Patient-reported benefit from proposed interventions to reduce financial toxicity during cancer treatment

Research on the issue of financial toxicity in cancer: A systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

This review aims to investigate Financial Toxicity (FT) among cancer patients across several different healthcare systems. It identifies factors that contribute to FT and proposes policies to mitigate its effects on cancer patients.

METHODS

Articles published between January 1st 2017 and March 31st 2022, describing Financial Toxicity experienced by cancer patients, were identified using PubMed, Scopus, Springer, and Science Direct databases. Papers written in English language, quantitative papers describing studies conducted in countries with public and mixed healthcare systems were considered eligible.

RESULTS

Based on 7917 records screened, 61 publications met our inclusion criteria. According to our findings, the referred prevalence of financial toxicity among cancer patients was up to 54 % in the United States, 44.7 % in high-income nations with public healthcare systems, and 80.4 % in low-income nations. Worse financial toxicity is linked to age under 65 years, low income, insurance status, high monthly out-of-pocket expenses, and cancer-related factors.

CONCLUSION

Financial toxicity is a widespread issue among cancer patients, and it is influenced by both socioeconomic and cancer-related factors, even in different countries and healthcare systems.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Patients who suffer from cancer often face very serious financial problems. The source of these problems is the increased cost of both the treatments and the drugs that they have to take for long periods and often for their entire lives, so there is a risk that patients do not have the necessary income to cover these costs, leading to patients' developing coping mechanisms such as not fully adhering doctors' instructions for treatment or even forgoing treatment, hence, putting their lives in immediate danger. This phenomenon is called financial toxicity. The cost of treatments as well as the financial burden borne by patients is not the same for everyone and depends both on the coverage of these expenses provided by each country's health system and on the personal characteristics of each patient such as age, amount of income, the existence or not of insurance coverage, daily out-of-pocket expenses as well as characteristics of the cancer such as the stage, type and metastatic disease. To improve the situation, it will be necessary to implement coordinated efforts between patients, providers, health systems, payers, and policy makers at multiple levels. For example, to tackle financial toxicity among cancer patients, tools could be implemented to identify those most vulnerable, considering factors like income, insurance coverage, and treatment costs. Hospitals could also establish financial counseling structures to help patients make the best treatment decisions based on to their financial status.

Cancer survivor preferences on the timing and content of interventions to mitigate financial toxicity associated with cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Despite growing research on financial toxicity among cancer survivors, large gaps remain in understanding how to intervene to minimize financial toxicity. Uptake and efficacy of interventions mitigating cancer financial toxicity, though promising, remain limited and inconsistent. To date, survivor preferences for financial toxicity interventions are underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate survivor preferences for timing and content of a survivor-facing intervention to address financial toxicity.

METHODS

Adult survivors (N = 105) of colorectal cancer (N = 55) or Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (N = 50) from three tertiary care centers self-reported demographic and clinical characteristics, comorbidities, mental health, financial impact of cancer (Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity scale), and preferences for intervention timing and content. Chi-square tests examined associations between intervention timing and content preferences with financial toxicity score. ANOVAs and correlation analyses described associations between the number of intervention components survivors endorsed and survivors' characteristics.

RESULTS

Regarding intervention timing, 79% of survivors favored intervention before treatment. The most frequently endorsed content was understanding out-of-pocket costs and insurance (48.6%) and applying for aid (39%). Survivors experiencing higher financial toxicity reported greater interest in all intervention components. Survivors with colorectal cancer (p = .018), < 65 years (p = .019), higher financial toxicity (p < .001), greater life-altering (p < .001) and care-altering (p = .014) coping behaviors, and poorer mental health (p = .008) endorsed more intervention components.

CONCLUSIONS

Actionable insights to improve financial toxicity interventions may be to offer assistance earlier than currently provided (i.e. before treatment) and to include certain topics currently rarely offered (e.g., stress management, budget development support) in line with survivors' preferences.

Financial Toxicity Among Women with Breast Cancer Varies by Age and Race

INTRODUCTION

Financial toxicity negatively affects clinical outcomes in breast cancer. Underrepresented demographics may be at higher risk for financial toxicity. We characterized disparities on the basis of age and other factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Surveys completed by women with stage 0-IV breast cancer treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 06/2022 and 05/2023 were analyzed. The comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST) scale was used to assess financial toxicity. Descriptive statistics were calculated for differences in financial toxicity/related factors, and outcomes by age and race. Associations between variables of interest and COST scores were analyzed using linear regression.

RESULTS

Of 8512 respondents (75% white, 9.3% Asian, 8.4% Black), most (68%) had clinical stage 0/I disease. Stratified by age, young Black women had higher financial toxicity than young white or Asian women (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, women age < 45 years experienced higher financial toxicity than older women (coefficient - 2.0, 95% CI - 2.8 to - 1.1, p < 0.001). Compared with white women, financial toxicity was greater among Black (coefficient - 6.8, 95% CI - 7.8 to - 5.8) and Asian women (coefficient - 3.5, 95% CI - 4.4 to - 2.5). Cost-related medication non-adherence was more frequent among Black and Asian women (p < 0.001). Asian women more often paid for treatment with savings than white and Black women (p < 0.001). Young women reported using savings for treatment-related costs more than older (45% vs. 32%); p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Racial minorities and young patients are disproportionately affected by financial toxicity. Further studies are planned to determine how financial toxicity evolves over time and whether referral to financial services effectively reduces toxicity.

Validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of the Indonesian version of FACIT-COST measure for subjective financial toxicity

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity describes the impairment of financial wellbeing in patients due to the burden of cancer diagnosis and care. The COST: A Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Measure of Financial Toxicity (FACIT-COST) is the most widely used cancer-specific measure of subjective financial toxicity, having been validated in multiple languages, but not in Indonesian. This study aimed to validate the Indonesian version of FACIT-COST in a breast cancer sample.

