Cross-sectional study of therapy-related expectations/concerns of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and physicians in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: To achieve patient-centricity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment, it is essential to clarify the differences in perspectives between patients and physicians. This cross-sectional analysis of a web survey aimed to clarify the differences in expectations and concerns between mRCC patients and physicians regarding systemic mRCC therapy in Japan. METHODS: Surveys from 83 patients and 165 physicians were analyzed. RESULTS: The top three most significant differences in expectations of systemic therapy between patients and physicians (patient-based physician value) were "Chance of achieving treatment-free status" (-30.1%, p < 0.001), "Longer survival" (+25.8%, p < 0.001), and "Chance of eliminating all evidence of disease" (-25.6%, p < 0.001). The top three most significant differences in concerns for systemic therapy between patients and physicians (patient-based physician value) were "Lack of efficacy" (+36.1%, p < 0.001), "Lack of knowledge of treatment" (-28.2%, p < 0.001), and "Daily activities affected by side effects" (+22.3%, p < 0.001). Diarrhea, fatigue/malaise, and nausea/vomiting were patients' most distressing adverse events; 50.6% of patients had difficulty telling their physicians about adverse events such as fatigue, anxiety, and depression. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a gap between patients with mRCC and physicians in their expectations and concerns for systemic therapy. Japanese patients with mRCC suffer from a number of adverse events, some of which are not shared with physicians. This study highlights the importance of communicating well with patients in clinical practice to achieve patient-centricity in systemic treatment for mRCC.

Financial Toxicity in Japanese Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Information on the financial toxicity experienced by Japanese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is lacking, even though Japan has its own unique public health insurance system. Thus, a web-based survey was conducted to evaluate the financial toxicity experienced by Japanese mRCC patients using the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) tool. This study enrolled Japanese patients who underwent, or were undergoing, systemic therapy for mRCC. The outcomes evaluated were the distribution of COST scores, the correlation between COST and quality of life (QOL) assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale, and demographic factors associated with financial toxicity. The median (range) COST score was 19.0 (3.0-36.0). The Pearson correlation coefficient for COST and FACT-G total scores was 0.40. Univariate analysis revealed that not having private health insurance and lower household income per year were significantly associated with lower COST scores. Multivariate analyses showed that age < 65 years and not having private health insurance were significantly associated with lower COST scores. This study revealed that Japanese mRCC patients experience adverse financial impacts even under the universal health insurance coverage system available in Japan, and financial toxicity negatively affects their QOL.