Time to add screening for financial hardship as a quality measure?

Cancer treatment is associated with financial hardship for many patients and families. Screening for financial hardship and referrals to appropriate resources for mitigation are not currently part of most clinical practices. In fact, discussions regarding the cost of treatment occur infrequently in clinical practice. As the cost of cancer treatment continues to rise, the need to mitigate adverse consequences of financial hardship grows more urgent. The introduction of quality measurement and reporting has been successful in establishing standards of care, reducing disparities in receipt of care, and improving other aspects of cancer care outcomes within and across providers. The authors propose the development and adoption of financial hardship screening and management as an additional quality metric for oncology practices. They suggest relevant stakeholders, conveners, and approaches for developing, testing, and implementing a screening and management tool and advocate for endorsement by organizations such as the National Quality Forum and professional societies for oncology care clinicians. The confluence of increasingly high-cost care and widening disparities in ability to pay because of underinsurance and lack of health insurance coverage makes a strong argument to take steps to mitigate the financial consequences of cancer.

Correlates of health-related quality of life in African Americans diagnosed with cancer: a review of survivorship studies and the Detroit research on cancer survivors cohort.

Advances in cancer screening and treatment have improved survival after a diagnosis of cancer. As the number of cancer survivors as well as their overall life-expectancy increases, investigations of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are critical in understanding the factors that promote the optimal experience over the course of survivorship. However, there is a dearth of information on determinants of HRQOL for African American cancer survivors as the vast majority of cohorts have been conducted predominantly among non-Hispanic Whites. In this review, we provide a review of the literature related to HRQOL in cancer survivors including those in African Americans. We then present a summary of published work from the Detroit Research on Cancer Survivors (ROCS) cohort, a population-based cohort of more than 5000 African American cancer survivors. Overall, Detroit ROCS has markedly advanced our understanding of the unique factors contributing to poorer HRQOL among African Americans with cancer. This work and future studies will help inform potential interventions to improve the long-term health of this patient population.

Mental health, financial, and social outcomes among older adults with probable COVID-19 infection: A longitudinal cohort study.

We investigated the immediate and longer-term impact (over 4-6 months) of probable COVID-19 infection on mental health, wellbeing, financial hardship, and social interactions among older people living in England. Data were analysed from 5146 older adults participating in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing who provided data before the pandemic (2018-19) and at two COVID-19 assessments in 2020 (June-July and November-December). The associations of probable COVID-19 infection (first COVID-19 assessment) with depression, anxiety, poor quality of life (QoL), loneliness, financial hardship, and social contact with family/friends at the first and second COVID-19 assessments were tested using linear/logistic regression and were adjusted for pre-pandemic outcome measures. Participants with probable infection had higher levels of depression and anxiety, poorer QoL, and greater loneliness scores compared with those without probable infection at both the first (ORdepression = 1.62, P-value = 0.005; ORanxiety = 1.59, P-value = 0.049; bpoorQoL = 1.34, P < 0.001; bloneliness = 0.49, P < 0.001) and second (ORdepression = 1.56, P-value = 0.003; ORanxiety = 1.55, P-value = 0.041; bpoorQoL = 1.38, P-value < 0.001; bloneliness = 0.31, P-value = 0.024) COVID-19 assessments. Participants with probable infection also experienced greater financial difficulties than those without infection at the first assessment (OR = 1.50, P-value = 0.011). Probable COVID-19 infection is associated with longer-term deterioration of mental health and wellbeing and short-term increases in financial hardship among older adults. It is important to monitor the mental health of older people affected by COVID-19 and provide additional support to those in need.

Understanding racial differences in financial hardship among older adults surviving cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite Medicare coverage, financial hardship is a prevalent issue among those diagnosed with cancer at age 65 years and older, particularly among those belonging to a racial or ethnic minority group. Sociodemographic, clinical, and area-level factors may mediate this relationship; however, no studies have assessed the extent to which these factors contribute to the racial/ethnic disparities in financial hardship. METHODS: Surveys assessing financial hardship were completed by 721 White (84%) or Black (16%) patients (aged 65 years and older) who were diagnosed with breast (34%), prostate (27%), lung (17%), or colorectal (14%) cancer or lymphoma (9%) at the University of Alabama at Birmingham between 2000 and 2019. Financial hardship included material, psychological, and behavioral domains. Nonlinear Blinder-Oaxaca effect decomposition methods were used to evaluate the extent to which individual and area-level factors contribute to racial disparities in financial hardship. RESULTS: Black patients reported lower income (65% vs. 34% earning <$50,000) and greater scores on the Area Deprivation Index (median, 93.0 vs. 55.0). Black patients reported significantly higher rates of overall (39% vs. 18%), material (29% vs. 11%), and psychological (27% vs. 11%) hardship compared with White patients. Overall, the observed characteristics explained 51% of racial differences in financial hardship among cancer survivors, primarily because of differences in income (23%) and area deprivation (11%). CONCLUSIONS: The current results identify primary contributors to racial disparities in financial hardship among older cancer survivors, which can be used to develop targeted interventions and allocate resources to those at greatest risk for financial hardship.

