Developing an Educational Intervention to Address Financial Hardship in Cancer Patients

Health insurance literacy among patients receiving outpatient cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

This study examines patients' understanding of health insurance terms and concepts and quantifies health insurance literacy (HIL) levels by key sociodemographic factors.

METHODS

This study included 393 adult patients with cancer (>18 years old) receiving treatment in two ambulatory infusion centers: Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Arizona and the University of Mississippi Medical Center in Jackson, Mississippi. Respondents' perceptions of their HIL were assessed using the Health Insurance Literacy Measure (HILM), a validated 21-item measure of a consumer's ability to select and use health insurance (HIL self-efficacy). Respondents' knowledge of health insurance concepts (HIL knowledge) was measured using 10 items created by the Kaiser Family Foundation. The number of correct answers was categorized into three levels: 0-4 (low knowledge), 5-6 (moderate knowledge), and 7-10 (high knowledge). Multivariable logistic regressions were used to compare correct answers to HIL knowledge questions by HIL self-efficacy.

RESULTS

Nearly three-quarters of patients had high HIL self-efficacy and high HIL knowledge (70.5%), understanding basic insurance terms, such as premiums and deductibles. Relatively low percentages of patients correctly answered questions about the meaning of provider networks, health insurance formularies, and calculating out-of-pocket spending in scenarios when insurers pay a portion of allowed charges. Lower HIL knowledge was more common among patients with less educational attainment (

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve HIL and navigation of health insurance plan features are required, especially for socioeconomically vulnerable patients.

Collapse

Key Words

• cancer
• cancer disparity
• health inequities
• health insurance
• health insurance literacy
• neoplasms

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Humans
• Female
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Neoplasms/therapy
• Health Literacy
• Insurance, Health
• Adult
• Aged
• Outpatients/statistics & numerical data
• Self Efficacy
• Insurance Coverage

Collapse

Grants

• Henry J. Predolin Foundation, Mayo Clinic

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Jingxuan Zhao Surveillance and Health Equity Science Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Nan Zhang Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
Talal Hilal Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi, USA
Joan M Griffin Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
K Robin Yabroff Surveillance and Health Equity Science Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Nandita Khera Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

Collapse

Preparing for Cancer: A Qualitative Study of Hispanic Patient and Caregiver Needs

BACKGROUND

Cancer disproportionately affects Hispanic populations, yet the preparedness of Hispanic caregiver-patient dyads facing cancer remains understudied. This study aims to identify essential components of preparedness needs and inform future psychosocial interventions for this demographic.

METHODS

Secondary analyses were conducted utilizing focus groups to develop a communication intervention for Hispanic patients and caregivers. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using NVivo v12 (2020).

RESULTS

Analysis revealed symptom management and treatment comprehension as pivotal aspects of preparation. Additionally, preparedness among our sample emerged by addressing the multifaceted dimensions of preparedness, including psychological, emotional, educational, familial, practical, financial, and spiritual aspects.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailoring interventions encompassing diverse dimensions of preparedness can foster inclusivity and maximize their impact on supportive measures. This underscores the necessity for culturally sensitive approaches when delivering interventions supporting Hispanic individuals navigating the challenges of cancer.

ESMO expert consensus statements on the screening and management of financial toxicity in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity, defined as both the objective financial burden and subjective financial distress from a cancer diagnosis and its treatment, is a topic of interest in the assessment of the quality of life of patients with cancer and their families. Current evidence implicates financial toxicity in psychosocial, economic and other harms, leading to suboptimal cancer outcomes along the entire trajectory of diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, survivorship and palliation. This paper presents the results of a virtual consensus, based on the evidence base to date, on the screening and management of financial toxicity in patients with and beyond cancer organized by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) in 2022.

