Patient-reported financial toxicity and adverse medical consequences in head and neck cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Financial toxicity (FT) is a significant barrier to high-quality cancer care, and patients with head and neck cancer (HNCA) are particularly vulnerable given their need for intensive support, daily radiotherapy (RT), and management of long-term physical, functional, and psychosocial morbidities following treatment. We aim to identify predictors of FT and adverse consequences in HNCA following RT.Materials and methods
We performed a prospective survey study of patients with HNCA seen in follow-up at an academic comprehensive cancer center (CCC) or Veterans Affairs hospital between 05/2016 and 06/2018. Surveys included validated patient-reported functional outcomes and the COST measure, a validated instrument for measuring FT.Results
The response rate was 86% (n = 63). Younger age and lower median household income by county were associated with lower COST scores (i.e., worse FT) on multivariable analysis (p = .045 and p = .016, respectively). Patients with worse FT were more likely to skip clinic visits (RR (95% CI) 2.13 (1.23-3.67), p = .007), be noncompliant with recommended supplements or medications (1.24 (1.03-1.48), p = .02), and require supportive infusions (1.10 (1.02-1.20), p = .02). At the CCC, patients with worse FT were more likely to require feeding tubes (1.62 (1.14-2.31), p = .007). Overall, 36% reported that costs were higher than expected, 48% were worried about paying for treatment, and 33% reported at least a moderate financial burden from treatment.Conclusion
HNCA patients experience substantial FT from their diagnosis and/or therapy, with potential implications for medical compliance, QOL, and survivorship care.
SUBMITTER: Beeler WH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7008081 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Patient-reported financial toxicity and adverse medical consequences in head and neck cancer.
Beeler Whitney H WH Bellile Emily L EL Casper Keith A KA Jaworski Elizabeth E Burger Nicholas J NJ Malloy Kelly M KM Spector Matthew E ME Shuman Andrew G AG Rosko Andrew A Stucken Chaz L CL Chinn Steven B SB Dragovic Aleksandar F AF Chapman Christina H CH Owen Dawn D Jolly Shruti S Bradford Carol R CR Prince Mark E P MEP Worden Francis P FP Jagsi Reshma R Mierzwa Michelle L ML Swiecicki Paul L PL
Oral oncology 20191223
<h4>Objectives</h4>Financial toxicity (FT) is a significant barrier to high-quality cancer care, and patients with head and neck cancer (HNCA) are particularly vulnerable given their need for intensive support, daily radiotherapy (RT), and management of long-term physical, functional, and psychosocial morbidities following treatment. We aim to identify predictors of FT and adverse consequences in HNCA following RT.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We performed a prospective survey study of patients ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Cancer-related financial toxicity impacts head and neck cancer patients and survivors. With increasing use of proton therapy as a curative treatment for head and neck cancer, the multifaceted financial and economic implications of proton therapy-dimensions of "financial toxicity"-need to be addressed. Herein, we identify knowledge gaps and potential solutions related to the problem of financial toxicity. To date, while cost-effectiveness analysis has been used to assess the value of proton therapy for head and neck cancer, it may not fully incorporate empiric comparisons of patients' and survivors' lost productivity and disability after treatment. A cost-of-illness framework for evaluation could address this gap, thereby more comprehensively identifying the value of proton therapy and distinctly incorporating a measurable aspect of financial toxicity in evaluation. Overall, financial toxicity burdens remain understudied in head and neck cancer patients from a patient-centered perspective. Systematic, validated, and accurate measurement of financial toxicity in patients receiving proton therapy is needed, especially relative to conventional photon-based strategies. This will enrich the evidence base for optimal selection and rationale for payer coverage of available treatment options for head and neck cancer patients. In the setting of cancer care delivery, a combination of conducting proactive screening for financial toxicity in patients selected for proton therapy, initiating early financial navigation in vulnerable patients, engaging stakeholders, improving oncology provider team cost communication, expanding policies to promote price transparency, and expanding insurance coverage for proton therapy are critical practices to mitigate financial toxicity in head and neck cancer patients.