Interventions to mitigate cancer-related medical financial hardship: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study systematically reviewed interventions mitigating financial hardship in patients with cancer and assessed effectiveness using a meta-analytic method. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for articles published in English during January 2000-April 2023. Two independent reviewers selected prospective clinical trials with an intervention targeting and an outcome measuring financial hardship. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers using a quality assessment tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Reporting followed the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Eleven studies (2211 participants; 55% male; mean age, 59.29 years) testing interventions including financial navigation, financial education, and cost discussion were included. Financial worry improved in only 27.3% of 11 studies. Material hardship and cost-related care nonadherence remained unchanged in the two studies measuring these outcomes. Four studies (373 participants; 37% male, mean age, 55.88 years) assessed the impact of financial navigation on financial worry using the comprehensive score of financial toxicity (COST) measure (score range, 0-44; higher score = lower financial worry) and were used for meta-analysis. There was no significant change in the mean of pooled COST score between post- and pre-intervention (1.21; 95% confidence interval, -6.54 to 8.96; p = .65). Adjusting for pre-intervention COST, mean change of COST significantly decreased by 0.88 with every 1-unit increase in pre-intervention COST (p = .02). The intervention significantly changed COST score when pre-intervention COST was ≤14.5. CONCLUSION: A variety of interventions have been tested to mitigate financial hardship. Financial navigation can mitigate financial worry among high-risk patients.

Health-related social needs, medical financial hardship, and mortality risk among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors may face challenges affording food, housing, and other living necessities, which are known as health-related social needs (HRSNs). However, little is known about the associations of HRSNs and mortality risk among adult cancer survivors. METHODS: Adult cancer survivors were identified from the 2013-2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and linked with the NHIS Mortality File with vital status through December 31, 2019. HRSNs, measured by food insecurity, and nonmedical financial worries (e.g., housing costs), was categorized as severe, moderate, and minor/none. Medical financial hardship, including material, psychological, and behavioral domains, was categorized as 2-3, 1, or 0 domains. Using age as the time scale, the associations of HRSNs and medical financial hardship and mortality risk were assessed with weighted adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Among cancer survivors 18-64 years old (n = 5855), 25.5% and 18.3% reported moderate and severe levels of HRSNs, respectively; among survivors 65-79 years old (n = 5918), 15.6% and 6.6% reported moderate and severe levels of HRSNs, respectively. Among cancer survivors 18-64 years old, severe HRSNs was associated with increased mortality risk (hazards ratio [HR], 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-2.93, p < .001; reference = minor/none) in adjusted analyses. Among cancer survivors 65-79 years old, 2-3 domains of medical financial hardship was associated with increased mortality risk (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.13-2.20, p = .007; reference = 0 domain). CONCLUSIONS: HSRNs and financial hardship are associated with increased mortality risk among cancer survivors; comprehensive assessment of HRSN and financial hardship connecting patients with relevant services can inform efforts to mitigate adverse consequences of cancer.

Financial hardship among siblings of long-term survivors of childhood cancer: A Childhood Cancer Survivor Study report.

