Background: Selection and sequencing of treatment regimens for individual patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mcrc) is driven by maintaining reasonable quality of life and extending survival, as well as by access to and cost of therapies. The objectives of the present study were to describe, for patients with mcrc, attrition across lines of systemic therapy, patterns of therapy and their timing, and KRAS status. Methods: A retrospective chart review at 6 Canadian academic centres included sequential patients who were diagnosed with mcrc from 1 January 2009 onward and who initiated first-line systemic treatment for mcrc between 1 January and 31 December 2009. Death was included as a competing risk in the analysis. Results: The analysis included 200 patients who started first-line therapy. The proportions of patients who started second-, third-, and fourth-line systemic therapy were 70%, 30%, and 15% respectively. Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab was the most common first-line combination (66%). The most common first-line regimen was folfiri plus bevacizumab. KRAS testing was performed in 103 patients (52%), and 38 of 68 patients (56%, 19% overall) with confirmed KRAS wild-type tumours received an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (egfri), which was more common in later lines. Most KRAS testing occurred after initiation of second-line therapy. Conclusions: In the modern treatment era, a high proportion of patients receive at least two lines of therapy for mcrc, but only 19% receive egfri therapy. Earlier KRAS testing and therapy with an egfri might allow a greater proportion of patients to access all 5 active treatment agents.

PURPOSE: Many countries face a significant shortage of medical oncologists. To mitigate this problem, some countries, including Canada, have established training programs for general practitioners in oncology (GPOs), which train family physicians (FPs) in the fundamentals of cancer care. This type of GPO training model may be useful in other countries facing similar challenges. Therefore, Canadian GPOs were surveyed to learn from their experiences and inform the development of similar programs in other countries. METHODS: A survey was designed and administered to Canadian GPOs to understand the methods and outcomes of GPO training and practice in the Canadian context. The survey was active from July 2021 to April 2022. Participants were recruited through personal and provincial networks and an email list provided by the Canadian GPO network. RESULTS: The survey received 37 responses for an estimated response rate of 18%. Although only 38% of respondents indicated that family medicine training sufficiently prepared them to care for patients with cancer, 90% indicated that GPO training did. Clinics with oncologists were found to be the most effective mode of learning, followed by small group learning and online education. Critical knowledge domains and skills most relevant for GPO training were identified as the treatment of side effects, symptom management, palliative care, and breaking bad news. CONCLUSION: Participants in this survey felt that a dedicated GPO training program offered value beyond family medicine residency in preparing providers to adequately care for patients with cancer. GPO training can be done effectively through virtual and hybrid content delivery. Critical knowledge domains and skills identified as the most important in this survey may be valuable for other groups and nations implementing similar training programs to increase their oncology workforce.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks among the top five incident cancers in Sri Lanka (SL). Here, we describe disease characteristics and treatment patterns of patients with CRC in SL. METHODS: All adult patients (age > 18 years) diagnosed with CRC during 2016-2020 were identified from the National Cancer Institute SL cancer registry. Cancer stage at diagnosis was defined according to the seventh edition of the TNM staging system. Concordance between recommendations for adjuvant therapy and actual rates of delivery was also analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the study cohort and treatment patterns. RESULTS: A total of 1,578 patients were diagnosed with CRC during the study period, 53% (n = 830) with colon cancer and 47% (n = 748) with rectal cancer. Mean age was 61 (range, 18-91) years. Stage distribution was 13%, 28%, 46%, and 12% for stage I, II, III, and IV cancers, respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was delivered to 82% of patients with stage III colon cancer. There was a lack of concordance with delivery of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which was only delivered to 50% of patients with stage III rectal cancer for whom this treatment was indicated. CONCLUSION: Aging population and advanced stage of CRC at diagnosis will continue to challenge the provision of high-quality CRC care in SL. Further quantitative and qualitative research may help better understand the nonconcordance with treatment guidelines. Such information would help ease the burden of advanced-stage CRC in SL.

The healthcare workforce plays a pivotal role in cancer care delivery, leadership, policy, education, and research in complex cancer systems. To ensure quality and relevance, health professionals must have the necessary competencies to deliver patient-centered and efficient care, coupled with the ability to work in teams and manage health resources wisely. This paper aims to review the concept of competency-based medical education (CBME) in the context of oncology to provide insights and guidance for those interested in adopting or adapting competency-based education in training programs. The results of a scoping review of CBME in oncology are presented here to describe the current status of CBME in oncology. The literature describing the implementation and evaluation of CBME in oncology training programs for medical professionals internationally is summarized and key themes identified to provide practical guidance for educators. Further, the paper identifies critical competencies for oncology education and training globally and presents recommendations and opportunities for collaboration in competency-based education and training in oncology. The authors argue for increased global collaboration and networking in the realm of CBME to facilitate the establishment of a competent global cancer care workforce.

PURPOSE: Nepal lacks enough cancer care providers to address the growing burden of cancer in the country. One way of addressing this issue is to train general practitioners (GPs) in oncology (GPOs) so that they can task-share and task-shift oncology care. However, limited information is available regarding the current level of oncology expertise of Nepali GPs and whether they perceive a need for, and have an interest in, such a GPO training program if available in Nepal. METHODS: A survey was distributed to GPs in Nepal to collect data on current oncology training and clinical practice and evaluate levels of interest and need for a GPO training program. The survey was distributed electronically from February to July 2021. RESULTS: The survey obtained 71 individual responses from GPs in Nepal. The majority of respondents were male (87%), and most worked as consultants or senior consultants (63%). Only 6% of respondents had a mandatory oncology rotation during their GP training, and only 15% indicated that their GP training had adequately prepared them to care for patients with cancer. Ninety-six percent of respondents perceived a need for a GPO training program in Nepal, with 94% indicating an interest in enrolling in such a program and 71% indicating that they were very interested. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate an urgent need for and an encouraging interest in establishing a GPO training program in Nepal. These findings will be used to guide the development and implementation of this type of program.