METHODS

A single-center prospective cohort study was performed in Indonesia. Female breast cancer patients aged ≥ 18 undergoing treatment at baseline were invited to participate and followed for up to six months. The survey included the official Indonesian version of FACIT-COST (v2) which was administered to the patients by interviewers. Clinical information (e.g., metastasis status, disease duration) was provided based on medical records. The following measurement properties of FACIT-COST were tested: distributional characteristics, structural validity (principal component [PCA] and confirmatory factor analyses [CFA]), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega), known-groups validity (Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis H test), test-retest reliability, and responsiveness to change.

RESULTS

Overall, 300 female patients participated at baseline. No patients reported the best or worst possible FACIT-COST total scores. The PCA proposed a two-factor model structure for the instrument, which was confirmed by the CFA (RMSEA = 0.042, SRMR = 0.049, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.99). The internal consistency reliability of the two factors was considered adequate (Cronbach's alpha = 0.774-0.882, McDonald's omega = 0.786-0.888). The FACIT-COST total score significantly discriminated across the following known-groups: age, education, residential setting, income, employment, metastasis status, number of symptoms, and financial coping strategies. The FACIT-COST demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96) and satisfactory responsiveness to change (standardized response mean and effect size ranges=|0.39| to |0.92|).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to validate the FACIT-COST in patients with breast cancer and to present the measurement properties of the Indonesian version of FACIT-COST. The Indonesian FACIT-COST demonstrates acceptable psychometric performance and shows potential as a valid measure of subjective financial toxicity. The instrument may serve as a valuable tool for informing health policies that focus on providing resource support to improve cancer care in Indonesia.

Screening for Health-Related Social Needs and Financial Toxicity Among Patients With Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy: Findings From a Quality Improvement Project

INTRODUCTION

Financial toxicity is common among patients with cancer, as are co-occurring health-related social risks (HRSRs). There is limited evidence to support best practices in screening for HRSRs and financial toxicity in the cancer context. This analysis sought to understand variations of identified needs based on treatment course using data from a large screening program.

METHODS

This 2022 to 2023 screening quality improvement program included four services (breast, gastrointestinal, gynecologic, thoracic) at an urban comprehensive cancer center. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity measured financial toxicity. Patients completed an HRSR checklist documenting food, housing, medication, or transportation insecurity and financial borrowing practices. Differences were evaluated by treatment course (radiation therapy [RT] versus other treatment and RT plus chemotherapy versus other treatment).

RESULTS

Screening surveys were sent to 70,983 unique patients; 38,249 completed a screening survey (54% response rate). Of responders, 4% (n = 1,686) underwent RT in the 120 days before their survey, and 3% (n = 1,033) received RT in combination with chemotherapy. Overall, patients receiving RT had lower unadjusted Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity scores, indicating worse financial toxicity. The proportion of patients receiving RT reporting unmet transportation (15% versus 12%, P < .001) and food (13% versus 11%, P = .02) needs was significantly higher than for patients not receiving RT. More patients receiving RT borrowed money than did patients not receiving RT (17% versus 15%, P = .02). In multivariable models, RT (alone or in combination) was associated with worse financial toxicity and transportation difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for financial toxicity and HRSR is possible at a large cancer center. Patients receiving RT have higher transportation insecurity and worse financial toxicity compared with those receiving other treatments. Tailored intervention throughout the treatment trajectory is essential.

Screening for Financial Toxicity Among Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Despite the pervasiveness and adverse impacts of financial toxicity (FT) in cancer care, there are no definitive measures for FT screening that have been widely integrated into clinical practice. The aim of this review is to evaluate current methods of assessing FT among patients with cancer and confirm factors associated with higher risk of FT.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We included peer-reviewed studies that cross-sectionally, longitudinally, or prospectively measured the self-reported financial impact of patients undergoing cancer care in the United States.

RESULTS

Out of 1,085 identified studies, 51 met final inclusion criteria. Outcomes evaluated included FT measures or tools, time and setting of screening, FT prevalence, and sociodemographic or clinical patient-level associated factors. Our findings demonstrate that there is wide variability in FT screening practices including in the timing (diagnosis versus treatment versus survivorship), setting (clinic-based, online, telephone or mail), tools used (21 unique tools, 7 previously validated), and interpretations of screening results (varying FT score cutoffs defining high versus low FT). Younger age, lower income, lower education, non-White race, employment status change, advanced cancer stage, and systemic or radiation therapy were among factors associated with worse FT across the studies.

DISCUSSION

FT screening remains heterogenous within the United States. With the ever-escalating cost of cancer care, and the strong association between FT and poor patient outcomes, universal and routine FT screening is imperative in cancer care. Further research and multifaceted interventions identifying best practices for FT screening are needed.

Financial-legal navigation reduces financial toxicity of pediatric, adolescent, and young adult cancers

BACKGROUND

Pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients with cancer and their caregivers are at high risk of financial toxicity, and few evidence-based oncology financial and legal navigation programs exist to address it. We tested the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance, a novel interdisciplinary financial and legal navigation intervention for pediatric, adolescent and young adult patients and their caregivers.

METHODS

We used a single-arm feasibility and acceptability trial design in a pediatric hematology and oncology clinic and collected preintervention and postintervention surveys to assess changes in financial toxicity (3 domains: psychological response/Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST], material conditions, and coping behaviors); health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical and Mental Health, Anxiety, Depression, and Parent Proxy scales); and perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness.

RESULTS

In total, 45 participants received financial navigation, 6 received legal navigation, and 10 received both. Among 15 adult patients, significant improvements in FACIT-COST (P = .041) and physical health (P = .036) were noted. Among 46 caregivers, significant improvements were noted for FACIT-COST (P < .001), the total financial toxicity score (P = .001), and the parent proxy global health score (P = .0037). We were able to secure roughly $335 323 in financial benefits for 48 participants. The intervention was rated highly for feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness.

CONCLUSIONS

Integrating financial and legal navigation through Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance was feasible and acceptable and underscores the benefit of a multidisciplinary approach to addressing financial toxicity.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION

NCT05876325.