BACKGROUND: Siblings of children with cancer may experience adverse household economic consequences, but their financial outcomes in adulthood are unknown. METHODS: A total of 880 siblings (aged 18-64 years) of adult-aged childhood cancer survivors were surveyed to estimate the prevalence of financial hardship by three established domains (behavioral, material, and psychological). For individual financial hardship items matching the contemporaneous National Health Interview Survey or Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, siblings were compared with the general population by calculating adjusted prevalence odds ratios (ORs) to sample-weighted responses. Multivariable logistic regression models examined associations between sibling characteristics and each hardship domain and between sibling hardship and survivors' cancer/treatment characteristics. RESULTS: Behavioral, material, and psychological hardship was reported by 24%, 35%, and 28%, respectively. Compared with national survey respondents, siblings were more likely to report worries about medical bills (OR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.22), difficulty affording nutritious foods (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.54-2.07), and forgoing needed medical care (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10-1.73), prescription medications (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.99-3.20), and dental care (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.15-1.57) because of cost. Sibling characteristics associated with reporting financial hardship in one or more domains included female sex, older age, chronic health conditions, lower income, not having health insurance, high out-of-pocket medical expenditures, and nonmedical/nonhome debt. No survivor cancer/treatment characteristics were associated with sibling financial hardship. CONCLUSIONS: Adult siblings of childhood cancer survivors were more likely to experience financial hardship compared with the general population. Childhood cancer may adversely affect entire households, with potentially lasting implications.

Financial Hardship Among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees With and Without Food Insecurity.

BACKGROUND: Compared to traditional Medicare (TM), Medicare Advantage (MA) plans impose out-of-pocket cost limits and offer extra benefits, potentially providing financial relief for MA enrollees, especially for those with food insecurity. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the prevalence of food insecurity differs between TM and MA enrollees at baseline and then examine whether MA enrollment in a baseline year is associated with less financial hardships in the following year, relative to TM enrollment, especially for those experiencing food insecurity. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Our analysis included 2807 Medicare beneficiaries (weighted sample size, 23,963,947) who maintained continuous enrollment in either TM or MA in both 2020 and 2021 from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed outcomes related to financial hardships in health care and non-health care domains (measured in 2021). Our primary independent variables were food insecurity and MA enrollment (measured in 2020). RESULTS: The point estimate of food insecurity prevalence was greater among MA enrollees than TM enrollees, but the difference was not statistically significant (1.1 percentage points [95% CI, - 1.0, 3.4]). Furthermore, there is evidence that compared to TM enrollment, MA enrollment did not mitigate the risk of financial hardship, particularly for food-insecure enrollees. Rather, food-secure MA enrollees faced greater financial hardship in the following year than food-secure TM enrollees (11.2% [8.9-13.6] and 7.6% [6.9-8.3] for problems paying medical bills and 5.5% [4.6-6.4] and 2.8% [2.1-3.6] for paying medical bills over time). Moreover, the point estimate of financial hardship was higher among food-insecure MA enrollees than food-insecure TM enrollees (21.5% [5.4-37.5] and 11.2% [4.1-18.4] and 23.7% [9.6-37.9] and 6.9% [0.5-13.3]) despite the lack of statistical significance. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the promise of financial protection offered by MA plans has not been fully realized, particularly for those with food insecurity.

Subjective and objective financial toxicity among colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer type worldwide. Colorectal cancer treatment costs vary between countries as it depends on policy factors such as treatment algorithms, availability of treatments and whether the treatment is government-funded. Hence, the objective of this systematic review is to determine the prevalence and measurements of financial toxicity (FT), including the cost of treatment, among colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: Medline via PubMed platform, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies that examined CRC FT. There was no limit on the design or setting of the study. RESULTS: Out of 819 papers identified through an online search, only 15 papers were included in this review. The majority (n = 12, 80%) were from high-income countries, and none from low-income countries. Few studies (n = 2) reported objective FT denoted by the prevalence of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), 60% (9 out of 15) reported prevalence of subjective FT, which ranges from 7 to 80%, 40% (6 out of 15) included studies reported cost of CRC management- annual direct medical cost ranges from USD 2045 to 10,772 and indirect medical cost ranges from USD 551 to 795. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus in defining and quantifying financial toxicity hindered the comparability of the results to yield the mean cost of managing CRC. Over and beyond that, information from some low-income countries is missing, limiting global representativeness.

