Mental Health Matters: Bringing Awareness to the Less Recognized Financial Toxicities of Cancer Care

Megan Sears-Smith,Thomas G. Knight

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.24.00425

2024-07-15

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:Discussing the less recognized financial toxicities of cancer care, including mental health and dental care

oncology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Financial Toxicity in Cancer Supportive Care: An International Survey

Alexandre Chan,Yu Ke,Mary Tanay,Mary Dagsi,Cristiane Bergerot,Niharika Dixit,Lawson Eng,Ana Cardeña Gutiérrez,Changchuan Jiang,Ana I Velázquez,Farhad Islami,Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.24.00043

Abstract:Purpose: The study aims to explore unmet social needs and sources of financial toxicities in patients as noted by health care professionals and researchers in cancer supportive care, shedding light on potential health disparities. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, we anonymously surveyed active members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). The survey, structured in three sections, included questions regarding the routine assessment of social needs during patient consultations, sociodemographic aspects, factors influencing financial toxicity (FT), perceived support for managing FT, and available/desirable resources. Results: A total of 218 MASCC members were included, predominantly from high-income countries (HIC, 73.4%), with many age 41-60 years (56.5%) and female (56.9%). Drug/treatment cost and insurance coverage were the main sources for FT among the HIC, whereas participants from low-middle-income countries (LMIC) considered transportation cost, loss of employment because of cancer diagnosis, and unavailability of return-to-work services as the top three sources of FT. Respondents from LMIC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.01 [95% CI, 1.15 to 7.93]) and physicians (aOR, 2.67 [95% CI, 1.15 to 6.21]) were more likely to routinely assess financial coverages. Socioeconomic status was consistently ranked as one of the top three sources of financial toxicities by participants from LMIC (34%), HIC excluding the United States (38%), those who do not self-identify as racial/ethnic minority (36%), and physicians (40%). Conclusion: This global survey of health care professionals and researchers in HIC and LMIC revealed varying approaches to assessing financial coverage and social needs. Socioeconomic status emerged as a consistent concern across countries, affecting financial toxicities. The study highlights the need for tailored approaches and improved resource visibility while emphasizing clinicians' pivotal role in addressing financial aspects of cancer care.
Addressing Financial Toxicity in Head and Neck Cancer—A Crucial Imperative

Leila J. Mady,Zachary N. Goldberg,John R. de Almeida

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2024.0427

2024-04-11

JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery

Abstract:This Viewpoint calls for consideration of the financial costs of head and neck cancer care when choosing treatment strategies for patients who may face severe financial stress or insolvency due to cancer treatment.

surgery,otorhinolaryngology
Short-term and long-term financial toxicity from breast cancer treatment: a qualitative study

Sandy Lee,Ramona G Olvera,Karen Shiu-Yee,Laura J Rush,Willi L Tarver,Tessa Blevins,Ann Scheck McAlearney,Barbara L Andersen,Electra D Paskett,William E Carson,J C Chen,Samilia Obeng-Gyasi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-08199-z

2023-12-14

Abstract:Purpose: The rising cost of breast cancer treatment has increased patients' financial burden, intensifying an already stressful treatment process. Although researchers increasingly recognize the harmful impact of medical and nonmedical costs associated with cancer treatment, understanding patients' perspectives of financial toxicity is limited. We aimed to explore the topic of financial toxicity through the lived experiences of patients with breast cancer from groups at risk of social and economic marginalization. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 50 women with breast cancer from four specific groups: Black women, Medicaid enrollees, rural residents, and women age ≤ 40. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed the data using deductive and inductive approaches. Results: Two overarching themes captured patients' experiences of financial toxicity: short-term and long-term impacts. Short-term stressors included direct medical (e.g., co-pays, premiums), nonmedical (e.g., transportation, lodging), and indirect (e.g., job loss, reduced work hours) costs. Early in their treatments, patients' focus on survival took precedence over financial concerns. However, as the treatment course progressed, fear of consequences from compounding costs of care and financial distress negatively impacted patients' lifestyles and outlooks for the future. Conclusion: Programs addressing financial toxicity that look beyond early-phase interventions are needed. Specifically, patients struggling with the accumulation of treatment costs and the resultant stress require ongoing support. Long-term support is especially needed for groups vulnerable to financial instability and social marginalization.
Cancer Survivors' Experience of Care and Financial Toxicity: Results From a National Survey

