients diagnosed and treated for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic at a single large academic center. There was a decrease in patient volume, specifically in patients with in situ disease and a shift in initial therapy toward the use of preoperative hormonal therapy.

Body Mass Index, Chemotherapy-Related Weight Changes, and Disease-Free Survival in Haitian Women With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Few studies have explored the relationship between body habitus and breast cancer outcomes in Caribbean women of African ancestry. This study evaluates the association between body mass index (BMI) and disease-free survival (DFS) in a retrospective cohort of 224 female Haitian patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BMI was obtained from the medical records and categorized as normal weight (< 25 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥ 30 kg/m2). DFS was defined as time from surgical resection to disease recurrence, death, or censoring. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated, and the association between BMI and DFS was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models to control for multiple confounders. Exploratory analyses were conducted on weight changes during adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients (37.1%) were normal weight, 66 (29.5%) were overweight, and 75 (33.5%) were obese. There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics or treatments received by BMI group. Twenty-six patients died and 73 had disease recurrence. Median DFS was 41.1 months. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed no significant DFS differences by BMI categories. After controlling for confounders, normal weight patients, when compared with overweight and obese patients, had adjusted hazard ratios of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.49 to 1.49) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.52 to 1.55), respectively. Overall, mean weight loss of 2% of body weight was noted over the course of adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients who were postmenopausal (P = .007) and obese (P = .05) lost more weight than other groups. However, chemotherapy-related weight changes did not have an impact on DFS. CONCLUSION: Baseline BMI and weight changes during adjuvant chemotherapy did not have an impact on DFS in this cohort. Future prospective studies in similar Caribbean breast cancer cohorts are needed to verify study findings.

Views From Patients With Cancer in the Setting of Unplanned Acute Care: Informing Approaches to Reduce Health Care Utilization.

PURPOSE: New oncology care delivery models that avoid preventable acute care are needed, yet it is unclear which interventions best meet the needs of patients and caregivers. Perspectives from patients who experienced unplanned acute care events may inform the successful development and implementation of care delivery models. METHODS: We performed a qualitative interview study of patients with solid tumors on active treatment who experienced the following 3 types of unplanned acute care events: emergency department visits, first hospitalizations, and multiple hospitalizations. Patients were prospectively recruited within a large academic health system from August 2018 to January 2019. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide developed from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The constant comparative approach was used to identify themes. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were interviewed; 51% were men, 75% were non-Hispanic White, and the mean age was 57.4 years (standard deviation, 1.9 years). Fifty-five percent of patients had metastatic disease, and 33% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 3-4. We identified the following key themes: drivers of the decision to seek acute care, patients' emotional concerns that influence interactions with the oncology team, and strategies used to avoid acute care. Patients' recommendations for interventions included anticipatory guidance, peer support, improved triage methods, and enhanced symptom management. Patients preferred options for virtual and home-based outpatient care. CONCLUSION: Patient-centered care models should focus on early delivery of supportive interventions that help patients and caregivers navigate the unexpected issues that come with cancer treatment. Patients advocate for proactive, multidisciplinary supportive interventions that enable home-based care and are led by the primary oncology team.

