Self-Reported Assessment of the Socio-Economic Impact of Anticancer Chemotherapy-Related Neurotoxicity.

Chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity is a well-known complication of several very effective systemic anticancer treatments, mainly presenting as cognitive impairment ("chemo-brain") and peripheral neuropathy. The social and economic effects of long-lasting chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity on patients' lifestyles and their relationships are under-investigated, and their impact is, therefore, largely unknown. In this study, we used a web-based questionnaire to record the self-reported perception of chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity on cancer patients' health status, but also on several different aspects of their daily life. From the study results, it emerged that the impact of chemotherapy-induced neurotoxicity on personal, social, and working activities is very high. A similar effect was also observed when the psychological impact is assessed. Moreover, there is evidence suggesting that the management of CIPN is suboptimal; this is partially due to a lack of effective drugs, but also of appropriate advice from healthcare providers. In conclusion, this study provides evidence for the relevance of the impact on the explored aspects of the daily life of cancer patients and spotlights the need for a larger and more structured investigation on these long-term side effects of anticancer chemotherapy.

Out-of-pocket costs sustained in the last 12 months by cancer patients: an Italian survey-based study on individual expenses between 2017 and 2018.

PURPOSE: Out of Pocket costs (OOP) sustained by cancer patients also in public NHS contribute to disease-related financial toxicity. Aim of the study was to investigate the amount and the types of OOP sustained by Italian cancer patients for care services. METHODS: A sample survey was conducted by FAVO in December 2017-June 2018, in 39 adhering hospitals and 1289 patients diagnosed from 1985 to 2018, by standardized questionnaire inquiring on: yearly expenditure by cancer service, age, year of diagnosis, disease phase, cancer site, sex, marital status, education, residence. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed between OOP and each variable. Multilevel mixed-effects negative binomial regression was used to assess the combined effects of patients characteristics on the differences in acquiring health services. RESULTS: The yearly average OOP was 1841.81€, with the highest values for transports (359.34€) and for diagnostic examinations (259.82€). Significantly higher OOP were found in North and Centre than South and Islands (167.51 vs. 138.39). In the fully adjusted multivariable analysis, the variables significantly associated with higher than reference expenditure were: medium/high education (OR 1.22 [1.05-1.42], upper gastrointestinal tract cancer (OR 1.37 [1.06-1.77]), disease phase of treatments for cancer progression or pain therapy (OR 1.59 [1.30-1.93]). CONCLUSION: Italian cancer patients in 2018 sustained OOP quite similar to those measured in 2012 to supplement NHS services. The main component of the OOP costs were diagnostic examination and transportation. The NHS should pay attention to potentiate its ability to answer unmet needs of patients with advanced cancer who are the most fragile ones. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Reinforcing the services where the main OOP expenses are located can help in promoting public health actions and reduce socio-economic needs that could compromise the receipt of optimal care along the whole disease course, from diagnosis to rehabilitation.

Complementary and Integrative Approaches to Cancer: A Pilot Survey of Attitudes and Habits among Cancer Patients in Italy.

Background: Cancer patients are among the main consumers of traditional, complementary, integrative, and alternative medicine (TCIM) such as natural products (herbals, integrators, etc.) and mind and body practices (yoga, acupuncture, etc.). Methods: A questionnaire on TCIM was submitted to 415 Italian cancer patients. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: (i) biographical and clinical information; (ii) use of natural substances; and (iii) use of mind-body practices. Results: 406 patients completed the questionnaire. The prevalence of TCIM use was 72.3%. Of them, 75.6% started to use TCIM after a tumor diagnosis. The main reasons for using TCIM were to mitigate side effects (65.0%), to regain physical and mental balance (35.9%), to relieve pain (18.3%), and to improve the efficacy of cancer therapy (16.0%). 44.7% of patients taking natural products used them during conventional therapies (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, etc.), and in 67.5% of cases without consulting a doctor. As a consequence, only about 50% of patients taking natural substances used these compounds appropriately, and the most common errors were related with the purpose of reducing the side effects of the therapy (52.3%) and for boosting immune system (32.1%). Conclusions: There is an impelling need to provide patients with scientifically validated information to raise awareness about the benefits and risks of using TCIM.

Cross-sectional study to develop and describe psychometric characteristics of a patient-reported instrument (PROFFIT) for measuring financial toxicity of cancer within a public healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: To measure and explain financial toxicity (FT) of cancer in Italy, where a public healthcare system exists and patients with cancer are not expected (or only marginally) to pay out-of-pocket for healthcare. SETTING: Ten clinical oncological centres, distributed across Italian macroregions (North, Centre, South and Islands), including hospitals, university hospitals and national research institutes. PARTICIPANTS: From 8 October 2019 to 11 December 2019, 184 patients, aged 18 or more, who were receiving or had received within the previous 3 months active anticancer treatment were enrolled, 108 (59%) females and 76 (41%) males. INTERVENTION: A 30-item prefinal questionnaire, previously developed within the qualitative tasks of the project, was administered, either electronically (n=115) or by paper sheet (n=69). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: According to the protocol and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research methodology, the final questionnaire was developed by mean of explanatory factor analysis and tested for reliability, internal consistency (Cronbach's α test and item-total correlation) and stability of measurements over time (test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient and weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient). RESULTS: After exploratory factor analysis, a score measuring FT (FT score) was identified, made by seven items dealing with outcomes of FT. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the FT score was 0.87 and the item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.74. Further, nine single items representing possible determinants of FT were also retained in the final instrument. Test-retest analysis revealed a good internal validity of the FT score and of the 16 items retained in the final questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient-Reported Outcome for Fighting FInancial Toxicity (PROFFIT) instrument consists of 16 items and is the first reported instrument to assess FT of cancer developed in a country with a fully public healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03473379.