Logistic burdens of cancer care: A qualitative study

Cancer treatment often creates logistic conflicts with everyday life priorities; however, these challenges and how they are subjectively experienced have been largely unaddressed in cancer care. Our goal was to describe time and logistic requirements of cancer care and whether and how they interfered with daily life and well-being. We conducted interviews with 20 adults receiving cancer-directed treatment at a single academic cancer center. We focused on participants' perception of the time, effort, and energy-intensiveness of cancer care activities, organization of care requirements, and preferences in how to manage the logistic burdens of their cancer care. Participant interview transcripts were analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach. Burdens related to travel, appointment schedules, healthcare system navigation, and consequences for relationships had roots both at the system-level (e.g. labs that were chronically delayed, protocol-centered rather than patient-centered bureaucratic requirements) and in individual circumstances (e.g. greater stressors among those working and/or have young children versus those who are retired) that determined subjective burdensomeness, which was highest among patients who experienced multiple sources of burdens simultaneously. Our study illustrates how objective burdens of cancer care translate into subjective burden depending on patient circumstances, emphasizing that to study burdens of care, an exclusive focus on objective measures does not capture the complexity of these issues. The complex interplay between healthcare system factors and individual circumstances points to clinical opportunities, for example helping patients to find ways to meet work and childcare requirements while receiving care.

Out-of-Pocket Costs and Payments in Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Nationwide Analysis

BACKGROUND

Many factors influence a patient's decision to undergo autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction, including medical, social, and financial considerations. This study aims to investigate differences in out-of-pocket and total spending for patients undergoing autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODS

The IBM MarketScan Commercial Databases were queried to extract all patients who underwent inpatient autologous or implant-based breast reconstruction from 2017 to 2021. Financial variables included gross payments to the provider (facility and/or physician) and out-of-pocket costs (total of coinsurance, deductible, and copayments). Univariate regressions assessed differences between autologous and implant-based reconstruction procedures. Mixed-effects linear regression was used to analyze parametric contributions to total gross and out-of-pocket costs.

RESULTS

The sample identified 2079 autologous breast reconstruction and 1475 implant-based breast reconstruction episodes. Median out-of-pocket costs were significantly higher for autologous reconstruction than implant-based reconstruction ($597 vs $250, P < 0.001) as were total payments ($63,667 vs $31,472, P < 0.001). Type of insurance plan and region contributed to variable out-of-pocket costs (P < 0.001). Regression analysis revealed that autologous reconstruction contributes significantly to increasing out-of-pocket costs (B = $597, P = 0.025) and increasing total costs (B = $74,507, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The US national data demonstrate that autologous breast reconstruction has higher out-of-pocket costs and higher gross payments than implant-based reconstruction. More study is needed to determine the extent to which these financial differences affect patient decision-making.

High Financial Hardship among Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer is considered the most fatal and costly gynecologic cancer. Although personalized therapies have improved ovarian cancer prognosis, they have resulted in increased financial toxicity concerns among this population. This study evaluated financial toxicity in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Using secondary data from a study of barriers to palliative care, financial toxicity (FT) was measured through the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity scale. Univariate and bivariate analyses were used to assess the relationship between selected demographic (i.e., age, race, ethnicity, education, place of birth, insurance type, yearly household income, employment status) and treatment-specific variables (i.e., years since diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, hormonal and targeted therapy) with clinically relevant financial toxicity. Characteristics were compared using Fisher's exact or chi squared tests. A total of 38 participants with advanced ovarian cancer were included in this study; 24% (n = 9) reported clinically significant FT. Income (p = .001), place of birth (p = .048) and employment status (p = .001) were related to FT. Study findings highlight that advanced ovarian cancer patients experience high FT, particularly those with low income, who are not able to work and were born outside the US. Further research using larger datasets and more representative samples is needed to inform intervention development and implementation.

Financial Toxicity in Radiation Oncology: Impact for Our Patients and for Practicing Radiation Oncologists

With rising costs of diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship, financial burdens on patients with cancer and negative effects from high costs, called financial toxicity (FT), are growing. Research suggests that FT may be experienced by more than half of working-age cancer survivors and a similar proportion may incur debt or avoid recommended prescription medications due to treatment costs. As FT can lead to worse physical, psychological, financial, and survival outcomes, there is a discrete need to identify research gaps around this issue that constrain the development and implementation of effective screening and innovative care delivery interventions. Prior research, including within a radiation oncology-specific context, has sought to identify the scope of FT among patients with cancer, develop assessment tools to evaluate patient risk, quantify financial sacrifices, and qualify care compromises that occur when cancer care is unaffordable. FT is a multifactorial problem and potential solutions should be pursued at all levels of the health care system (patient-provider, institutional, and systemic) with specific regard for patients' individual/local contexts. Solutions may include selecting alternative treatment schedules, discussing financial concerns with patients, providing financial navigation services, low-cost transportation options, and system-wide health policy shifts. This review summarizes existing FT research, describes tools developed to measure FT, and suggests areas for intervention and study to help improve FT and outcomes for radiation oncology patients.

Physician Perspectives on the Nonclinical Factors That Contribute to Decision-Making for Advanced Prostate Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study

Introduction

Promising new treatments exist for advanced prostate cancer. Decision-making is complicated: there is minimal comparative effectiveness data; differing routes of administration, drug mechanisms-of-action and side effects; and significant price differences. These challenges contribute to variations in care and quality, treatment disparities, and lack of concordance with patient values. The aim of this study was to examine physician perspectives of factors influencing decision-making for first-line advanced prostate cancer treatments.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative descriptive study of physicians who treat patients with advanced prostate cancer from 09/2021-06/2022. Participants were purposively sampled from across the United States.

Results

Twenty-seven physicians participated. We identified seventeen domains and three overarching themes affecting physician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer care. The themes were: 1) physician and practice factors impact prescribing decisions, 2) health practice resource availability affects the likelihood patients will receive the recommended treatment, and that the treatment will be in-line with patients' values and 3) patient non-clinical factors influence physician decision-making, but patient values could be better incorporated into prescribing decisions. Based upon the analyses, we constructed a preliminary framework of clinician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer.

