Diagnostic impression cytology for external eye disease.

S. L. Maskin,K. Heitman,A. W. Lawton,R. Yee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003226-198912000-00009

IF: 3.152

1989-12-01

Cornea

Abstract:The authors describe their experience with the use of impression cytology (IC) as a diagnostic aid in the evaluation of external eye disorders. IC is shown to be useful for diagnosis of epithelial cell storage disorders, infectious diseases, and allergic disorders.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Interventions to mitigate cancer‐related medical financial hardship: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Ali Rashidi,Jinho Jung,Raymond Kao,Emily Lan Nguyen,Theresa Le,Brandon Ton,Wen‐Pin Chen,Argyrios Ziogas,Gelareh Sadigh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35367

IF: 6.9209

2024-05-19

Cancer

Abstract:Background This study systematically reviewed interventions mitigating financial hardship in patients with cancer and assessed effectiveness using a meta‐analytic method. Methods PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for articles published in English during January 2000–April 2023. Two independent reviewers selected prospective clinical trials with an intervention targeting and an outcome measuring financial hardship. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers using a quality assessment tool. A random‐effects model meta‐analysis was performed. Reporting followed the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta‐analyses guidelines. Results Eleven studies (2211 participants; 55% male; mean age, 59.29 years) testing interventions including financial navigation, financial education, and cost discussion were included. Financial worry improved in only 27.3% of 11 studies. Material hardship and cost‐related care nonadherence remained unchanged in the two studies measuring these outcomes. Four studies (373 participants; 37% male, mean age, 55.88 years) assessed the impact of financial navigation on financial worry using the comprehensive score of financial toxicity (COST) measure (score range, 0–44; higher score = lower financial worry) and were used for meta‐analysis. There was no significant change in the mean of pooled COST score between post‐ and pre‐intervention (1.21; 95% confidence interval, –6.54 to 8.96; p = .65). Adjusting for pre‐intervention COST, mean change of COST significantly decreased by 0.88 with every 1‐unit increase in pre‐intervention COST (p = .02). The intervention significantly changed COST score when pre‐intervention COST was ≤14.5. Conclusion A variety of interventions have been tested to mitigate financial hardship. Financial navigation can mitigate financial worry among high‐risk patients.

oncology
Interventions to alleviate financial toxicity among patients with cancer: A systematic review.

Asad Arastu,Andrew Hamilton,Emerson Yu-sheng Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.e18841

IF: 45.3

2021-05-20

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e18841 Background: Financial toxicity (FT) has become a recognized side effect associated with cancer diagnosis and treatment; however, there is little data on what interventions have proven to be effective at mitigating the financial burden patients might face. Methods: A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Met-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo. Broad terminology to capture FT and all possible interventions was used to identify articles published through June 25, 2020 in MEDLINE and July 31, 2020 in Embase and PsycInfo. We excluded systematic reviews, studies not conducted in the United States, with non-adult participants, or those that did not examine an intervention to directly alleviate FT. Two independent reviewers (AA and EYC) reviewed all abstracts to identify which articles met inclusion criteria. An inductive approach was used to thematically categorize unique intervention strategies. Results: A total of 1126 abstracts were identified from the initial search strategy, and 9 met final inclusion criteria. Across these studies, 12 distinct strategies were reported in 27 unique occurrences. They were mapped into four broad domains: 1) patient assistance programs (PAPs) through pharmaceutical company and/or charity sponsored programs, 2) financial navigators who provide counseling and community resources, 3) direct coverage through free medications or payments, and 4) indirect coverage for related services (e.g. transportation). Direct coverage was most commonly proposed, 15/27 (56%) of interventions, followed by PAPs 5/27 (18%), financial navigators 4/27 (15%), and indirect costs 3/27 (11%). These interventions led to outcomes including: cost savings to patients in 5/9 studies (56%), alleviated fears surrounding cost of treatment in 2/9 (22%), earlier medication fills in 1/9 (11%), and decreased anxiety on a self-reported Likert scale in 1/9 (11%). Conclusions: While potential solutions to FT from cancer care remain unclear, this systematic review demonstrates that particular implemented strategies have lessened patient expenses, improved therapy adherence, or helped patients live better. Additional resources could help equip providers and institutions on how to use existing infrastructure (PAPs) or how to deploy additional workforce to diminish FT.

