Financial Distress and Its Associations With Physical and Emotional Symptoms and Quality of Life Among Advanced Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: There are limited data on the effects of financial distress (FD) on overall suffering and quality of life (QOL) of patients with advanced cancer (AdCa). In this cross-sectional study, we examined the frequency of FD and its correlates in AdCa. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We interviewed 149 patients, 77 at a comprehensive cancer center (CCC) and 72 at a general public hospital (GPH). AdCa completed a self-rated FD (subjective experience of distress attributed to financial problems) numeric rating scale (0 = best, 10 = worst) and validated questionnaires assessing symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), psychosocial distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), and QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General [FACT-G]). RESULTS: The patients' median age was 60 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.6-61.5 years); 74 (50%) were female; 48 of 77 at CCC (62%) versus 13 of 72 at GPH (18%) were white; 21 of 77 (27%) versus 32 of 72 (38%) at CCC and GPH, respectively, were black; and 7 of 77 (9%) versus 27 of 72 (38%) at CCC and GPH, respectively, were Hispanic (p < .0001). FD was present in 65 of 75 at CCC (86%; 95% CI: 76%-93%) versus 65 of 72 at GPH (90%; 95% CI: 81%-96%; p = .45). The median intensity of FD at CCC and GPH was 4 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-7) versus 8 (IQR: 3-10), respectively (p = .0003). FD was reported as more severe than physical distress, distress about physical functioning, social/family distress, and emotional distress by 45 (30%), 46 (31%), 64 (43%), and 55 (37%) AdCa, respectively (all significantly worse for patients at GPH) (p < .05). AdCa reported that FD was affecting their general well-being (0 = not at all, 10 = very much) with a median score of 5 (IQR: 1-8). FD correlated (Spearman correlation) with FACT-G (r = -0.23, p = .0057); HADS-anxiety (r = .27, p = .0014), ESAS-anxiety (r = .2, p = .0151), and ESAS-depression (r = .18, p = .0336). CONCLUSION: FD was very frequent in both groups, but median intensity was double among GPH patients. More than 30% of AdCa rated FD to be more severe than physical, family, and emotional distress. More research is needed to better characterize FD and its correlates in AdCa and possible interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Financial distress is an important and common factor contributing to the suffering of advanced cancer patients and their caregivers. It should be suspected in patients with persistent, refractory symptom expression. Early identification, measurement, and documentation will allow clinical teams to develop interventions to improve financial distress and its impact on quality of life of advanced cancer patients.

Association between supportive care interventions and patient self-reported depression among advanced cancer outpatients.

PURPOSE: Advanced cancer patients often experience moderate to severe physical and emotional distress. One of the main components of emotional distress is depression. The objective of this study was to examine the association between supportive care interventions and patient self-reported depression (PSRD) among advanced cancer outpatients. METHODS: We included consecutive patients seen in the outpatient Supportive Care Center between February 2008 and February 2010 with at least one follow-up visit. We used the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) to assess their symptom intensity. Clinical improvement of PSRD was defined as an improvement of at least 30% between the initial visit and the first follow-up. We used logistic regression models to assess possible predictors of improvement in PSRD. RESULTS: We included 444 patients with a median age of 59 years (Q1-Q3; 51-65). The most common type of cancer was gastrointestinal (98, 22%). Out of the 444 patients, 160 (36%) reported moderate/severe depression at baseline (ESAS item score ≥ 4/10). Higher baseline depression intensity was significantly associated to anxiety (r = 0.568, p = 0.046), total symptom distress score (TSDS; r = 0.550, p < 0.001) and personal history of depression (r = 0.242, p = 0.001). Of the 160 patients, 90 (56%) with moderate/severe PSRD at baseline showed a significant improvement at the follow-up visit (p = 0.038). Improvement in anxiety, sedation, and feeling of well-being were associated with higher depression improvement (OR 7.93, CI 3.74-16.80 and OR 2.44, CI 1.09-5.46, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% patients with moderate/severe PSRD significantly improved after one single supportive/palliative care consultation. Improvements of anxiety and sedation were independently associated with PSRD improvement.

Predictors of response to palliative care intervention for chronic nausea in advanced cancer outpatients.

PURPOSE: Nausea is a frequent and distressing symptom in advanced cancer patients. The objective of this retrospective study was to determine predictors of response to palliative care consultation for chronic nausea in advanced cancer outpatients. METHODS: Eligible patients included were outpatient supportive care center seen consecutively for an initial consultation and who had one follow-up visit within 30 days of the initial consultation. We reviewed the medical records of 1,273 consecutive patients, and 444 (35 %) were found to meet the eligibility criteria. All patients were assessed using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). Nausea response was defined as an improvement of at least 30% between the initial visit and the first follow-up. We used logistic regression models to assess the possible predictors of improvement in nausea. RESULTS: Overall, 112 of 444 patients (25%) experienced moderate/severe chronic nausea (ESAS item score ≥4/10). Higher baseline nausea intensity was significantly related to constipation (r = 0.158; p = 0.046) and all the symptoms assessed by the ESAS (p < 0.001). Sixty-eight of the 112 (61%) patients with moderate/severe nausea at baseline showed a significant improvement at the follow-up visit (p < 0.001). The main predictors for nausea response were improvement of fatigue (p = 0.005) and increased appetite (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline nausea was associated with all the ESAS symptom and improvement of fatigue and lack of appetite predicted a lower frequency of nausea at follow-up. More research is necessary to better understand the association between nausea severity and other symptoms and to predict which interventions will yield the best outcomes depending on the mix and severity of symptoms.