METHODS

A Delphi panel of 19 experts from 11 countries was convened taking into account multidisciplinarity, diversity in health system contexts and research relevance. The international panel of experts was divided into four working groups (WGs) to address questions relating to distinct thematic areas: patients with cancer at risk of financial toxicity; management of financial toxicity during the initial phase of treatment at the hospital/ambulatory settings; financial toxicity during the continuing phase and at end of life; and financial risk protection for survivors of cancer, and in cancer recurrence. After comprehensively reviewing the literature, statements were developed by the WGs and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment, and voting.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 25 evidence-informed consensus statements were developed, which answer 13 questions on financial toxicity. They cover evidence summaries, practice recommendations/guiding statements and policy recommendations relevant across health systems. These consensus statements aim to provide a more comprehensive understanding of financial toxicity and guide clinicians globally in mitigating its impact, emphasizing the importance of further research, best practices and guidelines.

Financial hardship for patients with cancer and caregivers at end of life in the USA: narrative review

BACKGROUND

Patients and their families face financial hardship during cancer treatment, which may intensify at end of life (EOL) due to increased symptoms and care needs. We undertook a narrative literature review to describe the current understanding of the causes, impacts and factors associated with financial hardship at EOL. We identify gaps in research, policy and clinical practice and propose steps to mitigate financial hardship for patients and caregivers at EOL.

METHODS

We conducted a Medline search to identify US studies since 2000 that examined EOL financial hardship for patients with cancer and their caregivers.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven adult and four paediatric studies met review criteria. Adults with cancer and their caregivers face significant financial hardship at EOL and in bereavement, especially due to employment changes and informal caregiving time costs. Financial hardship may be higher for younger caregivers and for patients who are uninsured, low income, rural, with high symptom burdens or with certain cancer types. The few paediatric studies showed high financial hardship and employment impact lasting well beyond a child's death.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited literature examining financial hardship at EOL in the USA, especially in paediatrics. Priorities for future research include longitudinal studies in diverse populations of patients with cancer and informal caregivers using standardised financial hardship measures. Policies to address financial hardship at EOL, especially with hospice care, should include insurance coverage for family caregiving and medical leave policies. There is need for increased financial hardship screening at EOL and in bereavement and a need for financial navigation interventions.

Determination of a cut-off COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) for identifying cost-related treatment nonadherence and impaired health-related quality of life among Chinese patients with cancer

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine a cut-off for the simplified Chinese version of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) that could identify cost-related treatment nonadherence among Chinese patients with cancer. The study also sought to validate this cut-off score by using it to assess impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the same population.

METHODS

A secondary analysis was conducted using data from a cross-sectional survey of 1208 Chinese patients with cancer who were recruited from 12 hospitals in six cities across three provinces of the Chinese mainland. Sociodemographic information and data on financial toxicity (FT), cost-related treatment nonadherence, and HRQoL were used in the analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the optimal cut-off for the simplified Chinese version of the COST.

RESULTS

The ROC analysis identified a COST cut-off of 18.5 for identifying cost-related treatment nonadherence, yielding a sensitivity of 76.5% and specificity of 71.4%. In the validation study, this cut-off score yielded a sensitivity of 64.2% and a specificity of 67.1% for identifying impaired HRQoL.

CONCLUSION

Early and dynamic assessment of cancer-related FT in routine clinical practice may play a crucial role in the early identification and management of FT. Accordingly, a COST cut-off of 18.5 was identified to indicate cost-related treatment nonadherence and impaired HRQoL in a population of patients with cancer from the Chinese mainland. This finding may facilitate the implementation of universal FT screening among patients with cancer in specific settings such as the Chinese mainland.

A Financial Toxicity Screening and Care Coordination Quality Improvement Program in a Gynecology Oncology Urban Practice

Background

Educating a multidisciplinary team on financial toxicity (FT) risk, screening, and care coordination is an approach to addressing gaps in care among newly diagnosed patients with stage III or IV cancer.

Objective

The goal of this quality improvement project (QIP) was to supply an education program for the multidisciplinary team providing insights for the following objectives: (1) Increase the rate of FT screening where there was no baseline screening, (2) Increase referrals for resource care coordination among patients experiencing FT, and (3) Evaluate the relationship between FT and selected demographic identifiers during the 8-week project.

Methods

The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model was adopted for learning and leading the change during the QIP, focusing on the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) and resource care coordination for newly diagnosed participants with stage III or IV gynecologic cancer.

