Anne F. Rositch

Purpose: Late-stage diagnoses drive high rates of cervical and breast cancer mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where early detection efforts are typically small-scale. Rwanda's government-funded Women's Cancer Early Detection Program (WCEDP) integrates breast cancer early detection and cervical cancer screening and is being scaled nationally. We aimed to understand barriers and facilitators of WCEDP scale-up to inform program optimization and provide lessons for other LMICs. Methods: We conducted 23 in-depth interviews with clinicians, health facility leaders, nongovernmental organization (NGO) staff, and policymakers. A codebook was collaboratively developed using a combined inductive and deductive approach; all transcripts were dual-coded. The Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS) framework served as a guiding theoretical framework. Results: Outer context: WCEDP facilitators include strong government engagement, national cancer control plans, and community acceptance. Barriers include low community awareness and insufficient resources dedicated to the program. Inner context: Rwanda's decentralized health care system and community health workers facilitated WCEDP scale-up. Nonetheless, workforce shortages, limited health facility leadership engagement and accountability, and clinicians' unfamiliarity with electronic health records (EHRs) were challenges. Innovation factors: The WCEDP-specific EHR was considered a strength. However, participants identified the need for training, technical assistance, ongoing quality monitoring, and adaptation to effectively use the EHR to improve care delivery and link patients to follow-up. Bridging factors: NGOs play a key role in WCEDP implementation. However, participants reported a need for improved coordination of different stakeholders. Phases of implementation: Identified facilitators and barriers provided lessons relevant to all EPIS phases (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment). Conclusion: This study contributes to the limited literature examining scale-up of cancer programs in resource-constrained settings and informs strategies to optimize women's cancer early detection at scale in Rwanda and other LMICs.

PURPOSE: Africa faces a growing burden of cancer yet remains under-represented in global cancer clinical trials. This disparity limits the generation of population-specific evidence needed to improve cancer outcomes. Recruitment and retention in cancer clinical trials are particularly challenging because of various systemic and individual barriers in Nigeria. This study explores patients' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to recruitment and retention in cancer clinical trials. METHODS: A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used, which comprised a cross-sectional survey and a descriptive qualitative approach. Participants were recruited from multiple oncology centers and secondary facilities within Nigeria’s ICON-3 Practice-Based Research Network. Quantitative data were collected through interviewer-administered questionnaires, whereas qualitative data were gathered via semistructured interviews and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: A total of 317 patients participated in the quantitative survey, 18 of whom participated in interviews. Barriers included limited understanding of clinical trials, logistical challenges such as transportation and visit frequency, distrust in researchers and the health care system, and lack of family support. Facilitators included effective communication, incentives, flexible research visits, and culturally tailored interventions. CONCLUSION: To optimize cancer clinical trial participation in low-resource settings, interventions must be tailored to local contexts, addressing structural and cultural barriers. Enhanced communication, community involvement, and supportive policies can significantly improve trial participation and outcomes.

PURPOSE: The under-representation of African countries in cancer clinical trials continues to widen the cancer health disparity. In this study, we assessed health care workers' perspectives on recruitment and retention in cancer clinical trials in Nigeria. METHODS: This study was a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, using a survey for quantitative analysis and focus group discussions (FGDs) for further qualitative investigation. The health care providers that participated in the study were drawn from the ICON-3 Practice-based Research Network across the six geopolitical zones in Nigeria. RESULTS: Of the 42 providers, 35 completed the survey and 25 participated in the FGDs. The most cited (agreed or strongly agreed) patient-related barriers were lack of understanding of cancer clinical trials (83%), cultural barriers (77%), and lack of financial compensation for study visits (77%). The most cited provider-related barriers were negative attitude of the clinical team (89%), lack of training in good clinical practice (89%), and an overwhelming clinical workload (86%). On trial-related barriers, about 71% agreed or strongly agreed that lack of trial publicity was a barrier. Over 90% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that several factors, including the friendliness of the study team (97%) and clarity in the presentation of trial information (97%), are important facilitators. The FGDs unveiled additional themes, including systems-related barriers such as lack of infrastructure, limited research collaboration, and prolonged ethical approval process, and capacity building and community engagement as potential facilitators. CONCLUSION: Our study provides providers' perspectives on the barriers and facilitators to the recruitment and retention of participants in cancer clinical trials in a low-resource setting and highlights the need for culturally appropriate recruitment strategies.

