Cross-sectional study to develop and describe psychometric characteristics of a patient-reported instrument (PROFFIT) for measuring financial toxicity of cancer within a public healthcare system

Self-reported financial difficulties of colorectal cancer patients 1 year after start of treatment

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to investigate self-reported financial difficulties (FDs) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and to develop easy-to-implement models to predict FDs 1 year after initiation of CRC treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the prospective EDIUM cohort, CRC patients are asked to complete the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and QLQ-CR29 before (T0) and 1 year after initiation of treatment (T1). These patient-reported outcomes are combined with sociodemographic and clinical data. The QLQ-C30 'FD' item is firstly analysed descriptively, together with covariates. Logistic lasso regression was carried out to develop a predictive model (full model) of FDs at T1, and its predictive capacity was assessed. This predictive model was then simplified using easy-to-collect predictors which showed importance in the full model.

RESULTS

Of 9124 CRC patients enrolled between October 2018 and May 2023, 6061 completed follow-up questionnaires (T1). Of those initially without FDs (n = 4989), 25% (1248 patients) reported new FDs at T1. These patients were younger [median age 66 versus 72 years; odds ratio (OR) 2.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.46-3.22)] and had a higher proportion of lower educational attainment [74% versus 69%; OR 1.32 (95% CI 1.14-1.54)]. Clinically, FDs were more frequently reported by patients with higher International Union Against Cancer (UICC) stages [48% in stages III/IV versus 32.5% in stages I/II; OR 1.98 (95% CI 1.74-2.26)] and rectal cancer [37% versus 28%; OR 1.52 (95% CI 1.32-1.73)]. The full model [based on a test and training dataset of n = 5910 patients, including 14 predictors, area under the curve (AUC) 0.75] was reduced to two simplified models with only the predictors age, sex (model 1, AUC 0.72)/localisation of tumour (model 2), and FDs at T0 (AUC = 0.74). On this basis, two risk assessment tables were developed.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of CRC patients report FDs 1 year after treatment initiation, particularly among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. Together with the predictive models and two ready-to-use risk assessment tables, these findings can be utilised by clinicians and psychosocial counselling services to provide tailored support options.

Measuring the Socioeconomic Impact of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Standardized Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments

BACKGROUND

A number of instruments have been developed to measure the socioeconomic impact (SEI) of cancer. A standardized comparison of the quality and content validity of these instruments is lacking. This study aimed to (1) conduct a standardized assessment of the quality of SEI instruments and (2) assess the content validity of these instruments using the conceptual framework developed by the Organization of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) for SEI analysis.

METHOD

We identified articles measuring the SEI of cancer with ad hoc and/or validated instruments from an existing database. These articles were the initial pearls in a systematic review of published articles that applied and validated these instruments using the pearl-growing search strategy in PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. The Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool was utilized to provide quantitative assessment and comparison of the quality of identified instruments. To examine content validity, we allocated each instrument's items against the themes and sub-themes of the established conceptual framework for SEI analysis.

RESULTS

We identified and investigated 21 validation studies using nine original instruments. The number of articles varied significantly among the identified instruments. The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) instrument was the most frequently used, validated in ten different settings, whereas some newer instruments have not been applied yet. This variation resulted in significant differences in EMPRO overall scores among these instruments. Regarding content validity, we found that not all themes of the OECI framework were covered by the content of the instruments.

CONCLUSION

The quality and the application of instruments measuring the SEI of cancer varied significantly. The content of the instruments seems not to cover all related themes of the applied OECI framework in this study. Further studies are warranted to confirm the quality and content validity of the instruments measuring the SEI of cancer.

Allies not enemies-creating a more empathetic and uplifting patient experience through technology and art

OBJECTIVE

To understand whether art and technology (mainly conversational agents) may help oncology patients to experience a more humanized journey.

METHODS

This narrative review encompasses a comprehensive examination of the existing literature in this field by a multicenter, multidisciplinary, and multiprofessional team aiming to analyze the current developments and potential future directions of using art and technology for patient engagement.

RESULTS

We identified three major themes of patient engagement with art and three major themes of patient engagement with technologies. Two real-case scenarios are reported from our experience to practically envision how findings from the literature can be implemented in different contexts.

CONCLUSION

Art therapy and technologies can be ancillary supports for healthcare professionals but are not substitutive of their expertise and responsibilities. Such tools may help to convey a more empathetic and uplifting patient journey if properly integrated within clinical practice, whereby the humanistic touch of medicine remains pivotal.

