Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34560006›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Oncology2021

Access to cancer medicines deemed essential by oncologists in 82 countries: an international, cross-sectional survey.

Adam Fundytus, Manju Sengar, Dorothy Lombe, Wilma Hopman, Matthew Jalink, Bishal Gyawali, Dario Trapani, Felipe Roitberg, Elisabeth G E De Vries, Lorenzo Moja and 3 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

84 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Trainee and Faculty Perspectives on Global Oncology: Assessing Interest, Barriers, and Opportunities.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Adverse drug reactions associated with doxorubicin and epirubicin: A descriptive analysis from VigiBase.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Adam FundytusDivision of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada; Departments of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Manju SengarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.
Dorothy LombeCancer Diseases Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia.
Wilma HopmanPublic Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Matthew JalinkDivision of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Bishal GyawaliDivision of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada; Departments of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada; Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Dario TrapaniDivision of Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Felipe RoitbergDepartment of Noncommunicable Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Elisabeth G E De VriesDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Lorenzo MojaDepartment of Health Products Policy and Standards, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
André IlbawiDepartment of Health Products Policy and Standards, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Richard SullivanInstitute of Cancer Policy, King's College London, London, UK.
Christopher M BoothDivision of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, ON, Canada; Departments of Oncology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada; Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada. Electronic address: booth@queensu.ca.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe WHO Essential Medicines List (EML) identifies priority medicines that are most important to public health. Over time, the EML has included an increasing number of cancer medicines. We aimed to investigate whether the cancer medicines in the EML are aligned with the priority medicines of frontline oncologists worldwide, and the extent to which these medicines are accessible in routine clinical practice.

methodsThis international, cross-sectional survey was developed by investigators from a range of clinical practice settings across low-income to high-income countries, including members of the WHO Essential Medicines Cancer Working Group. A 28-question electronic survey was developed and disseminated to a global network of oncologists in 89 countries and regions by use of a hierarchical snowball method; each primary contact distributed the survey through their national and regional oncology associations or personal networks. The survey was open from Oct 15 to Dec 7, 2020. Fully qualified physicians who prescribe systemic anticancer therapy to adults were eligible to participate in the survey. The primary question asked respondents to select the ten cancer medicines that would provide the greatest public health benefit to their country; subsequent questions explored availability and cost of cancer medicines. Descriptive statistics were used to compare access to medicines between low-income and lower-middle-income countries, upper-middle-income countries, and high-income countries.

findings87 country-level contacts and two regional networks were invited to participate in the survey; 46 (52%) accepted the invitation and distributed the survey. 1697 respondents opened the survey link; 423 were excluded as they did not answer the primary study question and 326 were excluded because of ineligibility. 948 eligible oncologists from 82 countries completed the survey (165 [17%] in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 165 [17%] in upper-middle-income countries, and 618 [65%] in high-income countries). The most commonly selected medicines were doxorubicin (by 499 [53%] of 948 respondents), cisplatin (by 470 [50%]), paclitaxel (by 423 [45%]), pembrolizumab (by 414 [44%]), trastuzumab (by 402 [42%]), carboplatin (by 390 [41%]), and 5-fluorouracil (by 386 [41%]). Of the 20 most frequently selected high-priority cancer medicines, 19 (95%) are currently on the WHO EML; 12 (60%) were cytotoxic agents and 13 (65%) were granted US Food and Drug Administration regulatory approval before 2000. The proportion of respondents indicating universal availability of each top 20 medication was 9-54% in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 13-90% in upper-middle-income countries, and 68-94% in high-income countries. The risk of catastrophic expenditure (spending >40% of total consumption net of spending on food) was more common in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, with 13-68% of respondents indicating a substantial risk of catastrophic expenditures for each of the top 20 medications in lower-middle-income countries versus 2-41% of respondents in upper-middle-income countries and 0-9% in high-income countries.

interpretationThese data demonstrate major barriers in access to core cancer medicines worldwide. These findings challenge the feasibility of adding additional expensive cancer medicines to the EML. There is an urgent need for global and country-level policy action to ensure patients with cancer globally have access to high priority medicines.

fundingNone.

Indexed as

Global HealthHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityOncologistsAdultAntineoplastic AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesDrug CostsDrugs, EssentialFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedAntineoplastic AgentsDrugs, Essential

Identifiers

PMID34560006
PMCPMC8476341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.