| S-EPMC8270089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo identify which patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may be most improved through adaptive radiation therapy (ART) with the goal of reducing toxicity incidence among head and neck cancer patients.MethodsOne hundred fifty-five head and neck cancer patients receiving radical VMAT (chemo)radiotherapy (66-70 Gy in 30-35 fractions) completed the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Xerostomia Questionnaire while attending routine follow-up clinics between June-October 2019. Hierarchical clustering characterized symptom endorsement. Conventional statistical approaches indicated associations between dose and commonly reported symptoms. These associations, and the potential benefit of interfractional dose corrections, were further explored via logistic regression.ResultsRadiotherapy-related symptoms were commonly reported (dry mouth, difficulty swallowing/chewing). Clustering identified three patient subgroups reporting: none/mild symptoms for most items (60.6% of patients); moderate/severe symptoms affecting some aspects of general well-being (32.9%); and moderate/severe symptom reporting for most items (6.5%). Clusters of PRO items broadly consisted of acute toxicities, general well-being, and head and neck-specific symptoms (xerostomia, dysphagia). Dose-PRO relationships were strongest between delivered pharyngeal constrictor Dmean and patient-reported dysphagia, with MDADI composite scores (mean ± SD) of 25.7 ± 18.9 for patients with Dmean <50 Gy vs. 32.4 ± 17.1 with Dmean ≥50 Gy. Based on logistic regression models, during-treatment dose corrections back to planned values may confer ≥5% decrease in the absolute risk of self-reported physical dysphagia symptoms ≥1 year post-treatment in 1.2% of patients, with a ≥5% decrease in relative risk in 23.3% of patients.ConclusionsPatient-reported dysphagia symptoms are strongly associated with delivered dose to the pharyngeal constrictor. Dysphagia-focused ART may provide the greatest toxicity benefit to head and neck cancer patients, and represent a potential new direction for ART, given that the existing ART literature has focused almost exclusively on xerostomia reduction.
| S-EPMC8560706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCancer and its treatment lead to increased financial distress for patients. To the authors' knowledge, to date, no standardized patient-reported outcome measure has been validated to assess this distress.MethodsPatients with AJCC Stage IV solid tumors receiving chemotherapy for at least 2 months were recruited. Financial toxicity was measured by the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) measure. The authors collected data regarding patient characteristics, clinical trial participation, health care use, willingness to discuss costs, psychological distress (Brief Profile of Mood States [POMS]), and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General (FACT-G) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QOL questionnaires. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and validity of the COST measure were assessed using standard-scale construction techniques. Associations between the resulting factors and other variables were assessed using multivariable analyses.ResultsA total of 375 patients with advanced cancer were approached, 233 of whom (62.1%) agreed to participate. The COST measure demonstrated high internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Factor analyses revealed a coherent, single, latent variable (financial toxicity). COST values were found to be correlated with income (correlation coefficient [r]?=?0.28; P<.001), psychosocial distress (r?=?-0.26; P<.001), and HRQOL, as measured by the FACT-G (r?=?0.42; P<.001) and by the EORTC QOL instruments (r?=?0.33; P<.001). Independent factors found to be associated with financial toxicity were race (P?=?.04), employment status (P<.001), income (P?=?.003), number of inpatient admissions (P?=?.01), and psychological distress (P?=?.003). Willingness to discuss costs was not found to be associated with the degree of financial distress (P?=?.49).ConclusionsThe COST measure demonstrated reliability and validity in measuring financial toxicity. Its correlation with HRQOL indicates that financial toxicity is a clinically relevant patient-centered outcome. Cancer 2017;123:476-484. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