Conclusions

Physicians perceive non-clinical patient, physician, and practice factors impact decision-making. These factors, therefore, must be considered when implementing programs to optimize a physician's ability to provide quality cancer care, reduce health care disparities and patient financial burden and provide patient goal-concordant care. The preliminary theoretical model of clinician decision-making for advanced prostate cancer care may also be used to inform these efforts.

A point-of-care pilot randomized intervention to connect patients with cancer-induced financial toxicity to telehealth financial counseling

PURPOSE

Elevated costs of cancer treatment can result in economic and psychological "financial toxicity" distress. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of a point-of-care intervention to connect adult patients with cancer-induced financial toxicity to telehealth-delivered financial counseling.

METHODS

We conducted a three-armed parallel randomized pilot study, allocating newly referred patients with cancer and financial toxicity to individual, group accredited telehealth financial counseling, or usual care with educational material (1:1:1). We assessed the feasibility of recruitment, randomization, retention, baseline and post-intervention COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST), and Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) scores.

RESULTS

Of 382 patients screened, 121 were eligible and enrolled. 58 (48%) completed the intervention (9 individual, 9 group counseling, 40 educational booklet). 29 completed follow-up surveys: 45% female, 17% African American, 79% white, 7% Hispanic, 55% 45-64 years old, 31% over 64, 34% lived in rural areas, 24% had cancer stage I, 21% II, 7% III, 31% IV. Baseline characteristics were balanced across arms, retention status, surveys completion. Mean (SD) COST was 12.4 (6.1) at baseline and 16.0 (8.4) post-intervention. Mean (SD) COST score differences were 6.3 (11.6) after individual counseling, 5.8 (8.5) after group counseling, and 2.5 (6.4) after usual care. Mean TUQ score among nine counseling participants was 5.5 (0.9) over 7.0. Non-parametric comparisons were not statistically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment and randomization were feasible, while study retention presented challenges. Nine participants reported good usability and satisfaction with telehealth counseling. Larger-scale trials focused on improving participation, retention, and impact of financial counseling among patients with cancer are justified.

Experiences of financial toxicity among caregivers of cancer patients: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of financial toxicity among caregivers of cancer patients and to provide recommendations for subsequent intervention strategies.

METHODS

Computer searches of PubMed, EmBase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL (EBSCO), CNKI, Wanfang database, and SinoMed for qualitative studies experience of financial toxicity among caregivers cancer patients. The search time frame was from the establishment of the database to May 2023. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Qualitative Research Checklist from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewer's Manual. The meta-synthesis was integrated following the meta-aggregation method proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and reported following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies were included, distilling 25 qualitative findings into nine new categories and synthesizing three synthesized findings: caregivers have strong negative experiences that affect their family relationships, daily work and life; caregivers use different strategies to cope with financial toxicity; needs and expectations of caregivers coping with financial toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial toxicity among caregivers of cancer patients affects their daily lives. Receiving timely recognition of this financial burden and providing assistance to enhance their coping skills are crucial in mitigating its impact. Healthcare professionals should focus on the financial toxicity experienced by caregivers of people with cancer, address their supportive needs, and develop a comprehensive support system to improve caregivers' coping abilities and quality of life.

Disparities in outcomes and access to therapy options in hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) disproportionately impacts racial and ethnic minorities and patients with lower socioeconomic status. These social determinants of health (SDH) lead to disparities in access to care and outcomes. We aim to understand the relationship between SDH and survival and locoregional treatment options in HCC.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, we evaluated survival and access locoregional treatments including non-transplant surgery, liver transplant (LT), and liver-directed radiation therapy (LDRT) in patients with HCC diagnosed between 2004 and 2017. Variables including clinical stage, age, sex, race, income, rurality, year of diagnosis, facility type (FT), Charlson-Deyo score (CD), and insurance were evaluated. Cox proportional hazards multivariable regression and dominance analyses were used for analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 140 340 patients were included. Worse survival was seen with advanced stage, older age, Black race, rurality, public insurance, treatment at a nonacademic center, and lower income. The top predictors for survival included stage, age, and income. Completion of non-transplant surgery was best predicted by stage, FT, and insurance type, whereas LT was predicted by age, year of diagnosis, and CD score. LDRT utilization was most associated with year of diagnosis, FT, and CD score.

CONCLUSION

For patients with HCC, survival was predicted primarily by stage, age, and income. The primary sociodemographic factors associated with access to surgical treatments, in addition to FT, were insurance and income, highlighting the financial burdens of health care. Work is needed to address disparities in access to care, including improved insurance access, addressing financial inequities and financial toxicities of treatments, and equalizing care opportunities in community centers.

Assessment of the prevalence and related factors of financial toxicity in cancer patients based on the COST scale: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The high cost of cancer treatment exposes patients to financial toxicity during treatment; however, no study has comprehensively analyzed the incidence of financial toxicity using a validated assessment tool. In this study, the objective was to ascertain the incidence of financial toxicity in cancer patients and the factors influencing it.

METHODS

Nine electronic databases were retrieved to collect cross-sectional studies reporting financial toxicity in cancer patients. A random effects meta-analysis was applied to yield the overall prevalence of financial toxicity. Subgroup analyses were conducted depending on the factors affecting financial toxicity.

RESULTS

In total, 30 studies met our inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of financial toxicity in cancer patients was 48% (95%CI:38%-58%, I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, a higher prevalence of financial toxicity in patients aged <67 years (47%, 95%CI: 28%-66%, I2 = 97.5%, p < 0.001), female (46%, 95%CI:39%-53%, I2 = 94.9%,p < 0.001), lung cancer(57%, 95%CI:38%-75%, I2 = 96.9%, p < 0.001), developing countries (64%, 95%CI:55%-72%, I2 = 98.1%, p < 0.001), time of investigation following COVID-19 (53%, 95%CI:37%-69%, I2 = 99.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Financial toxicity is prevalent in cancer patients and is increasingly evident after COVID-19. Furthermore, the odds of financial toxicity are higher in patients who are female, younger, whose cancer type is lung cancer, and from developing countries. These findings emphasize the significance of evaluating financial toxicity in cancer patients after COVID-19, especially in developing countries. This may play a pivotal role in helping patients cope with financial toxicity.