A qualitative analysis and development of a conceptual model assessing financial toxicity in cancer patients accessing the universal healthcare system.

PURPOSE: This paper illustrates a conceptual model for a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) aimed at measuring financial toxicity (FT) in oncological setting in Italy, where citizens are provided universal healthcare coverage. METHODS: Focus groups with overall 34 patients/caregivers in three different Italian centers (from Northern, Centre, and Southern Italy) and an open-ended survey with 97 medical oncologists were undertaken. Transcripts from focus groups and the open-ended survey were analyzed to identify themes and links between themes. Themes from the qualitative research were supplemented with those reported in the literature; concepts identified formed the basis for item development that were then tested through the importance analysis (with 45 patients) and the cognitive debriefing (with other 45 patients) to test relevance and comprehension of the first draft PRO instrument. RESULTS: Ten domains were extracted by analyzing 156 concepts generated from focus groups and the open-ended survey. After controlling for redundancy, 55 items were generated and tested through the importance analysis. After controlling comprehension and feasibility through cognitive debriefing interviews, a first version of the questionnaire consisting of 30 items was devised. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study represents the first part of a study conducted to develop a new PROM to assess FT in Italy, by using a bottom-up approach that makes the most of patients' experiences and the health system analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03473379 first posted on March 22, 2018.

Development and validation of a patient-reported outcome tool to assess cancer-related financial toxicity in Italy: a protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Financial toxicity (FT) is a well-recognised problem in oncology. US-based studies have shown that: (a) cancer patients have a 2.7 times risk of bankruptcy; (b) patients who declare bankruptcy have a 79% greater hazard of death; (c) financial burden significantly impairs quality of life (QoL) and (d) reduces compliance and adherence to treatment prescriptions. The aim of the project is to develop and validate a patient-reported-outcome (PRO) measure to assess FT of cancer patients in Italy, where, despite the universal health coverage provided by the National Health Service, FT is an emerging issue. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our hypothesis is that a specific FT measure, which considers the relevant sociocultural context and healthcare system, would allow us to understand the main determinants of cancer-related FT in Italy, in order to address and reduce these factors. According to the International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research guidelines on PROs, the project will include the following steps: (1) concept elicitation (from focus groups with patients and caregivers; literature; oncologists; nurses) and analysis, creating a coding library; (2) item generation (using a format that includes a question and a response on a 4-point Likert scale) and analysis through patients' cognitive interviews of item importance within different coding categories to produce the draft instrument; (3) factor analysis and internal validation (with Cronbach's alpha and test-retest for reliability) to produce the final instrument; (4) external validation with QoL anchors and depression scales. The use of the FT measure in prospective trials is also planned. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol is approved by the ethical committees of all the participating centres. The project will tentatively produce a validated tool by the spring 2021. The project might also represent a model and the basis for future cooperation with other European countries, with different healthcare systems and socioeconomic conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03473379.

Nutritional Online Information for Cancer Patients: a Randomized Trial of an Internet Communication Plus Social Media Intervention.

We hypothesized that cancer patients using an Internet website would show an improvement in the knowledge about healthy eating habits, and this might be enhanced by social media interaction. A 6-month randomized intervention was set up. Eligible subjects were allocated in intervention (IG) and control groups (CG). IG had access to the website, and CG was provided with printed versions. All enrolled participants filled in Nutrition Questionnaire (NQ), Quality of Life Questionnaire (QoL) and Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), at baseline and after 6 months. The difference between post- vs pre-questionnaires was calculated. Seventy-four subjects (CG 39; IG 35) completed the study. There was an increase in the score after the intervention in both groups for the NQ, even if not statistically significant. Dividing the IG into three categories, no (NI), low (LI) and high interactions (HI), we found a decreased score (improvement) in the CG (-0.2) and in the HI (-1.7), and an increased score (worsening) in the NI (+3.3) (p = NS) analysing the PDI. We found an increased score in the QoL both in CG and IG (adjusted LSMeans +3.5 and +2.8 points, respectively; p = NS). This study represents an example for support cancer patients. Despite the lack of significant effects, critical points and problems encountered may be of interest to researchers and organization working in the cancer setting. Intervention strategies to support patients during the care process are needed in order to attain the full potential of patient-centred care on cancer outcomes.