Literature DB >> 33797583

Identifying a cut-off score for the COST measure to indicate high financial toxicity and low quality of life among cancer patients.

Marques S N Ng1, Kai Chow Choi1, Dorothy N S Chan1, Cho Lee Wong1, Weijie Xing2, Pui Shan Ho3, Cecilia Au4, Mandy Chan5, Man Tong3, Wai Man Ling4, Maggie Chan4, Suzanne S S Mak5, Raymond J Chan6,7, Winnie K W So8.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To identify a cut-off score for the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) to predict a clinical implication of a high level of financial toxicity (FT).
METHODS: A total of 640 cancer patients were recruited from three regional hospitals in Hong Kong. They completed a questionnaire comprising the COST measure and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) instrument. The cut-off score for the COST that predicts the lowest quartile of the FACT-G total score was identified by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The sample was then stratified by this cut-off score, and characteristics were compared using Fisher's exact, chi-squared or independent sample t-test.
RESULTS: The mean scores were 20.1 ± 8.8 for the COST and 71.6 ± 15.5 for the FACT-G. The ROC analysis suggested that the cut-off of 17.5 yielded an acceptable sensitivity and specificity. Characteristics of patients with a higher level of FT included being younger, having a monthly household income of < 10,000 HKD (approximately 1290 USD), being more likely not employed, having stage IV cancer and receiving targeted and/or immunotherapy. In terms of financial support, a higher proportion of these patients had discussed financial issues with health care professionals and had received financial assistance. In addition, fewer of them were covered by private health insurance.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a cut-off for the COST that can be used to screen for FT in clinical settings. In addition, while a considerable proportion of high-FT patients received targeted therapy, they often received financial assistance. There is a gap between financial hardship and assistance that warrants attention.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Health expenditures; Health services; Health-related quality of life; Patient-reported outcomes; Treatment costs

Year:  2021        PMID: 33797583     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05962-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  23 in total

1.  The development of a financial toxicity patient-reported outcome in cancer: The COST measure.

Authors:  Jonas A de Souza; Bonnie J Yap; Fay J Hlubocky; Kristen Wroblewski; Mark J Ratain; David Cella; Christopher K Daugherty
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Reporting and grading financial toxicity.

Authors:  Nandita Khera
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09-08       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 3.  A review of cost communication in oncology: Patient attitude, provider acceptance, and outcome assessment.

Authors:  Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Chun-Ru Chien
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Economic Burden of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in the Era of Oral Targeted Therapies in the United States.

Authors:  Qiushi Chen; Nitin Jain; Turgay Ayer; William G Wierda; Christopher R Flowers; Susan M O'Brien; Michael J Keating; Hagop M Kantarjian; Jagpreet Chhatwal
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  The financial burden and distress of patients with cancer: Understanding and stepping-up action on the financial toxicity of cancer treatment.

Authors:  Pricivel M Carrera; Hagop M Kantarjian; Victoria S Blinder
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 6.  A Systematic Review of Financial Toxicity Among Cancer Survivors: We Can't Pay the Co-Pay.

Authors:  Louisa G Gordon; Katharina M D Merollini; Anthony Lowe; Raymond J Chan
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Understanding financial toxicity in head and neck cancer survivors.

Authors:  Leila J Mady; Lingyun Lyu; Maryanna S Owoc; Shyamal D Peddada; Teresa H Thomas; Lindsay M Sabik; Jonas T Johnson; Marci L Nilsen
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 5.337

8.  Cancer survivors' experiences with financial toxicity: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

Authors:  Zheng Zhu; Weijie Xing; Xiaoju Zhang; Yan Hu; Winnie K W So
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 3.894

9.  Methods for measuring financial toxicity after cancer diagnosis and treatment: a systematic review and its implications.

Authors:  J Witte; K Mehlis; B Surmann; R Lingnau; O Damm; W Greiner; E C Winkler
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Measuring financial toxicity as a clinically relevant patient-reported outcome: The validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST).

Authors:  Jonas A de Souza; Bonnie J Yap; Kristen Wroblewski; Victoria Blinder; Fabiana S Araújo; Fay J Hlubocky; Lauren H Nicholas; Jeremy M O'Connor; Bruce Brockstein; Mark J Ratain; Christopher K Daugherty; David Cella
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  3 in total

1.  Financial Toxicity Interventions in Hematologic Malignancies Are Timely and Necessary.

Authors:  Christopher T Su
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2022-07-08

2.  Financial toxicity and psychological distress in adults with cancer: A treatment-based analysis.

Authors:  Huihui Yu; Hui Li; Tingting Zuo; Li Cao; Xue Bi; Haiyang Xing; Lijuan Cai; Jianmin Sun; Yunyong Liu
Journal:  Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2022-04-20

Review 3.  A systematic review of financial toxicity among cancer patients in China.

Authors:  Binbin Xu; Li Hu; Qinqin Cheng; Winnie K W So
Journal:  Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2022-04-27
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.