oncology
Amoxicillin-induced acute aseptic meningitis

S. Prieto-González,R. Escoda,E. Coloma,J. Grau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2010.07.122

IF: 2.116

2011-03-01

Journal of Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract:
Implementation of Systematic Financial Screening in an Outpatient Breast Oncology Setting

Melissa P Beauchemin,David DeStephano,Rohit Raghunathan,Erik Harden,Melissa Accordino,Grace C Hillyer,Justine M Kahn,Benjamin L May,Billy Mei,Todd Rosenblat,Cynthia Law,Elena B Elkin,Rita Kukafka,Jason D Wright,Dawn L Hershman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/CCI.22.00172

Abstract:Purpose: Implementation of routine financial screening is a critical step toward mitigating financial toxicity. We evaluated the feasibility, sustainability, and acceptability of systematic financial screening in the outpatient breast oncology clinic at a large, urban cancer center. Methods: We developed and implemented a stakeholder-informed process to systematically screen for financial hardship and worry. A 2-item assessment in English or Spanish was administered to patients through the electronic medical record portal or using paper forms. We evaluated completion rates and mode of completion. Through feedback from patients, clinicians, and staff, we identified strategies to improve completion rates and acceptability. Results: From March, 2021, to February, 2022, 3,500 patients were seen in the breast oncology clinic. Of them, 39% (n = 1,349) responded to the screening items, either by paper or portal, 12% (n = 437) preferred not to answer, and the remaining 49% (n = 1,714) did not have data in their electronic health record, meaning they were not offered screening or did not complete the paper forms. Young adults (18-39 years) were more likely to respond compared with patients 70 years or older (61% v 30%, P < .01). English-preferring patients were more likely to complete the screening compared with those who preferred Spanish (46% v 28%, P < .01). Non-Hispanic White patients were more likely to respond compared with Non-Hispanic Black patients and with Hispanic patients (46% v 39% v 32%, P < .01). Strategies to improve completion rates included partnering with staff to facilitate paper form administration, optimizing patient engagement with the portal, and clearly communicating the purpose of the screening. Conclusion: Systematic financial screening is feasible, and electronic data capture facilitates successful implementation. However, inclusive procedures that address language and technology preferences are needed to optimize screening.
A Systematic Review of Interventions Targeting Cancer-Related Financial Hardship: Current Evidence and Implications

Shumin Jia,Denise Shuk Ting Cheung,Mu-Hsing Ho,Naomi Takemura,Yongshen Feng,Chia-Chin Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000001393

2024-08-26

Abstract:Background: Despite an increasing emphasis on alleviating financial hardship in cancer care delivery, limited knowledge of evidence-based and effective interventions is available. Objective: This systematic review aimed to identify gaps in the literature and provide insights for future evidence-based interventions targeting financial hardship from both micro and macro perspectives. Methods: We comprehensively searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases from inception to October 2022. Studies examining the effect of an intervention on mitigating cancer-related financial hardship were included. Results: A total of 24 studies were included. Findings indicate that the most significant positive changes were in the material conditions domain from the micro perspective of financial hardship. From the macro perspective, positive effects were shown for improving access to care, affordability of care, healthcare utilization, and healthcare equity of interventions at the provider or care team level, the community healthcare environment level, and the healthcare system and policy level. Notably, significant heterogeneity was observed among interventions and outcome measurements. Conclusions: This is the first comprehensive systematic review of interventions targeting cancer-related financial hardship from both micro and macro perspectives. No consistently positive effect of the interventions on all domains was reported. Multidisciplinary approaches and higher-level hierarchical and evidence-based interventions are needed to address financial hardship. Implications for practice: Health practitioners should screen and manage financial hardship using a standard and comprehensive measurement at the dyadic level of cancer survivors and caregivers.
The Impact of Interventions Addressing Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cancer-Related Outcomes in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

Annie Bygrave,Kate Whittaker,Sanchia Aranda AM,Aranda AM Sanchia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.1711

