Pilot Feasibility Study of an Oncology Financial Navigation Program in Brain Cancer Patients

Lay healthcare worker financial toxicity intervention: a pilot financial toxicity screening and referral program

PURPOSE

Financial toxicity is a source of significant distress for patients with urologic cancers, yet few studies have addressed financial burden in this patient population.

METHODS

We developed a financial toxicity screening program using a lay health worker (LHW) and social worker (SW) to assess and mitigate financial toxicity in a single academic medical clinic. As part of a quality improvement project, the LHW screened all newly diagnosed patients with advanced stages of prostate, kidney, or urothelial cancer for financial burden using three COST tool questions and referred patients who had significant financial burden to an SW who provided personalized recommendations. The primary outcome was feasibility defined as 80% of patients with financial burden completing the SW consult. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, change in COST Tool responses, and qualitative assessment of financial resources utilized.

RESULTS

The LHW screened a total of 185 patients for financial toxicity; 82% (n = 152) were male, 65% (n = 120) White, and 75% (n = 139) reported annual household income >$100,000 US Dollars; 60% (n = 114) had prostate cancer. A total of 18 (9.7%) participants screened positive for significant financial burden and were referred to the SW for consultation. All participants (100%) completed and reported satisfaction with the SW consultation and had 0.83 mean lower scores on the COST Tool post-intervention assessment compared to pre-intervention (95% confidence interval [0.26, 1.41]).

CONCLUSION

This multidisciplinary financial toxicity intervention using an LHW and SW was feasible, acceptable, and associated with reduced financial burden among patients with advanced stages of urologic cancers. Future work should evaluate the effect of this intervention among cancer patients in diverse settings.

Assessing the pre-implementation context for financial navigation in rural and non-rural oncology clinics

Background

Financial navigation (FN) is an evidence-based intervention designed to address financial toxicity for cancer patients. FN's success depends on organizations' readiness to implement and other factors that may hinder or support implementation. Tailored implementation strategies can support practice change but must be matched to the implementation context. We assessed perceptions of readiness and perceived barriers and facilitators to successful implementation among staff at nine cancer care organizations (5 rural, 4 non-rural) recruited to participate in the scale-up of a FN intervention. To understand differences in the pre-implementation context and inform modifications to implementation strategies, we compared findings between rural and non-rural organizations.

Methods

We conducted surveys (n = 78) and in-depth interviews (n = 73) with staff at each organization. We assessed perceptions of readiness using the Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC) scale. In-depth interviews elicited perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing FN in each context. We used descriptive statistics to analyze ORIC results and deductive thematic analysis, employing a codebook guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), to synthesize themes in barriers and facilitators across sites, and by rurality.

Results

Results from the ORIC scale indicated strong perceptions of organizational readiness across all sites. Staff from rural areas reported greater confidence in their ability to manage the politics of change (87% rural, 76% non-rural) and in their organization's ability to support staff adjusting to the change (96% rural, 75% non-rural). Staff at both rural and non-rural sites highlighted factors reflective of the Intervention Characteristics (relative advantage) and Implementation Climate (compatibility and tension for change) domains as facilitators. Although few barriers to implementation were reported, differences arose between rural and non-rural sites in these perceived barriers, with non-rural staff more often raising concerns about resistance to change and compatibility with existing work processes and rural staff more often raising concerns about competing time demands and limited resources.

Conclusions

Staff across both rural and non-rural settings identified few, but different, barriers to implementing a novel FN intervention that they perceived as important and responsive to patients' needs. These findings can inform how strategies are tailored to support FN in diverse oncology practices.

Financial toxicity among head and neck cancer patients and their caregivers: A cross‐sectional pilot study

Objectives

Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients experience greater financial toxicity than other cancer patients. Research on financial toxicity has concentrated on patients despite many informal caregivers sharing finances and reducing work hours to provide patient care. Thus, our pilot study: (1) assessed the feasibility of financial toxicity screening of HNC patients and their caregivers, and (2) described financial toxicity levels of HNC patients and their caregivers.