Dedicated financial hardship screening adds value to routine distress screening among gynecologic cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate existing distress screening to identify patients with financial hardship (FH) compared to dedicated FH screening and assess patient attitudes toward FH screening. METHODS: We screened gynecologic cancer patients starting a new line of therapy. Existing screening included: (1) Moderate/severe distress defined as Distress Thermometer score ≥ 4, (2) practical concerns identified from Problem Checklist, and (3) a single question assessing trouble paying for medications. FH screening included: (1) Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool and (2) 10-item Financial Needs Checklist to guide referrals. FH was defined as COST score < 26. We calculated sensitivity (patients with moderate/severe distress + FH over total patients with FH) and specificity (patients with no/mild distress + no FH over total patients with no FH) to assess the extent distress screening could capture FH. Surveys and exit interviews assessed patient perspectives toward screening. RESULTS: Of 364 patients screened for distress, average age was 62 years, 25% were Black, 45% were Medicare beneficiaries, 32% had moderate/severe distress, 15% reported ≥1 practical concern, and 0 reported trouble paying for medications. Most (n = 357, 98%) patients also completed FH screening: of them, 24% screened positive for FH, 32% reported ≥1 financial need. Distress screening had 57% sensitivity and 77% specificity for FH. Based on 79 surveys and 43 exit interviews, FH screening was acceptable with feedback to improve the timing and setting of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Dedicated FH screening was feasible and acceptable, but sensitivity was low. Importantly, 40% of women with FH would not have been identified with distress screening alone.

Health Care Spending, Use, and Financial Hardship Among Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage Enrollees With Mental Health Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the differences in health care spending and utilization, and financial hardship between Traditional Medicare (TM) and Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees with mental health symptoms. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries with mental health symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Kessler-6 Psychological Distress Scale in the 2015-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included health care spending and utilization (both general and mental health services), and financial hardship. The primary independent variable was MA enrollment. RESULTS: MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 2.3 percentage points (95% CI: -3.4, -1.2; relative difference: 16.1%) less likely to have specialty mental health visits than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There were no significant differences in total health care spending, but annual out-of-pocket spending was $292 (95% CI: 152-432; 18.2%) higher among MA enrollees with mental health symptoms than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. Additionally, MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were 5.0 (95% CI: 2.9-7.2; 22.3%) and 2.5 percentage points (95% CI: 0.8-4.2; 20.9%) more likely to have difficulty paying medical bills over time and to experience high financial burden than TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that MA enrollees with mental health symptoms were more likely to experience limited access to mental health services and high financial hardship compared to TM enrollees with mental health symptoms. There is a need to develop policies aimed at improving access to mental health services while reducing financial burden for MA enrollees.

Racial and ethnic disparities in the association between financial hardship and self-reported weight change during the first year of the pandemic in the U.S.

Studies have shown that financial hardship can impact weight change; however, it is unclear what the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has had on weight change in U.S. adults, or whether racial-ethnic groups were impacted differentially. We estimated the association between financial hardship and self-reported weight change using data from the cross-sectional COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) survey, a nationally representative online survey of 5,500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English- and Spanish-speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults conducted from 12/2020 to 2/2021. Financial hardship was measured over six domains (lost income, debt, unmet general expenses, unmet healthcare expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). The association between each financial hardship domain and self-reported 3-level weight change variable were estimated using multinomial logistic regression, adjusting for sociodemographic and self-reported health. After adjustment, food insecurity was strongly associated with weight loss among American Indian/Alaska Native (aOR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.05-4.77), Black/African American (aOR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.02-3.11), and Spanish-speaking Latino adults (aOR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.01-5.35). Unmet healthcare expenses were also strongly associated with weight loss among Black/African American, English-speaking Latino, Spanish-speaking Latino, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander adults (aORs = 2.00-2.14). Other domains were associated with weight loss and/or weight gain, but associations were not as strong and less consistent across race-ethnicity. In conclusion, food insecurity and unmet healthcare expenses during the pandemic were strongly associated with weight loss among racial-ethnic minority groups. Using multi-dimensional measures of financial hardship provides a comprehensive assessment of the effects of specific financial hardship domains on weight change among diverse racial-ethnic groups.