Financial toxicity questionnaire (FIT): development and validation of the italian version (FITALY) in head and neck cancer patients undergoing multimodal curative treatment

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity from cancer treatments is rising as an important patient-reported outcome. Its relevance was first assessed in the context of privately financed healthcare system, where the financial hardship caused by out-of-pocket payments negatively affects survival, while fewer evidence exists on its role in countries where care is financed by the public health care system. Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients face an increased risk for financial toxicity due to multimodal treatment and relevant out of pocket costs. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an Italian version of the Canadian Financial Index of Toxicity (FIT) questionnaire, defined FITALY.

METHODS

FIT questionnaire was translated through a forward-backward process by two investigators independently, and the process was reviewed by a certified medical scientific English native speaker. Once reached consensus upon Italian translation, two Health Economics experts were consulted to adapt the questionnaire to Italian socio-economic context. The FITALY questionnaire v1.0 hereby developed was anonymously administered to two consecutive groups of 30 patients who had received curative, multimodal treatment for HNC cancer at ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, Italy. A cognitive debriefing form was simultaneously administered to ask patients to exclude recurring and redundant items and include new relevant items.

RESULTS

The 14-item FITALY questionnaire provides a global evaluation of financial toxicity ranging from 0 to 100. The questionnaire is divided into 4 domains: financial burden (6 items), exploring the objective financial toxicity burden; financial distress (2 items), which refers to the psychological distress related to financial toxicity; out-of-pocket costs (4 items), which focus on medical expenses paid by the patient; and loss of productivity (2 items), that investigates the disease impact on both patient's and caregiver's job activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Starting from the Canadian 9-item FIT questionnaire, we developed and validated the Italian 14-item FITALY questionnaire. Prospective application to a cohort of Italian HNC patients is ongoing.

Psychometric Properties of Self-Reported Financial Toxicity Measures in Cancer Survivors: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

AIM(S)

To assess the methodological quality and psychometric properties of self-reported financial toxicity measures for cancer survivors, to offer evidence-based guidance for the selection of these measures in clinical practice, and to supply methodological references for the enhancement and development of related measures in the future.

DESIGN

An overview of systematic reviews.

METHODS

Four academic databases were searched to conduct an overview of systematic reviews published from inception to August 2024. The Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ) was employed to evaluate the methodological quality of the research included. The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments checklist (COSMIN) and the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system were employed to assess the methodological and psychometric quality of the financial toxicity measures included.

RESULTS

Six systematic reviews satisfied the inclusion criteria. The OQAQ results indicated that six studies exhibited significant methodological quality defects, each receiving a score of 3 points. COST-v1, COST-v2, HARDS, ENRICh, and FinTox were classified as level A. Ten measures were classified as level B, lacking evidence to support content validity and internal consistency as '+'. Seven measures were classified at level C, supported by high-quality evidence indicating certain domains as '-'.

CONCLUSION

COST is advised as the best appropriate measurement standard for research and clinical practice across many global contexts. HARDS and ENRICh were advised to select only after thoroughly evaluating the local socio-economic context. FinTox is particularly suggested for the assessment of severe FT. SFDQ and FIT are advised for selection following an evaluation of therapy alternatives and the cancer's location.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PATIENT CARE

Healthcare professionals can implement evidence-based measures in clinical practice to effectively assess the financial toxicity experienced by cancer survivors, offer policy-oriented interventions, and enhance patient-reported outcomes.

Financial Toxicity and Kidney Disease in Children and Adults: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Social determinants of health have been related with kidney diseases and their outcomes. Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the negative impact of health care costs on clinical conditions. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the literature linking FT with renal diseases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We Included all studies analyzing FT and renal disease recorded in PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar between 2013 and 2023. The research question was formulated with reference to the acronym PCC (Problem, Concept and Contest). For each included study, we considered the study design, the population and main results from different populations with distinct renal conditions and the results were summarized in four tables.

RESULTS

Socioeconomic deprivation was the main cause of FT, and the majority of studies on the relationship between FT and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were conducted in the USA (4 studies evaluated the pediatric population and 6 studies included adults). Three studies reported the impact of FT on nephrolithiasis, and 3 studies analyzed the link between FT and renal tumors. The methods used for detecting FT differed and were based on consultations, questionnaires, expenditures and database records analysis. The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) questionnaire was used in 7 studies (43%), and the prevalence of FT was reported to be high in children and adults.