Methods

We surveyed English-speaking adult HNC patients initiating treatment at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center and their informal caregivers. This survey assessed demographics and financial toxicity through the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) measure (0-44 range; lower score indicates higher financial toxicity). Screening feasibility was defined as ≥50% consent rate and ≥60% data completion rate.

Results

Our sample included 27 HNC patients and 9 caregivers. They both had slightly lower consent and completion rates than our goals. Patients reported a median COST score of 27 while caregivers reported a median COST score of 16. Approximately 25.9% of patients and 44.4% of caregivers reported high financial toxicity (COST < 17.5). Caregivers reported high concerns about their future financial health and their ability to control the amount of their financial contributions to the patient's care.

Conclusions

Patients and caregivers may require additional outreach approaches beyond emailed questionnaires to screen for their financial toxicity systematically. Future research is needed to replicate our results to determine whether differences in financial toxicity occur between patients and caregivers and identify areas of focus for interventions.

Level of evidence

IV.

Association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life of patients with gynecologic cancer

OBJECTIVES

Patients often struggle with their financial situation during cancer treatment due to treatment-related costs or loss of income. This resulting negative effect is called financial toxicity, which is a known as a side effect of cancer care. This study aimed to evaluate the association between financial toxicity and health-related quality of life among patients with gynecologic cancer using validated questionnaires.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, patients with gynecologic cancer receiving anti-cancer drug treatment for > 2 months were recruited. Patients answered the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, EORTC-QLQ-C30, disease-specific tools (EORTC-QLQ-OV28/CX24/EN24), and EQ-5D-5L. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to determine associations.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and July 2021, 109 cancer patients completed the COST questionnaire. The mean COST score was 19.82. Strong associations were observed between financial difficulty (r = - 0.616) in the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and body image (r = 0.738) in the EORTC-QLQ-CX24, while weak associations were noted between the global health status/quality of life (r = 0.207), EQ-5D-5L index score (r = 0.252), and several function and symptom scale scores with the COST score.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater financial toxicity was associated with worse health-related quality of life scores, such as financial difficulty in gynecologic cancer patients and body image in cervical cancer patients as strong associations, and weakly associated with general health-related quality of life scores and several function/symptom scales.

Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity

Financial toxicity, the cumulative financial hardships resulting from cancer diagnosis and treatment, is a growing problem in the United States. With the proliferation of costly novel therapeutics and improved cancer survival, financial toxicity will remain a major issue in cancer care delivery. Frontline oncology providers serve as gatekeepers in the medical system and, as such, could play essential roles in recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Providers and health systems could help mitigate financial toxicity through routine financial toxicity screening, financial navigation, and advocacy. Specific strategies include developing and implementing financial screening instruments that can be integrated in electronic medical records and establishing team-based financial navigation programs to help patients with out-of-pocket medical costs, nonmedical spending, and insurance optimization. Finally, providers should continue to advocate for policies and legislation that decrease cost and promote value-based care. In this review, we examine opportunities for provider engagement in these areas and highlight gaps for future research.

Treatment out-of-pocket cost communication and remote financial navigation in patients with cancer: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a pilot study assessing the feasibility of a personalized out-of-pocket cost communication, remote financial navigation, and counseling (CostCOM) intervention in cancer patients.

METHODS

Twenty-three adult, newly diagnosed cancer patients at a single community oncology practice were asked to complete a survey and participate in a CostCOM intervention, including patient-specific out-of-pocket cost communication, remote financial navigation, and counseling. Feasibility was defined as patient participation in CostCOM, and its impact on financial worry measured using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) (higher score = less worry) was assessed. Eight patients' and two providers' experience with CostCOM was evaluated using qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 61 (78.3% female; 100% white). Of 23 CostCOM patients, 86.9% completed CostCOM, 60% of them completed a financial assistance application, and 25% of those who applied were enrolled in a co-pay assistance program. Patients' financial worry significantly improved following CostCOM (COST score of 10.0 ± 9.6 at enrollment vs. 16.9 ± 8.1 at follow-up; p < 0.001). Mean general satisfaction (out of 5) with CostCOM was 4.1 ± 0.7. In qualitative interviews following OOPC communication, 75% felt a positive impact on their mental health, and all patients reported no change in their treatment plan; 83.3% found financial navigation beneficial. In providers' interviews, buy-in from relevant stakeholders, integration of the CostCOM with existing workflow, and larger studies to assess the effectiveness of CostCOM were identified as factors needed for CostCOM implementation in practice.

