Cancer disparities in Southeast Asia: intersectionality and a call to action.

Southeast Asia has a population of over 680 million people—approximately half the population of India and twice the population of the United States—and is a region marked by rich and complex histories and cultures, dynamic growth, and unique and evolving health challenges.1 Despite the momentum of economic development, health inequalities persist. These inequities have been aggravated since the COVID-19 pandemic, which pushed millions further into poverty, possibly exacerbating health disparities, especially among populations who suffer vulnerabilities.2 Particularly salient are the challenges associated with providing adequate care for people with cancer, a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the region.1,2 Cancer incidence and mortality in the region are projected to rise in the coming decades, given population growth and rapidly changing socioeconomic and geopolitical factors, as well as a host of interrelated and dynamic environmental, behavioral, and occupational risk factors.1, 2, 3 Large epidemiologic studies have demonstrated differences among Southeast Asian countries in terms of cancer incidence and mortality.3 Epidemiologic patterns can be attributed to variations in complex risk factors, access to screening and cancer care, and likely genetic predisposition.1, 2, 3 However, these differences also underscore that within each country exist richly diverse populations that experience disparities in cancer risk, screening, care access, outcomes, and survivorship in ways that require further examination. We draw attention to disparities in cancer in Southeast Asian countries. We highlight the need to study cancer disparities affecting minoritised groups in Southeast Asia—not only along lines of race/ethnicity, but also people minoritised along lines of sex/gender, socioeconomic status, religion, geography, and others. We highlight the intersectionality of elements of an individual's identity. Intersectionality, developed by critical race theorist Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989, is an analytic framework borne out of Black American feminist scholarship, that examines how a person's sociopolitical identities lead to disparate balances of privilege and discrimination.4 An intersectional approach would demonstrate that an individual or a community does not only experience economic poverty as the sole barrier to improved health; such an approach would examine how other identities such as religion or immigration status affect access to care. These different social determinants of health are not mutually exclusive; their interrelationships are complex, with consequences for health.5 We leverage the intersectional approach, which parallels the inherently syncretic cultures and histories of Southeast Asian nations, and explore how these identities impact access to cancer care. Meaningful cancer research focusing on peoples of Southeast Asia could present many opportunities for intervention and improvement

Brachytherapy Workflow Practices: Analysis of Different Workflow Scenarios in Patients With Cervical Cancer and Impact on IGBT Implementation—An IAEA Study

PURPOSEThe workflow of brachytherapy (BT) is an essential aspect of treatment to consider in image-guided brachytherapy (IGBT). It has an overarching effect influencing patient throughput and the number of cancer treatments that can be performed as it occupies equipment, space, and personnel. There is limited research addressing this issue. Under the International Atomic Energy Agency's Coordinated Research Activity titled IGBT for cervix cancer: An implementation study, our study analyzes various scenarios in the clinical workflow of BT delivery for cervical cancer. It aims to determine the extent to which these scenarios allow the routine implementation of IGBT. With this information, current barriers and individualized adaptations to efficient workflows can be identified to enhance the global application of IGBT, leading to better cervical cancer treatment.MATERIALS AND METHODSA web-based poll of questions regarding practices in BT workflow was presented to 62 participants from low-, lower middle-, upper middle-, and high-income countries (19 countries).RESULTSThis study highlighted diversity in BT practices across countries, income levels, and regions. It identified variations in workflow, patient throughput, and resource availability, which can have implications for the efficiency and quality of BT treatments. Scenario A, utilizing multiple locations for the steps of the BT procedure, was the most commonly used. The availability of resources, such as imaging devices and trained personnel, varied among the participating centers and remained challenging for IGBT implementation and sustainability.CONCLUSIONThe design of the BT facility plays a vital role in improving efficiency, with a dedicated BT suite contributing to an efficient workflow but limiting patient throughput, especially for high-volume centers. Although IGBT is effective, its implementation requires consideration of various logistical challenges and should be individualized