The international cancer expert corps: a unique approach for sustainable cancer care in low and lower-middle income countries

The Landscape of Pediatric Radiation Oncology in Nigeria

Radiation therapy (RT) is an essential part of the multidisciplinary treatment of pediatric cancer. Over the past five decades, significant advances have been made in the delivery of RT, with better dose delivery to disease targets while minimizing exposure to nearby organs at risk. These advances have led to improved treatment outcomes, increased survival, and reduced treatment-related toxicities. Advanced treatment techniques, however, require significant investment in infrastructural and personnel resources. This review documents what is currently available regarding expertise and infrastructure for pediatric radiation oncology practice in Nigeria. It was performed to serve as a foundation for the creation and design of tailored solutions (initiatives and policies) to increase pediatric radiation availability, accessibility, and equity in Nigeria and ultimately improve pediatric cancer treatment outcomes in the region.

A cloud-based consultation and collaboration system for radiotherapy: Remote decision support services for community radiotherapy centers

PURPOSE

This study aimed to establish a cloud-based radiotherapy consultation and collaboration system, then investigated the practicability of remote decision support for community radiotherapy centers using the system.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A cloud-based consultation and collaboration system for radiotherapy, OncoEvidance®, was developed to provide remote services of LINAC modeling, simulation CT data import/export, target volume and organ-at-risk delineation, prescription, and treatment planning. The system was deployed on a hybrid cloud. A federate of public nodes, each corresponding to a medical institution, are managed by a central node where a group of consultants have registered. Users can access the system through network using computing devices. The system has been tested at three community radiotherapy centers. One accelerator was modeled. 12 consultants participated the remote radiotherapy decision support and 77 radiation treatment plans had been evaluated remotely.

RESULTS

All the passing rates of per-beam dose verification are > 94% and all the passing rates of composite beam dose verification are > 99%. The average downloading time for one set of simulation CT data for one patient from Internet was within 1 min under the cloud download bandwidth of 8 Mbps and local network bandwidth of 100 Mbps. The average response time for one consultant to contour target volumes and make prescription was about 24 h. And that for one consultant to design and optimize a IMRT treatment plan was about 36 h. 100% of the remote plans passed the dosimetric criteria and could be imported into the local TPS for further verification.

CONCLUSION

The cloud-based consultation and collaboration system saved the travel time for consultants and provided high quality radiotherapy to patients in community centers. The under-staffed community radiotherapy centers could benefit from the remote system with lower cost and better treatment quality control.

Impact of High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy Training via Telehealth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

PURPOSE

Our objective was to demonstrate the efficacy of a telehealth training course on high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy for gynecologic cancer treatment for clinicians in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

A 12-week course consisting of 16 live video sessions was offered to 10 cancer centers in the Middle East, Africa, and Nepal. A total of 46 participants joined the course, and 22 participants, on average, attended each session. Radiation oncologists and medical physicists from 11 US and international institutions prepared and provided lectures for each topic covered in the course. Confidence surveys of 15 practical competencies were administered to participants before and after the course. Competencies focused on HDR commissioning, shielding, treatment planning, radiobiology, and applicators. Pre- and post-program surveys of provider confidence, measured by 5-point Likert scale, were administered and compared.

RESULTS

Forty-six participants, including seven chief medical physicists, 16 senior medical physicists, five radiation oncologists, and three dosimetrists, representing nine countries attended education sessions. Reported confidence scores, both aggregate and paired, demonstrated increases in confidence in all 15 competencies. Post-curriculum score improvement was statistically significant (P < .05) for paired respondents in 11 of 15 domains. Absolute improvements were largest for confidence in applicator commissioning (2.3 to 3.8, P = .009), treatment planning system commissioning (2.2 to 3.9, P = .0055), and commissioning an HDR machine (2.2 to 4.0, P = .0031). Overall confidence in providing HDR brachytherapy services safely and teaching other providers increased from 3.1 to 3.8 and 3.0 to 3.5, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A 12-week, low-cost telehealth training program on HDR brachytherapy improved confidence in treatment delivery and teaching for clinicians in 10 participating LMICs.

