Zachary J Ward1, Andrew M Scott2, Hedvig Hricak3, May Abdel-Wahab4, Diana Paez4, Miriam Mikhail Lette4, H Alberto Vargas3, T Peter Kingham5, Rifat Atun6. 1. Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: zward@hsph.harvard.edu. 2. Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Cancer Medicine, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 3. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications, Division of Human Health, Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging Section, Vienna, Austria. 5. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 6. Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate survival estimates are important for cancer control planning. Although observed survival estimates are unavailable for many countries, where they are available, wide variations are reported. Understanding the impact of specific treatment and imaging modalities can help decision makers to effectively allocate resources to improve cancer survival in their local context. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model of stage-specific cancer survival in 200 countries and territories for 11 cancers (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, anus, liver, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, and prostate) comprising 60% of global diagnosed cancer cases. The model accounts for country-specific availability of treatment (chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy) and imaging modalities (ultrasound, x-ray, CT, MRI, PET, single-photon emission CT), as well as quality of care. We calibrated the model to reported survival estimates from CONCORD-3 (which reports global trends in cancer survival in 2000-14). We estimated 5-year net survival for diagnosed cancers in each country or territory and estimated potential survival gains from increasing the availability of individual treatment and imaging modalities, and more comprehensive packages of scale-up of these interventions. We report the mean and 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all outcomes, calculated as the 2·5 and 97·5 percentiles of the simulation results. FINDINGS: The estimated global 5-year net survival for all 11 cancers combined is 42·6% (95% uncertainty interval 40·3-44·3), with survival in high-income countries being an average of 12 times (range 4-17) higher than that in low-income countries. Expanding availability of surgery or radiotherapy or improving quality of care would yield the largest survival gains in low-income (2·5-3·4 percentage point increase in survival) and lower-middle-income countries (2·4-6·1 percentage point increase), whereas upper-middle-income and high-income countries are more likely to benefit from improved availability of targeted therapy (0·7 percentage point increase for upper-middle income and 0·4 percentage point increase for high income). Investing in medical imaging will also be necessary to achieve substantial survival gains, with traditional modalities estimated to provide the largest gains in low-income settings, while MRI and PET would yield the largest gains in higher-income countries. Simultaneous expansion of treatment, imaging, and quality of care could improve 5-year net survival by more than ten times in low-income countries (3·8% [95% UI 0·5-9·2] to 45·2% [40·2-52·1]) and could more than double 5-year net survival in lower-middle-income countries (20·1% [7·2-31·7] to 47·1% [42·8-50·8]). INTERPRETATION: Scaling up both treatment and imaging availability could yield synergistic survival gains for patients with cancer. Expanding traditional modalities in lower-income settings might be a feasible pathway to improve survival before scaling up more modern technologies. FUNDING: Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health.
BACKGROUND: Accurate survival estimates are important for cancer control planning. Although observed survival estimates are unavailable for many countries, where they are available, wide variations are reported. Understanding the impact of specific treatment and imaging modalities can help decision makers to effectively allocate resources to improve cancer survival in their local context. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model of stage-specific cancer survival in 200 countries and territories for 11 cancers (oesophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, anus, liver, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, and prostate) comprising 60% of global diagnosed cancer cases. The model accounts for country-specific availability of treatment (chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy) and imaging modalities (ultrasound, x-ray, CT, MRI, PET, single-photon emission CT), as well as quality of care. We calibrated the model to reported survival estimates from CONCORD-3 (which reports global trends in cancer survival in 2000-14). We estimated 5-year net survival for diagnosed cancers in each country or territory and estimated potential survival gains from increasing the availability of individual treatment and imaging modalities, and more comprehensive packages of scale-up of these interventions. We report the mean and 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all outcomes, calculated as the 2·5 and 97·5 percentiles of the simulation results. FINDINGS: The estimated global 5-year net survival for all 11 cancers combined is 42·6% (95% uncertainty interval 40·3-44·3), with survival in high-income countries being an average of 12 times (range 4-17) higher than that in low-income countries. Expanding availability of surgery or radiotherapy or improving quality of care would yield the largest survival gains in low-income (2·5-3·4 percentage point increase in survival) and lower-middle-income countries (2·4-6·1 percentage point increase), whereas upper-middle-income and high-income countries are more likely to benefit from improved availability of targeted therapy (0·7 percentage point increase for upper-middle income and 0·4 percentage point increase for high income). Investing in medical imaging will also be necessary to achieve substantial survival gains, with traditional modalities estimated to provide the largest gains in low-income settings, while MRI and PET would yield the largest gains in higher-income countries. Simultaneous expansion of treatment, imaging, and quality of care could improve 5-year net survival by more than ten times in low-income countries (3·8% [95% UI 0·5-9·2] to 45·2% [40·2-52·1]) and could more than double 5-year net survival in lower-middle-income countries (20·1% [7·2-31·7] to 47·1% [42·8-50·8]). INTERPRETATION: Scaling up both treatment and imaging availability could yield synergistic survival gains for patients with cancer. Expanding traditional modalities in lower-income settings might be a feasible pathway to improve survival before scaling up more modern technologies. FUNDING: Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health.