CONCLUSION

Although the quality of the selected study is limited, due to different populations investigated and heterogeneity in detecting FT, the latter seems to be a frequent finding in people with renal disease. Health care professionals should recognize socioeconomic deprivation as the major cause of FT. Detecting FT could help in prioritizing patient-centered care in populations with renal diseases through the development of strategies aimed at improving care for people with kidney diseases.

Defining and Measuring Financial Toxicity in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

PURPOSE

Financial toxicity (FT) of cancer treatment likely affects more patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); however, most of the research on FT comes from high-income countries, which may not apply to LMICs. The causes and consequences of FT in patients with cancer in LMICs remain understudied.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CINAHL for FT literature in cancer originating from LMICs from inception until the end of 2023, and documented the different definitions used to define FT in LMICs, and the magnitude of FT documented using those definitions. LMIC was defined using the World Bank Country and Lending Group classification.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies on FT in cancer originating from LMICs have increased in recent years (>75% studies published 2020 onward) and used varying criteria to define FT, broadly categorized into five themes. Majority of the studies defined FT in terms of catastrophic health expenditure (45%) or household impoverishment (10%), while 26% of the studies used the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity tool, developed and validated in US patients, to measure FT in LMIC settings. Twenty-six percent of the studies defined FT in terms of coping mechanisms and 10% in terms of subjective financial burden. The magnitude of FT in patients with cancer was substantial irrespective of the definitions used.

CONCLUSION

This review synthesizes the different definitions of FT for LMICs that have been used in the literature so far. We conclude that the definitions that capture the coping mechanisms or hardships might reflect the magnitude of FT better than absolute dollar values or relative percentages of expenditures. Future studies can use our results to devise locally tailored definitions of FT.

Screening for Financial Toxicity in Oncology Research and Practice: A Narrative Review

Financial toxicity (FT) is now a well-recognized issue affecting many patients with cancer and their families. The field is rapidly moving from a focus on describing this problem to efforts to optimize screening and identify management solutions. There are now multiple validated tools to study FT in the research setting. Although there is currently no standard tool for screening in the setting of routine clinical practice, many of the scales for FT were developed with clinical screening in mind, and there is emerging evidence regarding potential to screen with one or two questions to detect financial distress. This narrative review is intended to provide an update on validated scales that have been used to study FT in the research context and provide examples of tools of varying length that are being studied for implementation of screening in clinical practice. It is important for clinicians to seek to identify and assist patients who may be experiencing FT as a result of cancer or cancer therapy.

Financial toxicity among pediatric oncology families during therapy and early survivorship: a qualitative analysis

PURPOSE

Cancer treatment often results in adverse financial consequences-also termed financial toxicity. To build upon limited research in pediatric oncology, we conducted a qualitative study exploring families' lived experiences with financial toxicity and their perspectives on potential mitigation strategies.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of English- and Spanish-speaking family caregivers, 3-24 months following diagnosis. We performed a thematic analysis focused on elucidating relationships between components/domains of financial toxicity, identifying mitigating and exacerbating factors, eliciting latent constructs for measurement, and querying caregivers' perspectives on interventions. We organized relationships between themes into a framework to compare with prior theoretically derived models.

RESULTS

We interviewed 21 caregivers, diverse with respect to income, age, race and ethnicity, family structure/composition, and patient characteristics. We identified four themes relating to financial toxicity: increased spending on providing care to patients/siblings, reduced income due to challenges in maintaining employment, new or worsened material hardship, and heightened psychological distress regarding finances. We also identified an additional theme pertaining to response behaviors directed at managing financial toxicity, with helpful or harmful downstream effects. Factors that exacerbated or lessened financial toxicity included awareness of resources, geography, and community. Caregivers suggested potential mitigation strategies, including proactive education and resource provision.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric patients and families can experience substantial financial impacts, which may differ from experiences of adults with cancer. These findings suggest a need for careful screening and measurement, as well as family-centered interventions and policies to reduce long-term consequences.

Measuring financial distress in German cancer patients: development and validation of the Financial Distress of Cancer Assessment Tool (FIAT)

BACKGROUND

Cancer diagnosis and therapy can lead to significant financial distress for those affected, even in universal health care systems. We present the development and validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for financial distress in German cancer patients.