CONCLUSION

CostCOM interventions are feasible and acceptable and decrease financial worry in patients with cancer.

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.

Financial Assistance Processes and Mechanisms in Rural and Nonrural Oncology Care Settings

PURPOSE

Patients with cancer are at heightened risk of experiencing financial hardship. Financial navigation (FN) is an evidence-based approach for identifying and addressing patient and caregiver financial needs. In preparation for the implementation of a multisite FN intervention, we describe existing processes (ie, events and actions) and mechanisms (ie, how events work together) connecting patients to financial assistance, comparing rural and nonrural practices.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with stakeholders (ie, administrators, providers, and staff) at each of the 10 oncology care sites across a single state (five rural and five nonrural practices). We developed process maps for each site and analyzed stakeholder perspectives using thematic analysis. After reporting findings back to stakeholders, we synthesized themes and process maps across rural and nonrural sites separately.

RESULTS

Eighty-three stakeholders were interviewed. We identified six core elements of existing financial assistance processes across all sites: distress screening (including financial concerns), referrals, resource connection points, and pharmaceutical, insurance, and community/foundation resources. Processes differed by rurality; however, facilitators and barriers to identifying and addressing patient financial needs were consistent. Open communication between staff, providers, patients, and caregivers was a primary facilitator. Barriers included insufficient staff resources, challenges in routinely identifying needs, inadequate preparation of patients for anticipated medical costs, and limited tracking of resource availability and eligibility.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a clear need for systematic implementation of oncology FN to equitably address patient and caregiver financial hardship. Results have informed our current efforts to implement a multisite FN intervention, which involves comprehensive financial toxicity screening and systematization of intake and referrals.

Financial toxicity impact on younger versus older adults with cancer in the setting of care delivery

BACKGROUND

Young adults and other working-age adults with cancer are at risk for cancer-related financial toxicity (FT), including material hardships, depletion of coping resources, and psychological burden. This study compares FT domains in young adults (18-39 years old) (YAs), other working-age adults (40-64 years old), and older adults (≥65 years old) receiving cancer care.

METHODS

A total of 311 adults were surveyed using the multi-domain Economic Strain and Resilience in Cancer instrument measuring FT (0-10 score indicating least to greatest FT; score ≥5 severe FT). Participants were receiving ambulatory care from March-September 2019. Associations of age with overall FT and material hardship, coping resource depletion, and psychological burden FT domains were tested using Kruskal-Wallis and χ2 tests and multivariable generalized linear models with gamma distribution.

RESULTS

YAs (median age, 31.5 years) comprised 9.6% of the sample; other working-age adults comprised 56.9%. Overall, material, coping, and psychological FT scores were worse in younger age adults versus older adults (P < .001 in all multivariable models). Compared with older adults, younger age adults demonstrated worse material hardship (median scores, 3.70 vs 4.80 vs 1.30 for YAs, other working-age, and older adults, respectively; P < .001), coping resource depletion (4.50 vs 3.40 vs 0.80; P < .001), and psychological burden (6.50 vs 7.00 vs 1.00; P < .001). Fifty percent of YAs had severe overall FT versus 40.7% of other working-age adults and 9.6% of older adults (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Younger age adults with cancer bore disproportionate FT. Interventions to address unmet needs are critical components for addressing FT in this population.

Financial distress and its associated burden in couples coping with an advanced cancer

PURPOSE

In efforts to understand financial distress (FD) associated with advanced cancer care from the perspective of both patients with incurable disease and their spousal caregivers, we assessed FD in both members of the couple, identified symptom and quality of life (QOL) correlates, and examined the potential role of illness communication.