Background: Telehealth technologies offer efficient ways to deliver health‐related social needs (HRSN) screening in cancer care, but these methods may not reach all populations. The authors examined patient characteristics associated with using an online patient portal (OPP) to complete HRSN screening as part of gynecologic cancer care.Methods: From June 2021 to June 2023, patients in a gynecologic oncology clinic completed validated HRSN screening questions either (1) using the OPP (independently before the visit) or (2) in person (verbally administered by clinic staff). The authors examined the prevalence of HRSN according to activated OPP status and, in a restricted subgroup, used stepwise multivariate Poisson regression to identify associations between patient and visit characteristics and using the OPP.Results: Of 1616 patients, 87.4% (n = 1413) had an activated OPP. Patients with inactive OPPs (vs. activated OPPs) more frequently reported two or more needs (10% vs 5%; p < .01). Of 986 patients in the restricted cohort, 52% used the OPP to complete screening. The final multivariable model indicated that patients were less likely to use the OPP if they were Black (vs. White; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59–0.83); not employed (vs. employed; aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68–0.97), or had low measures of OPP engagement (aRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68–0.92). New versus established patients were 21% more likely to use the OPP (aRR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06–1.38).Conclusions: Differential use of the OPP suggested that over‐reliance on digital technologies could limit the ability to reach those populations that have social factors already associated with cancer outcome disparities. Cancer centers should consider using multiple delivery methods for HRSN screening to maximize reach to all populations.

PURPOSE: People with HIV (PWH) have worse cancer outcomes, partially because of inequities in cancer treatment. We evaluated cancer treatment disparities among PWH, including an assessment of changes in disparities over time.METHODS: We used data from the HIV/AIDS Cancer Match Study, a population-based HIV and cancer registry linkage to examine diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and cancers of the cervix, lung, anus, prostate, colon, and female breast. Outcomes included receipt of (1) any cancer treatment and (2) standard therapy among patients with local-stage cancer. We assessed associations between HIV and each outcome by estimating adjusted prevalence odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CI and trends over time. We identified predictors of nonreceipt of cancer treatment in PWH.RESULTS: From 2001 to 2019, compared with people with cancer without HIV (n = 2,880,955), PWH (n = 16,334) were more likely to not receive cancer treatment for cervical cancer (aOR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.52 to 2.70]), DLBCL (aOR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.38 to 1.70]), HL (aOR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.19 to 1.63]), lung cancer (aOR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.65 to 1.93]), prostate cancer (aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.44]), colon cancer (aOR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.43 to 2.08]), and breast cancer (aOR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.77]). Similar associations were observed in PWH with local-stage cancers although no difference was observed for anal cancers. The association between HIV and nonreceipt of cancer treatment significantly decreased over time for breast, colon, and prostate cancers (all P trend <.0001), but PWH remained less likely to receive treatment in 2014-2019 for DLBCL, cervix, and lung cancers. Among PWH, Black individuals, people who inject drugs, and those 65 years and older were less likely to receive cancer treatment.CONCLUSION: Disparities in receipt of cancer treatment persist for PWH in the United States in contemporary time periods. Solutions to address inequitable receipt of cancer treatment among PWH are urgently needed.