Michael T Halpern,Carla Thamm,Reegan Knowles,Raymond J Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00370

2024-08-22

Abstract:Purpose: Financial toxicity (FT) can adversely affect quality of life, treatment adherence, and clinical outcomes. Patient experience of care (PEC) captures patient's perspectives on interactions with health care providers (HCPs) and systems, but the impact of PEC on FT is unknown. This study examined the relationship between PEC and FT. Methods: We used data from the 2016-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) Experience with Cancer Survivorship Supplement. PEC was assessed by patient-reported frequencies of their HCPs providing explanations that were easy to understand, listening carefully, showing respect, and spending enough time with the patient. FT was assessed by nine items to measure material, psychological, and behavioral FT. Analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression controlling for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and weighted to produce nationally representative estimates and account for survey nonresponse. Results: Data from 1,068 individuals diagnosed with cancer at age >18 years were assessed. A total of 30% reported material FT, 35% reported psychological FT, and 27% reported behavioral FT. Examining PEC, 64% of respondents indicated that HCPs always explained things, 60% always listened, 66% always showed respect, and 57% always spent adequate time with them. Odds of psychological FT were significantly (P < .05) lower among patients reporting HCPs always (v never/sometimes) listened to them (odds ratio [OR], 0.37 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.70]), showed them respect (OR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.81]), and spent enough time with them (OR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.86]). Significant associations with PEC were also found with MEPS psychological FT items on worry about paying medical bills, family's financial stability, and keeping job/income because of cancer. Conclusion: Worry/anxiety regarding costs can be a major factor affecting individuals diagnosed with cancer. Improving patient-provider interactions to enhance patient experience of care may reduce psychological financial toxicity.
Challenges and solutions to cancer-related financial toxicity according to Australian health professionals: qualitative results from a national survey

Jordana McLoone,Raymond J Chan,Megan Varlow,Kate Whittaker,Daniel Lindsay,Carla Thamm,Lillian Leigh,Laura Muir,Gillian Mackay,Deme J Karikios,Lee Hunt,Kim Hobbs,David E Goldsbury,Doreen Nabukalu,Louisa G Gordon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-023-07875-4

2023-07-04

Abstract:Purpose: To qualitatively explore Australian healthcare professionals' perspectives on how to improve the care and management of cancer-related financial toxicity, including relevant practices, services, and unmet needs. Methods: We invited healthcare professionals (HCP) who currently provide care to people with cancer within their role to complete an online survey, which was distributed via the networks of Australian clinical oncology professional associations/organisations. The survey was developed by the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia's Financial Toxicity Working Group and contained 12 open-ended items which we analysed using descriptive content analysis and NVivo software. Results: HCPs (n = 277) believed that identifying and addressing financial concerns within routine cancer care was important and most believed this to be the responsibility of all HCP involved in the patient's care. However, financial toxicity was viewed as a "blind spot" within a medical model of healthcare, with a lack of services, resources, and training identified as barriers to care. Social workers reported assessment and advocacy were part of their role, but many reported lacking formal training and understanding of financial complexities/laws. HCPs reported positive attitudes towards transparent discussions of costs and actioning cost-reduction strategies within their control, but feelings of helplessness when they perceived no solution was available. Conclusion: Identifying financial needs and providing transparent information about cancer-related costs was viewed as a cross-disciplinary responsibility, however, a lack of training and services limited the provision of support. Increased cancer-specific financial counselling and advocacy, via dedicated roles or developing HCPs' skills, is urgently needed within the healthcare system.
The social and economic toll of cancer survivorship: a complex web of financial sacrifice

Matthew P. Banegas,Jennifer L. Schneider,Alison J. Firemark,John F. Dickerson,Erin E. Kent,Janet S. de Moor,Katherine S. Virgo,Gery P. Guy,Donatus U. Ekwueme,Zhiyuan Zheng,Alexandra M. Varga,Lisa A. Waiwaiole,Stephanie M. Nutt,Aditi Narayan,K. Robin Yabroff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-019-00761-1