METHODS

Validation of the newly developed instrument followed a two-step approach, including two quantitative paper-pencil surveys (N1 = 111, N2 = 267) with patients of all types of cancer and treatment status at two German university hospitals. Factorial validity, reliability, construct, and criterion validity were assessed using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, correlative and linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

The Financial Distress of Cancer Assessment Tool (FIAT) comprises 19 items across three domains of subjective financial distress: (i) financial worries; (ii) dissatisfaction across various life domains, and (iii) challenging experiences with authorities and benefit providers (e.g. employment agency, health insurance). Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the instrument's factorial structure. Composite reliability (Raykov's rho) ranges from 0.88 to 0.96, and retest reliability ranges from 0.64 to 0.75. Correlational analyses showed significant associations between FIAT scores and related constructs [e.g. correlations with the EORTC-QLQ-C30 financial distress subscale (Q28) ranging from 0.47 to 0.60], supporting its construct validity. Additionally, higher FIAT scores were significantly associated with lower health-related quality of life measured by Q29 and Q30 of the EORTC-QLQ-C30, with correlations ranging from -0.21 to -0.28. They were also positively correlated with depression (PHQ-4), with correlations ranging from 0.33 to 0.45, and anxiety (PHQ-4) with correlations ranging from 0.25 to 0.36, confirming its criterion validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The newly developed patient-reported outcome measure is the first reported measurement tool to assess financial distress in German cancer patients. The instrument can be used for research purposes and to enable the provision of coordinated support services.

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.

A Phenomenological Approach to Financial Toxicity: The-Economic-Side Effect of Cancer

The economic burden of chronic diseases such as cancer could negatively impact patients' health and quality of life. The daily management of the disease results in economic needs that patients often face directly, which may lead to real toxicity, just defined as financial toxicity. This study aims to explore cancer patients' experiences, emotions, opinions, and feelings related to the phenomenon of financial toxicity. A phenomenological qualitative descriptive study was conducted through face-to-face interviews with adult oncological patients. The sample (n = 20) was predominantly composed of females (with a meanly 58 years old) with breast cancer and in chemotherapy treatment. The most relevant topics that emerged from the patients' experiences were the impact on work, the distance from the treatment centre, the economic efforts, the impact on the quality of life, and the healthcare workers' support during the healthcare pathway. From the phenomenological analysis of the interviews, three main themes and seven related subthemes emerged. This study provided a phenomenological interpretation of financial toxicity in adult cancer patients and underlines that this issue involves families or caregivers, too. Financial problems appear relevant for those who experience cancer and should be included in a routine assessment by healthcare professionals.

Amplifying the Patient's Voice in Oncology Early-Phase Clinical Trials: Solutions to Burdens and Barriers

Dose-finding oncology trials (DFOTs) provide early access to novel compounds of potential therapeutic benefit in addition to providing critical safety and dosing information. While access to trials for which a patient is eligible remains the largest barrier to enrollment on clinical trials, additional direct and indirect barriers unique to enrollment on DFOTs are often overlooked but worthy of consideration. Direct barriers including financial costs of care, travel and time investments, and logical challenges including correlative study designs are important to bear in mind when developing strategies to facilitate the patient experience on DFOTs. Indirect barriers such as strict eligibility criteria, washout periods, and concomitant medication restrictions should be accounted for during DFOT design to maintain the fidelity of the trial without being overly exclusionary. Involving patients and advocates and incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) throughout the process, from initial DFOT design, through patient recruitment and participation, is critical to informing strategies to minimize identified barriers to offer the benefit of DFOTs to all patients.

ESMO expert consensus statements on the screening and management of financial toxicity in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity, defined as both the objective financial burden and subjective financial distress from a cancer diagnosis and its treatment, is a topic of interest in the assessment of the quality of life of patients with cancer and their families. Current evidence implicates financial toxicity in psychosocial, economic and other harms, leading to suboptimal cancer outcomes along the entire trajectory of diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, survivorship and palliation. This paper presents the results of a virtual consensus, based on the evidence base to date, on the screening and management of financial toxicity in patients with and beyond cancer organized by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) in 2022.

METHODS

A Delphi panel of 19 experts from 11 countries was convened taking into account multidisciplinarity, diversity in health system contexts and research relevance. The international panel of experts was divided into four working groups (WGs) to address questions relating to distinct thematic areas: patients with cancer at risk of financial toxicity; management of financial toxicity during the initial phase of treatment at the hospital/ambulatory settings; financial toxicity during the continuing phase and at end of life; and financial risk protection for survivors of cancer, and in cancer recurrence. After comprehensively reviewing the literature, statements were developed by the WGs and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment, and voting.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 25 evidence-informed consensus statements were developed, which answer 13 questions on financial toxicity. They cover evidence summaries, practice recommendations/guiding statements and policy recommendations relevant across health systems. These consensus statements aim to provide a more comprehensive understanding of financial toxicity and guide clinicians globally in mitigating its impact, emphasizing the importance of further research, best practices and guidelines.

