Out-of-pocket payments for complementary medicine following cancer and the effect on financial outcomes in middle-income countries in southeast Asia: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Complementary medicine, which refers to therapies that are not part of conventional medicine, comprising both evidence-based and non-evidence-based interventions, is increasingly used following a diagnosis of cancer. We aimed to investigate out-of-pocket spending patterns on complementary medicine and its association with adverse financial outcomes following cancer in middle-income countries in southeast Asia. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, data on newly diagnosed patients with cancer were derived from the ASEAN Costs in Oncology (ACTION) cohort study, a prospective longitudinal study in 47 centres located in eight countries in southeast Asia. The ACTION study measured household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis. Participants were given cost diaries at baseline to record illness-related payments that were directly incurred and not reimbursed by insurance over the 12-month period after study recruitment. We assessed incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket cancer-related costs ≥30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (reduction in annual household income to below poverty line following subtraction of out-of-pocket cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments) at 1 year. FINDINGS: Between March, 2012, and September, 2013, 9513 participants were recruited into the ACTION cohort study, of whom 4754 (50·0%) participants were included in this analysis. Out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine were reported by 1233 households. These payments constituted 8·6% of the annual total out-of-pocket health costs in lower-middle-income countries and 42·9% in upper-middle-income countries. Expenditures on complementary medicine significantly increased risks of financial catastrophe (adjusted odds ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·23-1·88]) and medical impoverishment (1·75 [1·36-2·24]) at 12 months in upper-middle-income countries only. However, the risks were significantly higher for economically disadvantaged households, irrespective of country income group. INTERPRETATION: Integration of evidence-supported complementary therapies into mainstream cancer care, along with interventions to address use of non-evidence-based complementary medicine, might help alleviate any associated adverse financial impacts. FUNDING: None.

Male circumcision, penile human papillomavirus infection, and cervical cancer in female partners.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether male circumcision reduces the risks of penile human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in the man and of cervical cancer in his female partner. METHODS: We pooled data on 1913 couples enrolled in one of seven case-control studies of cervical carcinoma in situ and cervical cancer in five countries. Circumcision status was self-reported, and the accuracy of the data was confirmed by physical examination at three study sites. The presence or absence of penile HPV DNA was assessed by a polymerase-chain-reaction assay in 1520 men and yielded a valid result in the case of 1139 men (74.9 percent). RESULTS: Penile HPV was detected in 166 of the 847 uncircumcised men (19.6 percent) and in 16 of the 292 circumcised men (5.5 percent). After adjustment for age at first intercourse, lifetime number of sexual partners, and other potential confounders, circumcised men were less likely than uncircumcised men to have HPV infection (odds ratio, 0.37; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.85). Monogamous women whose male partners had six or more sexual partners and were circumcised had a lower risk of cervical cancer than women whose partners were uncircumcised (adjusted odds ratio, 0.42; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.79). Results were similar in the subgroup of men in whom circumcision was confirmed by medical examination. CONCLUSIONS: Male circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of penile HPV infection and, in the case of men with a history of multiple sexual partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their current female partners.

Gemcitabine and split-dose paclitaxel or docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer: a randomised phase II study.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of split-dose paclitaxel or docetaxel in combination with gemcitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had previously received anthracyclines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 210 patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment arms: gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) Days 1 and 8 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-h infusion on Day 1 (GP1); gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) Days 1 and 8 and paclitaxel 100 mg/m(2) as a 1-h infusion on Days 1 and 8 (GP2); gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) Days 1 and 8 and docetaxel 40 mg/m(2) as a 1-h infusion on Days 1 and 8 (GD). Cycles were repeated every 3 weeks. RESULTS: For the 204 patients evaluable for response assessment, the response rates were 48.6% for GP1, 52.2% for GP2, and 52.3% for GD. Median response duration, time to treatment failure, and time to progression (TTP) were similar in each arm. Median TTP for GP1, GP2 and GD was 7.5, 7.0 and 7.4 months, respectively. For the 208 patients evaluable for safety, the most common grade 3/4 toxicity for each regimen was neutropaenia, with 64%, 57%, and 68% for GP1, GP2, and GD, respectively. Grade 4 neutropaenia, grade 3/4 anaemia, febrile neutropaenia, and diarrhoea were more common in the docetaxel arm, as was the use of intravenous antibiotics and blood transfusions. CONCLUSION: The study confirmed the high activity of gemcitabine-taxane combinations in MBC. Split-dose paclitaxel had similar activity and toxicity to the 3-weekly administration. The split-dose docetaxel regimen had similar activity to the paclitaxel combinations though associated with higher toxicity.

Epidemiology and prevention of cervical cancer in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam.

Cervical cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancers in women from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types, particularly HPV-16 and 18, are consistently identified in cervical cancer cases regardless of geographical region. Factors that have been identified to increase the likelihood of HPV exposure or subsequent development of cervical cancer include young age at first intercourse, high parity and multiple sexual partners. Cervical cancer screening programs in these countries include Pap smears, single visit approach utilizing visual inspection with acetic acid followed by cryotherapy, as well as screening with colposcopy. Uptake of screening remains low in all regions and is further compounded by the lack of basic knowledge women have regarding screening as an opportunity for the prevention of cervical cancer. Prophylactic HPV vaccination with the quadrivalent vaccine has already been approved for use in Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, while the bivalent vaccine has also been approved in the Philippines. However, there has been no national or government vaccination policy implemented in any of these countries.

Cancer and the Philippine Cancer Control Program.

Cancer is the third leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the Philippines. Leading cancer sites/types are lung, breast, cervix, liver, colon and rectum, prostate, stomach, oral cavity, ovary and leukemia. There is at present a low cancer prevention consciousness and most cancer patients seek consultation only at advanced stages. Cancer survival rates are relatively low. The Philippine Cancer Control Program, begun in 1988, is an integrated approach utilizing primary, secondary and tertiary prevention in different regions of the country at both hospital and community levels. Six lead cancers (lung, breast, liver, cervix, oral cavity, colon and rectum) are discussed. Features peculiar to the Philippines are described; and their causation and prevention are discussed. A recent assessment revealed shortcomings in the Cancer Control Program and urgent recommendations were made to reverse the anticipated 'cancer epidemic'. There is also today in place a Community-based Cancer Care Network which seeks to develop a network of self-sufficient communities sharing responsibility for cancer care and control in the country.