Rural‒urban disparities in household catastrophic health expenditure in Bangladesh: a multivariate decomposition analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rural‒urban disparity in catastrophic healthcare expenditure (CHE) is a well-documented challenge in low- and middle-income countries, including Bangladesh, limiting financial protection and hindering the achievement of the Universal Health Coverage target of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. However, the factors driving this divide remain poorly understood. Therefore, this study aims to identify the key determinants of the rural‒urban disparity in CHE incidence in Bangladesh and their changes over time. METHODS: We used nationally representative data from the latest three rounds of the Bangladesh Household Income and Expenditure Survey (2005, 2010, and 2016). CHE incidence among households seeking healthcare was measured using the normative food, housing, and utilities method. To quantify covariate contributions to the rural‒urban CHE gap, we employed the Oaxaca-Blinder multivariate decomposition approach, adapted by Powers et al. for nonlinear response models. RESULTS: CHE incidence among rural households increased persistently during the study period (2005: 24.85%, 2010: 25.74%, 2016: 27.91%) along with a significant (p-value ≤ 0.01) rural‒urban gap (2005: 9.74%-points, 2010: 13.94%-points, 2016: 12.90%-points). Despite declining over time, substantial proportions of CHE disparities (2005: 87.93%, 2010: 60.44%, 2016: 61.33%) are significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) attributable to endowment differences between rural and urban households. The leading (three) covariate categories consistently contributing significantly (p-value ≤ 0.01) to the CHE gaps were composition disparities in the lowest consumption quintile (2005: 49.82%, 2010: 36.16%, 2016: 33.61%), highest consumption quintile (2005: 32.35%, 2010: 15.32%, 2016: 18.39%), and exclusive reliance on informal healthcare sources (2005: -36.46%, 2010: -10.17%, 2016: -12.58%). Distinctively, the presence of chronic illnesses in households emerged as a significant factor in 2016 (9.14%, p-value ≤ 0.01), superseding the contributions of composition differences in household heads with no education (4.40%, p-value ≤ 0.01) and secondary or higher education (7.44%, p-value ≤ 0.01), which were the fourth and fifth significant contributors in 2005 and 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Rural‒urban differences in household economic status, educational attainment of household heads, and healthcare sources were the key contributors to the rural‒urban CHE disparity between 2005 and 2016 in Bangladesh, with chronic illness emerging as a significant factor in the latest period. Closing the rural‒urban CHE gap necessitates strategies that carefully address rural‒urban variations in the characteristics identified above.

Revisiting a decade of inequality in healthcare financial burden in Cambodia, 2009-19: trends, determinants and decomposition.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure (OOPHE) without adequate social protection often translates to inequitable financial burden and utilization of services. Recent publications highlighted Cambodia's progress towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC) with reduced incidence of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) and improvements in its distribution. However, departing from standard CHE measurement methods suggests a different storyline on trends and inequality in the country. OBJECTIVE: This study revisits the distribution and impact of OOPHE and its financial burden from 2009-19, employing alternative socio-economic and economic shock metrics. It also identifies determinants of the financial burden and evaluates inequality-contributing and -mitigating factors from 2014-19, including coping mechanisms, free healthcare, and OOPHE financing sources. METHODS: Data from the Cambodian Socio-Economic Surveys of 2009, 2014, and 2019 were utilized. An alternative measure to CHE is proposed: Excessive financial burden (EFB). A household was considered under EFB when its OOPHE surpassed 10% or 25% of total consumption, excluding healthcare costs. A polychoric wealth index was used to rank households and measure EFB inequality using the Erreygers Concentration Index. Inequality shifts from 2014-19 were decomposed using the Recentered Influence Function regression followed by the Oaxaca-Blinder method. Determinants of financial burden levels were assessed through zero-inflated ordered logit regression. RESULTS: Between 2009-19, EFB incidence increased from 10.95% to 17.92% at the 10% threshold, and from 4.41% to 7.29% at the 25% threshold. EFB was systematically concentrated among the poorest households, with inequality sharply rising over time, and nearly a quarter of the poorest households facing EFB at the 10% threshold. The main determinants of financial burden were geographic location, household size, age and education of household head, social health protection coverage, disease prevalence, hospitalization, and coping strategies. Urbanization, biased disease burdens, and preventive care were key in explaining the evolution of inequality. CONCLUSION: More efforts are needed to expand social protection, but monitoring those through standard measures such as CHE has masked inequality and the burden of the poor. The financial burden across the population has risen and become more unequal over the past decade despite expansion and improvements in social health protection schemes. Health Equity funds have, to some extent, mitigated inequality over time. However, their slow expansion and the reduced reliance on coping strategies to finance OOPHE could not outbalance inequality.

Mitigating role of financial inclusion on the perceived difficulties, concerns, and borrowing for medical expenses in Saudi Arabia.