Financial Toxicity in Renal Patients (FINTORE) Study: A Cross-Sectional Italian Study on Financial Burden in Kidney Disease-A Project Protocol

Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the negative impact of health-care costs on clinical conditions. In general, social determinants of health, especially poverty, socioenvironmental stressors, and psychological factors, are increasingly recognized as important determinants of non-communicable diseases, such as chronic kidney disease (CKD), and their consequences. We aim to investigate the prevalence of FT in patients at different stages of CKD treated in our universal health-care system and from pediatric nephrology, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and renal transplantation clinics. FT will be assessed with the Patient-Reported Outcome for Fighting Financial Toxicity (PROFFIT) score, which was first developed by Italian oncologists. Our local ethics committee has approved the study. Our population sample will answer the sixteen questions of the PROFFIT questionnaire, seven of which are related to the outcome and nine the determinants of FT. Data will be analyzed in the pediatric and adult populations and by group stratification. We are confident that this study will raise awareness among health-care professionals of the high risk of adverse health outcomes in patients who have both kidney disease and high levels of FT. Strategies to reduce FT should be implemented to improve the standard of care for people with kidney disease and lead to truly patient-centered care.

The socioeconomic impact of cancer on patients and their relatives: Organisation of European Cancer Institutes task force consensus recommendations on conceptual framework, taxonomy, and research directions

Loss of income and out-of-pocket expenditures are important causes of financial hardship in many patients with cancer, even in high-income countries. The far-reaching consequences extend beyond the patients themselves to their relatives, including caregivers and dependents. European research to date has been limited and is hampered by the absence of a coherent theoretical framework and by heterogeneous methods and terminology. To address these shortages, a task force initiated by the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) produced 25 recommendations, including a comprehensive definition of socioeconomic impact from the perspective of patients and their relatives, a conceptual framework, and a consistent taxonomy linked to the framework. The OECI task force consensus statement highlights directions for future research with a view towards policy relevance. Beyond descriptive studies into the dimension of the problem, individual severity and predictors of vulnerability should be explored. It is anticipated that the consensus recommendations will facilitate and enhance future research efforts into the socioeconomic impact of cancer and cancer care, providing a crucial reference point for the development and validation of patient-reported outcome instruments aimed at measuring its broader effects.

Financial Toxicity and Health-Related Quality of Life Profile of Patients With Hematologic Malignancies Treated in a Universal Health Care System

PURPOSE

We investigated the association of financial toxicity (FT) with the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) profile of patients with hematologic malignancies treated in a universal health care system.

METHODS

We did a secondary analysis of six multicenter studies enrolling patients with hematologic malignancies. FT was evaluated using the financial difficulties item of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Multivariable linear regression models were used to assess the mean differences in HRQoL scores between patients with or without FT, while adjusting for key potential confounding factors. We also examined the prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms by the experience of FT, using established thresholds for the EORTC QLQ-C30. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to explore the risk factors associated with FT.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,847 patients were analyzed, of whom 441 (23.9%) reported FT. We observed statistically and clinically relevant worse scores for patients with FT compared with those without FT for all the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. The three largest clinically relevant mean differences between patients with and without FT were observed in pain (∆ = 19.6 [95% CI, 15.7 to 23.5]; P < .001), social functioning (∆ = -18.9 [95% CI, -22.5 to -15.2]; P < .001), and role functioning (Δ = -17.7 [95% CI, -22.1 to -13.3]; P < .001). Patients with FT tended to report a higher prevalence of clinically important problems and symptoms across all EORTC QLQ-C30 scales. In the univariable and multivariable analyses, the presence of FT was associated with the presence of comorbidities, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥1, and not receiving a salary.

CONCLUSION

Patients with hematologic malignancies treated in the setting of a universal health care system who experience FT have a worse HRQoL profile compared with those without FT.

Measuring financial toxicity in head and neck cancer: a systematic review

Objective

The current study systematically reviews the literature about financial toxicity (FT) in head and neck cancer patients. Three databases were reviewed: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science.