METHODS

Patients undergoing treatment for stage III/IV lung cancer or a grade III/IV primary brain tumor and their spousal caregivers (n = 76 dyads) completed measures of somatic and affective symptoms including FD, physical and mental QOL, and ease of engaging in illness communication. Patients and caregivers additionally rated their perception of each other's symptoms, including FD.

RESULTS

FD was endorsed by both patients (any FD 62.7%; high FD 24%) and spousal caregivers (any FD 64.7%; high FD 32.3%). Self-reported FD was significantly correlated (partial r = .52, p < .001) within couples. FD was associated with greater symptoms of anxiety (r = .29, p = .01; r = .31, p = .01), depression (r = 29, p = 01; r = .39, p = .001), and poorer physical QOL(r =  - .25, p = .03; r =  - .25, p = .001) for patients and caregivers, respectively. For patients, FD was additionally associated with poorer mental QOL(r =  - .44, p < .001). Caregivers accurately perceived patient FD, yet patients tended to underreport their caregiver's FD by almost an entire point (t = 2.8, p = .007). A 3-way interaction (FD X role X illness communication) revealed (b = .40, p = .041) that illness communication moderated the association between FD and physical QOL for spouses so that spouses who reported less ease of illness communication demonstrated a stronger association between financial distress and physical QOL (b =  - 2.08, p < .001) than those reporting greater ease of engaging in illness communication (b = .49, p = .508).

CONCLUSION

In the advanced cancer setting, FD is prevalent in both patients and their spousal caregivers and associated with psychological distress and poor physical QOL. Results suggest that optimal FD assessment should include patients and spouses, and spouse's ease of engaging with illness communication may be a potential target for future intervention studies.

A Scoping Review of Behavioral Interventions Addressing Medical Financial Hardship

Little information has been compiled across studies about existing interventions to mitigate issues of medical financial hardship, despite growing interest in health care delivery. The purpose of this qualitative systematic scoping review was to examine content and outcomes of interventions to address medical financial hardship. PRISMA guidelines were applied to present results using PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL, published between January 1980 and August 2020. Additional studies were identified through reference lists of selected papers. Included studies focused on mitigating medical financial hardship from out-of-pocket (OOP) health care expenses as an intervention strategy with at least 1 evaluation component. Screening 2412 articles identified 339 articles for full-text review, 12 of which met inclusion criteria. Variation was found regarding targets and outcome measurement of intervention. Primary outcomes were in the following categories: financial outcomes (eg, OOP expenses), behavioral outcomes, psychosocial, health care utilization, and health status. No included studies reported significant reduction in OOP expenses, perceptions of financial burden/toxicity, or health status. However, changes were observed for behavioral outcomes (adherence to treatment, patient needs addressed), some psychosocial outcomes (mental health symptoms, perceived support, patient satisfaction), and care utilization such as routine health care. No patterns were observed in the achievement of outcomes across studies based on intensity of intervention. Few rigorous studies exist in this emerging field, and studies have not shown consistent positive effects. Future research should focus on conceptual clarity of the intervention, align outcome measurement and achieve consensus around outcomes, and employ rigorous study designs, measurement, and outcome follow-up.

Financial assistance programs for cancer patients

Background:

The high costs of oncology care can lead to financial stress and have deleterious effects on the well-being of patients and their families. However, only a handful of financial assistance programs for cancer patients have been implemented and evaluated to date.

Recent findings:

Key features of reported programs include instrumental support through financial navigation or education for patients, and financial or charitable support for healthcare costs. Only one of the programs successfully reduced actual out-of-pocket costs for patients, though others were associated with psychosocial benefits or increased knowledge of financial resources. Four of the 5 programs evaluated to date were pilot studies with small sample sizes, and most lack control groups for comparison.

