Since the first case of COVID-19 and its progression to a pandemic, healthcare systems the world over have experienced severe difficulties coping with patient care for both COVID-19 and other diseases most especially non communicable diseases like cancer. These difficulties in Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially in Sub-Saharan Africa including Nigeria, are myriad. These LMICs are already bedeviled weak health systems, ill equipped cancer treatment centers, with outdated machines and grossly inadequate numbers of oncologists required to treat patients with cancer. As a result of these challenges coupled with unclear guidelines on how to manage cancer patients in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, 11 key Nigerian opinion leaders had a consensus meeting to identify challenges and possible workable solutions on continuing cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The discussion highlighted ethical issues, barriers to continuing cancer care (such as lockdown, fear of contracting disease, downscaled health services) and resource constraints such unavailable personal protective equipment. Yet, practical solutions were proffered such as necessary protective measures, case by case prioritization or de-prioritization, telemedicine and other achievable means in the Nigerian setting.

PURPOSE The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted cancer care in Africa, further exposing major health disparities. This paper compares and contrasts the experiences of 15 clinicians in six different African cancer centers to highlight the positive aspects (silver linings) in an otherwise negative situation. METHODS Data are from personal experience of the clinicians working at the six cancer centers blended with what is available in the literature. RESULTS The impact of COVID-19 on cancer care appeared to vary not only across the continent but also over cancer centers. Different factors such as clinic location, services offered, available resources, and level of restrictions imposed because of COVID-19 were associated with these variations. Collectively, delays in treatment and limited access to cancer care were commonly reported in the different regions. CONCLUSION There is a lack of data on cancer patients with COVID-19 and online COVID-19 and cancer registries for Africa. Analysis of the available data, however, suggests a higher mortality rate for cancer patients with COVID-19 compared with those without cancer. Positive or silver linings coming out of the pandemic include the adoption of hypofractionated radiation therapy and teleoncology to enhance access to care while protecting patients and staff members. Increasing collaborations using online technology with oncology health professionals across the world are also being seen as a silver lining, with valuable sharing of experiences and expertise to improve care, enhance learning, and reduce disparities. Advanced information and communication technologies are seen as vital for such collaborations and could avail efforts in dealing with the ongoing pandemic and potential future crises.

PURPOSE Because of the global COVID-19 pandemic, health care organizations introduced guidelines for modifications to health and cancer medical care delivery to mitigate transmission and ensure quality health outcomes. To examine the extent and impact of these modifications on oncology service disruptions in Nigeria, we surveyed oncology patients across selected public and private cancer treatment centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS Participating in the study were 15 tertiary cancer treatment centers across 12 Nigerian states. We recruited adult patients with cancer (18+ years) on active treatment to complete a self-administered survey on cancer care during COVID-19. We conducted descriptive and multivariate data analysis using Stata 16.1. RESULTS Respondents were (n = 1,072), female (65.7%), ages 18-49 years (50.3%), and married (80.7%). The top two cancers were breast and prostate. Overall, 17.3% of respondents reported disruptions to cancer care, and more than half (51.0%) reported difficulties accessing care. Changes in chemotherapy regimens or route of administration were reported in 8.4% of respondents. Odds for any disruption were highest for older patients, western states, patients with prostate cancer, and patients with two or more flu symptoms. Odds for radiotherapy cancellation were highest for older patients, those with prostate cancer, and those with medium service perception. CONCLUSION This study investigated COVID-19–influenced cancer treatment disruptions in Nigeria. Patients with cancer experienced significant disruptions to cancer care. Vulnerable patients are most likely to be negatively affected. Policies and strategies aimed at minimizing service disruptions while maintaining cancer patients' safety should be a priority for all health care institutions in the COVID-19 era.

In the advent of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, professional societies including the American Society for Radiation Oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommended adopting evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT). HFRT benefits include reduction in the number of clinical visits for each patient, minimizing potential exposure, and reducing stress on the limited workforce, especially in resource-limited settings as in Low-and-Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). Recent studies for LMICs in Africa have also shown that adopting HFRT can lead to significant cost reductions and increased access to radiotherapy. We assessed the readiness of 18 clinics in African LMICs to adopting HFRT. An IRB-approved survey was conducted at 18 RT clinics across 8 African countries. The survey requested information regarding the clinic’s existing equipment and human infrastructure and current practices. Amongst the surveyed clinics, all reported to already practicing HFRT, but only 44% of participating clinics reported adopting HFRT as a common practice. Additionally, most participating clinical staff reported to have received formal training appropriate for their role. However, the survey data on treatment planning and other experience with contouring highlighted need for additional training for radiation oncologists. Although the surveyed clinics in African LMICs are familiar with HFRT, there is need for additional investment in infrastructure and training as well as better education of oncology leaders on the benefits of increased adoption of evidence-based HFRT during and beyond the COVID-19 era.

PURPOSE Authorship gender disparities persist across academic disciplines, including oncology. However, little is known about global variation in authorship gender distribution. METHODS This retrospective cross-sectional study describes the distribution of author gender as determined from the first name across variables such as authorship position (first, middle, and last), country region, and country income level. The 608 articles with 5,302 authors included in this analysis were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology Global Oncology, from its inception in October 2015 through March 2020. Primary outcome measure was author gender on the basis of first name probabilities assessed by genderize.io. World Bank classification was used to categorize the country region and income level. Odds ratios were used to describe associations between female last authorship and representation in other authorship positions. RESULTS Although female authors were in the minority across all authorship positions, they were more under-represented in the last author position with 190 (32.1%) female, compared with 252 (41.4%) female first authors and 1,564 (38.1%) female middle authors. Female authors were most under-represented among authors from low-income countries, where they made up 21.6% of first authors and 9.1% of last authors. Of all the regions, sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia had the lowest percentage of female authors. Compared with articles with male last authors, those with female last authors had odds ratios (95% CI) of 2.2 (1.6 to 3.2) of having female first authors and 1.4 (0.9 to 2.1) of having 50% or more female middle authors. CONCLUSION There are wide regional variations in author gender distribution in global oncology. Female authors remain markedly under-represented, especially in lower-income countries, sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia. Future interventions should be tailored to mitigate these disparities.