2019-05-23

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:<h3>Purpose</h3><p>To assess the financial outcomes and associated social and economic effects on cancer survivors and their families.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We assessed the responses of 1656 cancer survivors to a survey with both closed- and open-ended questions about cancer-related financial sacrifices they and their family experienced and evaluated differences in financial sacrifice by reported levels of cancer-related debt.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>The most commonly reported financial sacrifices included cutbacks on household budgets, challenges with health care insurance and costs, career/self-advancement constraints, reduction/depletion of assets, and inability to pay bills. Survivors who incurred $10,000 or more in debt were significantly more likely to report social and economic impacts, including housing concerns and strained relationships.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our analysis demonstrates both the frequency with which cancer survivors and families must make financial sacrifices as a result of their cancer, and the variety of forms that this sacrifice can take, even for individuals who have health insurance. The many types of financial hardship create challenges that are unique to each survivor and family.</p><h3>Implications for Cancer Survivors</h3><p>Interventions that allow for personalized assistance with the specific financial and social needs of cancer survivors and their families have the potential to address a critical aspect of the long-term wellbeing of this important population.</p>

oncology,social issues
Financial toxicity among people with metastatic cancer: findings from the Cancer Experience Registry

Michelle A. Mollica,Alexandra K. Zaleta,Lisa Gallicchio,Rachelle Brick,Paul B. Jacobsen,Emily Tonorezos,Kathleen M. Castro,Melissa F. Miller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08328-2

IF: 3.1

2024-01-31

Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract:This study describes financial toxicity (FT) reported by people with metastatic cancer, characteristics associated with FT, and associations between FT and compensatory strategies to offset costs.

oncology,health care sciences & services,rehabilitation
Toward identification and intervention to address financial toxicity and unmet health‐related social needs among adolescents and emerging adults with cancer and their caregivers: A cross‐cultural perspective

Melissa P. Beauchemin,Samrawit Solomon,Claudia L. Michaels,Kathryn McHenry,Eleanor Turi,Rhea Khurana,Gabriella Sanabria

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.7197

IF: 4.711

2024-04-26

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:Adolescents and emerging adults with cancer and their caregivers experience financial burdens that are often navigated with the support from multiple levels. Participants in our qualitative study offer suggestions to inform future interventions to mitigate the negative impact of the financial costs of cancer care. Purpose We qualitatively explored the unique needs and preferences for financial toxicity screening and interventions to address financial toxicity among adolescents and emerging adults (younger AYAs: 15–25 years) with cancer and their caregivers. Methods We recruited English‐ or Spanish‐speaking younger AYAs who were treated for cancer within the past 2 years and their caregivers. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted to explore preferences for screening and interventional study development to address financial toxicity. The data were coded using conventional content analysis. Codes were reviewed with the study team, and interviews continued until saturation was reached; codes were consolidated into categories and themes during consensus discussions. Results We interviewed 17 participants; nine were younger AYAs. Seven of the 17 preferred to speak Spanish. We identified three cross‐cutting themes: burden, support, and routine, consistent, and clear. The burden came in the form of unexpected costs such as transportation to appointments, as well as emotional burdens such as AYAs worrying about how much their family sacrificed for their care or caregivers worrying about the AYA's physical and financial future. Support, in the form of familial, community, healthcare institution, and insurance, was critical to mitigating the effects of financial toxicity in this population. Participants emphasized the importance of meeting individual financial needs by routinely and consistently asking about financial factors and providing clear guidance to navigate these needs. Conclusion Younger AYAs and their caregivers experience significant financial challenges and unmet health‐related social needs during cancer treatment and often rely on key supports to alleviate these unmet needs. When developing interventions to mitigate financial toxicity, clinicians and health systems should prioritize clear, consistent, and tailorable approaches to support younger AYA cancer survivors and their families.

oncology
Opinions and strategies of Australian health professionals on tackling cancer‐related financial toxicity: A nationwide survey