Global Health Perspectives Among Radiation Oncology Residency Program Directors: A Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Survey

PURPOSE

Interest in global health has risen among medical students applying to and residents training in radiation oncology, often outpacing available educational offerings. The Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Global Health Subcommittee sought to determine the perceptions of program directors (PDs) in radiation oncology and their current or planned global health curricular opportunities.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A standardized, Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices survey composed of 32 binary items was sent to PDs for all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs.

RESULTS

The program response rate was 60% (55 of 91). Responding programs were distributed evenly geographically and included a range of training program sizes. Most PDs (77%) knew that most nations did not meet standard minimum benchmarks for radiation therapy access. Although 89% would support residents in pursuing global health rotations, only 22% would support departmental funding of such rotations. Furthermore, 94% believed that global health was a field worthy of an academic career, but only 39% believed that it had appropriate rigor. Only 8% of programs had dedicated global health rotations.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiation oncology PDs largely expressed favorable views of global health as a pursuit and affirmed a high degree of resident and medical student interest. However, faculty commitment and program offerings currently lag behind the interest level. In particular, a substantial number of PDs do not perceive global health to be a rigorous academic endeavor. Future progress in academic global health in radiation oncology will require strategies to systematically support pathways for the development of experience and scholarship both within and beyond residency.

Experiences of barriers and facilitators to establishing and sustaining radiotherapy services in low- and middle-income countries: A qualitative study

AIMS

The factors contributing to the establishment of high-quality radiotherapy services in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are poorly understood. The aim was to identify and describe barriers and facilitators to establishing and sustaining high-quality and accessible radiotherapy services in LMICs based on the experience of successful and unsuccessful attempts.

METHODS

An exploratory-descriptive qualitative study using semistructured telephone interviews was undertaken. Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were used to recruit participants. The World Health Organization Innovative Care for Chronic Conditions Framework informed the interview guide. A constant comparative data analysis approach was adopted.

FINDINGS

Seventeen participants were interviewed. Ten were working permanently in nine LMICs and seven were permanently employed in four high-income countries. Three themes were developed: committing to a vision of improving cancer care; making it happen and sustaining a safe service; and leveraging off radiotherapy to strengthen integrated cancer care. Identified barriers included lack of political leadership continuity, lack of a coordinated advocacy effort, non-Member State of the IAEA, lack of reliable epidemiological data, lack of a comprehensive budget and lack of local expertise. Facilitators identified included strong political support, vision champion, availability of a regulator, costed cancer control plan, diversified sources of funding, responsible project manager, adoption of evidence-based practice, strategic partnerships, motivation to provide patient-centered care, and availability of supportive technology.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing the level of readiness to establish and sustain a radiotherapy service is highly recommended. Future research is recommended to develop a readiness assessment tool for radiotherapy services implementation at LMICs.

Global palliative radiotherapy: a framework to improve access in resource-constrained settings

Radiotherapy is an essential component of cancer therapy. Lack of access to radiotherapy in less-developed countries prevents its use for both cure and symptom relief, resulting in a significant disparity in patient suffering. Several recent initiatives have highlighted the need for expanded access to both palliative medicine and radiotherapy globally. Yet, these efforts have remained largely independent, without attention to overlap and integration. This review provides an update on the progress toward global palliative radiotherapy access and proposes a strategic framework to address further scale-up. Synergies between radiotherapy, palliative medicine, and other global health initiatives will be essential in bringing palliative radiotherapy to patients around the globe.

Comprehensive cancer control in the U.S.: summarizing twenty years of progress and looking ahead

In order to celebrate the accomplishments of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP), the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partners (CCCNP) developed this Special Issue on Cancer Causes and Control. This, the third Special Issue on Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC), is a reflection of 20 years of building successful partnerships to prevent and control cancer; planning and implementing strategic cancer control; collaborating to address national cancer prevention and control priorities; evaluating efforts; sharing successes; and, in later years, serving as a model for global cancer control planning and implementation. The CDC currently supports cancer control planning and implementation in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, eight tribes or tribal organizations, and seven Pacific Island Jurisdictions and U.S. territories through the NCCCP. CCC is an approach that brings together multi-sector partners to address the cancer burden in a community collectively by leveraging existing resources and identifying and addressing cancer related issues and needs. The Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP), a partnership of national organizations, has been committed to supporting comprehensive cancer control efforts since 1999. We summarize the efforts described in this Special Issue. We also describe opportunities and critical elements to continue the momentum for comprehensive cancer control well into the future.