Describing financial toxicity among cancer patients in different income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is limited evidence of financial toxicity (FT) among cancer patients from countries of various income levels. Hence, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of objective and subjective FT and their measurements in relation to cancer treatment.

Methods

PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies that examined FT. There was no limit on the design or setting of the study. Random-effects meta-analysis was utilized to obtain the pooled prevalence of objective FT.

Results

Out of 244 identified studies during the initial screening, only 64 studies were included in this review. The catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) method was often used in the included studies to determine the objective FT. The pooled prevalence of CHE was 47% (95% CI: 24.0-70.0) in middle- and high-income countries, and the highest percentage was noted in low-income countries (74.4%). A total of 30 studies focused on subjective FT, of which 9 used the Comprehensive Score for FT (COST) tool and reported median scores ranging between 17.0 and 31.9.

Conclusion

This study shows that cancer patients from various income-group countries experienced a significant financial burden during their treatment. It is imperative to conduct further studies on interventions and policies that can lower FT caused by cancer treatment.

Health insurance as a moderator in the relationship between financial toxicity and medical cost-coping behaviors: Evidence from patients with lung cancer in China

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the relationship between financial toxicity and medical cost-coping behaviors (MCCB) in Chinese patients with lung cancer, with a particular focus on the moderating role of health insurance.

METHODS

We surveyed 218 patients with lung cancer and assessed their Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) and self-reported MCCB. Patients were categorized into Urban Employee's Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI) group and Urban-Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance Scheme (URRBMI) groups by their medical insurance, and matched for socioeconomic, demographic, and disease characteristics via propensity score.

RESULTS

Significant different characteristics were noted between UEBMI patients and URRBMI patients. Patients with UEBMI had higher COST scores but lower levels of MCCB compared to URRBMI patients in the original dataset. After data matching, multivariate logit regression analysis showed that better financial toxicity was associated with lower levels of MCCB (OR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Health insurance type did not have a direct association with cost-coping behaviors, but an interaction was observed between health insurance type and financial toxicity. Among patients with URRBMI, better financial toxicity was associated with lower levels of cost-coping behaviors (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.83-0.95). Patients with UEBMI had a lower probability of engaging in any cost-coping behaviors in situations of worse financial toxicity compared to patients with URRBMI.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that financial toxicity is correlated with MCCB in Chinese patients with lung cancer. The type of health insurance, specifically UEBMI and URRBMI, plays a moderating role in this relationship. Understanding these dynamics is essential for developing targeted interventions and policies to mitigate financial toxicity and improve patients' management of medical costs.

The long-term financial experiences of adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related financial hardship can negatively impact financial well-being and may prevent adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (ages 15-39) from gaining financial independence. This analysis explored the financial experiences following diagnosis with cancer among AYA survivors.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, anonymous survey of a national sample of AYAs recruited online. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) and InCharge Financial Distress/Financial Well-Being Scale (IFDFW) assessed financial hardship (cancer-related and general, respectively), and respondents reported related financial consequences and financial coping behaviors (both medical and non-medical).

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-seven AYA survivors completed the survey (mean 8.3 years from diagnosis). Financial hardship was high: mean COST score was 13.7 (moderate-to-severe financial toxicity); mean IFDFW score was 4.3 (high financial stress). Financial consequences included post-cancer credit score decrease (44%), debt collection contact (39%), spending more than 10% of income on medical expenses (39%), and lacking money for basic necessities (23%). Financial coping behaviors included taking money from savings (55%), taking on credit card debt (45%), putting off major purchases (45%), and borrowing money (42%). In logistic regression models, general financial distress was associated with increased odds of experiencing financial consequences and engaging in both medical- and non-medical-related financial coping behaviors.

DISCUSSION

AYA survivors face long-term financial hardship after cancer treatment, which impacts multiple domains, including their use of healthcare and their personal finances. Interventions are needed to provide AYAs with tools to navigate financial aspects of the healthcare system; connect them with resources; and create systems-level solutions to address healthcare affordability.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Survivorship care providers, particularly those who interact with AYA survivors, must be attuned to the unique risk for financial hardships facing this population and make efforts to increase access available interventions.

Cervical cancer treatment update: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology clinical practice statement

Cervical cancer is the most commonly diagnosed gynecologic cancer worldwide. Although the incidence has declined with increased screening and higher uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in high-income countries, this disease remains the second highest cause of cancer mortality among women in low- and middle-income countries. In this clinical practice statement, we describe therapies for cervical cancer by treatment setting, as well as quality of life, financial toxicity, and disparities associated with this disease. In addition to chemotherapy and radiation, therapeutic strategies for cervical cancer include immune checkpoint blockade, antiangiogenics, and antibody-drug conjugates. Optimal treatment for recurrent cervical cancer remains an area of unmet need, necessitating further exploration of rational and innovative treatment approaches, including cell and immune-based therapies. Importantly, development of effective therapies for cervical cancer must incorporate strategies to ensure universal equitable access to HPV vaccination, screening, and treatment. Important consequences of the disease and treatment that impact quality of life must also be addressed. Patients with cervical cancer are at increased risk for financial toxicity, which can lead to downstream detrimental effects on physical, financial, and career outcomes. Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in gynecologic oncology clinical trials highlights the urgent need for collaborative and focused initiatives to bridge the significant divide and alleviate inequalities in the prevention and treatment of cervical cancer.

Administrative Burden Associated with Cost-Related Delays in Care in U.S. Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

U.S. cancer patients engage in administrative tasks to pay for their healthcare. This study investigated the relationship between payment tasks and timely access to cancer care.

METHODS

We analyzed online survey data from 510 U.S. cancer patients and survivors to understand the relationship between administrative payment tasks and cost-related delays and nonadherence. Two-part modelling was used to determine if, and to what extent, there was a relationship between administrative burden and cost-related delays/nonadherence.

