Authors’ Response

Sir,

We thank the authors for their Letter to the Editor¹ and for their interest in our article.² We appreciate their constructive engagement and their emphasis on the importance of incorporating patient- and caregiver-derived perspectives in future cancer research priority-setting efforts.

We agree that patient and caregiver experiences are central to understanding the multidimensional burden of cancer, including psychosocial and financial dimensions that extend beyond conventional biomedical outcomes. As highlighted by the authors, these lived experiences provide valuable insights that can enrich the relevance and societal impact of research agendas.

In our published article, we had acknowledged the expert-driven nature of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology as a limitation and explicitly noted the need for future priority-setting exercises to incorporate patient and caregiver perspectives through complementary and structured approaches. The CHNRI framework is designed to generate transparent, systematic consensus among multidisciplinary experts to inform national research policy and funding priorities; however, we recognise that such expert-led models are most effective in terms of enhancing societal impact when complemented by patient-centred methodologies. Future priority-setting initiatives could consider hybrid or parallel approaches that combine CHNRI-based expert scoring with patient- and caregiver-derived inputs to capture lived experiences across the cancer continuum.

We would also like to apprise that cancer patients’ experiences are being examined in parallel through complementary implementation research initiatives by an Indian Council of Medical Research’s National Health Research Priority (NHRP) project. In this project, patient experiences are being explored through the cancer care pathway analysis among screen-positive and diagnosed patients of oral, breast, and cervical cancer. Patients on treatment and cancer survivors are also being engaged in the development of strategies to address poor screening uptake in India. While such studies do not replace patient involvement in research priority-setting, they provide important downstream insights that can inform the refinement of nationally identified research priorities.

While patient- and caregiver-centred approaches can meaningfully inform research priority-setting, decisions regarding their adoption, scope, and integration into national priority-setting frameworks ultimately lie with endorsement by the relevant institutional leadership within India.