The cost of cure: Examining objective and subjective financial toxicity in head and neck cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Little is documented regarding objective financial metrics and their impact on subjective financial toxicity in head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. METHODS: In a cross-sectional analysis, 71 survivors with available claims data for HNC-specific out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) completed a survey including patient-reported, subjective financial toxicity outcome tools: the Comprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) and the Financial Distress Questionnaire (FDQ). RESULTS: Worse COST scores were significantly associated with lower earnings at survey administration (coefficient = 3.79; 95% CI 2.63-4.95; p < 0.001); loss of earnings after diagnosis (coefficient = 6.03; 95% CI 0.53-11.52; p = 0.032); and greater annual OOPE as a proportion of earnings [log10(Annual OOPE:Earnings at survey): coefficient = -5.66; 95% CI -10.28 to -1.04; p = 0.017]. Similar results were found with FDQ. CONCLUSION: Financial toxicity is associated with particular socioeconomic characteristics which, if understood, would assist the development of pre-treatment screening tools to detect at-risk individuals and intervene early in the HNC cancer survivorship trajectory.

Exploring caregiver burden and financial toxicity in caregivers of tracheostomy-dependent children.

OBJECTIVE: Measure the prevalence of and factors associated with financial toxicity (FT) and caregiver burden in families of tracheostomy-dependent children. FT is defined as the objective and subjective patient-level impact of the costs of medical care and has been associated with lower quality of life, decreased compliance with treatment, and increased mortality. METHODS: A medical record review was performed on all children with a tracheostomy tube placed from 2009 to 2018 at a tertiary children's hospital to identify and include children younger than 18 years old, not deceased, and not decannulated at the time of review. Eligible children's caregivers were contacted to fill out a 36-item questionnaire and three validated instruments: The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) and the Financial Distress Questionnaire (FDQ), both addressed to the parent/primary caregiver, and the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers - short version (BSFC-s). RESULTS: Of the 140 eligible tracheostomy patients identified, 45 caregivers (32.1%) returned the survey. The average COST score was 18 ± 1.7 with 73.3% of caregivers reporting high toxicity based on FDQ, and 75.6% having severe-to-very severe caregiver burden. Significant increase in FT was seen in households where an adult had to leave a paid position (p = 0.047) or work less (p = 0.002) because of their child's condition; or needed to omit some of the child's medical services or medications due to cost-prohibitive reasons (p<0.001). Financial toxicity was associated with caregiver burden (by BSFC-s) [r = -596; beta coefficient = -0.95, t(43) = -4.87, p<0.001] and financial distress (by FDQ; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Caregivers of children with medically complex, tracheostomy-dependent conditions suffer from FT and caregiver burden. As a result, harmful financial coping mechanisms such as missing necessary care components or forgoing prescribed treatments, may be adopted for cost-prohibitive reasons.

Potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on financial toxicity in cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: In the context of COVID-19, cancer survivors represent a particularly vulnerable population that may be "doubly hit" by both costs of cancer treatment and financial strain imposed by the pandemic. METHODS: We performed a review of the literature pertaining to cancer, financial toxicity, and economic challenges. RESULTS: Multiple societies have put forth recommendations to modify delivery of cancer care in order to minimize patient exposure to the virus. Cancer survivors, especially patients with head and neck cancer, have been disproportionately affected by rising unemployment levels and economic recessions in the past, both of which are linked to higher cancer mortality. Patients who rely on employer-provided insurance and do not qualify for Medicaid may lose access to life-saving treatments. CONCLUSIONS: It is essential to implement interventions and policy changes in order to mitigate the effects of this pandemic but also to ensure this becomes a nonissue during the next one.