RESULTS

Younger patients (≤44 years) reported more payment tasks and cost-related delays/nonadherence than older patients (≥ 55 years); African American patients reported more payment tasks and cost-related delays/nonadherence than white patients. After accounting for age, race/ethnicity, education, and out-of-pocket costs, patients who reported engaging in more tasks had greater log odds of delaying/forgoing care [b = 0.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12-0.24]. Cost-related delays/nonadherence increased by 32% for every unit increase in administrative payment burden (b = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Administrative payment burden increased the odds of cost-related delays and nonadherence by 49%, taking the form of delayed or skipped doctor appointments, tests and bloodwork, and prescription fulfillment. Younger patients and those identifying as African American were more likely to engage in payment tasks and to delay or forgo care due to cost. Administrative burdens can disrupt access to care and traditionally underserved patient populations are disproportionately exposed to these hardships.

IMPACT

Reducing the complexity of healthcare through universal, human-centered design could reduce burdens and increase access.

Patient perceptions of copay card utilization and policies

BACKGROUND

Copay cards are intended to mitigate patient out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses. This qualitative, exploratory focus group study aimed to capture patient perceptions of copay cards and copay adjustment programs (CAPs; insurers' accumulator and maximizer policies), which redirect the copay card utilization benefits intended for patients' OOP expenses.

METHODS

Patients with chronic conditions were recruited through Janssen's Patient Engagement Research Council program. They completed a survey and attended a live virtual session to provide feedback on copay cards.

RESULTS

Among 33 participants (median age, 49 years [range, 24-78]), the most frequent conditions were cardiovascular-metabolic disease and inflammatory bowel disease. Patients associated copay cards with lessening financial burden, improving general and mental health, and enabling medication adherence. An impact on medication adherence was identified by 10 (63%) White and nine (100%) Black respondents. Some patients were unaware of CAPs despite having encountered them; they recommended greater copay card education and transparency about CAPs.

CONCLUSION

Patients relied on copay cards to help afford their prescribed medication OOP expenses and maintain medication adherence. Use of CAPs may increase patient OOP expenses. Patients would benefit from awareness programs and industry - healthcare provider partnerships that facilitate and ensure access to copay cards.

Financial Toxicity Order Set: Implementing a Simple Intervention to Better Connect Patients With Resources

PURPOSE

Financial toxicity of cancer treatment is well described in the literature, including characterizations of its risk factors, manifestations, and consequences. There is, however, limited research on interventions, particularly those at the hospital level, to address the issue.

METHODS

From March 1, 2019, to February 28, 2022, a multidisciplinary team conducted a three-cycle Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) process to develop, test, and implement an electronic medical record (EMR) order set to directly refer patients to a hospital-based financial assistance program. The cycles included an assessment of the efficacy of our current practice in connecting patients experiencing financial hardship with assistance, the development and piloting of the EMR referral order, and the broad implementation of the order set across our institution.

RESULTS

In PDSA cycle 1, we found that approximately 25% of patients at our institution experienced some form of financial hardship, but most patients were not connected to available resources because of our referral mechanism. In PDSA cycle 2, the pilot referral order set was deemed feasible and received positive feedback. Over the 12-month study period (March 1, 2021-February 28, 2022) of PDSA cycle 3, 718 orders were placed for 670 unique patients across interdisciplinary providers from 55 treatment areas. These referrals resulted in at least $850,000 in US dollars (USD) in financial aid in 38 patients (mean = $22,368 USD).

CONCLUSION

The findings from our three-cycle PDSA quality improvement project demonstrate the feasibility and efficacy of interdisciplinary efforts to develop a hospital-level financial toxicity intervention. A simple referral mechanism can empower providers to connect patients in need with available resources.

The role of financial security in loneliness or sadness among Medicare-enrolled cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to estimate the relative decreased rate of financial security and increased rate of loneliness or sadness during the COVID-19 pandemic and investigate the association between financial security and loneliness or sadness among Medicare beneficiaries with a cancer history.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We examined population-based, cross-sectional data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Winter 2021 survey. The study cohort included 1,632 Medicare beneficiaries (aged ≥65 years) with self-reported cancer history. The outcome was feelings of loneliness or sadness, and the independent variable was financial security during the 2020-2021 winter surge of COVID-19. We conducted weighted descriptive statistics, a cross-tabulation analysis, and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 18.8% of cancer survivors reported increased feelings of loneliness or sadness and 11.2% reported decreased financial security during the 2020-2021 winter surge of COVID-19. Cancer survivors who reported decreased financial security had 93% higher odds of increased feelings of loneliness or sadness compared to those who reported feeling more or about the same financial security (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.93; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.25-3.01; p <0.004).

DISCUSSION

Decreased financial security and increased feelings of loneliness or sadness were prevalent among cancer survivors. Additional screenings and interventions beyond what are currently available are needed to ease the socioeconomic vulnerabilities experienced by cancer survivors.

Financial toxicity assessment and associated factors analysis of patients with cancer in China

PURPOSE

Cancer-related expenditures present a lasting economic burden on patients and their families and may exert long-term adverse effects on the patients' life and quality of life. In this study, the comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST) was used to investigate the financial toxicity (FT) levels and related risk factors in Chinese patients with cancer.

METHODS

Quantitative data were collected through a questionnaire covering three aspects: sociodemographic information, economic and behavioral cost-coping strategies, and the COST scale. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with FT.

RESULTS

According to 594 completed questionnaires, the COST score ranged 0-41, with a median of 18 (mean±SD, 17.98±7.978). Over 80% of patients with cancer reported at least moderate FT (COST score <26). A multivariate model showed that urban residents, coverage by other health insurance policies, and higher household income and consumption expenditures were significantly associated with higher COST scores, indicative of lower FT. The middle-aged (45-59 years old), higher out-of-pocket (OOP) medication expenditures and hospitalizations, borrowed money, and forgone treatment were all significantly associated with lower COST scores, indicating higher FT.

CONCLUSION

Severe FT was associated with sociodemographic factors among Chinese patients with cancer, family financial factors, and economic and behavioral cost-coping strategies. Government should identify and manage the patients with high-risk characteristics of FT and work out better health policies for them.