Methods

Full text English papers published from 2000 to 2022 reporting on quantitative results about FT in head and neck cancer survivors collected through structured questionnaires or interviews were included.

Results

Twenty-seven articles were included. Most of the articles were published after 2015 and from United States. There was a slight prevalence of papers dealing with oropharyngeal cancer, squamous-cell carcinoma and locally advanced head and neck cancer. Measures of FT were obtained through validated questionnaires like COST, FIT and FDQ. Collected data were mostly referrable to financial spending, financial resources, psychosocial aspect, support seeking, coping care and coping lifestyle subdomain. FT scores by COST were found to be worse in the COVID era. Financial counseling and adequate information about the costs of treatment were two effective strategies to mitigate FT.

Conclusions

FT is a relatively new challenge in head and neck cancer treatment, whose expenses are higher than therapies for other cancers. A universal method to assess FT and a unified guideline for the administration of questionnaires are needed to mitigate FT and to improve patient outcomes.

Cross-cultural adaptation of the PROFFIT Instrument to measure financial toxicity in people living with cancer within a UK population

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to develop a British version of the Patient Reported Outcomes for Fighting Financial Toxicity of Cancer (PROFFIT): originally designed to measure financial toxicity in cancer for an Italian universal healthcare system. The instrument was carefully evaluated for crosscultural equivalence, face validity and practicality.

METHODS

A systematic approach to cross-cultural adaptation was used, including forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, consolidation of translations with an expert committee, and cognitive interviews. As part of the cognitive interview process, 18 cancer patients completed a structured interview of 60-90 min in length.

RESULTS

The translated and modified PROFFIT questionnaire demonstrated good psycho-linguistic properties, including high compliance (only one item was revised for clarity), high retrieval from memory, high decision-making processes, and high response processes.

CONCLUSION

PROFFIT has been found to be functional and adaptable in a new social environment. The tool may be useful for tailoring interventions to address and measure financial hardships within the cancer population, which appear to be a current challenge for public health.

POLICY SUMMARY

Even in universal healthcare systems, financial toxicity due to the increase in outof-pocket expenses poses a significant problem. The FT phenomenon warrants proper attention in the United Kingdom since it may negatively impact financial well-being, quality of life, psychosocial health, and treatment adherence.

Confirmatory validation analysis of the PROFFIT questionnaire to assess financial toxicity in cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The Patient Reported Outcome for Fighting FInancial Toxicity (PROFFIT) questionnaire was developed to measure financial toxicity (FT) and identify its determinants. The aim of the present study was to confirm its validity in a prospective cohort of patients receiving anticancer treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 2021 to July 2022, 221 patients were enrolled at 10 Italian centres. Selected items of the EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire represented the anchors, specifically, question 28 (Q-28) on financial difficulties, and questions 29-30 measuring global health status/quality of life (HR-QOL). The study had 80% power to detect a 0.20 correlation coefficient (r) between anchors and PROFFIT-score (items 1-7, range 0-100, 100 indicating maximum FT) with bilateral alpha 0.05 and 80% power. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted. FT determinants (items 8-16) were described.

RESULTS

Median age of patients was 65 years, 116 (52.5%) were females, 96 (43.4%) had low education level. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed goodness of fit of the PROFFIT-score. Significant partial correlation of PROFFIT-score was found with Q-28 (r = 0.51) and HR-QOL (r = -0.23). Mean (SD) PROFFIT-score at baseline was 36.5 (24.9); it was statistically significantly higher for patients living in South Italy, those with lower education level, those who were freelancer/unemployed at diagnosis and those who reported significant economic impact from the COVID-19 pandemic. Mean (SD) scores of determinants ranged from 17.6 (27.1) for item 14 (support from medical staff) to 49.0 (36.3) for item 10 (expenses for medicines or supplements). PROFFIT-score significantly increased with worsening response to determinants.

CONCLUSIONS

External validation of PROFFIT-score in an independent sample of patients was successful. The instrument is now being used in clinical studies.

Out-of-pocket costs sustained in the last 12 months by cancer patients: an Italian survey-based study on individual expenses between 2017 and 2018

PURPOSE

Out of Pocket costs (OOP) sustained by cancer patients also in public NHS contribute to disease-related financial toxicity. Aim of the study was to investigate the amount and the types of OOP sustained by Italian cancer patients for care services.

