Why Ghana's Health Advocacy Must Finally Turn Toward Cancer, Not Away From HIV

For more than three decades, HIV/AIDS has commanded the lion's share of Ghana's health advocacy architecture dedicated commissions, ring-fenced donor funding, national policies revised on a predictable cycle, and a public awareness apparatus built up since the first cases appeared in 1986.

That investment was necessary and it worked: Ghana's adult HIV prevalence fell substantially from its mid-2000s peak. But three decades on, a second epidemic has been allowed to grow in the shadow of the first, with none of the institutional urgency and almost none of the financial protection and it is now bankrupting ordinary Ghanaian families in a way HIV, for all its historical devastation, increasingly does not.

A cost burden HIV advocacy never had to confront at this scale

The comparison is not sentimental; it is financial. A cost-of-illness study at Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital found that Ghanaian households spent an average of nearly a thousand dollars treating breast cancer, the overwhelming share of it direct medical cost rather than incidental expense.

A separate study across Korle-Bu, Komfo Anokye, and a private Accra facility found the gap between public and private treatment costs was itself staggering: patients at public hospitals paid a median of roughly 29,600 cedis, equivalent to about 5,250 dollars, within a single year of active treatment, while those at the private facility studied paid nearly double that.

For context, Ghana's GDP per capita sits nowhere near a level where families can absorb that kind of expenditure without selling assets, borrowing, or abandoning treatment outright and researchers tracking cost-coping strategies elsewhere in the region have documented exactly that pattern, with over a third of patients in comparable studies selling property and half resorting to loans just to continue care.

The insurance gap that HIV mostly closed but cancer has not

Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme, for all its imperfections, has become reasonably comprehensive for HIV-related care. Cancer has received nothing close to the same treatment. Only breast and cervical cancer medicines are eligible for NHIS reimbursement at all, and even that coverage is undermined by routine screening tests such as mammography and pap smears falling outside the benefit package, alongside psychosocial support and rehabilitative care.

A national assessment of coverage gaps found that health providers themselves are often unaware of what NHIS will actually reimburse, creating a system where patients end up paying out-of-pocket for services they may technically have been entitled to claim. For childhood cancers the picture is similarly incomplete: despite roughly 2,500 children diagnosed annually in Ghana, only four childhood cancers were added to the NHIS benefits package as recently as December 2021, and even that expansion has not translated into comprehensive financial protection, with treatment abandonment remaining a documented outcome of the financing gap.

The structural reason for this is not mysterious. Every cancer medicine used in Ghana is imported, which means prices are directly exposed to currency depreciation, import duties, and small-volume purchasing that keeps unit costs high a pricing dynamic that has made access one of the central obstacles researchers have identified across the entire national cancer treatment system, not a problem confined to any one hospital or region.

This is not an argument against HIV funding it is an argument against a frozen 1990s hierarchy of urgency

None of this should be read as a case for defunding Ghana's HIV response, which remains necessary given that new infections have not disappeared and continue to show a troubling uptick among young adults. The argument is narrower and, I think, harder to dispute: Ghana's health advocacy infrastructure was built around the disease burden of the 1990s and early 2000s, and it has not been rebuilt around the disease burden of the 2020s.

Breast and cervical cancer alone account for roughly 30 percent of Ghana's total cancer burden, a proportion that any honest resource-allocation exercise would treat as comparable in scale to the key-population HIV burden that already commands a dedicated national commission, ring-fenced funding lines, and a permanent seat in the national conversation.

Cancer in Ghana has no equivalent institutional weight. There is no Ghana Cancer Commission with the profile of the Ghana AIDS Commission. There is no annual ribbon campaign with the reach of World AIDS Day messaging. There is no comparable donor coordination architecture pushing government toward a fully costed cancer benefit package the way global HIV funding once pushed Ghana toward near-universal antiretroviral access.

A national policy review found that Ghana's cancer control strategy, revised for 2022–2026, sets an ambitious 30 percent improvement target for diagnosis and treatment but explicitly acknowledges that financial barriers and funding gaps stand in the way of realizing it an admission of exactly the resourcing asymmetry this argument is describing.

What advocacy parity would actually require

Elevating cancer to the same tier of national urgency as HIV would mean expanding NHIS reimbursement beyond breast and cervical cancer to the other major cancers driving mortality, closing the screening and diagnostics gap that currently sits outside the benefit package entirely, decentralizing treatment away from the near-total concentration in Accra and Kumasi that forces rural patients into ruinous travel and accommodation costs, and building a domestic manufacturing or bulk-procurement strategy that insulates cancer medicine prices from currency shocks.

None of this requires diminishing HIV's place in Ghana's public health story. It requires acknowledging that a second catastrophic and now well-documented disease burden has been growing for two decades without the institutional infrastructure that would make treatment survivable for an ordinary Ghanaian family rather than financially catastrophic.

Mustapha Bature Sallama.
Medical/ Science Communicator,
Private Investigator, Criminal investigation and Intelligence Analysis.

International Conflict Management and Peace Building.USIP

mustysallama@gmail.com
+233-555-275-880
References
City Cancer Challenge (C/Can), "The hidden costs for breast and cervical cancer patients in Ghana." https://citycancerchallenge.org/the-hidden-costs-for-breast-and-cervical-cancer-patients-in-ghana/

"A comprehensive survey of cancer medicines prices, availability and affordability in Ghana," PLOS One. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0279817

"What influences cancer treatment service access in Ghana? A critical interpretive synthesis," PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9535186/

"Household treatment cost of breast cancer and cost coping strategies from a tertiary facility in Ghana," PLOS Global Public Health. https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pgph.0000268

"An assessment of the direct and indirect costs of breast cancer treatment in leading cancer hospitals in Ghana," PLOS One. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301378

"Achieving universal coverage of childhood cancers in Ghana via the National Health Insurance Scheme: A stakeholder analysis," PLOS Global Public Health. https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0004871

"A critical review and analysis of the context, current burden, and application of policy to improve cancer equity in Ghana," International Journal for Equity in Health. https://equityhealthj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12939-023-02067-2

DocTrePat, "Cancer Treatment Options in Ghana." https://doctrepat.com/blogs/cancer-treatment-options/

   Comments0