Journal of Cancer Policy最新文献

Importance

There is an increasing number of cancer ‘survivors’ and increasing research into supportive care. However, it is unknown how patterns of attention and citation differ between supportive and non-supportive cancer care research. We sought to estimate the engagement of high-impact studies of supportive compared to non-supportive cancer care papers.

Methods

In a cross-sectional review of top oncology journals (2016–2023), we reviewed studies examining supportive care strategies and a frequency-matched random sampling of studies on non-supportive interventions. We compared data on social engagement metrics, as represented by Altmetric scores and citations and funding status, by supportive care or non-supportive care articles.

Results

We found overall Altmetric scores were no different between articles that did not test supportive care and those that did, with a numerically higher score for supportive care articles (86.0 vs 102; p=0.416). Other bibliometric statistics (such as the number of blogs, number of X users, and the number of X posts) obtained from Altmetric did not differ significantly between the two groups. Non-supportive cancer care papers had a significantly higher number of citations than supportive cancer care papers (45.6 in supportive care vs 141 in non-supportive care papers; p<0.001). A greater proportion of non-supportive cancer care papers were also supported by pharmaceutical companies compared to supportive cancer care papers (54.2 % vs 15.3 %; p<0.001).

Conclusion

Though social media engagement is similar between supportive and non-supportive cancer care papers in high-impact journals, there is a significant difference in support from pharmaceutical companies and the number of citations.

Background

The uptake of prostate cancer (PCa) treatment determines the disease course, but is influenced by several factors. This review assessed the factors that influence the uptake of PCa treatments in Nigeria, with a view to providing evidence for policies and other interventional approaches that enhance treatment uptake and PCa outcomes.

Methods

A review of relevant articles retrieved from electronic databases of Web of science, PubMed, Google scholar, African Journals online and Hinari was performed using relevant keywords. Relevant studies were also extracted from the bibliographic references of the identified studies. Peer-reviewed published articles that reported any associated factor to the uptake or utilisation of PCa treatment options from 2000 to 2023 were considered eligible, and the most pertinent reports were extracted and incorporated into this review.

Results

The uptake of PCa treatment options was observed to be dependent on several factors which could be grouped as economic, system-related and patient-related factors. Among these were the availability of treatment options and targeted therapies, cost and financial constraints, system-related barriers, funding gaps and lack of insurance coverage, patients’ beliefs and perceptions, access to radiotherapy services and access to PCa screening.

Conclusion

Several influencing factors posed barriers to the timely uptake of PCa treatment. Policies and strategies aimed at reducing or preventing these barriers are solicited from relevant stakeholders.

Background

The rising burden of cancer significantly influences the global economy and healthcare systems. While local and contextual cancer research is crucial, it is often limited by the availability of funds. In South Asia, with 1.7 million new cancer cases and 1.1 million deaths due to cancer in 2020, understanding cancer research funding trends is pivotal.

Methods

We reviewed funded cancer studies conducted between January 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2022, using ClinicalTrials.gov, International Cancer Research Partnership (ICRP) Database, NIH World RePORT, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We included funded studies related to all cancer types, conducted in South Asian countries, namely Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Results

We identified 6561 funded cancer studies from South Asia between 2003 and 2022, increasing from 400 studies in 2003‐2007 to 3909 studies in 2018–2022. India had the highest number of funded cancer studies, while Afghanistan, Bhutan, and the Maldives had minimal or no funded cancer research output. Interventional studies (67.3%) were the most common study type funded. The most common cancer sites funded were breast (17.8%), lung (9.9%), oropharyngeal (6.2%), and cervical (5.0%) cancers. On the WHO ICTRP, international funding agencies contributed to a majority of studies (57.5%), except in India where local funding agencies (58.2%) funded more studies.

Conclusion

This study identified gaps in research funding distribution across cancer types and geographic areas in South Asia. This data can be used to optimize the distribution of cancer research funding in South Asia, fostering equitable advancement in cancer research.

