Article IX states that:
Recognizing the wide variability in resources and epidemiology throughout the world, the parties agree that individual countries must design national anti-cancer strategies according to local needs, and apply resources where they will have the greatest impact. Some nations might choose, for instance, to fund as a first priority strategies against those cancers that are preventable or curable, including prevention education and specific treatments. Other countries might strengthen immunization efforts as part of an overall cancer control strategy or more aggressively support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy to improve cancer survival outcomes. Each of these variable needs and opportunities have recently been defined by the World Health Organization in its effort to craft a global cancer control strategy.
It is clear that regardless of economic circumstance, a critical assessment of anti-cancer needs, appropriate planning and prioritization can meaningfully curtail the impact of cancer in both developed and developing nations alike.
The parties undertake to actively support the concept of national anti-cancer planning according to local need and resources. They further pledge to challenge all communities engaged in the fight against cancer to ensure such planning sufficiently prioritizes the current and looming cancer crisis – and optimally captures the significant opportunity to reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality.
Have national anti-cancer strategies been implemented to address the cancer crisis?
Programs like the International Cancer Control Partnership (ICCP) have been created to specifically help nations create anti-cancer plans for them to implement to create healthcare strategies based on their resources to combat the cancer burden in their country. Over 120 nations, including France, the United States, Japan, Poland, China, Brazil, Singapore, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Thailand, Mexico, and Austria to name a few, have implemented their own anti-cancer strategies. Additionally, organizations like the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) have created clinical practice guidelines as well as resource-dependent guidelines that are relatively accessible to help develop treatment strategies based on resources available or the cancer being treated.
This has been more successful in developed nations as many studies and databases like the Global Cancer Observatory show that the heaviest burden of cancer in the coming decades will be in less developed nations, which currently do not have the infrastructure or resources to implement fully-fledged anti-cancer strategies.