Health care costs for adolescents and young adults with cancer: a Wisconsin community-based hospital study between 2005 and 2020

Healthcare costs of cancer among children, adolescents, and young adults: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To collate and critically review international evidence on the direct health system costs of children and adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted searches in PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus. Articles were limited to studies involving people aged 0-39 years at cancer diagnosis and published from 2012 to 2022. Two reviewers screened the articles and evaluated the studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. The reviewers synthesized the findings using a narrative approach and presented the costs in 2022 US dollars for comparability.

RESULTS

Overall, the mean healthcare costs for all cancers in the 5 years post diagnosis ranged from US$36,670 among children in Korea to US$127,946 among AYA in the USA. During the first year, the mean costs among children 0-14 years ranged from US$34,953 in Chile to over US$130,000 in Canada. These were higher than the costs for AYA, estimated at US$61,855 in Canada. At the end of life, the mean costs were estimated at over US$300,000 among children and US$235,265 among adolescents in Canada. Leukemia was the most expensive cancer type, estimated at US$50,133 in Chile, to US$152,533 among children in Canada. Overall, more than a third of the total cost is related to hospitalizations. All the included studies were of good quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare costs associated with cancer are substantial among children, and AYA. More research is needed on the cost of cancer in low- and middle-income countries and harmonization of costs across countries.

Evaluation of financial toxicity and associated factors in female patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

These systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to discuss the financial toxicity (FT) level among breast cancer (BC) patients and the associated demographic and economic factors.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of single means were used by following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and PRISMA guidance. Untransformed means (MRAW) were used to estimate the confidence interval for individual studies, while I2 and tau2 statistics were used to examine heterogeneity among pooled studies. Electronic databases were PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE(R), Science Direct, and Turkish databases were used to find relevant studies published in the last 15 years (between 2008 and 2023).

RESULTS

A total of 50 studies were reviewed in the systematic review, and 11 were included in the overall and subgroup meta-analyses. The majority of reviewed studies were from the USA (38 studies), while there were four studies from China and eight studies from other countries having different types of health systems. The overall estimated FT level based on 11 pooled studies was 23.19, meaning mild level FT in the range of four categories (no FT score > 25, mild FT score 14-25, moderate FT score 1-13, and severe FT score equal to 0), with a 95% CI of 20.66-25.72. The results of subgroup meta-analyses showed that the estimated FT levels were higher among those patients who were single, with lower education levels, stage 3 patients, younger, lower income, unemployed, and living in other countries compared to those who were married, more educated, and stages 1 and 2 patients, more aged, more income, employed, and patients in the USA.

CONCLUSION

The cost-effectiveness of the treatment strategies of BC depends on the continuity of care. However, FT is one of the leading factors causing BC patients to use the required care irregularly, and it has a negative effect on adherence to treatment. So, removing the economic barriers by taking appropriate measures to decrease FT will increase the efficiency of already allocated resources to BC treatments and improve the health outcomes of BC patients.

Financial Toxicity of Nephrolithiasis: The First Assessment of the Economic Stresses of Kidney Stone Treatment

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the financial toxicity (FT) related to kidney stone treatment.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional cohort study with multi-institutional in-person and online cohorts of stone formers.  Participants were surveyed using the validated COST tool (COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity). The maximum score is 44 and lower scores indicate increased FT. "Moderate FT" was defined by COST scores between 25-14 points and "severe FT" for scores <14. Descriptive statistics, X² tests, T tests, Spearman correlation, and logistic regression were performed using SPSS v28.

RESULTS

241 participants were surveyed, including 126 in-person participants and 115 online. 60% of participants reported at least moderate FT (COST score <26) and 26% reported severe FT (COST score <14). Patients who reported moderate to severe FT were younger than those with low FT by a median difference of 8 years (95%CI = 4, 12). There was a significant correlation between out-of-pocket expense and COST scores, such that as out-of-pocket expenses increased, COST scores decreased, (Spearman's rho =-0.406, p = <0.001). Participants with moderate to severe FT tended to miss more workdays (p = 0.002), and their caretakers tended to miss more workdays (p = 0.007) due to their stone disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participants reported moderate to severe FT. As prior studies have shown that patients with "moderate FT" employ cost-coping strategies (i.e., medication rationing) and those with "severe FT" have worse health outcomes, urologists need to be sensitive to the financial burdens of treatment experienced by such patients undergoing kidney stone treatment.

Navigating financial toxicity in patients with cancer: A multidisciplinary management approach

Approximately one-half of individuals with cancer face personal economic burdens associated with the disease and its treatment, a problem known as financial toxicity (FT). FT more frequently affects socioeconomically vulnerable individuals and leads to subsequent adverse economic and health outcomes. Whereas multilevel systemic factors at the policy, payer, and provider levels drive FT, there are also accompanying intervenable patient-level factors that exacerbate FT in the setting of clinical care delivery. The primary strategy to intervene on FT at the patient level is financial navigation. Financial navigation uses comprehensive assessment of patients' risk factors for FT, guidance toward support resources, and referrals to assist patient financial needs during cancer care. Social workers or nurse navigators most frequently lead financial navigation. Oncologists and clinical provider teams are multidisciplinary partners who can support optimal FT management in the context of their clinical roles. Oncologists and clinical provider teams can proactively assess patient concerns about the financial hardship and employment effects of disease and treatment. They can respond by streamlining clinical treatment and care delivery planning and incorporating FT concerns into comprehensive goals of care discussions and coordinated symptom and psychosocial care. By understanding how age and life stage, socioeconomic, and cultural factors modify FT trajectory, oncologists and multidisciplinary health care teams can be engaged and informative in patient-centered, tailored FT management. The case presentations in this report provide a practical context to summarize authors' recommendations for patient-level FT management, supported by a review of key supporting evidence and a discussion of challenges to mitigating FT in oncology care. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:437-453.