Conclusions:

Additional studies are needed that include larger sample sizes and with comparison groups of cancer patients in order to determine whether the counseling and navigator programs are effective in addressing financial distress in this patient population. Of particular interest are programs designed for low-income patients and those who lack health care insurance. Financial assistance programs that implement solutions at different levels of the healthcare system (individual patients, providers, healthcare institutions) are more likely to be effective. Multi-level interventions are needed that address the systems in which patients access care, the actual costs of services and drugs, and the individual needs of patients in order to reduce financial hardship for cancer patients.

A cross-sectional study of financial distress in persons with multimorbidity

BACKGROUND

Financial distress among persons with multimorbidity is an important topic which has been inadequately addressed to date.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the extent of financial distress among persons with multimorbidity, using data from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional, population-based study.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults ages ≥ 18 years with multimorbidity.

MAIN MEASURES

Low income and selected social determinants of health that are indicators of financial distress.

KEY RESULTS

Multimorbidity was more common among those with a household income of less than $15,000 per year (P < 0.001) and among those who were 65 years of age or older (P < 0.001). There was an approximately linear increase in the percentage of individuals who had a household income of less than $15,000 or $25,000 per year with increasing number of morbidities. About one-quarter of individuals who had five or more morbidities had a household income of less than $15,000 per year as compared with 4.49% of individuals with no morbidities (P < 0.001). For all of the social determinants of health examined (Couldn't pay bills, didn't have money for food, didn't have money for balanced meals, didn't have enough money to make ends meet, and felt this kind of stress), there was an approximately linear increase in the percentage of individuals with an indicator of financial distress with increasing number of morbidities. Further research is needed examining the prevalence and correlates of financial distress in this population as well effective strategies for ameliorating its impact on the health and wellbeing of these persons.

Evidence of the Feasibility and Preliminary Efficacy of Oncology Financial Navigation: A Scoping Review

One in three cancer patients reports financial hardship. Cancer-related financial hardship is associated with diminished quality of life, treatment nonadherence, and early mortality. Over 80% of NCI-designated cancer centers provide some form of oncology financial navigation (OFN). Although interest in OFN has grown, there is little scientific evidence to guide care delivery. We conducted a scoping review to assess the evidence of OFN's feasibility and preliminary efficacy and determine its core components/functions. Papers were included that (i) evaluated a clinical intervention to reduce financial hardship in patients with cancer or caregivers by facilitating access to resources, (ii) were conducted in the United States, and (iii) were published since 2000. Of 681 titles, 66 met criteria for full-text review, and six met full inclusion/exclusion criteria. The FN literature consists of descriptive studies and pilot trials focused on feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. The studies showed that OFN implementation and evaluation are feasible; however, efficacy was difficult to evaluate because the studies were limited by small sample sizes (attributed to low patient participation). Most studies were conducted in urban, academic medical centers-which are less likely to be used by the poor and patients of color, who have the highest risk of financial hardship. The studies did not attempt to address the issue of underlying poverty at the individual and community level and whether OFN could be effectively adapted for these care environments. Future OFN programs must be tested with underserved and racially diverse patient populations, and evaluation efforts should aim to understand patient-reported barriers to participation.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Financial Consequences of Cancer-Related Employment Disruption

Introduction

Cancer-related employment disruption contributes to financial toxicity and associated clinical outcomes through income loss and changes in health insurance and may not be uniformly experienced. We examined racial/ethnic differences in the financial consequences of employment disruption.

Methods

We surveyed a national sample of cancer patients employed at diagnosis who had received assistance from a national nonprofit about the impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on employment. We used logistic regression models to examine racial/ethnic differences in income loss and changes in health insurance coverage.