Authors: Blake C Alkire; Nakul P Raykar; Mark G Shrime; Thomas G Weiser; Stephen W Bickler; John A Rose; Cameron T Nutt; Sarah L M Greenberg; Meera Kotagal; Johanna N Riesel; Micaela Esquivel; Tarsicio Uribe-Leitz; George Molina; Nobhojit Roy; John G Meara; Paul E Farmer Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Robert W Carlson; Jillian L Scavone; Wui-Jin Koh; Joan S McClure; Benjamin E Greer; Rashmi Kumar; Nicole R McMillian; Benjamin O Anderson Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Claudia Allemani; Tomohiro Matsuda; Veronica Di Carlo; Rhea Harewood; Melissa Matz; Maja Nikšić; Audrey Bonaventure; Mikhail Valkov; Christopher J Johnson; Jacques Estève; Olufemi J Ogunbiyi; Gulnar Azevedo E Silva; Wan-Qing Chen; Sultan Eser; Gerda Engholm; Charles A Stiller; Alain Monnereau; Ryan R Woods; Otto Visser; Gek Hsiang Lim; Joanne Aitken; Hannah K Weir; Michel P Coleman Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Rifat Atun; David A Jaffray; Michael B Barton; Freddie Bray; Michael Baumann; Bhadrasain Vikram; Timothy P Hanna; Felicia M Knaul; Yolande Lievens; Tracey Y M Lui; Michael Milosevic; Brian O'Sullivan; Danielle L Rodin; Eduardo Rosenblatt; Jacob Van Dyk; Mei Ling Yap; Eduardo Zubizarreta; Mary Gospodarowicz Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Lindsey A Torre; Rebecca L Siegel; Elizabeth M Ward; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-12-14 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Sana Al-Sukhun; Sarah Temin; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Neelima Denduluri; Thomas K Oliver; Doug Pyle; Manish A Shah; Julie Gralow Journal: J Glob Oncol Date: 2018-07
Authors: Kenneth A Fleming; Susan Horton; Michael L Wilson; Rifat Atun; Kristen DeStigter; John Flanigan; Shahin Sayed; Pierrick Adam; Bertha Aguilar; Savvas Andronikou; Catharina Boehme; William Cherniak; Annie Ny Cheung; Bernice Dahn; Lluis Donoso-Bach; Tania Douglas; Patricia Garcia; Sarwat Hussain; Hari S Iyer; Mikashmi Kohli; Alain B Labrique; Lai-Meng Looi; John G Meara; John Nkengasong; Madhukar Pai; Kara-Lee Pool; Kaushik Ramaiya; Lee Schroeder; Devanshi Shah; Richard Sullivan; Bien-Soo Tan; Kamini Walia Journal: Lancet Date: 2021-10-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Milou E Noltes; Gooitzen M van Dam; Wouter B Nagengast; Pieter J van der Zaag; Riemer H J A Slart; Wiktor Szymanski; Schelto Kruijff; Rudi A J O Dierckx Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Zachary J Ward; Surbhi Grover; Andrew M Scott; Sungmin Woo; Dina H Salama; Elizabeth C Jones; Tarek El-Diasty; Bradley R Pieters; Edward L Trimble; H Alberto Vargas; Hedvig Hricak; Rifat Atun Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Hedvig Hricak; Ada Muellner; Zachary J Ward; Rifat Atun; May Abdel-Wahab; Andrew M Scott Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Anna J Dare; Gregory C Knapp; Anya Romanoff; Olalekan Olasehinde; Olusola C Famurewa; Akinwumi O Komolafe; Samuel Olatoke; Aba Katung; Olusegun I Alatise; T Peter Kingham Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2021-09-10
Authors: Hedvig Hricak; May Abdel-Wahab; Rifat Atun; Miriam Mikhail Lette; Diana Paez; James A Brink; Lluís Donoso-Bach; Guy Frija; Monika Hierath; Ola Holmberg; Pek-Lan Khong; Jason S Lewis; Geraldine McGinty; Wim J G Oyen; Lawrence N Shulman; Zachary J Ward; Andrew M Scott Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 41.316