2020-07-28

Journal of Public Health Research

Abstract:Background High cancer mortality is a major source of burden. Population-wide programs have been developed to improve cancer outcomes, and although effective in improving outcomes overall, the socioeconomically disadvantaged population have disproportionately benefited. This systematic review evaluated interventions aimed at addressing inequalities in cancer-related outcomes between low and high socioeconomic groups within high-income countries. Materials and Methods The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and PubMed searches were completed in October 2018. Data extraction and quality appraisal were guided by established mechanisms. Impact of interventions, using odds ratios, with respective 95% confidence intervals were presented, where available. Results Sixteen studies reporting on 19 interventions were included. Seven interventions (37%) reduced socioeconomic inequalities in cancer-related outcomes, focusing on participation in cancer screening. Interventions included pre-formulated implementation intentions; GP-endorsed screening invitations; enhanced reminder letters; text message reminders; and implementation of an organised screening program. Conclusions This systematic review found limited evidence on the efficacy of existing interventions that aimed to reduce inequalities in cancer-related outcomes between people living in low and high socioeconomic areas among high-income countries. Future interventions should consider the specific needs of people living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas to improve the efficacy of an intervention.
Screening for Financial Toxicity Among Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Nadia L. Samaha,Leila J. Mady,Maria Armache,Madison Hearn,Rachel Stemme,Reshma Jagsi,Laila A. Gharzai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2024.04.024

IF: 6.24

2024-05-19

Journal of the American College of Radiology

Abstract: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 1085 identified studies, 51 met final inclusion criteria. Outcomes evaluated included FT measures/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 vs treatment vs survivorship), setting (clinic-based, online, telephone/mail), utilized tools (21 unique tools, 7 previously validated), and interpretations of screening results (varying FT score cutoffs defining high vs. low FT). Younger age, lower income, lower education, non-white race, employment status change, advanced cancer stage, and systemic/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.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Female Breast and Cervical Cancer Screens: A Systematic Review

Victoria Phillips,Daniela Franco Montoya,E. Kathleen Adams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16061134

2024-03-14

Cancers

Abstract:Purpose: To systematically review published cost-effectiveness analyses of Evidence-Based Interventions (EBIs) recommended by the United States Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) to increase breast and cervical cancer screening. Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase for prospective cost-effectiveness evaluations of EBIs for breast and cervical cancer screening since 1999. We reviewed studies according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs), defined as cost per additional woman screened, adjusted to 2021 USD, within and across EBIs by cancer type. Results: We identified eleven studies meeting our review criteria: nine were breast cancer-focused, one breast and cervical cancer combined, and one cervical only, which together reported twenty-four cost-effectiveness assessments of outreach programs spanning eight EBIs. One-on-one education programs were the most common EBI evaluated. The average ICER across breast cancer studies was USD 545 (standard deviation [SD] = USD 729.3), while that for cervical cancer studies was USD 197 (SD = 186.6. Provider reminder/recall systems for women already linked to formal care were the most cost-effective, with an average ICERs of USD 41.3 and USD 10.6 for breast and cervical cancer, respectively. Conclusions: Variability in ICERs across and within EBIs reflect the population studied, the specific EBI, and study settings, and was relatively high. ICER estimate uncertainty and the potential for program replicability in other settings and with other populations were not addressed. Given these limitations, using existing cost-effectiveness estimates to inform program funding allocations is not warranted at this time. Additional research is needed on outreach programs for cervical cancer and those which serve minority populations for either of the female cancer screens.

oncology
Breast and Cervical Cancer Screenings: A Systematic Economic Review of Patient Navigation Services

Sajal K. Chattopadhyay,Akash Pillai,Jeffrey Reynolds,Verughese Jacob,Donatus Ekwueme,Yinan Peng,Alison E. Cuellar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2024.06.005

IF: 6.604

2024-06-14

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract:Introduction This paper examined the economic evidence of patient navigation services to increase breast and cervical cancer screenings among historically disadvantaged racial and ethnic populations and people with lower incomes. Methods The literature search strategy for this systematic review included English-language studies conducted in high-income countries that were published from database inception to December 2022. Studies on patients with existing cancer or without healthcare system involvement were excluded. Analysis was completed in January 2023. All monetary values reported are in 2022 U.S. dollars. Results The search yielded 3 breast cancer, 2 cervical cancer, and 2 multiple cancer studies that combined breast and cervical cancer with other cancer screenings. For breast cancer screening, the intervention cost per patient ranged from 10,245. Two studies reported 740 as intervention cost per additional person screened. Changes in healthcare cost per person from 2 studies were 2,437. Two studies reported cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of 39,159 while one study reported cost per life year (LY) gained of 103 and 56 and 924). Discussion All estimates of cost per QALY/LY saved for breast cancer screening were below a conservative threshold of $50,000 indicating that patient navigation services for breast cancer screening were cost-effective. There is limited evidence to determine cost-effectiveness of patient navigation services for cervical cancer screening.