Results

Of 619 cancer patients included, 63% identified as Non-Hispanic/Latinx (NH) White, 18% as NH Black, 9% as Hispanic/Latinx, 5% as other racial/ethnic identities, and 5% unreported. Over 83% reported taking a significant amount of time off from work during cancer diagnosis and treatment, leading to substantial income loss for 64% and changes in insurance coverage for 31%. NH Black respondents had a 10.2 percentage point (95% CI: 4.8 – 19.9) higher probability of experiencing substantial income loss compared to NH White respondents, and Hispanic or Latinx respondents had a 12.4 percentage point (95% CI: 0.3 – 24.5) higher probability compared to NH White respondents, controlling for clinical characteristics (i.e., cancer type, stage and age at diagnosis, and time since diagnosis). Similarly, NH Black respondents had a 9.3 percentage point (95% CI: -0.7 – 19.3) higher probability of experiencing changes in health insurance compared to NH White respondents, and Hispanic or Latinx respondents had a 10.0 percentage point (95% CI: -3.0 – 23.0) higher probability compared to NH White respondents.

Discussion

Compared with NH White respondents, NH Black and Hispanic/Latinx respondents more commonly reported employment-related income loss and health insurance changes. Given documented racial/ethnic differences in job types, benefit generosity, and employment protections as a result of historic marginalization, policies to reduce employment disruption and its associated financial impact must be developed with a racial equity lens.

Correlates of financial toxicity in adult cancer patients and their informal caregivers

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity is commonly reported by cancer patients, but few studies have assessed caregiver perceptions. We aimed to validate the modified Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) in cancer caregivers, identify factors associated with financial toxicity in both patients and caregivers, and assess the association of caregiver financial toxicity with patient and caregiver outcomes.

METHODS

Using a convenience sampling method, 100 dyads of adult cancer patients and a primary caregiver visiting outpatient oncology clinics (Jan-Sep 2019) were recruited. We assessed the internal consistency and convergent and divergent validity of the modified COST. Multivariable analyses identified correlates of financial toxicity. Association of financial toxicity with care non-adherence, lifestyle-altering behaviors (e.g., home refinance/sale, retirement/saving account withdrawal), and quality of life (QOL) was investigated.

RESULTS

Recruited patient vs. caregiver characteristics were as follows: mean age: 60.6 vs. 56.5; 34% vs. 46.4% female; 79% vs. 81.4% white. The caregiver COST measure demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.91). In patients, older age (B, 0.3 [95% CI, 0.1-0.4]) and higher annual household income (B, 14.3 [95% CI, 9.3-19.4]) correlated with lower financial toxicity (P < 0.05). In caregivers, lower patient financial toxicity (B, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.2-0.6]) and cancer stages 1-3 (compared to stage 4) (B, 4.6 [95% CI, 0.4-8.8]) correlated with lower financial toxicity (P < 0.05). Increased caregiver financial toxicity correlated with higher care non-adherence in patients, increased lifestyle-altering behaviors, and lower QOL in patients and caregivers (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The COST measure can also be used to assess caregiver financial toxicity. Caregivers' financial toxicity was associated with negative outcomes for both dyad members.

Delivery of Financial Navigation Services Within National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers

Background

Cancer centers have a responsibility to help patients manage the costs of their cancer treatment. This article describes the availability of financial navigation services within the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers.

Methods

Data were obtained from the NCI Survey of Financial Navigation Services and Research, an online survey administered to NCI-designated cancer centers from July to September 2019. Of the 62 eligible centers, 57 completed all or most of the survey, for a response rate of 90.5%.

Results

Nearly all cancer centers reported providing help with applications for pharmaceutical assistance programs and medical discounts (96.5%), health insurance coverage (91.2%), assistance with nonmedical costs (96.5%), and help understanding medical bills and out-of-pocket costs (85.9%). Although other services were common, in some cases they were only available to certain patients. These services included direct financial assistance with medical and nonmedical costs and referrals to outside organizations for financial assistance. The least common services included medical debt management (63.2%), detailed discussions about the cost of treatment (54.4%), and guidance about legal protections (50.1%). Providing treatment cost transparency to patients was reported as a common challenge: 71.9% of centers agreed or strongly agreed that it is difficult to determine how much a cancer patient's treatment will cost, and 70.2% of oncologists are reluctant to discuss financial issues with patients.