This article delves into Bhutan’s adept execution of a nationwide cancer screening initiative within the Health Flagship Programme, concentrating on gastric, cervical, and breast cancers. Despite challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic, infrastructure constraints, logistical complexities, health human resource shortages, and data management issues, the programme succeeded. The procurement and logistics management ensured the timely provision of essential medical equipment and test kits. Robust political commitment, a comprehensive advocacy programme, and community engagement were pivotal for the programme’s success. Impressive screening coverage for all three cancers showcased the transformative impact on cancer care, integrating technology and fostering community involvement. Recommendations highlight the need for strengthened integration, strategic approaches, and ongoing evaluation, positioning Bhutan's programme as a potential model for nations facing similar health challenges.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, countries adopted mitigation strategies to reduce disruptions to cancer services. We reviewed their implementation across health system functions and their impact on cancer diagnosis and care during the pandemic. A systematic search was performed using terms related to cancer and COVID-19. Included studies reported on individuals with cancer or cancer care services, focusing on strategies/programs aimed to reduce delays and disruptions. Extracted data were grouped into four functions (governance, financing, service delivery, and resource generation) and sub-functions of the health system performance assessment framework. We included 30 studies from 16 countries involving 192,233 patients with cancer. Multiple mitigation approaches were implemented, predominantly affecting sub-functions of service delivery to control COVID-19 infection via the suspension of non-urgent cancer care, modified treatment guidelines, and increased telemedicine use in routine cancer care delivery. Resource generation was mainly ensured through adequate workforce supply. However, less emphasis on monitoring or assessing the effectiveness and financing of these strategies was observed. Seventeen studies suggested improved service uptake after mitigation implementation, yet the resulting impact on cancer diagnosis and care has not been established. This review emphasizes the importance of developing effective mitigation strategies across all health system (sub)functions to minimize cancer care service disruptions during crises. Deficiencies were observed in health service delivery (to ensure equity), governance (to monitor and evaluate the implementation of mitigation strategies), and financing. In the wake of future emergencies, implementation research studies that include pre-prepared protocols will be essential to assess mitigation impact across cancer care services.

Background

Cancer is the third leading cause of death in the Philippines. Radiotherapy (RT) is integral to the treatment and palliation of cancer. Therefore, RT resources across the country must be surveyed and optimized.

Methods

Online surveys were sent to the heads of all 50 RT facilities in the Philippines. The survey included items regarding the facility itself, personnel, and available services.

Findings

The survey had a 98% response rate. 76% of RT facilities in the Philippines are privately owned; 12 are government/public institutions and 8 are academic centers. Over a third are in the National Capital Region; three regions are without a single RT facility. For a population of >110 million, the Philippines has 53 linear accelerators, 125 radiation oncologists, 56 residents, 114 medical physicists, 113 radiation oncology nurses, and 343 radiation therapists. Nine radiation oncology residency programs are active. All facilities are capable of 3D conformal radiotherapy, and 96% are capable of intensity modulated radiotherapy. <30% offer stereotactic radiotherapy, and <50% offer HDR brachytherapy.

Conclusion

While there has been significant expansion of RT resources over the years, RT remains inaccessible for many in the Philippines. Urgent investment in training and retaining RT personnel is needed as well. Policy summary: With its current cancer burden, the Philippines needs at least 170 linear accelerators, 300 radiation oncologists, and 150 medical physicists. Public/government cancer centers must be built, with priority given to regions without RT facilities. HDR brachytherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy services must also be expanded. A national RT task force must be created to ensure the quality, availability, and accessibility of RT in the Philippines. Further work exploring payment schemes that improve access to RT and mitigate financial toxicity is needed, as well as integration of radiation oncology providers and health policy experts into national health system decision making.

Introduction

Achieving diversity and equity in healthcare, especially within academic and clinical spheres, poses significant challenges. This study aims to evaluate gender representation, geographical diversity among authors, and disclosure of conflicts of interest (COIs) in educational materials published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the American Society of Hematology (ASH).

Materials and methods

We conducted a comprehensive cross-sectional analysis covering all volumes of ASCO and ASH educational chapters from 2012 to 2022 and 2000 to 2022, respectively. Author data were extracted from the official websites of ASCO and ASH educational books, focusing on names, affiliations, countries of practice, COIs, and publication titles/subjects.

Results

Analysis of 2796 articles revealed significant trends in gender representation. Women comprised 44 % of first authors and 38 % of last authors in ASCO educational books, and 39 % of first authors and 39% of last authors in ASH educational books. Notably, there was a marked increase in female first and last authors over time across both ASCO and ASH publications (p < 0.001). Geographical diversity showed disparities, with the majority of authors affiliated with US institutions (72 % of first and last authors). International authors were less represented, with Canada, the UK, and Italy prominent among articles featuring international women authors. A substantial portion of analyzed articles disclosed COIs, mainly research funding, honoraria, and travel expenses.

Discussion

Our findings suggest a notable rise in female authorship, potentially reflecting efforts by ASH and ASCO to promote diversity. International authorship remained stable, while COIs were prevalent, primarily involving research funding. Addressing the need for greater international engagement and improving COI reporting quality are crucial to promote inclusivity and transparency in academic publications.