medicine, general & internal,public, environmental & occupational health
Impact of a Comprehensive Financial Navigation Intervention to Reduce Cancer-Related Financial Toxicity

Stephanie B Wheeler,Michelle L Manning,Mindy Gellin,Neda Padilla,Lisa P Spees,Caitlin B Biddell,Victoria Petermann,Allison Deal,Cindy Rogers,Julia Rodriguez-O'Donnell,Cleo Samuel-Ryals,Katherine Reeder-Hayes,Donald L Rosenstein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2024.7030

Abstract:Background: Although the need to reduce the impact of financial toxicity among patients with cancer is widely acknowledged, few interventions have been developed to address this issue. We tested a novel, multiphase, patient-centered financial navigation (FN) intervention at a large academic medical center. Methods: We developed a financial toxicity screening tool consisting of the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) measure plus several additional items based on patient feedback. After systematizing the screening process, 50 patients from the North Carolina Basnight Cancer Hospital were enrolled in the FN intervention following a positive screen for financial distress (COST score <23). The FN intervention involved one-on-one consultations with a trained financial navigator and included an initial comprehensive intake appointment to determine patient eligibility for financial assistance and follow-up appointments to discuss paperwork and application(s) status. We assessed preliminary intervention effectiveness (preintervention and postintervention COST scores) and implementation (ie, fidelity, uptake, acceptability). Results: All 50 patients assessed for study eligibility screened positive for financial distress. A total of 46 patients completed both the preintervention and postintervention COST instrument and other measures. Postintervention mean COST scores improved from 6.4 at baseline to 13.3 post-FN (P<.0001), indicating a significant decrease in perceived financial toxicity. Fidelity to the intervention was high and 96% of participants received financial assistance. Conclusions: A patient-centered FN intervention fully integrated into an existing care coordination model can help to decrease the burden of cancer-related financial toxicity among patients with cancer experiencing financial distress. Further studies are needed to test FN interventions in various oncology settings and among targeted populations.
Describing financial toxicity among cancer patients in different income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Meram Azzani,Wahib Mohammed Atroosh,Deepa Anbazhagan,Vinoth Kumarasamy,Mona Mohamed Ibrahim Abdalla

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1266533

IF: 5.2

2024-01-02

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract: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.

public, environmental & occupational health
Pancreatic and extrapancreatic galanin release during sympathetic neural activation.

B. Dunning,P. Havel,R. Veith,G. Taborsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/AJPENDO.1990.258.3.E436

1990-03-01

Abstract:To address the hypothesis that the neutropeptide, galanin, functions as a sympathetic neurotransmitter in the endocrine pancreas, we sought to determine if galanin is released from pancreatic sympathetic nerves during their direct electrical stimulation in halothane-anesthetized dogs. During bilateral thoracic splanchnic nerve stimulation (BTSNS), both peripheral arterial and pancreatic venous levels of galanin-like immunoreactivity (GLIR) increased (delta at 10 min = +92 +/- 31 and +88 +/- 25 fmol/ml, respectively). Systemic infusions of synthetic galanin demonstrated that 1) the increment of arterial GLIR observed during BTSNS was sufficient to modestly restrain basal insulin secretion and 2) only 25% of any given increment of arterial GLIR appears in the pancreatic vein, suggesting that the pancreas extracts galanin, as it does other neurotransmitters. By use of 75% for pancreatic extraction of circulating galanin, it was calculated that pancreatic galanin spillover (output) increased by 410 +/- 110 fmol/min during BTSNS. To reinforce the conclusion that pancreatic sympathetic nerves release galanin, GLIR spillover was next measured during direct local stimulation of the pancreatic sympathetic input produced by electrical stimulation of the mixed autonomic pancreatic nerves (MPNS) in the presence of the ganglionic blocker, hexamethonium. During this local pancreatic sympathetic nerve stimulation, arterial GLIR remained unchanged, but pancreatic venous GLIR increased by 123 +/- 34 fmol/ml. Thus pancreatic GLIR spillover increased by 420 +/- 110 fmol/min during MPNS in the presence of hexamethonium. We conclude that galanin is released from both pancreatic and extrapancreatic sources during sympathetic neural activation in dogs.
Financial Toxicity Screening Preferences in Patients With Breast Cancer