Access to convenient quality healthcare at all times is considered a basic human right; however, many countries are still striving to achieve this goal for their populations. The persistent rise in healthcare expenditure remains a significant obstacle in achieving universal health coverage on a global scale. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of financial inclusion in addressing the financial hardship related to health and medical expense concerns in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Probit models were applied to analyse nationally representative data from the Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) database. The results showed that financial inclusion had a significant impact on reducing the hardship associated with obtaining money for emergency expenses within 30 days as indicated by a significant coefficient of -0.262. Additionally, Financial inclusion substantially increases the likelihood of borrowing money for health or medical purposes in the past 12 months, with a coefficient of 0.585. Moreover, correlations were identified between low income levels and decreased likelihood of borrowing for health/medical purposes, increased difficulty in obtaining money for emergency expenses, and heightened concern regarding the ability to afford medical costs in the event of serious illness or accidents. These findings highlight the need for policy makers and health providers to prioritize financial inclusion and support programs for low-income individuals to achieve equity in health treatment for all in Saudi Arabia.

Financial hardship experience in middle- and older-aged patients with advanced lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Advancements in medical treatments have resulted in increased medical costs for cancer patients. More than half of the patients with advanced lung cancer reported unmet financial needs. The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in the prevalence and correlates of financial hardship between middle- and older-aged patients with advanced lung cancer, and its impact on multiple health-related outcomes. METHODS: This study presents a cross-sectional analysis involving 226 patients with advanced lung cancer, who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial conducted between 2018 and 2020. Data collection was performed through self-reported questionnaires and electronic medical records. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were adopted for analysis. RESULTS: 58.0% reported experiencing financial hardships. Middle-aged participants who were single and had a lower education level were more likely to experience financial difficulties. However, males and higher performance status were associated with a lower likelihood of experiencing financial difficulties among older-aged participants. Financial hardship was significantly associated with anxiety (p < 0.001), depression (p < 0.001), sleep disturbances (p < 0.001), quality of life, global health status (p = 0.002), functional scale score (p < 0.001), symptom scale score (p < 0.001), and lung cancer-specific scale score (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients with advanced lung cancer experienced financial hardships caused by cancer or its treatment, with a higher prevalence reported in middle-aged patients. Different sociodemographic and clinical variables correlated with financial hardship in middle- and older-aged participants, respectively. More attention should be paid to middle-aged patients with advanced lung cancer, particularly during routine assessments.

A proactive financial navigation intervention in patients with newly diagnosed gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Many cancer patients and caregivers experience financial hardship, leading to poor outcomes. Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer patients are particularly at risk for financial hardship given the intensity of treatment. This pilot randomized study among gastric/GEJ cancer patients and caregivers tested a proactive financial navigation (FN) intervention to obtain a signal of efficacy to inform a larger, more rigorous randomized study. METHODS: We tested a 3-month proactive FN intervention among gastric/GEJ cancer patients and caregivers compared to usual care. Caregiver participation was optional. The primary endpoint was incidence of financial hardship, defined as follows: accrual of debt, income decline of ≥ 20%, or taking loans to pay for treatment. Data from participant surveys and documentation by partner organizations delivering the FN intervention was analyzed and outcomes were compared between study arms. RESULTS: Nineteen patients and 12 caregivers consented. Primary FN resources provided included insurance navigation, budget planning, and help with out-of-pocket medical expenses. Usual care patients were more likely to experience financial hardship (50% vs 40%) and declines in quality of life (37.5% vs 0%) compared to intervention patients. Caregivers in both arms reported increased financial stress and poorer quality of life over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Proactive financial navigation has potentially positive impacts on financial hardship and quality of life for cancer patients and more large-scale randomized interventions should be conducted to rigorously explore the impact of similar interventions. Interventions that have the potential to lessen caregiver financial stress and burden need further exploration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: TRN: NCT03986502, June 14, 2019.

Financial toxicity among people with metastatic cancer: findings from the Cancer Experience Registry.