| S-EPMC5298039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAesthetic outcomes are key determinants of psychosocial functioning among surgically treated patients with head and neck cancer (HNC); however, long-term aesthetic outcomes after microvascular free tissue transfer (MFTT) are not well described.ObjectiveTo examine risk factors for impaired long-term aesthetic satisfaction and appearance-related psychosocial functioning after HNC ablation with MFTT.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted at an academic tertiary care center. A total of 228 individuals who underwent MFTT between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, for treatment of HNC were included. The study was conducted from November 1, 2020, through January 15, 2021.ExposuresHead and neck cancer ablation with MFTT.Main outcomes and measuresPatient-reported outcomes were assessed via Aesthetic FACE-Q scales. The primary objective was aesthetic satisfaction determined by the Satisfaction With Facial Appearance scale. Secondarily, the Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress, Psychological Function, and Social Function scales were used to assess appearance-related psychosocial functioning. Patients were stratified by demographic, disease, surgical, and postoperative characteristics. Survey scores on a 100-point scale were compared and subjected to univariable and multivariable linear regression.ResultsA total of 124 of 228 patients (54.4%) completed surveys a median of 34.4 months after MFTT (interquartile range, 22.6-48.8). Most responders (79 [63.7%]) were men with advanced cancer of the oral cavity or skin, reconstructed with anterolateral thigh or osteocutaneous fibula free flaps. Nonresponders had no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The Satisfaction With Facial Appearance score was independently lower among patients who received osteocutaneous flaps (regression coefficient, -10.6 points, 95% CI, -20.4 to -0.8 points) and/or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (regression coefficient, -6.9 points; 95% CI, -13.8 to -0.1 points). Impaired appearance-related psychosocial functioning was independently associated with female sex, a history of anxiety or depression, osteocutaneous flaps, prolonged tube feeding requirements, and any recurrent or persistent disease. After adjustment for covariates, each 1-point increase in the Satisfaction With Facial Appearance score independently estimated improved appearance-related psychosocial functioning as determined by the Appearance-Related Psychosocial Distress scale (regression coefficient, -0.5 points; 95% CI, -0.7 to -0.4 points), Psychological Function scale (regression coefficient, 0.4 points; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.5 points), and Social Function scale (regression coefficient, 0.4 points; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.6 points).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this cross-sectional, web-based survey study suggest that osteocutaneous reconstruction and adjuvant therapy independently increase the risk of poor patient-reported long-term aesthetic satisfaction, which correlated with impaired appearance-related psychosocial functioning. Aesthetic outcomes appear to be a priority to address in patients with HNC undergoing MFTT.
| S-EPMC8299365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Radiation (RT) dose to the central nervous system (CNS) has been implicated as a contributor to treatment-related fatigue in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients undergoing radiation therapy (RT). This study evaluates the association of RT dose to CNS structures with patient-reported (PRO) fatigue scores in a population of HNC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS:At pre-RT (baseline), 6th week of RT, and 1-month post-RT time points, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20) scores were prospectively obtained from 124 patients undergoing definitive treatment for HNC. Medulla, pons, midbrain, total brainstem, cerebellum, posterior fossa, and pituitary dosimetry were evaluated using summary statistics and dose-volume histograms, and associations with MFI-20 scores were analyzed. RESULTS:Maximum dose (Dmax) to the brainstem and medulla was significantly associated with MFI-20 scores at 6th week of RT and 1-month post-RT time points, after controlling for baseline scores (p<0.05). Each 1Gy increase in medulla Dmax resulted in an increase in total MFI-20 score over baseline of 0.30 (p=0.026), and 0.25 (p=0.037), at the 6th week of RT and 1-month post-RT, respectively. Each 1Gy increase in brainstem Dmax resulted in an increase in total MFI-20 score over baseline of 0.30 (p=0.027), and 0.25 (p=0.037) at the 6th week of RT, 1-month post-RT, respectively. Statistically significant associations were not found between dosimetry for the other CNS structures and MFI-20 scores. CONCLUSIONS:In this analysis of PRO fatigue scores from a population of patients undergoing definitive RT for HNC, maximum dose to the brainstem and medulla was associated with a significantly increased risk of acute patient fatigue.