Laila A Gharzai,Yingzhe Alex Liu,Zequn Sun,Leila J Mady,Michelle Mohn,Alexis Larson,Sheetal Kircher,Betina Yanez,Ruth C Carlos,John Pottow,Reshma Jagsi,Gelareh Sadigh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00415

2024-09-17

Abstract:Purpose: Financial toxicity is an important issue in cancer that affects quality of life and treatment adherence. Screening can identify patients at risk but consensus on appropriate timing or methods is lacking. Methods: We sent an anonymous survey to e-mail subscribers of a nationwide breast cancer-specific philanthropic organization in July 2023 asking about financial toxicity screening preferences. Frequencies, percentages, and medians were calculated for categorical and continuous variables. Results: Of 5,774 potential participants, 738 respondents with a confirmed cancer diagnosis participated (12.7% response rate). Participants were 93% female (n = 690), had a median age of 50 years (IQR, 44-57), were 57% non-Hispanic White (n = 418), 20% Black/African-American (n = 149), 9.2% Hispanic (n = 68). 93% confirmed a breast cancer diagnosis (n = 689), and 54% were currently undergoing treatment (n = 400). Most indicated not being asked about financial stressors by (58%, n = 425) and not receiving assistance from their care team (68%, n = 498). Most preferred for providers to reach out regarding financial needs (83%, n = 615). Most wished for these discussions to take place early (when first diagnosed [45%, n = 334] or when treatment selected [37%, n = 275]) and to be asked frequently (each appointment [42%, n = 312] or once per month [36%, n = 268]). Participants felt most comfortable discussing financial needs with a social worker or patient/financial navigator (92%, n = 679), in person (75%, n = 553), or via telephone (65%, n = 479). Conclusion: Patients in this sample primarily consisting of women with breast cancer desired financial screening to occur early, often, and to be initiated by their providers. Patient preferences can inform optimal implementation of financial toxicity screening practices. Continued work refining best practices for financial toxicity screening should incorporate these patient preferences.
Financial Toxicity among Breast Cancer Patients

Yi Kuang,Xiaoyi Yuan,Zheng Zhu,Weijie Xing

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ncc.0000000000001262

IF: 2.6

2023-01-01

Cancer Nursing

Abstract:Background Breast cancer has become the leading cause of global cancer incidence. With the improvement of treatment methods, financial toxicity among breast cancer patients has been widely studied. Objectives The aims of this study were to summarize the risk factors for and outcomes of financial toxicity among breast cancer patients, to identify populations at risk for financial toxicity, to identify the consequent health impacts, and to provide evidence for subsequent intervention programs. Methods We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (Ovid), ProQuest, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases from inception to July 21, 2022. We followed the updated framework for scoping reviews proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Results A total of 31 studies were included. Risk factors and outcomes of financial toxicity among breast cancer patients were identified and extracted. The risk factors included socioeconomic, demographic, disease and treatment, and psychological and cognitive factors, whereas financial toxicity affected the physical, behavioral, and psychological domains of breast cancer patients, resulting in material loss, coping behaviors, and impaired health-related quality of life. Conclusion Financial toxicity among breast cancer patients depends on multiple factors and has profound effects. The findings will be helpful for identifying breast cancer patients at a high risk of financial toxicity and developing intervention programs to reduce financial toxicity and outcomes. Implications for Practice More high-quality prospective, multicenter studies should be conducted in the future to better understand the trajectory of and risk factors for financial toxicity. Further studies should merge symptom management and psychosocial support into intervention programs.
Interventions for Financial Toxicity Among Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review