METHODS

A sample survey was conducted by FAVO in December 2017-June 2018, in 39 adhering hospitals and 1289 patients diagnosed from 1985 to 2018, by standardized questionnaire inquiring on: yearly expenditure by cancer service, age, year of diagnosis, disease phase, cancer site, sex, marital status, education, residence. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed between OOP and each variable. Multilevel mixed-effects negative binomial regression was used to assess the combined effects of patients characteristics on the differences in acquiring health services.

RESULTS

The yearly average OOP was 1841.81€, with the highest values for transports (359.34€) and for diagnostic examinations (259.82€). Significantly higher OOP were found in North and Centre than South and Islands (167.51 vs. 138.39). In the fully adjusted multivariable analysis, the variables significantly associated with higher than reference expenditure were: medium/high education (OR 1.22 [1.05-1.42], upper gastrointestinal tract cancer (OR 1.37 [1.06-1.77]), disease phase of treatments for cancer progression or pain therapy (OR 1.59 [1.30-1.93]).

CONCLUSION

Italian cancer patients in 2018 sustained OOP quite similar to those measured in 2012 to supplement NHS services. The main component of the OOP costs were diagnostic examination and transportation. The NHS should pay attention to potentiate its ability to answer unmet needs of patients with advanced cancer who are the most fragile ones.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Reinforcing the services where the main OOP expenses are located can help in promoting public health actions and reduce socio-economic needs that could compromise the receipt of optimal care along the whole disease course, from diagnosis to rehabilitation.

Is Financial Toxicity Captured in Assessments of Quality of Life In Oncology Randomized Clinical Trials?

BACKGROUND

Financial difficulties in relation with diagnosis and treatment of patients with cancer affects their quality-of-life (QoL). We aim to characterize how financial toxicity was captured in oncology randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and to estimate how often the study-drug or other expenses were covered by sponsors.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional analysis of articles published in six high impact journals (The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, JAMA, The Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, and JAMA Oncology). Selected articles needed to report on a RCT published between January 2018 and December 2019, study an anti-cancer drug, and have reported QoL results. We abstracted the QoL questionnaires used; whether the survey was directly assessing financial difficulties; whether a difference in financial toxicity was reported between arms; and whether the sponsor supplied the study-drug or covered other expenses.

RESULTS

For all 73 studies that met inclusion criteria, 34 studies (47%) utilized QoL questionnaires without direct assessment of financial difficulties. The study drug was provided by the sponsor in at least 51 trials (70%), provided according to local rules in 3 trials (4%), and undeterminated in the remaining 19 trials (26%). We found 2 trials (3%) with payments or compensation to enrolled patients.

CONCLUSION

This cross-sectional study found 47% of articles reporting on QoL in oncology RCTs did not use QoL questionnaires directly assessing financial toxicity. Additionnaly, the study drug was supplied by the sponsor in most trials. Financial toxicity occurs in real-life settings when patients have to pay for the drugs and other medical expenses. QoL assessments from oncology RCTs lack generalizability to real-world settings, due to limited querying of financial toxicity.

POLICY SUMMARY

Real-world evidence could be demanded by regulators as post-requirement studies to ensure QoL results observed in trials will replicate in patients treated outside investigational trials.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell Therapy in Hematologic Malignancies and Patient-reported Outcomes: A Scoping Review

The inclusion of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy research is critical for understanding the impact of this novel approach from a unique patient standpoint. We performed a scoping review to map the available literature on the use of PRO measures in CAR T-cell therapy studies of patients with hematologic malignancies published between January 2015 and July 2022. Fourteen studies were identified, of which 7 (50%) were investigational early-phase trials, 6 (42.9%) were observational studies, and 1 (7.1%) was a pilot study. The EQ-5D and the PROMIS-29 were the 2 most frequently used PRO measures, being included in 6 (42.9%) and 5 (35.7%) studies, respectively. Despite differences in study designs, there seems to be evidence of improvements over time since CAR T-cell infusion in important domains such as physical functioning and fatigue, at least in patients who respond to therapy. Overall, the studies identified in our review have shown the added value of PRO assessment in CAR T-cell therapy research by providing novel information that complements the knowledge on safety and efficacy. However, there are several questions which remain to be answered in future research. For example, limited evidence exists regarding patient experience during important phases of the disease trajectory as only 4 (28.6%) and 5 (35.7%) studies provided information on PROs during the first 2 weeks from CAR T-cell infusion and after the first year, respectively. Time is ripe for a more systematic implementation of high-quality PRO assessment in future clinical trials and in real-life settings of patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy.

