Loon, Katherine Van

By 2045, more than three quarters of global cancer deaths are projected to occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); however, the global availability of cancer care remains constrained by high costs and inequitable access. Value-based frameworks that integrate clinical benefit with affordability, feasibility, and equity are essential to better guide research prioritization, resource allocation, and regulatory policies in LMICs. A key component of a value-based approach is the generation of high-quality, locally relevant data to support evidence-based implementation of cancer prevention and control strategies. Herein, we provide three contemporary examples from JCO Global Oncology which demonstrate how economic evaluation in cancer research can address locally relevant, health system–specific questions.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To provide guidance on the recommended management of cancer in pregnant patients. METHODS A multidisciplinary Expert Panel convened and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS The systematic review identified 450 eligible studies. Much of the evidence consisted of observational data, case series, and case reports. RECOMMENDATIONS Management of cancer during pregnancy should be grounded in a values-based informed-consent process outlining maternal and fetal risks and anticipated benefits. Diagnostic evaluation should follow the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle, with timing of diagnostic studies individualized based on urgency of cancer detection, potential dangers of delay, and the balance of risks to both the pregnant patient and her embryo or fetus. Due to significant risk of harm to the developing embryo and/or fetus, systemic therapy should be deferred until the second trimester. Methotrexate, hormonal therapies, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–targeted agents, vascular endothelial growth factor and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and all cellular therapies are contraindicated during pregnancy, regardless of gestational age. For patients who wish to continue their pregnancy, delivery should be planned at or after 37 weeks, with the final chemotherapy dose scheduled 2-4 weeks before birth. Referral to psychosocial support services is essential to address emotional and practical challenges, reduce distress, and support shared decision making. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines .

1510 Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Harmonized Guidelines for Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have emerged as leading cancer treatment guidelines in SSA. The NCCN-SSA guidelines, derived by adapting NCCN guidelines for the SSA context, offer standardized recommendations to guide cancer care and shape policy in SSA. This study examines the evidence cited in support of the NCCN-SSA guidelines, with a focus on population characteristics and generalizability to SSA. Methods: Two reviewers independently examined the NCCN-SSA guidelines for the eight most common cancers in SSA to identify all studies cited in support of treatment/management recommendations. Study selection discrepancies were resolved by discussion. Full-text articles were reviewed and data on age, sex, race, and recruitment geography were abstracted. Descriptive analyses were performed using R statistical software. Results: Overall, 4,589 citations were reviewed, and 2,938 (64.0%) studies with individual-level data were included, representing >10.4 million study participants. Of the 2,061 studies reporting geographic information (70%), 50 (2.4%) recruited in SSA; of these, 39 (83.0%) recruited from South Africa. Three studies (0.2%) recruited exclusively in SSA. Most studies (95.3%) recruited exclusively from high or upper-middle income countries. Only 29.2% of studies with race data included >10% Black study participants. Conclusions: Most studies cited in the NCCN-SSA guidelines were conducted in high-income countries outside SSA. A small minority of all study participants were Black. Our findings underscore potential limitations in the generalizability of the NCCN-SSA guidelines to SSA and highlight a pressing need to generate and incorporate context-specific data to guide care and inform policy. WHO region of recruitment, race, and country-level income of studies included in NCCN-SSA guidelines. Cancer type # (%) studies reporting geography # (%) studies by recruitment region*: Americas # (%) studies by recruitment region*: Europe # (%) studies by recruitment region*: Sub-Sah. Africa % participants, White % participants, Black % participants, Other race # (%) studies representing only HMIC (per World Bank) Overall 2061(70%) 1177 (57%) 921 (45%) 50 (2%) 79% 9% 11% 1964(95%) B-cell 325(57%) 173 (53%) 178 (55%) 5(2%) 82% 7% 10% 307(94%) Breast 206(44%) 123 (60%) 124 (60%) 12 (6%) 80% 9% 11% 179(87%) Cervical 163(90%) 100 (61 %) 44(27%) 3(2%) 64% 14% 22% 158(97%) Colorectal 584(82%) 278 (48%) 292 (50%) 11 (2%) 80% 10% 10% 571 (98%) Hepato-cellular 183(74%) 80(44%) 68(37%) 0(0%) 69% 9% 22% 169(92 %) Kaposi sarcoma 51(80%) 25 (49%) 19(37%) 5(10%) 38% 51% 10% 44(86%) Ovarian 115(56%) 76 (66%) 35 (30%) 0(0%) 83% 4% 13% 115(100%) Prostate 434(88 %) 322 (74 %) 161 (37%) 14 (3%) 79% 9% 12% 421(97%) HMIC = high and upper-middle income countries. *Percent of studies includes as the denominator only the number of studies with reported geographies.