Xiaoyi Yuan,Xuehui Zhang,Jing He,Weijie Xing,Xiaoyi YUAN,Weijie XING

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2023.104140

IF: 6.625

2023-09-22

Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology

Abstract:Introduction Financial toxicity impairs cancer survivors' material condition, psychological wellbeing and quality of life. This scoping review aimed to identify interventions for reducing cancer-related financial toxicity (FT), and to summarize their main findings. Methods A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Clinical Trials, China National Knowledge Internet, Wanfang and SinoMed from January 2010 to September 2022 following the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Results From 2,842 identified articles, a total of 15 were included in this review. Existing interventions can be classified into four types: financial navigation, financial counseling, insurance education and others. Previous interventions preliminarily affirmed the feasibility, satisfaction, and improvement in financial worries and knowledge. However, the effectiveness on FT was controversial. Conclusions Previous interventions affirmed the feasibility and primary effect of these interventions. Studies with more rigorous design are needed to evaluate the effectiveness and generalizability of interventions on FT across diverse healthcare systems.

oncology,hematology
Financial toxicity experienced by patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review

Jingru Bian,Aomei Shen,Wanwan Yang,Liyuan Zhang,Wanmin Qiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07800-9

2023-05-27

Abstract:Purpose: To perform a systematic review on financial toxicity of breast cancer-related lymphedema. Methods: Seven databases were searched on September 11, 2022. Eligible studies were identified, analyzed, and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Empirical studies were appraised by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool version 2018 was used to assess the mixed method studies. Results: A total of 963 articles were identified, but only 7 articles reporting on 6 studies met the eligibility criteria. A 2-year treatment for lymphedema was approximately USD$14,877 to USD$23,167 in America. In Australia, the average out-of-pocket costs ranged from A$207 to A$1400 (USD$156.26 to USD$1056.83) per year. Outpatient visits, compressed clothing, and hospital admissions were the dominant costs. The financial toxicity was associated with the severity of lymphedema, and patients with heavy financial burden had to reduce other expenses or even forgo the treatment. Conclusion: Breast cancer-related lymphedema aggravated the economic burden of patients. The included studies showed great variation in the methods used and therefore differences in cost results. The national government should further improve the healthcare system and increase the insurance coverage of lymphedema treatment to alleviate this burden. More research is needed to focus on financial toxicity experience of breast cancer patients with lymphedema. Implications for cancer survivors: The cost of the ongoing treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema influences patients' economic situation and quality of life. Survivors need to be informed early about the potential financial burden associated with lymphedema treatment.
Financial toxicity of cancer care in sub-Saharan Africa: protocol for a systematic review

Akiko Ida,Zin Wai Htay

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084148

IF: 3.006

2024-09-16

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction: In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the number of cancer deaths is expected to double between 2020 and 2030; however, financial costs remain a barrier to accessing cancer treatment and care. There is an evidence gap on financial toxicity related to cancer care in SSA, both for the patient and for the family members providing care. Against this background, this review aims to analyse cancer care-related financial toxicity for the patient and family caregivers in SSA. Methods and analysis: A comprehensive search of peer-reviewed articles in the English language reporting the financial burden of cancer care on patients and family caregivers in SSA will be conducted using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science from 1 January 2000 to 13 October 2023. Two researchers will independently review the titles, abstracts and full-text articles, and any disagreements will be resolved through consensus. A risk of bias assessment will be conducted using the assessment tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. A quantitative and narrative synthesis of included studies, including the prevalence of financial toxicity of cancer care in SSA, will be developed. The review will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical review is not required because this review draws on published literature. The results will be presented at leading cancer and public health conferences, published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated via website posts and social media channels to improve access to cancer care and to facilitate evidence-based policymaking in SSA. Prospero registration number: CRD42023469011.
Out-of-pocket payment and financial risk protection for breast cancer treatment: a prospective study from India

Tabassum Wadasadawala,Sanjay K Mohanty,Soumendu Sen,Tejaswi S Kanala,Suraj Maiti,Namita Puchali,Sudeep Gupta,Rajiv Sarin,Vani Parmar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lansea.2023.100346

