Social needs in gynecologic oncology: A Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) clinical practice statement

Integrating Social Needs Screening and Resource Referral Into Standard Ambulatory Oncology Care: A Quality Improvement Project

PURPOSE

We previously implemented paper-based screening for health-related social resource needs (HRSN) in our gynecologic oncology clinic and found that 36% of patients who completed the screening reported HRSN. We identified two primary deficiencies with our process. First, only 52% of patients completed the screening. Second, 37% of patients with needs failed to indicate if they desired resource referral or not. Therefore, we conducted a quality improvement project to integrate screening and referral processes into the electronic medical record (EMR) and routine clinic workflow to achieve at least 90% screening compliance and 90% elicited referral preference.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team consisting of physicians, a health outcomes researcher, a computer programmer, project assistants, and the staff of a partner community organization designed and implemented an intervention that screened for HRSN online via the EMR patient platform or in person during visits. The primary outcome was the percentage of eligible patients who completed the HRSN screening (ie, reach). Outcomes were reviewed weekly, and feedback was provided to stakeholders monthly. Iterative changes were incorporated into five successive Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles completed from January 2021 to March 2023.

RESULTS

Screening compliance increased from the baseline of 52% (paper-based) to 97% in PDSA 4. Completion via the online patient portal increased from 17% in prelaunch to 49% in PDSA 4. Of patients who reported needs, 100% had a documented referral preference.

CONCLUSION

Compared with paper-based screening, an EMR-integrated HRSN screening and referral system significantly improved reach to patients at a gynecologic oncology clinic. Implementation efforts to expand to other ambulatory clinic settings are in process.

Executive Summary of the Ovarian Cancer Evidence Review Conference

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention awarded funding to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to develop educational materials for clinicians on gynecologic cancers. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists convened a panel of experts in evidence review from the Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology and content experts from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology to review relevant literature, best practices, and existing practice guidelines as a first step toward developing evidence-based educational materials for women's health care clinicians about ovarian cancer. Panel members conducted structured literature reviews, which were then reviewed by other panel members and discussed at a virtual meeting of stakeholder professional and patient advocacy organizations in February 2022. This article is the executive summary of the relevant literature and existing recommendations to guide clinicians in the prevention, early diagnosis, and special considerations of ovarian cancer. Substantive knowledge gaps are noted and summarized to provide guidance for future research.

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.

Financial toxicity: A practical review for gynecologic oncology teams to understand and address patient-level financial burdens

Financial toxicity describes the adverse impact patients experience from the monetary and time costs of cancer care. The financial burden patients experience comes from substantially increased out-of-pocket spending that often occurs concurrent with reduced income due to sick leave from work. Financial toxicity is common affecting approximately half of patients with a gynecological cancer depending on the validated instrument used for measurement. Financial toxicity is experienced by patients in three domains: economic hardship affecting patients' material conditions (i.e., medical debt), psychological response (i.e., distress), and health-related coping behaviors that patients adopt (i.e., foregoing care due to costs). Higher financial toxicity among cancer patients has been associated with decreased quality of life, impaired adherence to recommended care, and worse overall survival. In this review, we describe the current literature on financial toxicity, including how it can be assessed with validated tools, the downstream impact on patients, risk factors, and employment concerns of survivors. Whenever possible, we highlight data from research featuring patients with gynecologic cancer specifically. We also review studies with interventions aimed to mitigate financial toxicity and offer the reader real world examples of interventions currently being used. Lastly, we provide an overview of health policy developments relevant to financial toxicity and advocate for innovation in the development and implementation of strategies to decrease the financial toxicity patients experience following a diagnosis of gynecologic cancer.

Financial toxicity in ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the most costly and deadly of the gynecologic malignancies. Financial toxicity from out-of-pocket costs for direct care and medications as well as indirect costs from lost income is a growing challenge in oncology. The aim of this review is to focus on recent financial toxicity literature in the gynecologic oncology sphere and highlight specific issues and challenges regarding financial toxicity in ovarian cancer. Treatment options for ovarian cancer lead to variable costs for patients, and there are risk factors for high financial toxicity unique to gynecologic oncology patients. Identification and prompt intervention for those most at risk can help alleviate financial distress from ovarian cancer care.