Patient Characteristics and Outcomes of Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer in Haiti: Results from a Retrospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: There are few studies on breast cancer outcomes in the Caribbean region. This study identified a retrospective cohort of female patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer in Haiti and conducted survival analyses to identify prognostic factors that may affect patient outcomes. METHODS: The cohort included 341 patients presenting between June 2012 and December 2016. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS), defined as time to disease progression, recurrence, or death. Descriptive summaries of patient characteristics and treatments were reported. Survival curves were plotted using Kaplan-Meier estimation. Multivariate survival analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 49 years, with 64.2% being premenopausal. Most patients (55.1%) were staged as locally advanced. One hundred and sixty patients received neoadjuvant therapy: 33.3% of patients with early stage disease and 61.2% of those with locally advanced stage disease. Curative-intent surgery was performed in 278 (81.5%) patients, and 225 patients received adjuvant therapy. Adjuvant endocrine therapy was used in 82.0% of patients with estrogen receptor-positive disease. During the follow-up period, 28 patients died, 77 had disease recurrence, and 10 had progressive disease. EFS rates at 2 years and 3 years were 80.9% and 63.4%, respectively. After controlling for multiple confounders, the locally advanced stage group had a statistically significant adjusted hazard ratio for EFS of 3.27 compared with early stage. CONCLUSION: Patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer in Haiti have more advanced disease, poorer prognostic factors, and worse outcomes compared with patients in high-income countries. Despite several limitations, curative treatment is possible in Haiti. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients with breast cancer in Haiti have poor outcomes. Prior studies show that most Haitian patients are diagnosed at later stages. However, there are no rigorous studies describing how late-stage diagnosis and other prognostic factors affect outcomes in this population. This study presents a detailed analysis of survival outcomes and assessment of prognostic factors in patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer treated in Haiti. In addition to late-stage diagnosis, other unfavorable prognostic factors identified were young age and estrogen receptor-negative disease. The study also highlights that the availability of basic breast cancer treatment in Haiti can lead to promising early patient outcomes.

Management of Lung Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a devastating impact around the world. With high rates of transmission and no curative therapies or vaccine yet available, the current cornerstone of management focuses on prevention by social distancing. This includes decreased health care contact for patients. Patients with lung cancer are a particularly vulnerable population, where the risk of mortality from cancer must now be balanced by the potential risk of a life-threatening infection. In these unprecedented times, a collaborative and multidisciplinary approach is required to streamline but not compromise care. We have developed guidelines at our academic cancer center to standardize management of patients with lung cancer across our health care system and provide guidance to the larger oncology community. We recommend that general principles of lung cancer treatment continue to be followed in most cases where delays could result in rapid cancer progression. We recognize that our recommendations may change over time based on clinical resources and the evolving nature of the COVID-19 pandemic. In principle, however, treatment paradigms must continue to be individualized, with careful consideration of risks and benefits of continuing or altering lung cancer-directed therapy.

Assessing and Addressing the Need for Cancer Patient Education in a Resource-Limited Setting in Haiti.

PURPOSE: Misinformation and lack of information about cancer and its treatment pose significant challenges to delivering cancer care in resource-limited settings and may undermine patient engagement in care. We aimed to investigate patients' knowledge and attitudes toward cancer and its treatment and to adapt, implement, and evaluate a low-literacy cancer patient education booklet at the Hôpital Universitaire de Mirebalais (HUM) in rural Haiti. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A low-literacy cancer patient education booklet was adapted into Haitian Creole in collaboration with clinicians at HUM. Patients were recruited for structured interviews (n = 20) and two focus groups (n = 13) designed to explore patients' attitudes toward cancer and its treatment and to assess whether the booklet increased patients' knowledge via an investigator-designed knowledge test. RESULTS: Participants reported a subjective lack of knowledge about cancer and its treatments and described views of cancer as deadly or incurable. Patients of varying education levels valued receiving written materials that set expectations about cancer treatment and expressed a desire to share the booklet with caregivers and others in their community. Participants across all levels of education significantly increased their performance on a knowledge test after counseling using the booklet (p < .001). CONCLUSION: We found that an educational booklet about cancer developed in collaboration with local providers was well received by patients with variable literacy levels and improved their knowledge of cancer and its treatment in a resource-limited setting. Such educational materials have the potential to serve as tools to engage patients with cancer and their families in care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Misinformation and lack of information pose significant challenges to delivering cancer care in resource-limited settings; however, there are often no culturally and literacy appropriate tools available to aid in patient education. This article shows that written educational materials are well received by patients of variable literacy levels and can be effective tools for increasing patients' knowledge of cancer and its treatment in a limited-resource setting. Furthermore, the authors have made their educational booklet, Cancer and You, freely available online and welcome the opportunity to connect with readers of The Oncologist interested in implementing this educational booklet in clinical care.