2024-01-16

Abstract:Background: Available data on cost of cancer treatment, out-of-pocket payment and reimbursement are limited in India. We estimated the treatment costs, out-of-pocket payment, and reimbursement in a cohort of breast cancer patients who sought treatment at a publicly funded tertiary cancer care hospital in India. Methods: A prospective longitudinal study was conducted from June 2019 to March 2022 at Tata Memorial Centre (TMC), Mumbai. Data on expenditure during each visit of treatment was collected by a team of trained medical social workers. The primary outcome variables were total cost (TC) of treatment, out-of-pocket payment (OOP), and reimbursement. TC included cost incurred by breast cancer patients during treatment at TMC. OOP was defined as the total cost incurred at TMC less of reimbursement. Reimbursement was any form of financial assistance (cashless or repayment), including social health insurance, private health insurance, employee health schemes, and assistance from charitable trusts, received by the patients for breast cancer treatment. Findings: Of the 500 patients included in the study, 45 discontinued treatment (due to financial or other reasons) and 26 died during treatment. The mean TC of breast cancer treatment was ₹258,095/US$3531 (95% CI: 238,225, 277,934). Direct medical cost (MC) accounted for 56.3% of the TC. Systemic therapy costs (₹50,869/US$696) were higher than radiotherapy (₹33,483/US$458) and surgery costs (₹25,075/US$343). About 74.4% patients availed some form of financial assistance at TMC; 8% patients received full reimbursement. The mean OOP for breast cancer treatment was ₹186,461/US$2551 (95% CI: 167,666, 205,257), accounting for 72.2% of the TC. Social health insurance (SHI) had a reasonable coverage (33.1%), followed by charitable trusts (29.6%), employee health insurance (5.1%), private health insurance (4.4%) and 25.6% had no reimbursement. But SHI covered only 40.1% of the TC of treatment compared to private health insurance that covered as much as 57.1% of it. Both TC and OOP were higher for patients who were younger, belonged to rural areas, had a comorbidity, were diagnosed at an advanced stage, and were from outside Maharashtra. Interpretation: In India, the cost and OOP for breast cancer treatment are high and reimbursement for the treatment flows from multiple sources. Though many of the patients receive some form of reimbursement, it is insufficient to prevent high OOP. Hence both wider insurance coverage as well as higher cap of the insurance packages in the health insurance schemes is suggested. Allowing for the automatic inclusion of cancer treatment in SHI can mitigate the financial burden of cancer patients in India. Funding: This work was funded by an extramural grant from the Women's Cancer Initiative and the Nag Foundation and an intramural grant from the International Institute of Population Sciences, Mumbai.
What Interventions Work to Reduce Cost Barriers to Primary Healthcare in High-Income Countries? A Systematic Review

Bailey Yee,Nisa Mohan,Fiona McKenzie,Mona Jeffreys

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081029

2024-08-05

Abstract:High-income countries like Aotearoa New Zealand are grappling with inequitable access to healthcare services. Out-of-pocket payments can lead to the reduced use of appropriate healthcare services, poorer health outcomes, and catastrophic health expenses. To advance our knowledge, this systematic review asks, "What interventions aim to reduce cost barriers for health users when accessing primary healthcare in high-income countries?" The search strategy comprised three bibliographic databases (Dimensions, Embase, and Medline Web of Science). Two authors selected studies for inclusion; discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. All articles published in English from 2000 to May 2022 and that reported on outcomes of interventions that aimed to reduce cost barriers for health users to access primary healthcare in high-income countries were eligible for inclusion. Two blinded authors independently assessed article quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed in a narrative synthesis. Forty-three publications involving 18,861,890 participants and 6831 practices (or physicians) met the inclusion criteria. Interventions reported in the literature included removing out-of-pocket costs, implementing nonprofit organizations and community programs, additional workforce, and alternative payment methods. Interventions that involved eliminating or reducing out-of-pocket costs substantially increased healthcare utilization. Where reported, initiatives generally found financial savings at the system level. Health system initiatives generally, but not consistently, were associated with improved access to healthcare services.
Abstract C048: Addressing financial toxicity in cancer clinical trials: Acceptability and feasibility of a text-based intervention for the offering, screening, and enrolling of patients in a financial reimbursement program

Ashley Santaniello,Elizabeth Ramos,Hena Patel,Vivian Nguyen,Dana Dornsife,Robert G Johnson,Sarah Milinski,E. Paul Wileyto,Robert H Vonderheide,Carmen E Guerra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-c048