Risk factors for financial toxicity in patients with gynecologic cancer

BACKGROUND

The cost of cancer care is high and rising. Evidence of increased patient cost burden is prevalent in the medical literature and has been defined as "financial toxicity," the financial hardship and financial concerns experienced by patients because of a disease and its related treatments. With targeted therapies and growing out-of-pocket costs, patient financial toxicity is a growing concern among patients with gynecologic cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of financial toxicity and identify its risk factors in patients with gynecologic cancer treated at a large cancer center using objective data.

STUDY DESIGN

Using institutional databases, we identified patients with gynecologic cancer treated from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients with a preinvasive disease were excluded. Financial toxicity was defined according to institutionally derived metrics as the presence of ≥1 of the following: ≥2 bills sent to collections, application or granting of a payment plan, settlement, bankruptcy, financial assistance program enrollment, or a finance-related social work visit. Clinical characteristics were gathered using a 2-year look-back from the time of the first financial toxicity event or a randomly selected treatment date for those not experiencing toxicity. Risk factors were assessed using chi-squared tests. All significant variables on univariate analysis were included in the logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Of the 4655 patients included in the analysis, 1155 (25%) experienced financial toxicity. In the univariate analysis, cervical cancer (35%), stage 3 or 4 disease (24% and 30%, respectively), younger age (35% for age <30 years), nonpartnered marital status (31%), Black (45%) or Hispanic (37%) race and ethnicity, self-pay (48%) or commercial insurance (30%), clinical trial participation (31%), more imaging studies (39% for ≥9), ≥1 emergency department visit (36%), longer inpatient stays (36% for ≥20 days), and more outpatient clinician visits (41% for ≥20 visits) were significantly associated with financial toxicity (P<.01). In multivariate analysis, younger age, nonpartnered marital status, Black and Hispanic race and ethnicity, commercial insurance, more imaging studies, and more outpatient physician visits were significantly associated with financial toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Financial toxicity is an increasing problem for patients with gynecologic cancer. Our analysis, using objective measures of financial toxicity, has suggested that demographic factors and healthcare utilization metrics may be used to proactively identify at-risk patients for financial toxicity.

Crowdsourcing to measure financial toxicity in gynecologic oncology

OBJECTIVE

To utilize a novel crowdsourcing method to measure financial toxicity and its effects among a national cohort of gynecologic cancer patients.

METHODS

Crowdsourcing methods were used to administer an online survey to women in the United States with gynecologic cancers. We used the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool to measure financial toxicity and the EQ-5D-3L to measure quality of life (QOL). Based on prior work, we defined high financial toxicity as a COST score ≤ 23. We assessed correlation of COST scores with QOL. We used log-binomial regression to examine associations between high financial toxicity and cost-coping strategies.

RESULTS

Among the final study sample of 334 respondents, 87% were white, median age at diagnosis was 55 (interquartile range 47-63), 52% had stage III or IV disease and 90% had private insurance or Medicare. Median COST score was 24 (interquartile range 15-32) and 49% of respondents reported high financial toxicity. Greater financial toxicity was correlated with worse QOL (p < 0.001). Participants reporting high financial toxicity were more likely to use cost-coping strategies, including spending less on basic goods (RR: 3.3; 95% CI: 2.1-5.1), borrowing money or applying for financial assistance (RR: 4.0; 95% CI: 2.4-6.9), and delaying or avoiding care (RR: 5.6; 95% CI: 2.6-12.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Crowdsourcing is an effective tool to measure financial toxicity. Nearly half of respondents reported high financial toxicity, which was significantly associated with worse QOL, utilization of cost-coping strategies and delays or avoidance of care.