Cargando…

Pilot Study in Investigating Material Financial Toxicity Markers by Age in Cancer Patients

PURPOSE: Studies have shown that financial toxicity can reduce survival, decrease quality of life, and reduce compliance with treatments. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate material markers of financial toxicity, including insurance coverage, financial assistance, and balances du...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Skinner, Amber, Buhlmann, Melanie, Fridley, Brooke L., Reed, Damon R., Vicedo, Deborah, Mason, Neil T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9968625/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36094443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jayao.2022.0011
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Studies have shown that financial toxicity can reduce survival, decrease quality of life, and reduce compliance with treatments. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate material markers of financial toxicity, including insurance coverage, financial assistance, and balances due among adolescent and young adult (AYA) (18–39), adult (40–64), and senior adult (>65) patients with a sarcoma diagnosis after the Affordable Care Act became effective. METHODS: This study performed a retrospective analysis of possible indicators within the material domain of financial toxicity in sarcoma patients, a common diagnosis in young adult patients. Indicators of financial toxicity included: insurance status and number of insurances, charity care, accessing financing options, or having an unpaid balance referred to a collection's agency. RESULTS: The cumulative charges per patient were similar between AYA, adult, and senior adult populations at an average of $194,329 (standard deviation [SD] = $321,425), $236,724 (SD = $368,345), and $188,030 (SD = $271,191), respectively. AYA patients were more likely than adult and senior adult patients to have Medicaid coverage (income-based government insurance) (22.1% vs. 8.4% vs. 1.2%), receive charity care (5.3% vs. 2.6% vs. 1.2%), or have a balance referred to a collection's agency (9.2% vs. 5.8% vs. 1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that younger cancer patients are more likely to suffer material financial strain and additional financial resources may need to be made available to ensure they can receive care without an increase of financial toxicity markers and undue financial stress.