Scholarlink

<p>Breast cancer remains one of the leading causes of mortality in women worldwide, the bulk of which is attributed to metastatic disease. Clinical management of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a subject of considerable variation across different regions. This review aims to examine the treatment strategies put forth by three advisory bodies— NCCN, ESMO and ICMR. To augment the theoretical comparison, inputs from clinicians from various hospitals in Bangalore, India have been incorporated to provide a more realistic picture of cancer treatment in India. While NCCN and ESMO guidelines integrate innovative and resource-intensive therapies, ICMR guidelines emphasize on the accessibility and cost-effectiveness, aligning with the realities of resource-limited healthcare environments. Insights from clinicians unveil challenges such as diagnostic delays, financial and systemic barriers and a deficit of palliative care providers. Notable progress has been made, in the form of waivers on custom duty for imported drugs, multi-national policy initiatives and the establishment of National Cancer Grid. This review concludes by outlining few suggestions to policymakers that, if implemented, would alleviate the suffering of patients suffering from MBC as well as reduce the burden on the healthcare system.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Treatment strategies for metastatic breast cancer: disparity between India and the West

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月10日

查看全文
  • Aniruddha Murahar Kulkarni,
  • Anish Hemanth Samprathi,
  • Sri Harsha Paladugu,
  • B. M. Mouna,
  • Santhosh Devadas,
  • Smitha Saldanha,
  • Pavan Sugoor,
  • S. Pushkala,
  • Vinayak Maka,
  • K. Govind Babu,
  • Annapoorni Rangarajan

摘要

Breast cancer remains one of the leading causes of mortality in women worldwide, the bulk of which is attributed to metastatic disease. Clinical management of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a subject of considerable variation across different regions. This review aims to examine the treatment strategies put forth by three advisory bodies— NCCN, ESMO and ICMR. To augment the theoretical comparison, inputs from clinicians from various hospitals in Bangalore, India have been incorporated to provide a more realistic picture of cancer treatment in India. While NCCN and ESMO guidelines integrate innovative and resource-intensive therapies, ICMR guidelines emphasize on the accessibility and cost-effectiveness, aligning with the realities of resource-limited healthcare environments. Insights from clinicians unveil challenges such as diagnostic delays, financial and systemic barriers and a deficit of palliative care providers. Notable progress has been made, in the form of waivers on custom duty for imported drugs, multi-national policy initiatives and the establishment of National Cancer Grid. This review concludes by outlining few suggestions to policymakers that, if implemented, would alleviate the suffering of patients suffering from MBC as well as reduce the burden on the healthcare system.