BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative (CAM) cancer treatment is often expensive and not covered by insurance. As a result, many people turn to crowdfunding to access this treatment.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify the rationales of patients with cancer seeking CAM treatment abroad by looking specifically at crowdfunding campaigns to support CAM cancer treatment in Tijuana, Mexico.
METHODS: We scraped the GoFundMe.com and GiveSendGo.com crowdfunding platforms for campaigns referencing CAM cancer clinics in Tijuana, initiated between January 1, 2022, and February 28, 2023. The authors created a coding framework to identify rationales for seeking CAM treatment in Tijuana. To supplement campaign metadata, we coded the beneficiary\'s cancer stage, type, age, specific treatment sought, whether the beneficiary died, gender, and race.
RESULTS: Patients sought CAM cancer treatment in Tijuana because the (1) treatment offers the greatest efficacy (29.9%); (2) treatment offered domestically was not curative (23.2%); (3) the clinic treats the whole person, and addresses the spiritual dimension of the person (20.1%); (4) treatments are nontoxic, natural, or less invasive (18.2%); and (5) clinic offers the newest technology (8.5%). Campaigns raised US $5,275,268.37 and most campaign beneficiaries were women (69.7%) or White individuals (71.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: These campaigns spread problematic misinformation about the likely efficacy of CAM treatments, funnel money and endorsements to CAM clinics in Tijuana, and leave many campaigners short of the money needed to pay for CAM treatments while costing beneficiaries and their loved one\'s time, privacy, and dignity. This study affirms that Tijuana, Mexico, is a very popular destination for CAM cancer treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer imposes a substantial financial burden on patients because of the high out-of-pocket expenses and the significant hardships. Financial toxicity describes the impact of cancer care costs at the patient level. Although the financial impact of cancer has been recognized, understanding the extent and determinants of financial toxicity in specific contexts is crucial. This study investigated the level of financial toxicity and its associated factors among patients with cancer at an oncology hospital in central Vietnam.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 334 patients with cancer. Direct interviews and medical record reviews were used for data collection. Financial toxicity was assessed using the 11-item Comprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST). A logistic regression model was used to determine factors associated with financial toxicity.
RESULTS: A notable 87.7% of patients experienced financial toxicity due to cancer cost, with 37.7% experiencing mild financial toxicity and 49.7% suffering from moderate financial toxicity, 0.3% reporting severe financial toxicity. Individuals with low household income exhibited a higher proportion of financial toxicity compared to that of those with higher income (odds ratio (OR) = 5.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-25.68). Compared with that of participants in the early stages, a higher burden was found in patients with advanced-stage cancer (OR = 3.88, 95% CI: 1.36-11.11).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that patients with cancer in Vietnam facefinancial toxicity. It is thus necessary for interventions to mitigate the financial burden on patients with cancer, focusing on vulnerable individuals and patients in the advanced stages.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate FinTox, a concise tool for screening and managing financial toxicity in oncology settings.
METHODS: Development involved qualitative interviews with healthcare providers and patients, and feedback from a 7-member expert panel resulting in a 5-item measure that evaluates financial strain, psychological responses, and care modifications. Psychometric evaluations examined factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent and convergent validity. Associations between FinTox scores and sociodemographic/medical factors were also analyzed using univariate and multivariable regression models.
RESULTS: Twelve healthcare providers and 20 patients were interviewed, and 268 patients (69.8% female, 47.4% non-Hispanic White) completed surveys including FinTox, the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures, and sociodemographic questions. FinTox demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach\'s alpha = 0.90) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95). Significant correlations with the COST (r = -0.62, p < 0.001) and HRQOL measures corroborated content and convergent validity. Diagnostic accuracy was evidenced by a sensitivity of 72.3%, specificity of 85.2%, positive predictive value of 83.2%, and negative predictive value of 70.3%. Higher FinTox scores were also associated with receiving care at a safety-net hospital, Black race, household income <600% of the federal poverty level, and Stage 4 cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: FinTox\'s robust psychometric properties and diagnostic accuracy position it as a reliable tool for detecting financial toxicity. Future research should evaluate its responsiveness to changes over time and integration into clinical workflows.