Impact of Essential Medicine Stock Outs on Cancer Therapy Delivery in a Resource-Limited Setting.

PURPOSE: Essential cancer medicine stock outs are occurring at an increasing frequency worldwide and represent a potential barrier to delivery of standard therapy in patients with cancer in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of cancer medicine stock outs on delivery of optimal therapy in Botswana. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with common solid tumor malignancies who received systemic cancer therapy in 2016 at Princess Marina Hospital, Gaborone, Botswana. Primary exposure was the duration of cancer medicine stock out during a treatment cycle interval, when the cancer therapy was intended to be administered. Mixed-effects univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to calculate the association of the primary exposure, with the primary outcome, suboptimal therapy delivery, defined as any dose reduction, dose delay, missed cycle, or switch in intended therapy. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients met diagnostic criteria and received systemic chemotherapy in 2016. Of these, 76% received standard regimens consisting of 1,452 cycle intervals and were included in this analysis. Paclitaxel stock out affected the highest proportion of patients. In multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression, each week of any medicine stock out (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7 to 2.13; P < .001) was independently associated with an increased risk of a suboptimal therapy delivery event. CONCLUSION: Each week of cancer therapy stock out poses a substantial barrier to receipt of high-quality cancer therapy in low- and middle-income countries. A concerted effort between policymakers and cancer specialists is needed to design implementation strategies to build sustainable systems promoting a reliable supply of cancer medicines.

American Society of Clinical Oncology's Global Oncology Leadership Task Force: Findings and Actions.

In response to rising cancer incidence and mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries and the increasingly global profile of ASCO's membership, the ASCO Board of Directors appointed the Global Oncology Leadership Task Force (Task Force) to provide recommendations on ASCO's engagement in global oncology. To accomplish its work, the Task Force convened meetings of global oncology experts, conducted focus group discussions with member groups, did site visits to South America and India, and met regularly to analyze the findings and develop recommendations. Task Force findings included global concerns, such as access to care, and specific concerns of middle- and low-resource settings. The need to strengthen health systems and the importance of alliances with a range of international cancer stakeholders were emphasized. Task Force recommendations to the ASCO Board of Directors were based on a three-part global oncology strategy of professional development, improvement of access to quality care, and acceleration of global oncology research. Specific areas of focus within each of these strategic pillars are provided along with an update on areas of ASCO activity as these recommendations are implemented.

Cancer Care and Control as a Human Right: Recognizing Global Oncology as an Academic Field.

The global burden of cancer incidence and mortality is on the rise. There are major differences in cancer fatality rates due to profound disparities in the burden and resource allocation for cancer care and control in developed compared with developing countries. The right to cancer care and control should be a human right accessible to all patients with cancer, regardless of geographic or economic region, to avoid unnecessary deaths and suffering from cancer. National cancer planning should include an integrated approach that incorporates a continuum of education, prevention, cancer diagnostics, treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. Global oncology as an academic field should offer the knowledge and skills needed to efficiently assess situations and work on solutions, in close partnership. We need medical oncologists, surgical oncologists, pediatric oncologists, gynecologic oncologists, radiologists, and pathologists trained to think about well-tailored resource-stratified solutions to cancer care in the developing world. Moreover, the multidisciplinary fundamental team approach needed to treat most neoplastic diseases requires coordinated investment in several areas. Current innovative approaches have relied on partnerships between academic institutions in developed countries and local governments and ministries of health in developing countries to provide the expertise needed to implement effective cancer control programs. Global oncology is a viable and necessary field that needs to be emphasized because of its critical role in proposing not only solutions in developing countries, but also solutions that can be applied to similar challenges of access to cancer care and control faced by underserved populations in developed countries.