Upcoming imaging concepts and their impact on treatment planning and treatment response in radiation oncology

For 2018, the American Cancer Society estimated that there would be approximately 1.7 million new diagnoses of cancer and about 609,640 cancer-related deaths in the United States. By 2030 these numbers are anticipated to exceed a staggering 21 million annual diagnoses and 13 million cancer-related deaths. The three primary therapeutic modalities for cancer treatments are surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Individually or in combination, these treatment modalities have provided and continue to provide curative and palliative care to the myriad victims of cancer.

Today, CT-based treatment planning is the primary means through which conventional photon radiation therapy is planned. Although CT remains the primary treatment planning modality, the field of radiation oncology is moving beyond the sole use of CT scans to define treatment targets and organs at risk. Complementary tissue scans, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron electron emission (PET) scans, have all improved a physician’s ability to more specifically identify target tissues, and in some cases, international guidelines have even been issued. Moreover, efforts to combine PET and MR to define solid tumors for radiotherapy planning and treatment evaluation are also gaining traction.

Keeping these advances in mind, we present brief overviews of other up-and-coming key imaging concepts that appear promising for initial treatment target definition or treatment response from radiation therapy.

Barriers to radiotherapy access at the University College Hospital in Ibadan, Nigeria

Introduction

Nigeria has the biggest gap between radiotherapy availability and need, with one machine per 19.4 million people, compared to one machine per 250,000 people in high-income countries. This study aims to identify its patient-level barriers to radiotherapy access.

Material and methods

This was a cross sectional study consisting of patient questionnaires (n = 50) conducted in January 2016 to assess patient demographics, types of cancers seen, barriers to receiving radiotherapy, health beliefs and practices, and factors leading to treatment delay.

Results

Eighty percent of patients could not afford radiotherapy without financial assistance and only 6% of the patients had federal insurance, which did not cover radiotherapy services. Of the patients who had completed radiotherapy treatment, 91.3% had experienced treatment delay or often cancellation due to healthcare worker strike, power failure, machine breakdown, or prolonged wait time. The timeliness of a patient’s radiotherapy care correlated with their employment status and distance from radiotherapy center (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Barriers to care at a radiotherapy center in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC) have previously not been well characterized. These findings can be used to inform efforts to expand the availability of radiotherapy and improve current treatment capacity in Nigeria and in other LMICs.

Cancer Care Access and Outcomes for American Indian Populations in the United States: Challenges and Models for Progress

Low socioeconomic and health care access realities of being American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) in the United States combined with decades of data documenting poor cancer outcomes for this population provide a population nested within the United States that is analogous to the cancer care landscape of low- and middle-income countries internationally. We reviewed the medical literature with respect to cancer prevention, access to cancer treatment, and access to effective supportive and palliative care for AI/AN populations in the United States. Research confirms poorer cancer outcomes, suboptimal cancer screening, and high-risk cancer behaviors among AI/AN communities. AI/AN cancer patients are less likely to undergo recommended cancer surgeries, adjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation therapy than their White counterparts. Studies including both rural and urban survivors with AI cancer revealed barriers to receipt of optimal cancer symptom management and proportionally lower hospice use among AI/AN populations. Culturally tailored programs in targeted communities have been shown to mitigate the observed cancer-related health disparities among AI/AN communities. There is still much work to be done to improve cancer-related health outcomes in AI/AN communities, and the goals of the providers serving them corresponds with those propelling the growing interest in global oncology equity. Policy work and more funding are needed to continue to build upon the work that the Indian Health Service and established cancer-related health programs have begun in AI/AN communities.