PURPOSE: We previously implemented paper-based screening for health-related social resource needs (HRSN) in our gynecologic oncology clinic and found that 36% of patients who completed the screening reported HRSN. We identified two primary deficiencies with our process. First, only 52% of patients completed the screening. Second, 37% of patients with needs failed to indicate if they desired resource referral or not. Therefore, we conducted a quality improvement project to integrate screening and referral processes into the electronic medical record (EMR) and routine clinic workflow to achieve at least 90% screening compliance and 90% elicited referral preference. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team consisting of physicians, a health outcomes researcher, a computer programmer, project assistants, and the staff of a partner community organization designed and implemented an intervention that screened for HRSN online via the EMR patient platform or in person during visits. The primary outcome was the percentage of eligible patients who completed the HRSN screening (ie, reach). Outcomes were reviewed weekly, and feedback was provided to stakeholders monthly. Iterative changes were incorporated into five successive Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles completed from January 2021 to March 2023. RESULTS: Screening compliance increased from the baseline of 52% (paper-based) to 97% in PDSA 4. Completion via the online patient portal increased from 17% in prelaunch to 49% in PDSA 4. Of patients who reported needs, 100% had a documented referral preference. CONCLUSION: Compared with paper-based screening, an EMR-integrated HRSN screening and referral system significantly improved reach to patients at a gynecologic oncology clinic. Implementation efforts to expand to other ambulatory clinic settings are in process.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer and second most common cause of cancer-related death in Ghana. Early detection and access to diagnostic services are vital for early treatment initiation and improved survival. This study characterizes the geographic access to hospital-based breast cancer diagnostic services in Ghana as a framework for expansion. METHODS: A cross-sectional hospital-based survey was completed in Ghana from November 2020 to October 2021. Early diagnostic services, as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Framework for Resource Stratification, was assessed at each hospital. Services were characterized as available >80% of the time in the previous year, 80% of the time, with 43% of the population living within 45 km. Ten of the 12 met full NCCN Core criteria, and none met full NCCN Enhanced criteria. An additional 12 hospitals were identified that provide the majority of NCCN Basic services but lack select services necessary to meet this criterion. Expansion of services in these hospitals could result in an additional 20% of the population having access to NCCN Basic-level early diagnostic services within 45 km. CONCLUSION: Hospital-based services for breast cancer early diagnosis in Ghana are available but sparse. Many hospitals offer fragmented aspects of care, but only a limited number of hospitals offer the full NCCN Basic or Core level of care. Understanding current availability and geographical distribution of services provides a framework for potential targeted expansion of services.

PURPOSE: Cancer deaths in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) will nearly double by 2040. Available evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer prevention and early detection can reduce cancer-related mortality, yet there is a lack of evidence on effectively scaling these EBIs in LMIC settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review to identify published literature from six databases between 2012 and 2022 that described efforts for scaling cancer prevention and early detection EBIs in LMICs. Included studies met one of two definitions of scale-up: (1) deliberate efforts to increase the impact of effective intervention to benefit more people or (2) an intervention shown to be efficacious on a small scale expanded under real-world conditions to reach a greater proportion of eligible population. Study characteristics, including EBIs, implementation strategies, and outcomes used, were summarized using frameworks from the field of implementation science. RESULTS: This search yielded 3,076 abstracts, with 24 studies eligible for inclusion. Included studies focused on a number of cancer sites including cervical (67%), breast (13%), breast and cervical (13%), liver (4%), and colon (4%). Commonly reported scale-up strategies included developing stakeholder inter-relationships, training and education, and changing infrastructure. Barriers to scale-up were reported at individual, health facility, and community levels. Few studies reported applying conceptual frameworks to guide strategy selection and evaluation. CONCLUSION: Although there were relatively few published reports, this scoping review offers insight into the approaches used by LMICs to scale up cancer EBIs, including common strategies and barriers. More importantly, it illustrates the urgent need to fill gaps in research to guide best practices for bringing the implementation of cancer EBIs to scale in LMICs.

PURPOSE: In Tanzania, high breast cancer mortality can be attributed to delays in diagnosis and treatment initiation. We adapted the cascade analysis method to depict sequential steps along the breast cancer care pathway in a tertiary hospital in Mwanza, to identify where correction of loss to attrition would have the biggest impact on improving outcomes. METHODS: This prospective cohort included adult women presenting with breast concerns between February 2020 and January 2022. Five cascade steps beginning with patients' initial clinical breast assessment (CBA) through cancer treatment were identified: (1) CBA, (2) ordering diagnostic test(s), (3) completion of diagnostic test(s), (4) receipt of final diagnosis, and (5) initiating cancer treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 721 eligible women with a median age of 42.8 years (IQR, 32.5-55.0) were included. Median time from presentation to treatment initiation was 35 days (IQR, 20-63). For step 1, 39.1% (n = 282) of patients were diagnosed with a benign concern and removed from the cascade. Completion rates for steps 2-4 were 95.0%, 90.2%, and 91.0, respectively. There were 156 (45.6%) patients diagnosed with breast cancer, and for step 5, 71.2% of patients initiated cancer treatment. In steps 2, 3, 4, and 5, there was a loss of 22, 41, 34, and 45 patients, respectively. If loss was eliminated at steps 2, 3, 4, or 5, an additional 6, 12, 11, or 45 patients, respectively, would have completed the pathway. CONCLUSION: Initiating cancer treatment was identified as the step with the biggest loss and, if remedied, would have the biggest impact on improving breast cancer outcomes at Bugando Medical Centre. These results will inform future programs focused on reducing overall loss in the system and supporting patients with breast cancer.