Cited by 1,112Advances in Oncology and RadiotherapyGlobal Health and SurgeryHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Expanding global access to radiotherapy

Atun, Rifat, Jaffray, David A, Barton, Michael B, Bray, Freddie, Baumann, Michael, Vikram, Bhadrasain, Hanna, Timothy P, Knaul, Felicia M +10 more·2015·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

Radiotherapy is a critical and inseparable component of comprehensive cancer treatment and care. For many of the most common cancers in low-income and middle-income countries, radiotherapy is essential for effective treatment. In high-income countries, radiotherapy is used in more than half of all cases of cancer to cure localised disease, palliate symptoms, and control disease in incurable cancers. Yet, in planning and building treatment capacity for cancer, radiotherapy is frequently the last resource to be considered. Consequently, worldwide access to radiotherapy is unacceptably low. We present a new body of evidence that quantifies the worldwide coverage of radiotherapy services by country. We show the shortfall in access to radiotherapy by country and globally for 2015-35 based on current and projected need, and show substantial health and economic benefits to investing in radiotherapy. The cost of scaling up radiotherapy in the nominal model in 2015-35 is US$26·6 billion in low-income countries, $62·6 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $94·8 billion in upper-middle-income countries, which amounts to $184·0 billion across all low-income and middle-income countries. In the efficiency model the costs were lower: $14·1 billion in low-income, $33·3 billion in lower-middle-income, and $49·4 billion in upper-middle-income countries-a total of $96·8 billion. Scale-up of radiotherapy capacity in 2015-35 from current levels could lead to saving of 26·9 million life-years in low-income and middle-income countries over the lifetime of the patients who received treatment. The economic benefits of investment in radiotherapy are very substantial. Using the nominal cost model could produce a net benefit of $278·1 billion in 2015-35 ($265·2 million in low-income countries, $38·5 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $239·3 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Investment in the efficiency model would produce in the same period an even greater total benefit of $365·4 billion ($12·8 billion in low-income countries, $67·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $284·7 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns, by the human-capital approach, are projected to be less with the nominal cost model, amounting to $16·9 billion in 2015-35 (-$14·9 billion in low-income countries; -$18·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $50·5 billion in upper-middle-income countries). The returns with the efficiency model were projected to be greater, however, amounting to $104·2 billion (-$2·4 billion in low-income countries, $10·7 billion in lower-middle-income countries, and $95·9 billion in upper-middle-income countries). Our results provide compelling evidence that investment in radiotherapy not only enables treatment of large numbers of cancer cases to save lives, but also brings positive economic benefits.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00222-3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 135 · Cited by 1,112

Authors
Atun, R., Jaffray, D. A., Barton, M. B., Bray, F., Baumann, M., Vikram, B., Hanna, T. P., Knaul, F. M., Lievens, Y., Lui, T. Y. M., Milosevic, M., O'Sullivan, B., Rodin, D. L., Rosenblatt, E., Van Dyk, J., Yap, M. L., Zubizarreta, E., & Gospodarowicz, M.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Centre international de recherche sur le cancer (FR)
  • University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Queen's University (CA)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • International Atomic Energy Agency (AT)
Corresponding author
Atun, Rifat
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
16
Issue
10
Pages
1153-1186
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164437838
Cited by
1,112
References
135
Citations by year
2026: 104 · 2025: 142 · 2024: 135 · 2023: 122 · 2022: 122 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 86 · 2018: 71 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 11
FWCI
10.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
World Health Organization
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Health and Surgery
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
radiotherapy access, low- and middle-income countries, life-years saved, human capital approach
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Developing Countries, Diffusion of Innovation, Forecasting, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, National Health Programs, Neoplasms, Radiotherapy, Socioeconomic Factors, Time Factors, Global Health, Treatment Outcome, Health Care Costs, Models, Economic, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review