At the Summit on Cancer Health Disparities held in 2023, the session on Access to Cancer Care in Low- and middle- income countries (LMIC) highlighted several efforts globally. The collaborative efforts of Dana Farber Cancer Institute and the Ministry of Health in spearheading the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence (BCCOE) in Rwanda was one such initiative. They were able to set up the BCCOE to address the unmet need of cancer care in this area and have trained nurses in East Africa to help establish other similar centers. They also serve as the single radiotherapy center for the entire of the country. Another such collaborative effort between Massachusetts General Hospital and the cancer center in Botswana in setting up sexual health education initiatives for women undergoing pelvic radiation was highlighted. They started with a quality improvement project to demonstrate the benefit of sexual health education and proper vaginal dilator use amongst women in this demographic. They were able to demonstrate that 90% of patients were able to complete an in-person 6-week workshop with clear benefits noted on a long-term basis. To highlight examples of best practice examples of equitable partnerships, examples of partnerships between Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia in Mexico City and UCSF was described. It was emphasized that for successful collaborations, equitable bidirectional partnerships are key. The thought leaders in this field also highlighted challenges associated with global oncology and the need for inclusion of minorities in clinical trials to improve cancer care for all globally.

Abstract Background The incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yoCRC) is increasing. It is unknown if there are survival differences between young and older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods We studied the association of age with survival in 2326 mCRC patients enrolled in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B and SWOG 80405 trial, a multicenter, randomized trial of first-line chemotherapy plus biologics. The primary and secondary outcomes of this study were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively, which were assessed by Kaplan-Meier method and compared among younger vs older patients with the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on Cox proportional hazards modeling, adjusting for known prognostic variables. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of 2326 eligible subjects, 514 (22.1%) were younger than age 50 years at study entry (yoCRC cohort). The median age of yoCRC patients was 44.3 vs 62.5 years in patients aged 50 years and older. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between yoCRC vs older-onset patients (median = 27.07 vs 26.12 months; adjusted HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.10; P = .78). The median PFS was also similar in yoCRC vs older patients (10.87 vs 10.55 months) with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.13; P = .67). Patients younger than age 35 years had the shortest OS with median OS of 21.95 vs 26.12 months in older-onset patients with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.08 (95% CI = 0.81 to 1.44; Ptrend = .93). Conclusion In this large study of mCRC patients, there were no statistically significant differences in survival between patients with yoCRC and CRC patients aged 50 years and older.

PURPOSE The eastern corridor of Africa is affected by a high burden of esophageal cancer (EC), with > 90% of patients presenting with advanced disease. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been previously reported as safe and effective for palliation of malignant dysphagia in resource-limited settings; however, access is limited throughout Eastern Africa. METHODS In response to demand for palliative interventions for patients with dysphagia because of EC, the African Esophageal Cancer Consortium (AfrECC) partnered with the Clinton Health Access Initiative to improve access to SEMS in Eastern Africa. We undertook a stepwise implementation approach to (1) identify barriers to SEMS access, (2) conduct a market analysis, (3) select an industry partner, (4) establish regulatory and procurement processes, (5) develop endoscopic training resources, (6) create a medical device registry, and (7) establish principles of accountability. RESULTS Following an evaluation of market demand and potential SEMS manufacturers, Boston Scientific Corporation announced its commitment to launch an access program to provide esophageal SEMS to patients in Tanzania, Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia at a subsidized price. Parallel regulatory and procurement processes were established in each participating country. Endoscopy training courses were designed and conducted, using the Training-of-Trainers model. A device registry was created to centralize data for quality control and to monitor channels of SEMS distribution. Principles of accountability were developed to guide the sustainability of this endeavor. CONCLUSION The AfrECC Stent Access Initiative is an example of a multisector partnership formed to provide an innovative solution to align regional needs with a supply chain for a high-priority medical device.

4038 Background: GEM has served as the chemotherapy platform for most phase III clinical trials in APC, inc. CALGB 80303 (GEM +/- BEV). However, GEM-based combination regimens may confer superior outcomes in select pts and represent a preferred backbone in clinical trial design testing targeted agents. Methods: Data was pooled from 5 phase II trials evaluating GEM-based cytotoxic doublets plus BEV in APC. 1o endpoint was OS. 2o endpoints included ORR, CA19-9 response, and adverse events (AEs). Kaplan-Meier methods estimated time-to-event endpoints. The Cox proportional hazard model estimated univariate hazard ratios (HR) of death. Results: Of 261 pts, 90.7% were Caucasian, 95.4% had an ECOG PS 0-1, and 91.6% had metastatic disease. Median age = 60y. Pooled OS data (in mos), stratified for PS and stage, is shown in the table. ORR across all trials: CR 1.6%, PR 22.9%, SD 50.8%, PD 20.2%, NA 4.7%. HR for pts who achieved disease control (CR/PR/SD) was 0.35 vs. those with PD (95% CI 0.23-0.54, p<0.001). 76.5% of pts had elevated baseline CA19-9; of these, 62% achieved ≥50% reduction (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.34-0.73, p<0.001). BEV-related AEs ≥grade 3: HTN (10.6%), hemorrhage (9.5%), VTE (10.1%), cardiac events (3.4%), and bowel perforation (2.2%). Median OS in pts with grade 3-4 HTN was 13.4 mos vs. 9.8 mos in those without (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.48-1.24, p=0.29). Conclusions: Recognizing the limitations of single-arm phase II trial design and cross-study comparisons, these results compare favorably to those from CALGB 80303. The standard paradigm of GEM +/- drug X in clinical trial development for APC needs to be reconsidered. Based on our data as well as the recent phase III FOLFIRINOX study, building on more intensive combination chemo regimens in future trials may represent a better strategy, especially for pts with good PS. [Table: see text]