National cancer plans and primary care a systematic analysis comparing Latin American and non-Latin American countries

Background Cancer is a growing global health issue, particularly in middle- and high-income countries. National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs) have emerged as a strategic response to reduce this burden. Primary care plays a crucial role across the cancer care continuum, yet its systematic inclusion in NCCPs remains unclear—especially in countries facing significant epidemiological challenges. Methods This study employed a systematic qualitative design based on document analysis. Using the READ (Ready material, Extract data, Analyze, Distil) model, we examined the integration of primary care policies and practices in eight NCCPs: four from non-Latin American high-income countries (NLAHIc—Australia, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom) and four from Latin American middle-income countries (LATAMc—Argentina, Colombia, Chile, and Mexico). Covidence software facilitated the systematic text review, and a set of evidence-based key performance indicators (KPIs) was developed to guide the analysis. Results Primary care integration varied across countries. LATAMc NCCPs showed greater inclusion of primary care than NLAHIc. Health promotion strategies were more consistently present in NLAHIc, while LATAMc better integrated primary prevention into primary care. However, only 50 % of KPIs for secondary prevention and 15 % for survivorship care were included in LATAMc. Palliative care was more consistently integrated in LATAMc (75 %) than in NLAHIc (33 %). Policy Summary This is the first study to benchmark NCCPs from Latin American and high-income countries using evidence-based KPIs to assess primary care involvement in cancer control. Findings highlight an urgent need to strengthen primary care integration. LATAMc should improve secondary prevention and survivorship care, while NLAHIc need to better incorporate primary prevention and palliative care into their NCCPs.