Association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life of patients with gynecologic cancer

OBJECTIVES

Patients often struggle with their financial situation during cancer treatment due to treatment-related costs or loss of income. This resulting negative effect is called financial toxicity, which is a known as a side effect of cancer care. This study aimed to evaluate the association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life among patients with gynecologic cancer using validated questionnaires.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, patients with gynecologic cancer receiving anti-cancer drug treatment for > 2 months were recruited. Patients answered the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, EORTC-QLQ-C30, disease-specific tools (EORTC-QLQ-OV28/CX24/EN24), and EQ-5D-5L. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to determine associations.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and July 2021, 109 cancer patients completed the COST questionnaire. The mean COST score was 19.82. Strong associations were observed between financial difficulty (r = - 0.616) in the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and body image (r = 0.738) in the EORTC-QLQ-CX24, while weak associations were noted between the global health status/quality of life (r = 0.207), EQ-5D-5L index score (r = 0.252), and several function and symptom scale scores with the COST score.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater financial toxicity was associated with worse health-related quality of life scores, such as financial difficulty in gynecologic cancer patients and body image in cervical cancer patients as strong associations, and weakly associated with general health-related quality of life scores and several function/symptom scales.

Evaluation of parking-related financial toxicity associated with cancer treatments in Western Canada

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

Patients and their caregivers incur numerous out-of-pocket costs while receiving oncologic treatments. These expenses are often overlooked by clinicians, even in countries with publicly funded healthcare systems. Parking fees are one such category of expenses that contribute to financial toxicity in cancer care. Patients with cancer often have protracted treatment courses, especially if they are receiving external beam radiation therapy. It is not clear if cancer center parking fees influence city-specific indices such as city-specific cost of living. The aim of this study was to evaluate cancer center parking fees in Western Canada and to elucidate any correlation between daily cost of parking and the city-specific indices.

METHODS

This was a cross sectional study conducted from February 1st, 2022, to March 1st, 2022. An online search was undertaken to obtain the publicly available parking information for the regional and community cancer centers in the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan. Telephone calls were made with parking offices or switchboards to obtain this information for the cancer centers that did not have online information on parking. Cancer center address transit scores, median city household income, and city-specific cost of living scores were obtained online for the cities where the cancer centers were located. Pearson correlation and a zero-inflated negative binomial model were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Data was collected from 115 community and regional cancer centers distributed across the 4 provinces. The median hourly parking fee across all provinces was 2.00 Canadian Dollars (CAD) (Interquartile range (IQR), 0-4.25), whereas the median daily cost of parking was 9.50 CAD (IQR, 0-13.13). The median cancer center address transit score was 41.00 (IQR, 12.00-50.50). There was a statistically significant (p=0.029) positive correlation between the daily cost of parking and city cost of living. The correlation coefficient between the two variables was 0.412. Furthermore, there was a statistically significant (p<0.001) positive correlation between daily cost of parking and cancer center address transit score. The correlation coefficient between the two variables was 0.676. In addition, there was a strong negative correlation between the cancer center address transit score and the presence of free parking with a correlation coefficient of -0.613 (p<0.001). There was a nonsignificant (p=0.88) negative correlation between cost of living and the presence of free parking with a correlation coefficient of -0.028.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study demonstrate that daily cost of parking for community and regional cancer centers in Western Canada significantly influences city-specific cost of living and cancer center address transit scores to a varying degree. This demonstrates that the influence of parking fees on patients with cancer is multilayered with significant direct and indirect effects. This can contribute to loss of wage and added financial burden on patients and their caregivers in higher-cost provinces. The presence of free parking at community and regional cancer centers had a statistically significant negative correlation with the cancer center address transit score. This suggests that cities with more free parking also have less robust public transit systems. Conversely, the presence of an extensive public transit system leads to a lower likelihood of free parking being available at cancer centers.

CONCLUSION

The presence of a strong public healthcare system does not necessarily address all aspects of cancer-related financial toxicity. There is strong evidence of both positive and negative correlations between city specific indices and cancer center parking fees in Western Canada. Policy makers and stakeholders should be cognizant of this interplay between the various city specific indices and parking fees for patients with cancer. Policies on provincial and federal levels should be implemented to address this increasingly problematic burden on oncologic patients.

Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity

Financial toxicity, the cumulative financial hardships resulting from cancer diagnosis and treatment, is a growing problem in the United States. With the proliferation of costly novel therapeutics and improved cancer survival, financial toxicity will remain a major issue in cancer care delivery. Frontline oncology providers serve as gatekeepers in the medical system and, as such, could play essential roles in recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Providers and health systems could help mitigate financial toxicity through routine financial toxicity screening, financial navigation, and advocacy. Specific strategies include developing and implementing financial screening instruments that can be integrated in electronic medical records and establishing team-based financial navigation programs to help patients with out-of-pocket medical costs, nonmedical spending, and insurance optimization. Finally, providers should continue to advocate for policies and legislation that decrease cost and promote value-based care. In this review, we examine opportunities for provider engagement in these areas and highlight gaps for future research.

Patient-reported supportive care needs among Asian American cancer patients

PURPOSE

Cancer is the leading cause of death for Asian Americans. However, few studies have documented supportive care needs from the perspective of Asian American cancer patients. This study describes the needs reported by Asian American patients with colorectal, liver, or lung cancer over a 6-month period during their treatment.

METHODS

Participants were recruited through the Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry and from cancer care providers in San Francisco. Participants self-identified as Asian or Asian American; were age 21 or older; spoke English, Chinese, or Vietnamese; and had stage I-III colon, rectum, liver, or lung cancer. Participants were matched with a language concordant patient navigator who provided support during a 6-month period. Needs were assessed by surveys at baseline, 3, and 6 months.

RESULTS

Among 24 participants, 58% were 65 years or older, 42% did not complete high school, and 75% had limited English proficiency (LEP). At baseline, the most prevalent needs were cancer information (79%), nutrition and physical activity (67%), language assistance (54%), and daily living (50%). At the 3- and 6-month follow-up surveys, there was a higher reported need for mental health resources and healthcare access among participants.