The Radiation Stress Response: Of the People, By the People and For the People

The radiation stress response can have broad impact. In this Failla Award presentation it is discussed in three components using terms relevant to the current political season as to how the radiation stress response can be applied to the benefit for cancer care and as service to society. Of the people refers to the impact of radiation on cells, tissues and patients. The paradigm our laboratory uses is radiation as a drug, called "focused biology", and physics as "nano-IMRT" because at the nanometer level physics and biology merge. By the people refers to how the general population often reacts to the word "radiation" and how the Radiation Research Society can better enable society to deal with the current realities of radiation in our lives. For the people refers to the potential for radiation oncology and radiation sciences to improve the lives of millions of people globally who are now beyond benefits of cancer treatment and research.

Mobilising Expertise and Resources to Close the Radiotherapy Gap in Cancer Care

Closing the gap in cancer care within low- and middle-income countries and in indigenous and geographically isolated populations in high-income countries requires investment and innovation. This is particularly true for radiotherapy, for which the global disparity is one of the largest in healthcare today. New models and paradigms and non-traditional collaborations have been proposed to improve global equity in cancer control. We describe recent initiatives from within the radiation oncology community to increase access to treatment, build the low- and middle-income countries' radiation oncology workforce, mobilise more professionals from within high-income countries and raise awareness of the global need for equitable cancer care.

A Roadmap and Cost Implications of Establishing Comprehensive Cancer Care Using a Teleradiotherapy Network in a Group of Sub-Saharan African Countries With No Access to Radiation Therapy

PURPOSE

To propose a roadmap and explore the cost implications of establishing a teleradiotherapy network to provide comprehensive cancer care and capacity building in countries without access to radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Ten low-income sub-Saharan countries with no current radiation therapy facilities were evaluated. A basic/secondary radiation therapy center (SRTC) with 2 teletherapy, 1 brachytherapy, 1 simulator, and a treatment planning facility was envisaged at a cost of 5 million US dollars (USD 5M). This could be networked with 1 to 4 primary radiation therapy centers (PRTC) with 1 teletherapy unit, each costing USD 2M. The numbers of PRTCs and SRTCs for each country were computed on the basis of cancer incidence, assuming that a PRTC and SRTC could respectively treat 450 and 900 patients annually.

RESULTS

An estimated 71,215 patients in these countries will need radiation therapy in 2020. Stepwise establishment of a network with 99 PRTCs and 28 SRTCs would result in 155 teletherapy units and 96% access to radiation therapy. A total of 310 radiation oncologists, 155 medical physicists, and 465 radiation therapy technologists would be needed. Capacity building could be undertaken through telementoring by networking to various international institutions and professional societies. Total infrastructure costs would be approximately USD 860.88M, only 0.94% of the average annual gross domestic product of these 10 countries. A total of 1.04 million patients could receive radiation therapy during the 15-year lifespan of a teletherapy unit for an investment of USD 826.69 per patient. For the entire population of 218.32 million, this equates to USD 4.11 per inhabitant.

CONCLUSION

A teleradiotherapy network could be a cost-contained innovative health care strategy to provide effective comprehensive cancer care through resource sharing and capacity building. The network could also be expanded to include other allied specialties. The proposal calls for active coordination between all national and international organizations backed up by strong geopolitical commitment and action from all stakeholders.

eHealth: past and future perspectives

eHealth is an umbrella term incorporating any area that combines healthcare and technology to improve efficiencies and reduce costs. The ultimate goal of eHealth is to rationalize treatment selection to improve patient safety and outcomes. Telemedicine, first used in the 1920s, is the oldest form of eHealth. The introduction of broadband Internet, followed by wireless technologies, has allowed an explosion of mHealth applications within this field. Wearable technologies, such as smartwatches, are now being used for diagnostics and patient monitoring. Challenges remain to develop reusable Clinical Decision Support systems that will streamline the flow of data from clinical laboratories to point of care. This review explores the history of eHealth, and describes some of the remaining integration and implementation challenges.