Conclusions

Cancer centers provide many financial services and resources. However, there remains a need to build additional capacity to deliver comprehensive financial navigation services and to understand the extent to which patients are referred and helped by these services.

Breast cancer patients' insurance status and residence zip code correlate with early discontinuation of endocrine therapy: An analysis of the ECOG-ACRIN TAILORx trial

BACKGROUND

Early discontinuation is a substantial barrier to the delivery of endocrine therapies (ETs) and may influence recurrence and survival. The authors investigated the association between early discontinuation of ET and social determinants of health, including insurance coverage and the neighborhood deprivation index (NDI), which was measured on the basis of patients' zip codes, in breast cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of a prospective randomized clinical trial (Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment), women with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer who started ET within a year of study entry were included. Early discontinuation was calculated as stopping ET within 4 years of its start for reasons other than distant recurrence or death via Kaplan-Meier estimates. A Cox proportional hazards joint model was used to analyze the association between early discontinuation of ET and factors such as the study-entry insurance and NDI, with adjustments made for other variables.

RESULTS

Of the included 9475 women (mean age, 55.6 years; White race, 84%), 58.0% had private insurance, whereas 11.7% had Medicare, 5.8% had Medicaid, 3.8% were self-pay, and 19.1% were treated at international sites. The early discontinuation rate was 12.3%. Compared with those with private insurance, patients with Medicaid (hazard ratio [HR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-1.92) and self-pay patients (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.25-2.17) had higher early discontinuation. Participants with a first-quartile NDI (highest deprivation) had a higher probability of discontinuation than those with a fourth-quartile NDI (lowest deprivation; HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.11-1.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' insurance and zip code at study entry play roles in adherence to ET, with uninsured and underinsured patients having a high rate of treatment nonadherence. Early identification of patients at risk may improve adherence to therapy.

LAY SUMMARY

In this retrospective analysis of 9475 women with breast cancer participating in a clinical trial (Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment), Medicaid and self-pay patients (compared with those with private insurance) and those in the highest quartile of neighborhood deprivation scores (compared with those in the lowest quartile) had a higher probability of early discontinuation of endocrine therapy. These social determinants of health assume larger importance with the expected increase in unemployment rates and loss of insurance coverage in the aftermath of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Early identification of patients at risk and enrollment in insurance optimization programs may improve the persistence of therapy.

Unmet Care Needs and Financial Hardship in Patients With Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer on Immunotherapy or Chemoimmunotherapy in Clinical Practice

PURPOSE

Immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy is now standard treatment for most patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), yet patient supportive care needs (SCNs) on immunotherapy are not well defined. This study characterized the SCNs and financial hardship of patients with mNSCLC treated with immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy and examined the relationship between patient and caregiver cancer-related employment reductions and patient financial hardship.

METHODS

Patients with mNSCLC on immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy from a single academic medical center completed the SCNs Survey-34, items indexing material, psychological, and behavioral financial hardship, and the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity. Univariate and bivariate analyses examined care needs, financial hardship, and impact of cancer-related employment reductions on patient financial hardship.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (40% male; 75% White, mean age = 62.5 years, 57% on immunotherapy alone) participated. Fifty-five percent reported unmet needs in physical or daily living and psychological domains. Financial hardship was common (33% material, 63% psychological, and 57% behavioral). Fifty-two percent reported hardship in at least two domains. Forty percent reported a caregiver cancer-related employment reduction. Caregiver employment reduction was related to patient financial hardship (68% of those reporting caregiver employment reduction reported at least two domains of hardship v 40% of those without reduction, P = .03) and patient financial distress (mean Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity = 19.6 among those with caregiver employment reduction v 26.8 without, P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Patients with mNSCLC treated with immunotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy report multiple unmet care needs and financial hardship. Psychological, functional, financial, and caregiver concerns merit assessment and intervention in this population.

Current Practices for Screening and Addressing Financial Hardship within the NCI Community Oncology Research Program

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related financial hardship is associated with poor care outcomes and reduced quality of life for patients and families. Scalable intervention development to address financial hardship requires knowledge of current screening practices and services within community cancer care.