Louisa G. Gordon,Doreen Nabukalu,Raymond J. Chan,David E. Goldsbury,Kim Hobbs,Lee Hunt,Deme J. Karikios,Gillian Mackay,Laura Muir,Lillian Leigh,Carla Thamm,Daniel Lindsay,Kate Whittaker,Megan Varlow,Jordana McLoone,on behalf of the COSA Financial Toxicity Working Group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.13786

2022-05-21

Abstract:Many health professionals caring for patients with cancer often discuss the financial concerns of their patients and have increasing awareness of these issues but are limited by time and practical supports. Resources supporting financial‐related discussions for all health professionals are urgently needed to advance action in this field. Aim To understand the opinions and current practices of health professionals on the topic of addressing cancer‐related financial toxicity among patients. Methods A cross‐sectional online survey was distributed through Australian clinical oncology professional organizations/networks. The multidisciplinary Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Financial Toxicity Working Group developed 25 questions relating to the frequency and comfort levels of patient–clinician discussions, opinions about their role, strategies used, and barriers to providing solutions for patients. Descriptive statistics were used and subgroup analyses were undertaken by occupational groups. Results Two hundred and seventy‐seven health professionals completed the survey. The majority were female (n = 213, 77%), worked in public facilities (200, 72%), and treated patients with varied cancer types across all of Australia. Most participants agreed that it was appropriate in their clinical role to discuss financial concerns and 231 (88%) believed that these discussions were an important part of high‐quality care. However, 73 (28%) stated that they did not have the appropriate information on support services or resources to facilitate such conversations, differing by occupation group; 7 (11%) social workers, 34 (44%) medical specialists, 18 (25%) nurses, and 14 (27%) of other occupations. Hindrances to discussing financial concerns were insufficient resources or support systems to refer to, followed by lack of time in a typical consultation. Conclusion Health professionals in cancer care commonly address the financial concerns of their patients but attitudes differed across occupations about their role, and frustrations were raised about available solutions. Resources supporting financial‐related discussions for all health professionals are urgently needed to advance action in this field.

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

Maisha R. Huq,Marc D. Schwartz,Heather Derry-Vick,Amanda Khoudary,Lia Sorgen,Osairys Billini,Thomas S. Gunning,Conor Luck,Shreya Kaushik,Vanessa B. Hurley,John Marshall,Benjamin A. Weinberg,Anteneh Tesfaye,Andrew Ip,Arnold L. Potosky,Claire C. Conley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08983-5

IF: 3.1

2024-11-09

Supportive Care in Cancer

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

oncology,health care sciences & services,rehabilitation
Cancer Survivors' Experiences with Financial Toxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta‐synthesis of Qualitative Studies

Zheng Zhu,Weijie Xing,Xiaoju Zhang,Yan Hu,Winnie K.W. So

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5361

2020-01-01

Psycho-Oncology

Abstract:Objective The aim of this study was to synthesize qualitative research evidence on cancer survivors' experiences with financial toxicity (FT). Methods We carried out a systematic review of qualitative studies using a meta‐aggregation approach. Papers published prior to 31 August 2019, were collected from electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Cochrane Library (Wiley). Results Six synthesized findings were derived from 14 studies covering cancer patients' awareness of FT, cancer‐related expenditures, and the risk factors, impacts, coping strategies, and unmet needs related to FT. Conclusions Cancer survivors incur FT; however, their awareness of FT is limited. Cancer‐related FT has multiple impacts on survivors' lives. Although cancer survivors try to cope with FT through adjustments, they still have unmet needs for the management of FT. Nurses and social workers can play a critical role in helping survivors manage FT by increasing pre‐awareness of FT, strengthening emotional empowerment, and providing personalized informative support.
Financial Toxicity in Radiation Oncology: Impact for Our Patients and for Practicing Radiation Oncologists

Victoria S Wu,Xinglei Shen,Janet de Moor,Fumiko Chino,Jonathan Klein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2023.101419

2023-12-10

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

Elisa Raggini,Davide Mattavelli,Gabriele Zigliani,Paolo Bossi,Cesare Piazza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100x-n2762

2024-02-01

Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica

Abstract: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.

otorhinolaryngology
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.
Addressing financial toxicity in cancer treatment—An opportunity for the 340B drug pricing program