Poverty, Health and Livelihoods

Developing countries, especially those in the tropical regions of the world, are known for poverty and infectious diseases (ID). People in developing countries carry on their day-to-day living amongst these two challenges. Between the years 1940–2004, over 300 emerging human ID have been reported worldwide. Infectious diseases have resulted in high mortality and morbidity in developing countries. Affecting more than 1 billion of the world’s population, neglected tropical diseases (NTD) are a group of infectious diseases that are endemic in the poorest regions of the world. Most of the affected populations live in rural areas with very minimal resources but at high risk of disease due to their livelihood. Non-communicable diseases are also on the increase in developing countries, further exacerbating public health challenges in these regions. With nearly 15 million people dying each year as a result of ID, most of them living in developing countries, there is need to find solutions to prevent and tackle infectious diseases in these communities. This book is devoted to infectious diseases and livelihoods in developing countries.

Expanding global access to radiotherapy

Radiotherapy is a critical and inseparable component of comprehensive cancer treatment and care. For many of the most common cancers in low-income and middle-income countries, radiotherapy is essential for effective treatment. In high-income countries, radiotherapy is used in more than half of all cases of cancer to cure localised disease, palliate symptoms, and control disease in incurable cancers. Yet, in planning and building treatment capacity for cancer, radiotherapy is frequently the last resource to be considered. Consequently, worldwide access to radiotherapy is unacceptably low. We present a new body of evidence that quantifies the worldwide coverage of radiotherapy services by country. We show the shortfall in access to radiotherapy by country and globally for 2015-35 based on current and projected need, and show substantial health and economic benefits to investing in radiotherapy. The cost of scaling up radiotherapy in the nominal model in 2015-35 is US$26·6 billion in low-income countries, $62·6 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $94·8 billion in upper-middle-income countries, which amounts to $184·0 billion across all low-income and middle-income countries. In the efficiency model the costs were lower: $14·1 billion in low-income, $33·3 billion in lower-middle-income, and $49·4 billion in upper-middle-income countries-a total of $96·8 billion. Scale-up of radiotherapy capacity in 2015-35 from current levels could lead to saving of 26·9 million life-years in low-income and middle-income countries over the lifetime of the patients who received treatment. The economic benefits of investment in radiotherapy are very substantial. Using the nominal cost model could produce a net benefit of $278·1 billion in 2015-35 ($265·2 million in low-income countries, $38·5 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $239·3 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Investment in the efficiency model would produce in the same period an even greater total benefit of $365·4 billion ($12·8 billion in low-income countries, $67·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $284·7 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns, by the human-capital approach, are projected to be less with the nominal cost model, amounting to $16·9 billion in 2015-35 (-$14·9 billion in low-income countries; -$18·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $50·5 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns with the efficiency model were projected to be greater, however, amounting to $104·2 billion (-$2·4 billion in low-income countries, $10·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $95·9 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Our results provide compelling evidence that investment in radiotherapy not only enables treatment of large numbers of cancer cases to save lives, but also brings positive economic benefits.

EPMA position paper in cancer: current overview and future perspectives

At present, a radical shift in cancer treatment is occurring in terms of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine (PPPM). Individual patients will participate in more aspects of their healthcare. During the development of PPPM, many rapid, specific, and sensitive new methods for earlier detection of cancer will result in more efficient management of the patient and hence a better quality of life. Coordination of the various activities among different healthcare professionals in primary, secondary, and tertiary care requires well-defined competencies, implementation of training and educational programs, sharing of data, and harmonized guidelines. In this position paper, the current knowledge to understand cancer predisposition and risk factors, the cellular biology of cancer, predictive markers and treatment outcome, the improvement in technologies in screening and diagnosis, and provision of better drug development solutions are discussed in the context of a better implementation of personalized medicine. Recognition of the major risk factors for cancer initiation is the key for preventive strategies (EPMA J. 4(1):6, 2013). Of interest, cancer predisposing syndromes in particular the monogenic subtypes that lead to cancer progression are well defined and one should focus on implementation strategies to identify individuals at risk to allow preventive measures and early screening/diagnosis. Implementation of such measures is disturbed by improper use of the data, with breach of data protection as one of the risks to be heavily controlled. Population screening requires in depth cost-benefit analysis to justify healthcare costs, and the parameters screened should provide information that allow an actionable and deliverable solution, for better healthcare provision.