Sumeet K Bhanvadia1, Sarah P Psutka2, Madeleine L Burg3, Ronald de Wit4, Haryana M Dhillon5, Bishal Gyawali6, Alicia K Morgans7, Daniel A Goldstein8, Angela B Smith9, Maxine Sun10, David F Penson11. 1. USC Norris Cancer Center, Keck Medical Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: sumeet.bhanvadia@med.usc.edu. 2. Department of Urology, University of Washington Seattle Cancer Care Alliance. Electronic address: spsutka@uw.edu. 3. USC Norris Cancer Center, Keck Medical Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Dept Medical Oncology Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Centre for Medical Psychology & Evidence-based Decision-making, School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of SydneyANZUP Cancer Trials Group, Sydney, Australia. 6. Departments of Oncology and Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada. 7. Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago IL. 8. Depts. Oncology and Internal Medicine, Rabin Medical Center. 9. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. 10. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. 11. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the detrimental effects of financial strain caused by a cancer diagnosis on the well-being of patients and their families. It is highly prevalent among cancer patients and has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature regarding FT among patients with prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, and to propose a framework for future FT investigations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Primary manuscripts and abstracts reporting FT as a primary or secondary outcome or a covariate in patients with prostate, bladder, or kidney cancer, published before May 2020, were retrieved using the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of 629 titles identified, 19, ten, and two studies met the inclusion criteria for prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, respectively, and were included (24 unique articles). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Significant heterogeneity was observed in covariates, methodology, and measure of FT. Factors commonly associated with FT included younger age at diagnosis, black race, low socioeconomic status, low education attainment, and rurality. FT was commonly associated with lower quality of life and nonadherence. FT was common among patients in countries with universal health coverage as well as those without, although the nature of these costs differed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite paucity of literature, it is suggested that FT is common among patients with prostate and bladder cancer, and remains uncharacterized in kidney cancer patients. Future work will benefit from the incorporation of a formal FT framework, utilization of validated FT instruments to characterize FT consistently, and inclusion of FT measures in outcomes reported by patients with genitourinary cancers. PATIENT SUMMARY: Financial toxicity affects many prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer patients; however, this toxicity is understudied. It is associated with decreased quality of life and lower medication and treatment adherence.
CONTEXT: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the detrimental effects of financial strain caused by a cancer diagnosis on the well-being of patients and their families. It is highly prevalent among cancer patients and has been associated with inferior clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the literature regarding FT among patients with prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, and to propose a framework for future FT investigations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Primary manuscripts and abstracts reporting FT as a primary or secondary outcome or a covariate in patients with prostate, bladder, or kidney cancer, published before May 2020, were retrieved using the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of 629 titles identified, 19, ten, and two studies met the inclusion criteria for prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, respectively, and were included (24 unique articles). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Significant heterogeneity was observed in covariates, methodology, and measure of FT. Factors commonly associated with FT included younger age at diagnosis, black race, low socioeconomic status, low education attainment, and rurality. FT was commonly associated with lower quality of life and nonadherence. FT was common among patients in countries with universal health coverage as well as those without, although the nature of these costs differed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite paucity of literature, it is suggested that FT is common among patients with prostate and bladder cancer, and remains uncharacterized in kidney cancer patients. Future work will benefit from the incorporation of a formal FT framework, utilization of validated FT instruments to characterize FT consistently, and inclusion of FT measures in outcomes reported by patients with genitourinary cancers. PATIENT SUMMARY: Financial toxicity affects many prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer patients; however, this toxicity is understudied. It is associated with decreased quality of life and lower medication and treatment adherence.
Authors: Tamir N Sholklapper; Michael L Creswell; Alexandra T Payne; Michael Markel; Abigail Pepin; Michael Carrasquilla; Alan Zwart; Malika Danner; Marilyn Ayoob; Thomas Yung; Brian Collins; Deepak Kumar; Nima Aghdam; Simeng Suy; Ryan A Hankins; Keith Kowalczyk; Sean P Collins Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 6.244