| S-EPMC5841457 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Agreement between patient- and practitioner-reported toxic effects during chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancer is unknown.To compare patient-reported symptom severity and practitioner-reported toxic effects among patients receiving chemoradiotherapy for head and neck cancer.Forty-four patients participating in a phase 2 trial of deintensified chemoradiotherapy for oropharyngeal carcinoma were included in the present study (conducted from February 8, 2012, to March 2, 2015). Most treatment (radiotherapy, 60 Gy, with concurrent weekly administration of cisplatin, 30 mg/m2) was administered at academic medical centers. Included patients had no prior head and neck cancers, were 18 years or older, and had a smoking history of 10 pack-years or less or more than 10 pack-years but 30 pack-years or less and abstinent for the past 5 years. Cancer status was untreated human papillomavirus or p16-positive squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx or unknown head and neck primary site; and cancer staging was category T0 to T3, category N0 to N2c, M0, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1. Baseline, weekly, and posttreatment toxic effects were assessed by physicians or nurse practitioners using National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. Patient-reported symptom severity was measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE). Descriptive statistics were used to characterize raw agreement between CTCAE grades and PRO-CTCAE severity ratings.Baseline, weekly, and posttreatment toxic effects assessed using CTCAE, version 4.0, and PRO-CTCAE.Raw agreement indices between patient-reported toxic effects, including symptom frequency, severity, and interference with daily activities (score range, 0 [none] to 4 [very severe]), and practitioner-measured toxic effects, including swallowing, oral pain, and hoarseness (score range, 1 [mild] to 5 [death]).Of the 44 patients included in the analysis (39 men, 5 women; mean [SD] age, 61 [8.4] years), there were 327 analyzable pairs of CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE symptom surveys and no treatment delays due to toxic effects. Patient-reported and practitioner-reported symptom severity agreement was high at baseline when most symptoms were absent but declined throughout treatment as toxic effects increased. Most disagreement was due to lower severity of toxic effects reported by practitioners (eg, from 45% agreement at baseline to 27% at the final week of treatment for pain). This was particularly noted for domains that are not easily evaluated by physical examination, such as anxiety and fatigue (eg, severity of fatigue decreased from 43% at baseline to 12% in the final week of treatment).Practitioner-reported toxic effects are lower than patient self-reports during head and neck chemoradiotherapy. The inclusion of patient-reported symptomatic toxic effects provides information that can potentially enhance clinical management and improve data quality in clinical trials.
| S-EPMC5928525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the prevalence and predictors of patient-reported barriers to care among survivors of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and the association with health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes.Study designRetrospective cohort study.SettingOutpatient oncology clinic at an academic tertiary care center.MethodsData were obtained from the UNC Health Registry/Cancer Survivorship Cohort. Barriers to care included self-reported delays in care and inability to obtain needed care due to cost. HRQOL was measured with validated questionnaires: general (PROMIS) and cancer specific (FACT-GP).ResultsThe sample included 202 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with a mean age of 59.6 years (SD, 10.0). Eighty-two percent were male and 87% were White. Sixty-two patients (31%) reported at least 1 barrier to care. Significant predictors of a barrier to care in unadjusted analysis included age ≤60 years (P = .007), female sex (P = .020), being unmarried (P = .016), being uninsured (P = .047), and Medicaid insurance (P = .022). Patients reporting barriers to care had significantly worse physical and mental HRQOL on the PROMIS questionnaires (P < .001 and P = .002, respectively) and lower cancer-specific HRQOL on the FACT-GP questionnaire (P < .001), which persisted across physical, social, emotional, and functional domains. There was no difference in 5-year OS (75.3% vs 84.1%, P = .177) or 5-year CSS (81.6% vs 85.4%, P = .542) in patients with and without barriers to care.ConclusionDelay- and affordability-related barriers are common among survivors of head and neck cancer and appear to be associated with significantly worse HRQOL outcomes. Certain sociodemographic groups appear to be more at risk of patient-reported barriers to care.
