Radiation Oncology Training in the Philippines: Bridging Gaps for Improved Cancer Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Abstract

PURPOSERadiation oncology in the Philippines, a large lower- and middle-income country in Southeast Asia, is facing a critical shortage in manpower, with only 113 radiation oncologists (ROs) over 55 radiotherapy (RT) centers serving 100 million population. Paramount to workforce expansion is ensuring that training programs can produce adequately trained specialists. In this study, we describe the current state of radiation oncology training programs in the Philippines.METHODSThis is a cross-sectional observational analysis of the nine radiation oncology residency training programs in the Philippines. Data were collected from a survey of the program directors, the Philippine Radiation Oncology Society database, and a PubMed literature search.RESULTSEight of the nine programs are in the National Capital Region. Since program standardization in 2005, there have been 82 four-year residency graduates, with up to 18 new graduates annually. Faculty-to-trainee ratio ranges from 0.5 to 2.67. In terms of technology, all programs have intensity-modulated RT and high-dose-rate brachytherapy, but only six are equipped with computed tomography–based image guidance and stereotactic capabilities. Clinical education schemes vary per institution regarding curriculum implementation, resident activities, and methods of evaluation. Required resident case logs are not met for lung, GI, genitourinary, bone and soft tissue, and hematologic malignancies. In total, there are only 22 resident-led publications from 10 unique individuals in two training programs.CONCLUSIONProgram expansions are warranted to meet the projected demand for ROs in the Philippines, but training programs must first improve key aspects of staffing, technology, clinical education, and research. Addressing training challenges related to resource limitations necessitates local and international collaborations with higher-capacity centers to bridge gaps for continued quality improvement with the aim of ultimately delivering better overall cancer care.