METHODS

The NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) 2017 Landscape Assessment survey assessed financial screening and financial navigation practices within U.S. community oncology practices. Logistic models evaluated associations between financial hardship screening and availability of a cancer-specific financial navigator and practice group characteristics (e.g., safety-net designation, critical access hospital, proportion of racial and ethnic minority patients served).

RESULTS

Of 221 participating NCORP practice groups, 72% reported a financial screening process and 50% had a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practice groups with more than 10% of new patients with cancer enrolled in Medicaid (_adjOR = 2.81, P = 0.02) and with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (_adjOR = 3.91, P < 0.01) were more likely to screen for financial concerns. Practice groups with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (_adjOR = 2.37, P < 0.01) were more likely to have a dedicated financial navigator or counselor for patients with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Most NCORP practice groups screen for financial concerns and half have a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practices serving more racial or ethnic minority patients are less likely to screen and have a designated financial navigator.

IMPACT

The effectiveness of financial screening and navigation for mitigating financial hardship could be tested within NCORP, along with specific interventions to address cancer care inequities.See related commentary by Yabroff et al., p. 593.

Cancer and COVID-19: economic impact on households in Southeast Asia

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic may worsen the existing financial vulnerabilities of cancer survivors who may be experiencing a double financial hit, both from cancer-induced financial toxicity as well as economic strains arising from loss of income and prolonged unemployment following the pandemic. The impact of the pandemic is likely to be more pronounced on cancer survivors living in resource-limited settings, such as in Southeast Asia. As health care systems in the region try to streamline resources and accommodate the influx of patients from COVID-19, many in the cancer community have experienced severe disruptions in their care. The delays and disruption of timely access to cancer care could lead to patients presenting with worsened conditions and at more advanced cancer stages in which treatment options tended to be costlier. Similar to countries around the world, the various forms of movement restrictions that were enforced have aggravated the rates of unemployment, loss of wages and the limited access to support from family or friends around Southeast Asia. The economic impact of COVID-19 hits even harder on the large proportion of the population in the region that works in the informal sector, who are often one paycheque or one episode of illness away from financial catastrophe. More worryingly, the lack of a robust social security system in many Southeast Asian countries, especially in terms of income protection, could ultimately force many cancer survivors to choose between paying for their treatments, or to forego treatments, and feed their families. Early identification of cancer patients experiencing financial toxicity following the pandemic will enable timely and appropriate interventions to be undertaken by various stakeholders, potentially averting a cascade of other economic fallouts that may last for years after cancer treatment.

Perceptions and experiences of multiple sclerosis patients regarding out-of-pocket costs of care discussions

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a costly disease and out-of-pocket (OOP) cost information is difficult to obtain. We seek to characterize the perceptions and experiences of MS patients regarding out-of-pocket (OOP) costs of care discussions and evaluate factors associated with them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MS patients visiting an outpatient neurology clinic 7/2018-2/2019 were approached to complete a survey regarding costs of care discussions. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with patient preferences in discussing OOP costs with their provider and actions to contact insurance company to inquire about OOP costs.

RESULTS

A total of 243 patients responded (response rate 43.5%). With regard to perceptions, 85.3% of patients expressed interest in knowing about OOP costs, 59.6% reported desire specifically for their healthcare provider to discuss OOP costs, and 18.5% reported that there have been times they wanted to discuss OOP costs but did not have the opportunity to do so. With regard to experiences, 20.5% reported discussing costs with their providers in the past three months, 15.5% contacted their insurance company regarding OOP costs, and 10.6% received a call from an imaging center to inform them of OOP costs. Patients who were male, white, or had at least one relapse were significantly more likely to desire to discuss OOP costs with their provider. No factors were significantly associated with patients contacting their insurance company regarding OOP costs.

CONCLUSION

Most MS patients would like to discuss costs of care with their providers, but only one in five actually do so. Medical practices can take initiatives towards providing transparency in OOP costs.