Barri M. Blauvelt

Identifying important breast cancer control strategies in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East/North Africa

BackgroundBreast cancer is the most frequent cause of cancer death in women worldwide, but global disparities in breast cancer control persist, due to a lack of a comprehensive breast cancer control strategy in many countries.ObjectivesTo identify and compare the need for breast cancer control strategies in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East/North Africa and to develop a common framework to guide the development of national breast cancer control strategies.MethodsData were derived from open-ended, semi-structured interviews conducted in 2007 with 221 clinicians, policy makers, and patient advocates; stratified across Asia (n = 97), Latin America (n = 46), the Middle East/North Africa (ME/NA) (n = 39) and Australia and Canada (n = 39). Respondents were identified using purposive and snowballing sampling. Interpretation of the data utilized interpretive phenomenological analysis where transcripts and field notes were coded and analyzed and common themes were identified. Analysis of regional variation was conducted based on the frequency of discussion and the writing of the manuscript followed the RATS guidelines.ResultsAnalysis revealed four major themes that form the foundation for developing national breast cancer control strategies: 1) building capacity; 2) developing evidence; 3) removing barriers; and 4) promoting advocacy - each specified across five sub-ordinate dimensions. The propensity to discuss most dimensions was similar across regions, but managing advocacy was discussed more frequently (p = 0.004) and organized advocacy was discussed less frequently (p < 0.001) in Australia and Canada.ConclusionsThis unique research identified common themes for the development of breast cancer control strategies, grounded in the experience of local practitioners, policy makers and advocacy leaders across diverse regions. Future research should be aimed at gathering a wider array of experiences, including those of patients.

Prioritizing strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control in Asia: a conjoint analysis

BackgroundLiver cancer is a complex and burdensome disease, with Asia accounting for 75% of known cases. Comprehensive cancer control requires the use of multiple strategies, but various stakeholders may have different views as to which strategies should have the highest priority. This study identified priorities across multiple strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control (CLCC) from the perspective of liver cancer clinical, policy, and advocacy stakeholders in China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Concordance of priorities was assessed across the region and across respondent roles.MethodsPriorities for CLCC were examined as part of a cross-sectional survey of liver cancer experts. Respondents completed several conjoint-analysis choice tasks to prioritize 11 strategies. In each task, respondents judged which of two competing CLCC plans, consisting of mutually exclusive and exhaustive subsets of the strategies, would have the greatest impact. The dependent variable was the chosen plan, which was then regressed on the strategies of different plans. The restricted least squares (RLS) method was utilized to compare aggregate and stratified models, and t-tests and Wald tests were used to test for significance and concordance, respectively.ResultsEighty respondents (69.6%) were eligible and completed the survey. Their primary interests were hepatitis (26%), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (58%), metastatic liver cancer (10%) and transplantation (6%). The most preferred strategies were monitoring at-risk populations (p<0.001), clinician education (p<0.001), and national guidelines (p<0.001). Most priorities were concordant across sites except for three strategies: transplantation infrastructure (p=0.009) was valued lower in China, measuring social burden (p=0.037) was valued higher in Taiwan, and national guidelines (p=0.025) was valued higher in China. Priorities did not differ across stakeholder groups (p=0.438).ConclusionsPriorities for CLCC in Asia include monitoring at-risk populations, clinician education, national guidelines, multidisciplinary management, public awareness and centers of excellence. As most priorities are relatively concordant across the region, multilateral approaches to addressing comprehensive liver cancer would be beneficial. However, where priorities are discordant among sites, such as transplantation infrastructure, strategies should be tailored to local needs.

Priorities for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Control: A Comparison of Policy Needs in Five European Countries

Abstract In 2006, the European Parliament designated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a serious public health problem, recognizing it as both a complex and deadly cancer. The authors conducted the first comparative needs assessment for HCC across five European countries. One hundred HCC experts assessed ten dimensions of HCC control. Common needs exist for lifestyle risk factor management (p < 0.001), political awareness (p < 0.001) and public awareness (p < 0.001). Discordances were found on funding for treatment (p = 0.001) and screening (p = 0.006), hepatitis C (p = 0.035), and hepatitis B (p = 0.050) strategies. The findings identify the priority needs, both common and country-specific, that should be addressed in these countries.

Facing the Global Challenges of Access to Cancer Medication

Recent articles and an editorial1-3 published in Journal of Global Oncology have broached the question of affordability of modern anticancer medication and suggested that “the financial challenge presented by the rising cost of care will create a barrier to its delivery.” Booth and Del Paggio,2 as well as Del Paggio et al,4 applied both the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale and the ASCO Value Framework and concluded that many of these recently approved agents offer only marginal value.

The unknown burden and cost of celiac disease in the U.S

ABSTRACT Introduction: Celiac disease is an autoimmune disease that results from exposure to gluten in genetically susceptible individuals and leads to a range of gastrointestinal and extraintestinal symptoms. Areas covered: In order to evaluate the literature with respect to burden associated with celiac disease in the U.S. and identify any knowledge gaps, we performed a literature review of journal articles published between 2000–2016. We note that celiac disease is a prevalent condition associated with a significant burden of disease through its impact on morbidity, quality of life, as well as through increased costs associated with its diagnosis and management. At the same time, knowledge gaps exist in our understanding of the precise epidemiologic burden in the U.S.; the trade-offs between burden and benefit of a gluten-free diet; and better estimation of the costs of diagnosis, treatment and management.Expert commentary: Additional research is necessary to better understand these gaps to be able to reduce burden of celiac disease, particularly the impact on health-related quality of life and the costs associated with inaccurate or delayed diagnoses and insufficient treatment of disease.