CONCLUSION

In this pilot study of Asian American cancer patients who predominantly had LEP, participants reported many needs, with cancer information and language assistance as the most prominent. The findings highlight the importance of culturally and linguistically appropriate patient navigators in addressing supportive care needs among cancer patients with LEP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03867916.

Patient-Reported Financial Toxicity in a Population-Based Cohort of Oropharynx Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) are at high risk for financial toxicity (FT), but the nature, extent, and predictors of FT experienced after primary radiation therapy (RT) or surgery are poorly understood.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used a population-based sample of patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage I to III OPSCC diagnosed from 2006 to 2016 and treated with primary RT or surgery. Of 1668 eligible patients, 1600 were sampled, 400 responded, and 396 confirmed OPSCC. Measures included the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck, Neck Dissection Impairment Index, and a financial toxicity instrument adapted from the Individualized Cancer Care (iCanCare) study. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations of exposures with outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 396 analyzable respondents, 269 (68%) received primary RT and 127 (32%) surgery. The median time from diagnosis to survey was 7 years. Due to OPSCC, 54% of patients experienced material sacrifice (including 28% who reduced food spending and 6% who lost their housing), 45% worried about financial problems, and 29% experienced long-term FT. Independent factors associated with more long-term FT included female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.40), Black non-Hispanic race (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.26-7.09), unmarried status (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.03), feeding tube use (OR, 3.98; 95% CI, 2.29-6.90), and worst versus best quartile on the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.23-2.90) and Neck Dissection Impairment Index (OR, 5.62; 95% CI, 3.79-8.34). Factors associated with less long-term FT included age >57 years (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.71; P < .001) and household income ≥$80,000 (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.82; P = .001). Primary RT versus surgery was not associated with long-term FT (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Oropharynx cancer survivors experience high rates of material sacrifice and long-term FT, and we identified important risk factors. Chronic symptom burden was associated with significantly worse long-term financial status, supporting the hypothesis that toxicity mitigation strategies may reduce long-term FT.

Correlation between Quality of Life under Treatment and Current Life Satisfaction among Cancer Survivors Aged 75 Years and Older Receiving Outpatient Chemotherapy in Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan

Life satisfaction is increasingly important for older cancer survivors as the global population ages and the life expectancy 29 of cancer survivors increases. This study sought to identify factors associated with physical symptoms, quality of life under treatment, and current life satisfaction in cancer survivors aged 75 years and older receiving outpatient chemotherapy. Information about treatment for cancer survivors was collected from electronic medical records, and interviews were conducted to assess life satisfaction under treatment. Participants were older cancer survivors in Ishikawa, Japan. Of the participants, 80% lived on the Noto Peninsula. The average linear distance traveled for treatment was 40.7 km. The factors associated with patients’ dissatisfaction with their current lives included general malaise (odds ratio: 9.61; 95% confidence interval: 1.28–72.22) and being less happy now than when they were younger (odds ratio: 10.559; 95% confidence interval: 1.50–74.24). In outpatient cancer treatment for survivors aged 75 years and older, support should consider the distance to the hospital. As in past studies, general malaise was shown to have a negative impact on the lives of cancer survivors aged 75 years or older. Support providers should pay attention to patients’ general malaise when providing support.

Navigating financial toxicity in patients with cancer: A multidisciplinary management approach

Approximately one-half of individuals with cancer face personal economic burdens associated with the disease and its treatment, a problem known as financial toxicity (FT). FT more frequently affects socioeconomically vulnerable individuals and leads to subsequent adverse economic and health outcomes. Whereas multilevel systemic factors at the policy, payer, and provider levels drive FT, there are also accompanying intervenable patient-level factors that exacerbate FT in the setting of clinical care delivery. The primary strategy to intervene on FT at the patient level is financial navigation. Financial navigation uses comprehensive assessment of patients' risk factors for FT, guidance toward support resources, and referrals to assist patient financial needs during cancer care. Social workers or nurse navigators most frequently lead financial navigation. Oncologists and clinical provider teams are multidisciplinary partners who can support optimal FT management in the context of their clinical roles. Oncologists and clinical provider teams can proactively assess patient concerns about the financial hardship and employment effects of disease and treatment. They can respond by streamlining clinical treatment and care delivery planning and incorporating FT concerns into comprehensive goals of care discussions and coordinated symptom and psychosocial care. By understanding how age and life stage, socioeconomic, and cultural factors modify FT trajectory, oncologists and multidisciplinary health care teams can be engaged and informative in patient-centered, tailored FT management. The case presentations in this report provide a practical context to summarize authors' recommendations for patient-level FT management, supported by a review of key supporting evidence and a discussion of challenges to mitigating FT in oncology care. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:437-453.

Patient-reported drivers of financial toxicity in gynecologic cancers: a focus group study

Objective

To understand how treatment-related financial burden affects patients with gynecologic cancer and to identify targets for interventions to reduce financial toxicity.

Methods

Patients with gynecologic cancer were invited to participate in a qualitative focus group study. Each participant completed an online, secure survey that included questions regarding diagnosis, treatment, employment status, and income. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool was used to measure economic burden (COST score 0–44), with lower scores indicating worse toxicity. Each participant then took part in a virtual semistructured focus group with a social worker and a study staff member. Three investigators independently analyzed the transcripts for common themes and reconciled disagreements through consensus.

Results

Over 60% of participants had private insurance, and 54% had moderate to high financial toxicity (COST scores <26). The five most commonly discussed themes included extent of insurance coverage, out-of-pocket health expenses, employment status changes, health system inefficiencies, and opportunity costs. Minor themes included issues surrounding delayed care, provider conversations, parking, and transportation. Participants with moderate to high toxicity reported strain associated with employment status changes, opportunity costs, and health system inefficiencies more often than those with mild toxicity.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that patient-centered interventions to optimize insurance coverage and enhance care coordination may reduce financial toxicity. Both targets are potentially immediately actionable and could have downstream effects on health outcomes. Meanwhile, advocacy efforts to improve work leave policies and reduce out-of-pocket health expenditure are system-level interventions that also should be considered to curtail financial toxicity.