Back

Leapfrogging cancer diagnostics with AI: a mixed-methods assessment of implementation determinants in low- and middle-income countries

Schoenpflug, L. A.; van den Berg, N. J.; Chhut, S. V.; Leung, E. Y. L.; Looi, L.-M.; Lukande, R.; Meja, S. J.; Parra-Medina, R.; Pathak, T. B.; Pyuza, J. J.; Razack, R.; Tawiah, A.; Waithaka, M. W.; Zoroquiain, P.; Barkey Wolf, J.; Jundt, G.; Lafarge, M. W.; Bosse, T.; Koelzer, V. H.; Horeweg, N.

2026-10-20 public and global health
10.64898/2026.10.19.26365881 medRxiv
Show abstract

Introduction Cancer incidence is rising rapidly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where diagnostic pathology capacity is constrained. AI applied to routine histopathology could strengthen diagnostic capacity and offer leapfrogging potential by embedding AI into diagnostic systems as they are built up. However, without empirically identifying implementation determinants in LMIC cancer-diagnostic settings, AI solutions risk being poorly aligned with local constraints, limiting impact or exacerbating existing disparities. Methods We conducted an exploratory mixed-methods pilot study across three phases: 1) a structured survey characterising the diagnostic and technical landscape and AI priorities; 2) focus group discussions (FGDs) to inductively identify implementation determinants and 3) a second survey quantifying FGD-derived themes. Twelve physicians were purposively recruited (10 from LMIC, 2 from high-income countries for reference) and findings integrated through narrative triangulation. Results There was substantial heterogeneity in diagnostic and AI infrastructure that did not track consistently with country income classification. H&E staining was universally available, immunohistochemistry capacity was rudimentary at 7 of 10 sites and molecular testing absent or minimal at 6 of 10 sites. Whole-slide-imaging scanners were available at 8 of 10 sites, while graphical processing units, required for efficient AI inference, were available at only 4 of 10 sites. The participants would prioritise use of AI for cancer screening, cancer diagnosis, and biomarker prediction from H&E slides. Six implementation determinants were identified: AI literacy, governance frameworks, funding, evidence generation, clinical deployment, and collaboration. Financial constraints emerged as the dominant barrier across all determinants, and collaboration as an important enabling mechanism. Conclusion AI implementation readiness in LMIC cancer-diagnostic settings is highly heterogeneous and cannot be inferred from income classification, underscoring the need for institution-level assessment. Realising the leapfrogging potential of AI in this context requires coordinated progress across all determinants, with sustainable financing, and collaboration enabling the remaining determinants.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.