Validity of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) in patients with gynecologic cancer

OBJECTIVE

Financial toxicity is a financial burden of cancer care itself, which leads to worse quality of life and higher mortality and is considered an adverse effect. The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) tool is a patient-reported outcome measurement used to evaluate financial toxicity. We aimed to validate the internal consistency and reproducibility of the COST tool in patients with gynecologic cancer.

METHODS

In this multicenter study covering the period April 2019 to July 2021, using the COST tool in Japan, patients diagnosed with ovarian, cervical, or endometrial cancer receiving systemic anti-cancer drug therapy for more than 2 months were eligible. Patients with no out-of-pocket costs for direct medical costs were excluded. The patients answered the initial test and a retest, which was completed from 2 to 14 days after the initial test. Internal consistency and reproducibility were assessed using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. Cronbach's alpha ≥0.8 indicates good internal consistency, and ICC ≥0.8 is highly reliable.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients (ovarian: 50, cervical: 26, endometrial: 36) responded to the initial test, and 89 patients answered the retest from 2 to 14 days after the initial test. The median patient age was 58 (range, 28-78) years. The median COST score was 19. Cronbach's alpha showed good internal consistency at 0.83 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.87). The ICC at 0.850 (95% CI 0.777 to 0.900) showed high reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

The COST tool has good internal consistency and reliable reproducibility in patients with gynecologic cancer in Japan. The COST tool quantifies financial toxicity in the insurance system, where patients have limited out-of-pocket direct medical costs. The results support the use of the COST tool in patients with gynecologic cancer.

Psychometric properties of self-reported financial toxicity measures in cancer survivors: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) measuring financial toxicity (FT) in cancer survivors.

DESIGN

This systematic review was conducted according to the guidance of the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology.

DATA SOURCES

Comprehensive searches were performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest and Cochrane Library from database inception to February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included studies that reported any PROMs for measuring FT in cancer survivors who were ≥18 years old. FT was defined as perceived subjective financial distress resulting from objective financial burden. Studies that were not validation studies and that used a PROM only as an outcome measurement were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included papers. We used the COSMIN criteria to summarise and evaluate the psychometric properties of each study regarding structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing for construct validity, cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance, criterion validity and responsiveness.

RESULTS

A total of 23 articles (21 PROMs) were eligible for inclusion in this study. The findings highlighted that the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) had an adequate development process and showed better psychometric properties than other PROMs, especially in internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.92), reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.80) and hypothesis testing (r=0.42-0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

From a psychometric property perspective, the COST could be recommended as the most suitable worldwide available measure for use in research and clinical practice across different contexts. We suggest that PROMs should be selected only after careful consideration of the local socioeconomic context. Future studies are warranted to develop various FT PROMs based on different social and cultural backgrounds and to clarify the theoretical grounds for assessing FT.

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

INTRODUCTION

Financial toxicity is common and pervasive among cancer patients. Research suggests that gynecologic cancer patients experiencing financial toxicity are at increased risk for engaging in harmful cost-coping strategies, including delaying/skipping treatment because of costs, or forsaking basic needs to pay medical bills. However, little is known about patients' preferences for interventions to address financial toxicity.

METHODS

Cross-sectional surveys to assess financial toxicity [Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST)], cost-coping strategies, and preferences for intervention were conducted in a gynecologic cancer clinic waiting room. Associations with cost-coping were determined using multivariate modeling. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) explored associations between financial toxicity and intervention preferences.

RESULTS

Among 89 respondents, median COST score was 31.9 (IQR: 21-38); 35% (N = 30) scored < 26, indicating they were experiencing financial toxicity. Financial toxicity was significantly associated with cost-coping (adjusted OR = 3.32 95% CI: 1.08, 14.34). Intervention preferences included access to transportation vouchers (38%), understanding treatment costs up-front (35%), minimizing wait times (33%), access to free food at appointments (25%), and assistance with minimizing/eliminating insurance deductibles (23%). In unadjusted analyses, respondents experiencing financial toxicity were more likely to select transportation assistance (OR = 2.67, 95% CI: 1.04, 6.90), assistance with co-pays (OR = 9.17, 95% CI: 2.60, 32.26), and assistance with deductibles (OR = 12.20, 95% CI: 3.47, 43.48), than respondents not experiencing financial toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm the presence of financial toxicity in gynecologic cancer patients, describe how patients attempt to cope with financial hardship, and provide insight into patients' needs for targeted interventions to mitigate the harm of financial toxicity.