Cancer is now widely recognized as a global problem that unfortunately lacks a global solution. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) exemplified this conundrum.¹ Despite global commitment to reducing the risk of and disability from NCDs, including cancer, implementation of known solutions is inadequate to reach the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases^2,3 (25% reduction in premature mortality from NCDs by 2025) and the third Sustainable Development Goal (by 2030 reduce by one-third premature mortality from NCDs through prevention and treatment, and promote mental health and well-being).⁴ To reduce cancer burden, identifying the scope of the problem and mapping out implementation of solutions is best done in National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs). However, a recent review showed that only 29% of low-income countries had a NCCP, and even if NCCPs existed, cost, financing, monitoring, and expansion of information systems was often inadequate. Many highly effective prevention and treatment strategies exist for cancer. However, they are often very specific (eg, vaccination for human papillomavirus and hepatitis B virus for prevention of cervical and liver cancer, or tyrosine kinase inhibitors for cancers with targetable mutations). Effective NCCPs therefore require detailed knowledge about the local burden of cancer and associated risk factors. We herein present results from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study describing cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries from 1990 through 2017, which can inform cancer control through policy, resource allocation, and health system planning.

Understanding the patterns of HIV/AIDS epidemics is crucial to tracking and monitoring the progress of prevention and control efforts in countries. We provide a comprehensive assessment of the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, mortality, and coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for 1980-2017 and forecast these estimates to 2030 for 195 countries and territories. We determined a modelling strategy for each country on the basis of the availability and quality of data. For countries and territories with data from population-based seroprevalence surveys or antenatal care clinics, we estimated prevalence and incidence using an open-source version of the Estimation and Projection Package-a natural history model originally developed by the UNAIDS Reference Group on Estimates, Modelling, and Projections. For countries with cause-specific vital registration data, we corrected data for garbage coding (ie, deaths coded to an intermediate, immediate, or poorly defined cause) and HIV misclassification. We developed a process of cohort incidence bias adjustment to use information on survival and deaths recorded in vital registration to back-calculate HIV incidence. For countries without any representative data on HIV, we produced incidence estimates by pulling information from observed bias in the geographical region. We used a re-coded version of the Spectrum model (a cohort component model that uses rates of disease progression and HIV mortality on and off ART) to produce age-sex-specific incidence, prevalence, and mortality, and treatment coverage results for all countries, and forecast these measures to 2030 using Spectrum with inputs that were extended on the basis of past trends in treatment scale-up and new infections. Global HIV mortality peaked in 2006 with 1·95 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval 1·87-2·04) and has since decreased to 0·95 million deaths (0·91-1·01) in 2017. New cases of HIV globally peaked in 1999 (3·16 million, 2·79-3·67) and since then have gradually decreased to 1·94 million (1·63-2·29) in 2017. These trends, along with ART scale-up, have globally resulted in increased prevalence, with 36·8 million (34·8-39·2) people living with HIV in 2017. Prevalence of HIV was highest in southern sub-Saharan Africa in 2017, and countries in the region had ART coverage ranging from 65·7% in Lesotho to 85·7% in eSwatini. Our forecasts showed that 54 countries will meet the UNAIDS target of 81% ART coverage by 2020 and 12 countries are on track to meet 90% ART coverage by 2030. Forecasted results estimate that few countries will meet the UNAIDS 2020 and 2030 mortality and incidence targets. Despite progress in reducing HIV-related mortality over the past decade, slow decreases in incidence, combined with the current context of stagnated funding for related interventions, mean that many countries are not on track to reach the 2020 and 2030 global targets for reduction in incidence and mortality. With a growing population of people living with HIV, it will continue to be a major threat to public health for years to come. The pace of progress needs to be hastened by continuing to expand access to ART and increasing investments in proven HIV prevention initiatives that can be scaled up to have population-level impact. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Mental Health of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the National Institute on Aging of the NIH.

Since 2000, many countries have achieved considerable success in improving child survival, but localized progress remains unclear. To inform efforts towards United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3.2—to end preventable child deaths by 2030—we need consistently estimated data at the subnational level regarding child mortality rates and trends. Here we quantified, for the period 2000–2017, the subnational variation in mortality rates and number of deaths of neonates, infants and children under 5 years of age within 99 low- and middle-income countries using a geostatistical survival model. We estimated that 32% of children under 5 in these countries lived in districts that had attained rates of 25 or fewer child deaths per 1,000 live births by 2017, and that 58% of child deaths between 2000 and 2017 in these countries could have been averted in the absence of geographical inequality. This study enables the identification of high-mortality clusters, patterns of progress and geographical inequalities to inform appropriate investments and implementations that will help to improve the health of all populations.

Socioeconomic and health inequalities remain a huge problem in post-apartheid South Africa. Despite substantial efforts at ensuring universal access to vaccines, many children remain under-vaccinat...

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer diagnosis, treatment and research in African health systems: a review of current evidence and contextual perspe

Objectives Addressing the barriers to early breast and cervical cancer diagnosis in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) requires a sound understanding and accurate assessment of diagnostic timeliness. This review aimed to map the current evidence on the time to breast and cervical cancer diagnosis and associated factors in LMICs. Design Scoping review. Sources MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, Scopus and CINAHL. Eligibility criteria Studies describing the time to diagnosis and associated factors in the context of breast and cervical cancer in LMICs published from 1 January 2010 to 20 May 2021. Study selection and data synthesis Two reviewers independently screened all abstracts and full texts using predefined inclusion criteria. The review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Evidence was narratively synthesised using predefined themes. Results Twenty-six studies conducted across 24 LMICs were included in the review, most (24/26) of which focused on breast cancer. Studies varied considerably in their conceptualisation and assessment of diagnostic time, events, intervals and delays, with a minority of the studies reporting the use of validated methods and tools. Patient-related intervals and delays were more frequently evaluated and reported than provider-related and health system-related intervals and delays. Across studies, there were variations in the estimated lengths of the appraisal, help-seeking, patient and diagnostic intervals for both cancers and the factors associated with them. Conclusions Despite the significant burden of breast and cervical cancer in LMICs, there is limited information on the timeliness of diagnosis of these cancers. Major limitations included variations in conceptualisation and assessment of diagnostic events and intervals. These underscore the need for the use of validated and standardised tools, to improve accuracy and translation of findings to better inform interventions for addressing diagnostic delays in LMICs.