Mixed-Methods Study on the Responsiveness of the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity Among People With Multiple Myeloma.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is a contributor to the psychosocial burden of cancer care. There is no consensus measure of financial toxicity; however, recent studies have adopted the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST). Despite its growing popularity, data on the responsiveness to change of the COST instrument are lacking. To address this gap in the literature, we performed a sequential mixed-methods study of people with multiple myeloma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the quantitative phase of the study, we collected COST scores at two time points approximately 8 weeks apart from 72 patients. In the qualitative phase, we conducted semistructured interviews with a subset of 12 patients who reported the largest changes in scores. The qualitative data were analyzed using a deductive coding scheme developed using the Framework Method in the context of a commonly cited conceptual model of financial toxicity. RESULTS: The median absolute change in COST scores was four points (IQR, 2-6). Only 13% of the sample had the same COST scores at both assessments; 38% had an improved score and 50% had a worsened score. Only, seven of the 12 patients (58%) interviewed reported changes to one or more of the constructs in the conceptual model of financial toxicity. Most commonly, changes to out-of-pocket medical costs were reported (5/12). Changes to nonmedical expenses (n = 2) and subjective financial distress without changes to objective financial burden (n = 2) were also reported. CONCLUSION: Additional research is needed to explicate changes in COST scores over time.

The Dynamics of Financial Toxicity in Multiple Myeloma.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: People with multiple myeloma are at risk for financial toxicity due to the high cost of treatment and prolonged treatment duration. However, little data exist regarding financial toxicity among people with myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, a cohort of 135 patients were recruited from an ongoing observational trial to complete the Comprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST). Participants were sent follow-up surveys at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: The median age was 68 years; the majority were non-Hispanic whites (88%), male (63%), held a college degree (61%), and had left the workforce (70%). The median time from myeloma diagnosis was 28 months. The median COST score was 27; 48% of participants had a score below 27 and considered to have financial toxicity. The only characteristic associated with financial toxicity was a college degree. After controlling for other covariates, those with a college education were 69% less likely to have financial toxicity. Of the 108 participants who completed a follow-up survey, 34% reported changes in their financial toxicity status at a subsequent time point. Transitioning from not having financial toxicity to having financial toxicity was more common than the reverse. CONCLUSION: Because financial toxicity is a dynamic process, which patients are experiencing it at any given time is difficult to predict. Focusing the research agenda on improved detection and intervention may be warranted.

Corrigendum to: A phase II study of laser interstitial thermal therapy combined with doxorubicin in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1093/noajnl/vdab164.].

A phase II study of laser interstitial thermal therapy combined with doxorubicin in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a major limiting factor for drug delivery in brain tumors. Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) disrupts the peritumoral BBB. In this study, we examine survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) treated with LITT followed by low-dose doxorubicin, a potent anti-neoplastic drug with poor BBB permeability. METHODS: Forty-one patients with recurrent GBM were enrolled; thirty patients were evaluable. Participants underwent LITT followed by 6 weekly doxorubicin treatments starting within one week (Early Arm) or at 6-8 weeks (Late Arm) after LITT. The overall survival (OS), local progression-free survival (PFS), and any PFS were compared to historical controls treated with bevacizumab salvage therapy (n = 50) or LITT with standard BBB-permeable salvage therapy (n = 28). Cox proportional-hazards models examined the contribution of age, gender, MGMT promoter status, and IDH-mutation status on any PFS and OS. Adverse events were also cataloged. RESULTS: The Late Arm and all patients (Early Arm + Late Arm) demonstrated significant improvement in OS compared to historical controls treated with bevacizumab (p < 0.001) and LITT with standard salvage therapy (p < 0.05). No significant difference in any PFS was observed between either arm and historical controls. Low-dose doxorubicin was well tolerated with comparable adverse event rates between the arms. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose doxorubicin given after LITT is well tolerated and correlated with higher OS compared to historical controls treated with bevacizumab or LITT with standard salvage chemotherapy. A larger study is needed to further characterize survival and progression patterns.