Kassem S. Faraj,Megan E. V. Caram,Vahakn B. Shahinian,Brent K. Hollenbeck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35379

IF: 6.9209

2024-05-29

Cancer

Abstract:Cancer treatment has become increasingly expensive, partially due to the use of specialty drugs. The costs of these drugs are often passed down to patients, who may face the consequences of paying for more than they can afford, leading to financial toxicity. The 340B drug pricing program is a health care policy that may provide an opportunity to mitigate the financial consequences of cancer care. The 340B program requires manufacturers to sell outpatient drugs at a discount to hospitals caring for a significant number of socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals. The program intended for hospitals to use savings from discounted purchases to expand their safety net to vulnerable patients. Some studies have shown that participating hospitals do this by offering more charity and discounted care, whereas others have demonstrated that hospitals fail to sufficiently expand their safety net. A potential flaw of the program is the lack of guidance from governing bodies on how hospitals should use savings from discounted purchases. There has been growing discussion among stakeholders to reform the 340B program given the mixed findings of its effectiveness. With the rising costs of specialty drugs and associated prevalence of financial toxicity in patients with cancer, there is an opportunity to address these issues through reform that improves the program. Directing hospitals to offer specific safety net opportunities, such as passing along discounted drug prices to vulnerable populations, could help the growing number of patients who are financially burdened by medications at the core of the 340B program.

oncology
As if the disease was not enough: coping with the financial consequences of cancer

Barbara Head,Lesley Harris,Karen Kayser,Amy Martin,Lisa Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3918-y

Abstract:Purpose: The goal of this research was to understand how cancer survivors cope with the financial consequences of their disease. Methods: Twenty-six cancer survivors who self-identified as having experienced financial hardship related to their disease were interviewed. Transcripts of these interviews were analyzed using constructivist grounded theory approach. An analysis of codes related to coping strategies was conducted, and findings were stratified based on established coping theories (Lazarus and Folkman and Moos and Holahan) previously applied to coping with serious/chronic illnesses. Results: Participants used both person-oriented/emotion-focused and task/problem-focused coping skills to confront the financial consequences of their disease trajectory. Problem-focused skills included dealing with debt, accessing financial assistance, making lifestyle changes, seeking information and education, altering treatment protocols, being proactive, and negotiating insurance. Emotion-focused tasks included using personal strengths, expressing emotion, accessing social support, being determined, and taking care of oneself. Results were further analyzed using Moos and Holahan's framework of coping skills; examples of each of these coping skills were identified in the interview data. Conclusions: Facing serious financial ramifications due to a cancer diagnosis calls forth coping skills and tasks that can be categorized using coping theories traditionally applied to coping with the illness itself. Cancer patients are often confronted with dual threats: the physical and emotional impact of the illness and the loss of financial security and the lifestyle that they have worked to maintain. Interventions with cancer survivors should include facilitating effective coping with the financial implications of the disease.
Lay healthcare worker financial toxicity intervention: a pilot financial toxicity screening and referral program

Divya A Parikh,Gladys M. Rodriguez,Meera Ragavan,Elizabeth Kerr,Mary Khay Asuncion,Jennifer Hansen,Sandy Srinivas,Alice C. Fan,Sumit Shah,Manali I. Patel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08357-x

IF: 3.1

2024-02-18

Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract:Financial toxicity is a source of significant distress for patients with urologic cancers, yet few studies have addressed financial burden in this patient population.

oncology,health care sciences & services,rehabilitation
A Potential Resource to Counter Financial Toxicity

Lauren V. Ghazal,Joanna Doran,Monica Bryant,Brad Zebrack,Margaret I. Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31050214