PURPOSE: This study describes financial toxicity (FT) reported by people with metastatic cancer, characteristics associated with FT, and associations between FT and compensatory strategies to offset costs. METHODS: Cancer Support Community's Cancer Experience Registry data was used to identify respondents with a solid tumor metastatic cancer who completed the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (FACIT-COST) measure. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined associations between respondent characteristics and FT, and FT and postponing medical visits, nonadherence to medications, and postponing supportive and/or psychosocial care. RESULTS: 484 individuals were included in the analysis; the most common cancers included metastatic breast (31%), lung (13%), gynecologic (10%), and colorectal (9%). Approximately half of participants (50.2%) reported some degree of FT. Those who were non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, or multiple races (compared to non-Hispanic Black), and who reported lower income, less education, and being less than one year since their cancer diagnosis had greater odds of reporting FT. Individuals with any level of FT were also more likely to report postponing medical visits (Adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 2.58; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.45-4.58), suboptimal medication adherence (Adjusted OR 5.05; 95% CI 2.77-9.20) and postponing supportive care and/or psychosocial support services (Adjusted OR 4.16; 95% CI 2.53-6.85) compared to those without FT. CONCLUSIONS: With increases in the number of people living longer with metastatic cancer and the rising costs of therapy, there will continue to be a need to systematically screen and intervene to prevent and mitigate FT for these survivors.

The faces of Long-COVID: interplay of symptom burden with socioeconomic, behavioral and healthcare factors.

AIMS: The long-term effects of COVID-19 (Long COVID) include 19 symptoms ranging from mild to debilitating. We examined multidimensional correlates of Long COVID symptom burden. METHODS: This study focused on participants who reported having had COVID in Spring 2023 (n = 656; 85% female, mean age = 55, 59% college). Participants were categorized into symptom-burden groups using Latent Profile Analysis of 19 Long-COVID symptoms. Measures included demographics; quality of life and well-being (QOL); and COVID-specific stressors. Bivariate and multivariate associations of symptom burden were examined. RESULTS: A three-profile solution reflected low, medium, and high symptom burden, aligning with diagnosis confirmation and treatment by a healthcare provider. Higher symptom burden was associated with reporting more comorbidities; being unmarried, difficulty paying bills, being disabled from work, not having a college degree, younger age, higher body mass index, having had COVID multiple times, worse reported QOL, greater reported financial hardship and worry; maladaptive coping, and worse healthcare disruption, health/healthcare stress, racial-inequity stress, family-relationship problems, and social support. Multivariate modeling revealed that financial hardship, worry, risk-taking, comorbidities, health/healthcare stress, and younger age were risk factors for higher symptom burden, whereas social support and reducing substance use were protective factors. CONCLUSIONS: Long-COVID symptom burden is associated with substantial, modifiable social and behavioral factors. Most notably, financial hardship was associated with more than three times the risk of high versus low Long-COVID symptom burden. These findings suggest the need for multi-pronged support in the absence of a cure, such as symptom palliation, telehealth, social services, and psychosocial support.

Financial hardship screening among Native American patients with cancer: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related financial hardship is an increasingly recognized concern for patients, families, and caregivers. Many Native American (NA) patients are at increased risk for cancer-related financial hardship due to high prevalence of low income, medical comorbidity, and lack of private health insurance. However, financial hardship screening (FHS) implementation for NA patients with cancer has not been reported. The objective of this study is to explore facilitators and barriers to FHS implementation for NA patients. METHODS: We conducted key informant interviews with NA patients with cancer and with clinical staff at an academic cancer center. Included patients had a confirmed diagnosis of cancer and were referred to the cancer center through the Indian Health Service, Tribal health program, or Urban Indian health program. Interviews included questions regarding current financial hardship, experiences in discussing financial hardship with the cancer care and primary care teams, and acceptability of completing a financial hardship screening tool at the cancer center. Clinical staff included physicians, advanced practice providers, and social workers. Interviews focused on confidence, comfort, and experience in discussing financial hardship with patients. Recorded interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed using MAXQDA® software. RESULTS: We interviewed seven patients and four clinical staff. Themes from the interviews included: 1) existing resources and support services; 2) challenges, gaps in services, and barriers to care; 3) nuances of NA cancer care; and 4) opportunities for improved care and resources. Patients identified financial challenges to receiving cancer care including transportation, lodging, food insecurity, and utility expenses. Patients were willing to complete a FHS tool, but indicated this tool should be short and not intrusive of the patient's financial information. Clinical staff described discomfort in discussing financial hardship with patients, primarily due to a lack of training and knowledge about resources to support patients. Having designated staff familiar with I/T/U systems was helpful, but perspectives differed regarding who should administer FHS. CONCLUSIONS: We identified facilitators and barriers to implementing FHS for NA patients with cancer at both the patient and clinician levels. Findings suggest clear organizational structures and processes are needed for financial hardship to be addressed effectively.