Results

Of the 42 (80.75%) participants consenting to the QIP, 61.90% had COST scores below 23, with 100% (26) of the participants receiving referrals for resource care coordination. On average, 6.50 patients enter the practice for care, with 50% (3.25) reporting FT. At this rate, 162.50 patients were experiencing FT in a 50-week year and were not receiving resource care coordination. However, because some patients did not consent to the QIP, the average FT (Yes) count could potentially be between 199.50 to 225.00 patients in a 50-week year, leading to a potential 62.50 with FT (or 28% of 225.00) not receiving referrals. Age was the main driver for FT COST Score in this QIP. Many variables were unobserved in this QIP and could impact the FT COST Score. However, separate modeling reveals that age alone explains approximately 15% of FT COST scores' observed changes. Controlling for more variables may refine the model, but it seems unlikely by the data analysis that age would disappear as a driver of change in the FT COST score.

Conclusion

Developing a multidisciplinary education program focusing on a structured QIP-PDSA plan can be an example of standardizing an FT screening and care coordination program. The QIP team successfully incorporated a PDSA model roadmap screening program to identify the participants experiencing FT and promptly referred 100% for resource care coordination.

Financial Hardship in Childhood Cancer Survivors Treated with Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Long-term survivors of childhood cancer are at risk for financial hardship. However, it is not known if HCT leads to an incremental change in financial hardship for survivors who received it versus those who did not. We examined financial outcomes among adult survivors of childhood cancer who had undergone HCT. Using a cross-sectional survey in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study population between 2017 and 2019, self-reported financial hardship was compared between survivors who received HCT, survivors treated without HCT ("non-HCT"), and siblings and categorized into 3 domains: material hardship/financial sacrifices, behavioral, and psychological hardship. The standardized score of each domain of financial hardship was calculated by adding the item responses and dividing by the standard deviation among siblings. Multivariable linear and logistic regression were used to evaluate associations between sociodemographic characteristics, cancer diagnosis, post-treatment complications, and financial hardship among survivors. The mean adjusted score for each hardship domain was not significantly different between HCT survivors (n = 133) and non-HCT survivors (n = 2711); mean differences were .18 (95% confidence interval [CI], -.05 to .41) for material hardship/financial sacrifices, .07 (95% CI, -.18 to .32) for behavioral hardship, and .19 (95% CI, -.04 to .42) for psychological hardship. Within specific items, a higher proportion of survivors treated with HCT reported greater financial hardship compared to non-HCT survivors. HCT survivors also had significantly higher mean domain scores compared to sibling controls (n = 1027) in all domains. Household income and chronic health conditions, but not HCT, were associated with financial hardship among all survivors. Adult survivors of childhood cancer treated with HCT do not report greater overall financial hardship compared to non-HCT survivors but do report greater overall financial hardship compared to sibling controls. Surveillance and intervention may be necessary for all survivors regardless of HCT status.

Leveraging national and global political determinants of health to promote equity in cancer care

Health and politics are deeply intertwined. In the context of national and global cancer care delivery, political forces-the political determinants of health-influence every level of the cancer care continuum. We explore the "3-I" framework, which structures the upstream political forces that affect policy choices in the context of actors' interests, ideas, and institutions, to examine how political determinants of health underlie cancer disparities. Borrowing from the work of PA Hall, M-P Pomey, CJ Ho, and other thinkers, interests are the agendas of individuals and groups in power. Ideas represent beliefs or knowledge about what is or what should be. Institutions define the rules of play. We provide examples from around the world: Political interests have helped fuel the establishment of cancer centers in India and have galvanized the 2022 Cancer Moonshot in the United States. The politics of ideas underlie global disparities in cancer clinical trials-that is, in the distribution of epistemic power. Finally, historical institutions have helped perpetuate disparities related to racist and colonialist legacies. Present institutions have also been used to improve access for those in greatest need, as exemplified by the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence in Rwanda. In providing these global examples, we demonstrate how interests, ideas, and institutions influence access to cancer care across the breadth of the cancer continuum. We argue that these forces can be leveraged to promote cancer care equity nationally and globally.

