Evidence From Ghana Indicates That Childhood Cancer Treatment in Sub-Saharan Africa Is Very Cost Effective: A Report From the Childhood Cancer 2030 Network

Abstract

PurposeNo published study to date has examined total cost and cost-effectiveness of maintaining a pediatric oncology treatment center in an African setting, thus limiting childhood cancer advocacy and policy efforts.MethodsWithin the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Ghana, costing data were gathered for all inputs related to operating a pediatric cancer unit. Cost and volume data for relevant clinical services (eg, laboratory, pathology, medications) were obtained retrospectively or prospectively. Salaries were determined and multiplied by proportion of time dedicated toward pediatric patients with cancer. Costs associated with inpatient bed use, outpatient clinic use, administrative fees, and overhead were estimated. Costs were summed for a total annual operating cost. Cost-effectiveness was calculated based on annual patients with newly diagnosed disease, survival rates, and life expectancy.ResultsThe Korle Bu Teaching Hospital pediatric cancer unit treats on average 170 new diagnoses annually. Total operating cost was $1.7 million/y. Personnel salaries and operating room costs were the most expensive inputs, contributing 45% and 21% of total costs. Together, medications, imaging, radiation, and pathology services accounted for 7%. The cost per disability-adjusted life-year averted was $1,034, less than the Ghanaian per capita income, and thus considered very cost effective as per WHO-CHOICE methodology.ConclusionTo our knowledge, this study is the first to examine institution-level costs and cost-effectiveness of a childhood cancer program in an African setting, demonstrating that operating such a program in this setting is very cost effective. These results will inform national childhood cancer strategies in Africa and other low- and middle-income country settings.

The cost effectiveness of treating Burkitt lymphoma in Uganda

“…Taken together, these cost differences likely account for the significantly lower cost of treating a disease like BL in this low‐income country setting, as compared with diseases with longer or more intensive treatment regimens. Notably, a major cost category in some other economic studies of LMIC childhood cancer programs is surgical personnel and costs, which are most relevant in the treatment of pediatric solid tumors . Aside from the minimal procedural costs associated with pathologic diagnosis, such costs do not accrue in the context of BL management.…”

Cost‐benefit analysis of implementing a pediatric early warning system at a pediatric oncology hospital in a low‐middle income country

“…Recent data have suggested that treating childhood cancer in LMICs via organized pediatric oncology units is cost‐effective . However, critically ill patients represent a significant increase in costs for inpatient care due to the need for intensive interventions, medications, and more frequent monitoring.…”

A pilot study to determine out‐of‐pocket expenditures by families of children being treated for cancer at public hospitals in New Delhi, India

“…In the absence of health care insurance and/or a social support network, the catastrophic costs associated with a childhood cancer may lead to the abandonment of treatment in low and middle‐income countries . These lives lost, within a global society that has the knowledge, expertise, and resources to cost‐effectively treat childhood cancer represent a gross health inequality and a violation of children's human rights . Therefore, there is an urgent need to redress the existing inequities to relieve the distress imposed on families of children with cancer and to reduce their social and economic costs.…”