2024-09-22

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Out-of-pocket (OOP) costs in cancer clinical trials (CCT) are a barrier to recruitment and retention and add to the high financial toxicity (FT) experienced by participants. To address FT in CCTs, the Lazarex Cancer Foundation created the Improving Patient Access to Cancer Clinical Trials (IMPACT) Program, a financial reimbursement program (FRP) for OOP travel and lodging costs incurred during CCT participation. We previously showed that barriers to enrolling in the FRP include lack of program awareness and delayed program introduction by the CCT research team and administrative burden. To overcome these challenges, we designed an automated text message intervention to systematically offer, screen, and enroll patients in the IMPACT program via the Way to Health platform. Here, we present the patient acceptability and feasibility of this intervention. At our academic cancer center from March - May 2024, 25 patients (68% White, 20% Black, 12% Other Race; 60% Female, 40% Male; μ Age=58 σ=12) were referred from treatment CCTs for Breast, Leukemia, and CAR-T treated neoplasms (lymphoma, glioblastoma, prostate and pancreatic adenocarcinoma). All were enrolled in an automated text-message program during which they confirm their identity, confirm consideration of a CCT, screen for income eligibility, choose to receive the program application link via call, text, or email, and finally, complete the Net Promoter Score (NPS) survey. Of the 25 patients who received texts, 11 (44%) completed the text conversation and 14 (56%) did not. Of those who completed the text conversation, the mean age (51) was younger than those who did not (65, p=0.072*) and the proportion of female patients (72%) was greater than those who did not (50%, p=0.4592**) but the results did not reach statistical significance. Of those who did not complete the text conversation, 2 opted out after the initial message, 3 requested to screen via phone, and 9 stopped responding at various other points. Almost all (23) patients confirmed their identity, 22 indicated they are considering or enrolled in a trial while 1 confirmed they are not, and 18 agreed to screen for IMPACT eligibility (15 via text, 3 via phone call). Of those who screened via text, 13 indicated their household size, and 12 went on to confirm their income level (7 qualifying and 5 disqualifying financially). Of the 7 eligible patients, 6 requested an application via email and 1 via text. The final NPS (NPS = % promoters (55%) - % detractors (18%), expressed as an integer), calculated from the 11 patients who completed the measure via text, is 36, indicating favorable degrees of patient satisfaction. The reported high engagement (92%), screening rate (72%), and enrollment rate among eligible patients (57%) demonstrates that using text messages is a feasible and acceptable way to offer, screen, and enroll patients in the IMPACT FRP. This provides a potential, low-cost, opportunity to scale the program to other institutions. * Welch Two Sample t-test ** 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction Citation Format: Ashley Santaniello, Elizabeth Ramos, Hena Patel, Vivian Nguyen, Dana Dornsife, Robert G Johnson, Sarah Milinski, E. Paul Wileyto, Robert H Vonderheide, Carmen E Guerra. Addressing financial toxicity in cancer clinical trials: Acceptability and feasibility of a text-based intervention for the offering, screening, and enrolling of patients in a financial reimbursement program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr C048.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health

Diagnostic impression cytology for external eye disease.

Interventions to mitigate cancer‐related medical financial hardship: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Interventions to alleviate financial toxicity among patients with cancer: A systematic review.

Amoxicillin-induced acute aseptic meningitis

Implementation of Systematic Financial Screening in an Outpatient Breast Oncology Setting

A Systematic Review of Interventions Targeting Cancer-Related Financial Hardship: Current Evidence and Implications

The Impact of Interventions Addressing Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cancer-Related Outcomes in High-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

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

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Female Breast and Cervical Cancer Screens: A Systematic Review

Breast and Cervical Cancer Screenings: A Systematic Economic Review of Patient Navigation Services

Impact of a Comprehensive Financial Navigation Intervention to Reduce Cancer-Related Financial Toxicity

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

Pancreatic and extrapancreatic galanin release during sympathetic neural activation.

Financial Toxicity Screening Preferences in Patients With Breast Cancer

Financial Toxicity among Breast Cancer Patients

Interventions for Financial Toxicity Among Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review

Financial toxicity experienced by patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review

Financial toxicity of cancer care in sub-Saharan Africa: protocol for a systematic review

Out-of-pocket payment and financial risk protection for breast cancer treatment: a prospective study from India

What Interventions Work to Reduce Cost Barriers to Primary Healthcare in High-Income Countries? A Systematic Review

Abstract C048: Addressing financial toxicity in cancer clinical trials: Acceptability and feasibility of a text-based intervention for the offering, screening, and enrolling of patients in a financial reimbursement program