Financial Toxicity in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies: a Review and Need for Interventions

INTRODUCTION

Financial toxicity is a developing research area to quantify the financial stress experienced by patients and caregivers, as well as the mechanisms by which they manage the costs associated with treatment and the very real harms that this stress can inflict upon cancer care. Patients with blood malignancies experience increased costs associated with their diagnosis due to possible inpatient admissions for treatment, frequent office visits, and even more frequent lab evaluations and testing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple studies have examined the causes and effects of financial toxicity on patient care and outcomes, and there have been several validated tools developed to identify patients experiencing or at risk for financial harm.

DISCUSSION

However, few studies to date have focused on implementing successful interventions to assist in mitigating financial difficulties for patients diagnosed with hematologic malignancies and their families. In this review, we examine the current literature with an emphasis on levels of care, including providers, systems, and policies. Specifically, we discuss published interventions including physician education about treatment costs, financial navigation in cancer centers, and novel institutional multidisciplinary review of patients' financial concerns. We also discuss the urgent need for societal and governmental interventions to lessen financial distress experienced by these highly vulnerable blood cancer patients.

Inequity in care delivery in cardio-oncology: dissecting disparities in underrepresented populations

It is well known that patients with cancer have a significantly higher cardiovascular mortality risk than the general population. Cardio-oncology has emerged to focus on these issues including risk reduction, detection, monitoring, and treatment of cardiovascular disease or complications in patients with cancer. The rapid advances in early detection and drug development in oncology, along with socioeconomic differences, racial inequities, lack of support, and barriers to accessing quality medical care, have created disparities in various marginalized populations. In this review, we will discuss the factors contributing to disparities in cardio-oncologic care in distinct populations, including Hispanic/Latinx, Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, indigenous populations, sex and gender minorities, and immigrants. Some factors that contribute to differences in outcomes in cardio-oncology include the prevalence of cancer screening rates, genetic cardiac/oncologic risk factors, cultural stressors, tobacco exposure rates, and physical inactivity. We will also discuss the barriers to cardio-oncologic care in these communities from the racial and socioeconomic context. Appropriate and timely cardiovascular and cancer care in minority groups is a critical component in addressing these disparities, and there need to be urgent efforts to address this widening gap.

Financial toxicity in patients with leukemia undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A systematic review

Financial toxicity (FT) is a term used to describe the objective financial burden of cancer care including the associated coping behaviors used by patients and their caregivers. FT has been shown to result in both direct financial burdens and in clinically relevant outcomes, such as non-adherence with care, diminished quality of life, and even decreased overall survival. Much of the data has been described in solid tumors, with limited investigations in the malignant hematology population. Patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) face a unique financial burden driven by lengthy hospitalizations and acute and chronic morbidity that have downstream implications on their income and costs. In this review, we discuss the prevalence of FT in patients with leukemia who are eligible for HSCT. We review the impact of FT on financial and clinical outcomes and the role of various interventions that have been studied within this population.

Assessing Patient-Reported Financial Hardship in Patients With Cancer in Routine Clinical Care

PURPOSE

Financial hardship (FH) in cancer care is a growing challenge for patients, their caregivers, and health care providers with impact on morbidity and mortality. In this study, we report on a standardized approach to describe the prevalence and predictors for FH as part of routine clinical workflow. We also report on the association of FH with survival in our cancer patient population.

METHODS

This study includes patients who completed a FH screen at least once between 2018 and 2020. Demographics, disease state, and mortality data were extracted from the medical records. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine association of sociodemographic and disease variables with FH. By using propensity score weighting to account for differences in demographic and clinical factors between patients with and without FH, we then fit Cox proportional hazards models to examine the relationship between FH and survival.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 31,154 patients. FH was reported by 14% (n = 4,250) of the patients. A significantly higher likelihood of having FH (P < .001 for all) was reported by racial/ethnic minority patients; those who were unemployed/disabled, single, or divorced; patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods; and those who were self-pay or had government insurance. Older age, being retired, and living farther from the cancer center were associated with significantly less likelihood of endorsing FH. Patients who endorsed FH had a lower survival (hazard ratio for mortality 1.46).