| S-EPMC8671675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe symptom burden faced by long-term head and neck cancer survivors is not well understood. In addition, the accuracy of clinical data sources for symptom ascertainment is not clear.ObjectiveTo 1) describe the prevalence of symptoms in 5-year survivors of head and neck cancer, and 2) to evaluate agreement between symptoms obtained via self-report and symptoms obtained from clinical data sources.MethodsWe recruited 5-year survivors of head and neck cancer enrolled at Kaiser Permanente Washington (n = 54). Symptoms were assessed using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory head and neck cancer module. For each symptom, we assessed the agreement of the patient's survey response ("gold standard") with the 1) medical chart and 2) administrative health care claims data. We computed the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value, along with their 95 percent confidence intervals, for each clinical data source.ResultsEighty percent of patients responded. Nearly all participants (95 percent) reported experiencing at least one symptom from the MDASI-HN, and 93 percent reported two or more symptoms. Among patients reporting a given symptom, there was generally no evidence of the symptom from either clinical data source (i.e., sensitivity was generally no greater than 40 percent). The specificity and PPV of the clinical data sources were generally higher than the sensitivity.ConclusionRelying only on medical chart review and/or administrative health data would substantially underestimate symptom burden in long-term head and neck cancer survivors.
| S-EPMC6625536 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purpose:Acute pain during weekly radiotherapy (RT) to the head and neck is not well characterized. We studied dose-volume metrics and clinical variables that are plausibly associated with throat or esophageal pain as measured with a weekly questionnaire during RT. Materials and methods:We prospectively collected weekly patient-reported outcomes from 122 head and neck cancer patients during RT. The pain score for each question consisted of a four-level scale: none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), and severe (3). Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate associations between both esophageal and throat pain and clinical as well as dosimetric variables. Results:In multivariate analysis, age was significantly associated with both types of pain, leading to odds ratio (OR)?=?0.95 (p?=?0.008) and OR?=?0.95 (p?=?0.007) for esophageal and throat pain, respectively. For throat pain, sex (OR?=?4.12; p?=?0.010), with females at higher risk, and fractional organ at risk (OAR) mean dose (OR?=?3.30; p?=?0.014) were significantly associated with throat pain. Conclusions:A fractional OAR mean dose of 1.1?Gy seems a reasonable cutoff for separating no or mild pain from moderate to severe esophageal and throat pain. Younger patients who received RT experienced more esophageal and throat pain. Females experienced more throat pain, but not esophageal pain.
| S-EPMC6134163 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionFinancial toxicity (FT) is a well-recognised problem in oncology. US-based studies have shown that: (a) cancer patients have a 2.7 times risk of bankruptcy; (b) patients who declare bankruptcy have a 79% greater hazard of death; (c) financial burden significantly impairs quality of life (QoL) and (d) reduces compliance and adherence to treatment prescriptions. The aim of the project is to develop and validate a patient-reported-outcome (PRO) measure to assess FT of cancer patients in Italy, where, despite the universal health coverage provided by the National Health Service, FT is an emerging issue.Methods and analysisOur hypothesis is that a specific FT measure, which considers the relevant sociocultural context and healthcare system, would allow us to understand the main determinants of cancer-related FT in Italy, in order to address and reduce these factors. According to the International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research guidelines on PROs, the project will include the following steps: (1) concept elicitation (from focus groups with patients and caregivers; literature; oncologists; nurses) and analysis, creating a coding library; (2) item generation (using a format that includes a question and a response on a 4-point Likert scale) and analysis through patients' cognitive interviews of item importance within different coding categories to produce the draft instrument; (3) factor analysis and internal validation (with Cronbach's alpha and test-retest for reliability) to produce the final instrument; (4) external validation with QoL anchors and depression scales. The use of the FT measure in prospective trials is also planned.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol is approved by the ethical committees of all the participating centres. The project will tentatively produce a validated tool by the spring 2021. The project might also represent a model and the basis for future cooperation with other European countries, with different healthcare systems and socioeconomic conditions.Trial registration numberNCT03473379.
| S-EPMC6738930 | biostudies-literature