Implementation Models and Equity in the Early Integration of Palliative Care into Oncology: A Narrative Review

Background: Randomised evidence shows that early integration of palliative care alongside active oncological treatment improves quality of life and end-of-life care in patients with advanced cancer. Despite guideline endorsement, this model is inconsistently implemented, and its benefits may not be equally distributed across populations. Methods: This is a narrative, critically appraised review rather than a systematic review. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2009 to July 2026 for trials, meta analyses, and guideline statements on early palliative care integration, implementation science, and equity in oncology; search terms and selection criteria are detailed in Section 2. Findings: Five delivery and implementation models are reviewed: early integrated specialist care, stepped needs-triggered care, telehealth enabled delivery, primary/generalist care with task-shifting, and electronic patient-reported-outcome (ePRO)-triggered screening. Pooled analyses across 43 randomised trials show consistent quality-of-life benefit but no significant survival benefit. Two 2024 trials found that stepped care is non-inferior to intensive early integrated care with substantially fewer specialist visits, and that video-delivered care is equivalent to in-person care. Promising, though still early-stage, equity-oriented interventions include community-health-worker models, lay navigation, and culturally tailored decision aids. Disparities in utilisation by race, income, and geography are well documented in high-income settings, and the global burden of serious health-related suffering remains concentrated in low and middle-income countries, where basic access to palliative care — not only specialist referral pathways — is the binding constraint. Conclusions: Scalable delivery models can narrow the efficacy–implementation gap, but efficiency and equity are distinct goals: models that conserve specialist resources require deliberate, tested safeguards to avoid widening disparities rather than closing them.