The financial burden and distress of patients with cancer: Understanding and stepping-up action on the financial toxicity of cancer treatment.

"Financial toxicity" has now become a familiar term used in the discussion of cancer drugs, and it is gaining traction in the literature given the high price of newer classes of therapies. However, as a phenomenon in the contemporary treatment and care of people with cancer, financial toxicity is not fully understood, with the discussion on mitigation mainly geared toward interventions at the health system level. Although important, health policy prescriptions take time before their intended results manifest, if they are implemented at all. They require corresponding strategies at the individual patient level. In this review, the authors discuss the nature of financial toxicity, defined as the objective financial burden and subjective financial distress of patients with cancer, as a result of treatments using innovative drugs and concomitant health services. They discuss coping with financial toxicity by patients and how maladaptive coping leads to poor health and nonhealth outcomes. They cover management strategies for oncologists, including having the difficult and urgent conversation about the cost and value of cancer treatment, availability of and access to resources, and assessment of financial toxicity as part of supportive care in the provision of comprehensive cancer care. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:153-165. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

The financial hazard of personalized medicine and supportive care.

Personalized medicine is revolutionizing the delivery of oncological care, promising benefits both at the patient and health system levels. The cost of targeted therapies, unfortunately, is becoming more expensive and unaffordable. Where supportive care in cancer concerns the prevention and management of the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment and is the thrust of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, financing of and value in personalized medicine is an important area of research and engagement for the association. Discussing patients' concerns with and identifying those at most risk for the financial hazard of cancer treatment and offering financial counseling and assistance and/or referral to support networks are potential key areas for (exploring and providing) better supportive care. The time is now to turn the concern of patients and their carers, providers, and other advocates regarding the affordability of cancer treatment into a collective cause towards coordinated action.

Current practice in and considerations for personalized medicine in lung cancer: From the patient's molecular biology to patient values and preferences.

Both at the individual and health system levels, the burden of complex illnesses associated with and which rise in mid- to later life, such as cancer, is expected to increase further. The advent of personalized medicine, or the use of a patient's genetic profile to guide medical decisions, is touted to substantially improve drug tolerance and efficacy and, in so doing, also improve the effectiveness and efficiency of oncological care. Amidst the hype and hope surrounding personalized cancer care, there is increasing concern about its unnecessary, unintended effects especially with regards to the financial burden of targeted therapies using specialty drugs. In this paper, we take a patient-centered perspective on the therapeutic benefits of personalized medicine as well as the limitations of current practice and its psychological and financial toxicities by focusing on advanced-stage lung cancer. We argue that the modest clinical benefits of targeted therapy, premium prices for many specialty drugs and the narrow focus on the genetic constitution of individual patients run the risk of undercutting personalized lung cancer care's contribution to realizing health and non-health outcomes. We discuss the contribution of grading the financial burden of treatment and seamless integration of palliative care as key action areas regarding patients' access to and appropriateness of care given patients' needs and preferences.

Implementation of Out-of-Office Blood Pressure Monitoring in the Netherlands: From Clinical Guidelines to Patients' Adoption of Innovation.

Out-of-office blood pressure monitoring is promoted by various clinical guidelines toward properly diagnosing and effectively managing hypertension and engaging the patient in their care process. In the Netherlands, however, the Dutch cardiovascular risk management (CVRM) guidelines do not explicitly prescribe 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) and home BP measurement (HBPM). The aim of this descriptive study was to develop an understanding of patients' and physicians' acceptance and use of out-of-office BP monitoring in the Netherlands given the CVRM recommendations.Three small focus group discussions (FGDs) with patients and 1 FGD with physicians were conducted to explore the mechanisms behind the acceptance and use of out-of-office BP monitoring and reveal real-world challenges that limit the implementation of out-of-office BP monitoring methods. To facilitate the FGDs, an analytical framework based on the technology acceptance model (TAM), the theory of planned behavior and the model of personal computing utilization was developed to guide the FGDs and analysis of the transcriptions of each FGD.ABPM was the out-of-office BP monitoring method prescribed by physicians and used by patients. HBPM was not offered to patients even with patients' feedback of poor tolerance of ABPM. Even as there was little awareness about HBPM among patients, there were a few patients who owned and used sphygmomanometers. Patients professed and seemed to exhibit self-efficacy, whereas physicians had reservations about (all of their) patients' self-efficacy in properly using ABPM. Since negative experience with ABPM impacted patients' acceptance of ABPM, the interaction of factors that determined acceptance and use was found to be dynamic among patients but not for physicians.In reference to the CVRM guidelines, physicians implemented out-of-office BP monitoring but showed a strong preference for ABPM even where there is poor tolerance of the method. We found that physicians' positive attitude to ABPM enabled the use of the method by patients which, in turn, impeded the diffusion of HBPM. For patients, the acceptance process of HBPM can only begin after the physician has adopted the innovation. Physicians are in a position to encourage as well as hinder out-of-office BP monitoring and self-management.

Do-it-yourself healthcare: the current landscape, prospects and consequences.

The wider availability and increasing use of mHealth tools - covering health applications, smartphone plug-ins and gadgets is significant for healthcare. This trend epitomises broader trajectories in access to and delivery of healthcare, with greater consumer involvement and decentralisation. This shift may be conceptualised as 'do-it-yourself Healthcare' - allowing consumers to monitor and manage their health, and guide their healthcare consumption. Technology that enables data collection by patients informs them about vital health metrics, giving them more control over experiences of health or illness. The information can be used alone as empowered consumers or together with healthcare professionals in an environment of patient-centred care. Current evidence suggests a large scope for do-it-yourself Healthcare, given the availability of technologies, whilst mHealth tools enhance diagnostics, improve treatment, increase access to services and lower costs. There are, however, limitations to do-it-yourself Healthcare. Notably, its evidence base is less well developed than the availability of technologies to facilitate it. A more complex model and understanding is needed to explain motivations for and consequences of engaging in do-it-yourself Healthcare. That said, its introduction alongside existing medicine may improve quality and reduce costs - potentially improving health system sustainability whilst future generations - tomorrow's middle-aged and the elderly, will become more conducive to its spread.