CONCLUSION

Our study identified key groups more likely to report FH in a relatively affluent population at a large cancer center and showed an adverse association between FH and survival. Further research is needed to develop clinical care pathways for patients at high risk for worse financial and clinical outcomes.

Association of Health Insurance Literacy With Financial Hardship in Patients With Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Patient-reported financial hardship is an increasing challenge in cancer care delivery. Health insurance literacy and its association with financial hardship in patients with cancer, especially after controlling for financial literacy, have not been well examined.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of and factors in the association between health insurance literacy and financial literacy as well as the overall and individual domains of financial hardship and their association with health insurance literacy, both independently and when adjusted for financial literacy, in patients with cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional survey study recruited and enrolled patients from 2 separate ambulatory infusion centers at Mayo Clinic Arizona in Phoenix, Arizona, and the University of Mississippi Medical Center in Jackson, Mississippi. Adult patients aged 18 years or older were enrolled from December 2019 to February 2020 and from August to October 2020 at Mayo Clinic Arizona (n = 299) and from September 2020 through January 2021 at the University of Mississippi Medical Center (n = 105). Survey respondents received a $5 gift card.

EXPOSURES

Surveys included questions about sociodemographic characteristics, health insurance literacy and financial literacy, financial knowledge, and financial hardship and its domains (material hardship, psychological hardship, and behavioral hardship).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Financial hardship was assessed using the COST-FACIT (Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy) measure and National Health Interview Survey questions to capture information about the domains of financial hardship. The Health Insurance Literacy Measure is a validated 21-item measure of a consumer's ability to select and use health insurance. Five questions from the National Financial Capability Study assessed financial literacy.

RESULTS

A total of 404 participants were enrolled in the study. Median (IQR) age of the respondents was 63 (54-71) years, and 219 were women (54%), 307 were non-Hispanic White individuals (76%), 153 (38%) had private insurance, and 289 (72%) had solid tumors. Overall financial hardship (denoted by median COST-FACIT score <27 points) was reported by 49% (95% CI, 44%-53%) of the cohort. Prevalence of financial hardship was higher using the National Health Interview Survey questions, with 68% (95% CI, 63%-72%) of respondents reporting at least 1 hardship domain (n = 276). Sixty-six percent (95% CI, 60%-69%) of respondents (n = 265) had a high level of financial literacy. The mean (SD) Health Insurance Literacy Measure score was 64.9 (13.3) points. In multivariable analyses, each 10-point increase in the Health Insurance Literacy Measure score was associated with lower odds of financial hardship (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99; P = .04). However, this association was no longer significant after adjusting for financial literacy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study showed that, despite a high level of health insurance literacy and financial literacy, the prevalence of financial hardship was high. Although there were lower odds of financial hardship with increased health insurance literacy, the association was no longer significant when financial literacy was added to the model, suggesting that a high level of financial literacy may help mitigate the adverse outcome of lower health insurance literacy levels in patients with cancer.

Patient-reported benefit from proposed interventions to reduce financial toxicity during cancer treatment

INTRODUCTION

Financial toxicity is common and pervasive among cancer patients. Research suggests that gynecologic cancer patients experiencing financial toxicity are at increased risk for engaging in harmful cost-coping strategies, including delaying/skipping treatment because of costs, or forsaking basic needs to pay medical bills. However, little is known about patients' preferences for interventions to address financial toxicity.

METHODS

Cross-sectional surveys to assess financial toxicity [Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST)], cost-coping strategies, and preferences for intervention were conducted in a gynecologic cancer clinic waiting room. Associations with cost-coping were determined using multivariate modeling. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) explored associations between financial toxicity and intervention preferences.

