Palliative and Supportive Care in the Philippines: Systems, Barriers, and Steps Forward

Although integral to alleviating serious health-related suffering, global palliative care remains systemically and culturally inaccessible to many patients living in low- and middle-income countries. In the Philippines, a lower-middle income country in Southeast Asia of over 110 million people, up to 75% of patients with cancer suffer from inadequate pain relief. We reviewed factors that preclude access to basic palliative care services in the Philippines. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched thoroughly; search terms included but were not limited to "palliative care," "supportive care," "end-of-life care," and "Philippines." We found that a limited palliative care workforce, high out-of-pocket healthcare costs, and low opioid availability all hinder access to palliative care in the archipelago. Religious fatalism, strong family-orientedness, and physician reluctance to refer to palliative care providers represent contributory sociocultural factors. Efforts to improve palliative care accessibility in the country must address health systems barriers while encouraging clinicians to discuss end-of-life options in a timely manner that integrates patients' unique individual, familial, and spiritual values. Research is needed to elucidate how Filipinos-and other global populations-view end-of-life, and how palliative care strategies can be individualised accordingly.

Leveraging national and global political determinants of health to promote equity in cancer care

Health and politics are deeply intertwined. In the context of national and global cancer care delivery, political forces-the political determinants of health-influence every level of the cancer care continuum. We explore the "3-I" framework, which structures the upstream political forces that affect policy choices in the context of actors' interests, ideas, and institutions, to examine how political determinants of health underlie cancer disparities. Borrowing from the work of PA Hall, M-P Pomey, CJ Ho, and other thinkers, interests are the agendas of individuals and groups in power. Ideas represent beliefs or knowledge about what is or what should be. Institutions define the rules of play. We provide examples from around the world: Political interests have helped fuel the establishment of cancer centers in India and have galvanized the 2022 Cancer Moonshot in the United States. The politics of ideas underlie global disparities in cancer clinical trials-that is, in the distribution of epistemic power. Finally, historical institutions have helped perpetuate disparities related to racist and colonialist legacies. Present institutions have also been used to improve access for those in greatest need, as exemplified by the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence in Rwanda. In providing these global examples, we demonstrate how interests, ideas, and institutions influence access to cancer care across the breadth of the cancer continuum. We argue that these forces can be leveraged to promote cancer care equity nationally and globally.

End-of-life care for Filipino patients with cancer

Providing end-of-life care within the cultural context of a Filipino patient in the United States is a complex process for clinicians, patients, and their families. An inclusive approach is crucial, especially because a significant proportion of patients belong to minority groups such as Filipinos, who represent the fourth largest group of immigrants in the United States as of data available in 2019. The case provided in this paper highlights the importance of family, religion, and finances in guiding the best possible way of providing end-of-life care for Filipino patients with cancer. At the end of this review, we discuss concrete action points that may give a non-Filipino physician a deeper understanding of end-of-life care for Filipinos.