2024-05-16

Current Oncology

Abstract:This study describes the conception, development, and growth of the Triage Cancer Conference hosted by Triage Cancer, a national nonprofit organization providing free legal and financial education to the cancer community. We conducted a retrospective analysis of post-conference participant surveys. Descriptive statistics were calculated for participant demographics, and acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness were evaluated. From 2016–2021, 1239 participants attended the conference and completed post-conference surveys. Participants included social workers (33%), nurses (30%), and cancer patients/survivors (21%), with representation from over 48 states. Among those who reported race, 16% were Black, and 7% were Hispanic. For acceptability, more than 90% of participants felt that the conference content, instructors, and format were suitable and useful. For feasibility, more than 90% of participants felt that the material was useful, with 93–96% reporting that they were likely to share the information and 98% reporting that they would attend another triage cancer event. Appropriateness was also high, with >80–90% reporting that the sessions met the pre-defined objectives. Triage Cancer fills an important gap in mitigating financial toxicity, and formal evaluation of these programs allows us to build evidence of the role and impact of these existing resources. Future research should focus on adding validated patient-reported outcomes, longer-term follow-up, and ensuring inclusion and evaluation of outcome metrics among vulnerable populations.

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
Financial Distress in Genitourinary Cancer: Insights From CDC National Health Interview Survey

Steven Leonard,Emma Helstrom,Andres Correa,Mohit Sindhani,Nicole Uzzo,Angela Y. Jia,Alexander Kutikov,Robert Uzzo,Sarah P. Psutka,Adam Calaway,Zachary Klaassen,Michael Staehler,Marc Smaldone,Christopher J.D. Wallis,Laura Bukavina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.23.00733

2024-07-15

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:PURPOSE This study leverages CDC National Health Interview Survey data to examine Financial Distress (FD) among genitourinary (GU) cancer survivors, specifically prostate cancer (PC), kidney cancer (KC), and bladder cancer (BC). It investigates the economic impacts faced by these patients, especially in relation to disparities in insurance coverage and its effects on material, psychological, and behavioral aspects of FD. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed responses from GU cancer survivors, stratifying by cancer status and age (18-64 years, ≥65 years). Medical financial hardship was divided into three domains: material, psychological, and behavioral. Associations between cancer history, hardship, and clinical factors were assessed using generalized ordinal logistic regressions. RESULTS Significant health care access disparities were found, particularly for mental health services, with 25% of younger BC survivors and 4.7% of younger KC survivors reporting affordability issues, in contrast to 2.7% of noncancer individuals. Dental care was also problematic, with higher avoidance rates among younger BC (27%) and KC (15%) survivors compared with the general population. Surprisingly, noncancer individuals reported more difficulty in affording prescriptions than BC survivors across both age groups. PC survivors, however, showed lower FD across all domains versus noncancer controls, indicating fewer concerns about medical bills and a lesser tendency to forgo care. CONCLUSION The study underscores significant gaps in the financial support system for GU cancer survivors, with urgent needs in mental and dental health care access. Policy interventions, including comprehensive insurance reforms, are imperative to alleviate the financial burdens on these individuals.

oncology

Mental Health Matters: Bringing Awareness to the Less Recognized Financial Toxicities of Cancer Care

Financial Toxicity in Cancer Supportive Care: An International Survey

Addressing Financial Toxicity in Head and Neck Cancer—A Crucial Imperative

Short-term and long-term financial toxicity from breast cancer treatment: a qualitative study

Cancer Survivors' Experience of Care and Financial Toxicity: Results From a National Survey

Challenges and solutions to cancer-related financial toxicity according to Australian health professionals: qualitative results from a national survey

The social and economic toll of cancer survivorship: a complex web of financial sacrifice

Financial toxicity among people with metastatic cancer: findings from the Cancer Experience Registry

Toward identification and intervention to address financial toxicity and unmet health‐related social needs among adolescents and emerging adults with cancer and their caregivers: A cross‐cultural perspective

Opinions and strategies of Australian health professionals on tackling cancer‐related financial toxicity: A nationwide survey

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

Cancer Survivors' Experiences with Financial Toxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta‐synthesis of Qualitative Studies

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

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

Financial Toxicity Screening Preferences in Patients With Breast Cancer

Addressing financial toxicity in cancer treatment—An opportunity for the 340B drug pricing program

As if the disease was not enough: coping with the financial consequences of cancer

Lay healthcare worker financial toxicity intervention: a pilot financial toxicity screening and referral program

A Potential Resource to Counter Financial Toxicity

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

Financial Distress in Genitourinary Cancer: Insights From CDC National Health Interview Survey