Assessing financial toxicity in patients with metastatic breast cancer: A single institution experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors

null

Shruti Sinkar

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD

Shruti Sinkar, Faith Too, Kelly Carr, Jessica Jelinek, Elizabeth Saylor, Jacqueline Bacon, Vered Stearns, Karen L. Smith

Organizations

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins SKCC at Sibley Memorial Hospital, Washington, DC

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
Pfize, Other Government Agency

Background: Assessment of financial toxicity (FTox) is recommended as a component of comprehensive supportive care for patients with metastatic cancer. FTox is common in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and is associated with poor quality of life. Available data suggest many patients with cancer have faced financial hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We evaluated FTox using the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) measure in patients with MBC at Johns Hopkins clinical sites. Respondents were patients with MBC who completed the COST measure as part of the baseline assessment for one of two IRB-approved quality improvement projects initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic: 1) a pilot project evaluating incorporation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures into routine care (RC), and 2) a needs assessment prior to attending a multi-disciplinary clinic (MultiD-C) focusing on supportive care. COST scores range from 0-44 with higher scores indicating better financial well-being. FTox was graded as: Grade 0 (G0): >26, Grade 1 (G1): >14-26, Grade 2 (G2): >0-14 and Grade 3 (G3): 0. Results: 40 patients with MBC completed the COST measure May 2020 through April 2021 as a component of RC and 17 patients with MBC completed the COST measure September 2020 through May 2021 in advance of anticipated attendance at the MultiD-C. Median age (range) for RC and MultiD-C respondents was 64 (36-85) and 55 (37-75) years, respectively. 4 (10%) and 4 (24%) of RC and MultiD-C respondents respectively reported household income < $50,000. The majority of respondents in both groups were White [RC: 28 (70%), MultiD-C: 14 (82%)], non-Hispanic [RC: 36 (90%), MultiD-C: 16 (94%)], had more than high school education [RC: 37 (93%), MultiD-C: 17 (100%)] and all were insured. 27 (68%) of RC respondents and 11 (65%) of MultiD-C respondents were receiving oral cancer therapies. COST scores and grading are shown in the Table. Approximately half of the respondents in each group reported their illness has been at least “a little bit” of a financial hardship [RC: 22 (55%), Multi-D: 8 (47%)]. Conclusions: Patients with MBC receiving care during the COVID-19 pandemic frequently report FTox. Implementation of routine assessment for FTox via PRO measures and identification of strategies to support patients with MBC experiencing FTox are priorities both during the pandemic and beyond.

COST scores
Routine Care Respondents
Multi-Disciplinary Clinic Respondents
Median (range)
28 (4-44)
27 (3-41)
Grade 0 – N (%)
25 (63%)
9 (53%)
Grade 1 – N (%)
12 (30%)
4 (24%)
Grade 2 – N (%)
3 (8%)
4 (24%)
Grade 3 – N (%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2021 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B: Patient Experience; Quality, Safety, and Implementation Science; Technology and Innovation in Quality of Care

Track

Technology and Innovation in Quality of Care,Patient Experience,Quality, Safety, and Implementation Science,Cost, Value, and Policy,Health Care Access, Equity, and Disparities

Sub Track

Integrating Patient Experience Assessment and Patient Reported Outcomes Into Practice

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 28; abstr 176)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2020.39.28_suppl.176

Abstract #

176

Poster Bd #

Online Only

Abstract Disclosures