RESULTS

Among 89 respondents, median COST score was 31.9 (IQR: 21-38); 35% (N = 30) scored < 26, indicating they were experiencing financial toxicity. Financial toxicity was significantly associated with cost-coping (adjusted OR = 3.32 95% CI: 1.08, 14.34). Intervention preferences included access to transportation vouchers (38%), understanding treatment costs up-front (35%), minimizing wait times (33%), access to free food at appointments (25%), and assistance with minimizing/eliminating insurance deductibles (23%). In unadjusted analyses, respondents experiencing financial toxicity were more likely to select transportation assistance (OR = 2.67, 95% CI: 1.04, 6.90), assistance with co-pays (OR = 9.17, 95% CI: 2.60, 32.26), and assistance with deductibles (OR = 12.20, 95% CI: 3.47, 43.48), than respondents not experiencing financial toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm the presence of financial toxicity in gynecologic cancer patients, describe how patients attempt to cope with financial hardship, and provide insight into patients' needs for targeted interventions to mitigate the harm of financial toxicity.

Greater financial toxicity relates to greater distress and worse quality of life among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity includes distress and burden from cancer-related costs. Women are more likely to experience worse cancer-related financial outcomes than men. This study evaluated breast and gynecologic cancer patients' subjective experiences of financial toxicity and associations with distress and quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey study included measures of financial toxicity (Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST] Version 2), distress (Patient Health Questionnaire), and QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy). Chi-square, t-tests, and ANOVAs examined bivariate relationships. Two regression models tested associations between financial toxicity and distress and QOL, controlling for covariates. Financial toxicity subgroups were compared based on a validated grading system.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 273; 74% breast cancer) averaged 54.65 years (SD = 12.08), were 3.42 years (SD = 4.20) post-diagnosis, and 33% reported cancer-related change in employment status. Financial toxicity was "mild" overall (COST M = 26.11, SD = 11.14); 32% worried about cancer-related financial problems (quite a bit/very much; item-level analysis). Worse financial toxicity related to younger age (p < 0.001), identifying as a non-Asian minority (p = 0.03) or Hispanic (p = 0.01), being single (p < 0.001), lower education (p = 0.004), lower income (p < 0.001), late-stage disease (p = 0.001), recurrent disease (p = 0.004), and active treatment (p < 0.001). In separate multivariable models, greater financial toxicity related to greater distress (β = -0.45 p < 0.001) and worse QOL (β = 0.58, p < 0.001). Financial toxicity subgroups reported clinically significant differences in distress and QOL (p's < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer-related financial burden is associated with pervasive negative effects and may impact subgroups differently. Future research should explore financial experiences across subgroups, aiming to better identify those at risk and build targeted interventions.

Unequal distribution of financial toxicity among people with cancer and its impact on access to care: a rapid review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Research demonstrates that patients and their families often carry a good portion of the economic burden during and following cancer treatment, frequently resulting in implications for access to care. This rapid review summarizes how this knowledge has evolved in recent years.

RECENT FINDINGS

The number of articles on patient financial burden is increasing, suggesting awareness about the growing impact of economic burden on patients. This is particularly evident when discussing out-of-pocket costs, and lost work for patients/caregivers. However, there is an increasing focus on 'foregone care' and 'financial distress'. Additionally, emerging literature is examining policies and approaches to screen and/or mitigate these patient financial risks, thereby improving access to care. There is also increasing focus on populations that shoulder a disproportionate financial burden, including ethnic minorities (blacks, Asians, Latinos) as well as those with lower socioeconomic status. Additionally, there is evidence that this burden also affects the middle class.

SUMMARY

As healthcare budgets become stretched, especially during a pandemic, supportive programs benefiting the less fortunate often shrink, which impacts access to care. The emerging research on strategies with government or institutions to mitigate these burdens and access issues are both welcome and needed.

Navigating the high costs of cancer care: opportunities for patient engagement

Over the past decade, the financial burden of cancer care on patients and their families has garnered increased attention. Many of the potential solutions have focused on system-level interventions such as adopting value-based payment models and negotiating drug prices; less consideration has been given to actions at the patient level to address cancer care costs. We argue that it is imperative to develop and support patient-level strategies that engage patients and consider their preferences, values and individual circumstances. Opportunities to meet these aims and improve the economic experience of patients in oncology are discussed, including: shared decision-making and communication, financial navigation and treatment planning, digital technology and alternative care pathways, and value-based insurance design.