BACKGROUND: \"Financial Toxicity\" (FT) is the financial burden imposed on patients due to disease and its treatment. Approximately 50% of gynecologic oncology patients experience FT. This study describes the implementation and outcomes of a novel financial navigation program (FNP) in gynecologic oncology.
METHODS: Patients presenting for initial consultation with a gynecologic oncologist from July 2022 to September 2023 were included. A FNP was launched inclusive of hiring a financial navigator (FN) in July 2022, and implementing FT screening in October 2022. We prospectively captured patient referrals to the FN, collecting clinical, demographic, financial and social needs information, along with FN interventions and institutional support service referrals. Referrals to the FN and support services were quantified before and after screening implementation.
RESULTS: There were 1029 patients with 21.6% seen before and 78.4% after screening initiation. Median age was 58 (IQR 46-68). The majority were non-Hispanic white (60%) with private insurance (61%). A total of 10.5% patients were referred to the FN. Transportation (32%), financial assistance (20.5%) and emotional support (15.4%) were the most common needs identified. A higher proportion of patients referred to the FN identified as Black, had government-funded insurance or diagnoses of uterine or cervical cancers (p < 0.05). Post-screening referrals to FN increased (5% vs. 12.9%, p < 0.001), while referrals to other support services decreased (9.5% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the FNP was feasible, though presence of both a FN and FT screening maximized its effectiveness. Further investigation is needed to understand screening barriers and evaluate longer-term impact.

UNASSIGNED: Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks as the second most prevalent type of cancer in China. The financial implications of treatment are a significant factor to be taken into account for patients diagnosed with middle and advanced stages of colorectal cancer (III-IV CRC). The research aims to explore current financial toxicity (FT) conditions and analyze factors that may influence it in patients with middle and advanced CRC.
UNASSIGNED: This is a cross-sectional survey. The participants of the study were individuals diagnosed with middle and advanced colorectal cancer who were admitted to the hospital between January and June 2023. The cross-sectional survey utilized a variety of instruments, including a general information questionnaire, a cancer patient report outcome economic toxicity scale, a medical coping style questionnaire, an Anderson symptom assessment scale, a disease shame scale, and a social support scale. Multiple linear regression analysis was employed to examine the factors influencing FT.
UNASSIGNED: A cohort of 264 patients diagnosed with stage III-IV CRC were included in the study. The majority of patients with intermediate and advanced CRC (87.1%, n = 230) reported experiencing substantial financial strain. Multivariate analysis revealed that factors influencing FT included low family monthly income, out-of-pocket expenses, unemployment, undergoing surgical treatment, the level of stigma, and the severity of symptoms (P < 0.001).
UNASSIGNED: Patients with stage III-IV cancer (CRC) demonstrate increased levels of financial toxicity (FT), a common occurrence in individuals with moderate to severe CRC. In patients with stage III-IV CRC, the presence of FT is correlated with various factors including family monthly income, medical payment methods, work status, surgical treatment, stigma levels, and symptom severity. These characteristics may serve as influencing factors for subsequent treatment decisions.

Randomized clinical trials demonstrated a recurrence-free survival benefit with adjuvant anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD1) inhibitors of resected stage IIB-IV melanoma. However, no improvement in overall survival has been observed thus far. Furthermore, there are no predictive markers for immunotherapy response in melanoma, therefore adjuvant treatment is offered to all comers based exclusively on the pathological and clinical stages. Additionally, one year of treatment duration and the risk of chronic immune-related adverse effects may negatively impact patients´ quality of life. In this review, we will try to answer whether the currently available data on adjuvant anti-PD1 therapy of stage IIB-IV resected melanoma is sufficient to make this strategy available to all patients. We will also discuss the economic impact of this therapy on healthcare system budgets. Recent studies suggest that the high cost of cancer drugs may affect access to these agents globally by raising questions of sustainability for patients and society.

UNASSIGNED: Osimertinib is more efficacious and as safe as first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors. However, osimertinib is not affordable for most patients in developing nations. Moreover, the minimum biologically effective dose of osimertinib may be less than the approved dose.
UNASSIGNED: This was a retrospective observational multicentric study aimed to describe the efficacy (objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS)) and toxicity of osimertinib 80 mg orally administered less frequently than daily (ranging from every other day to once-a-week) in patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer.
UNASSIGNED: Between January 2021 and August 2023, we enrolled 22 patients. Six received osimertinib 80 mg once-a-week, nine received 80 mg once-in-3-days and seven received 80 mg on alternate days. Responses included 0 complete responses, 7 (31.8%) partial responses, 9 (40.9%) stable disease and 5 (22.7%) progressive disease. ORR was 31.8%, and DCR was 72.7%. Median PFS was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-15.7), and median OS was 17.8 months (95% CI, 3.2-32.6). In patients who received reduced frequency osimertinib in the second line and beyond, the ORR was 29.4%, DCR was 70.5%, median PFS was 5.9 months (95% CI, 1.1-10.6) and median OS was 17.6 months (95% CI, 2.9-32.2). Grade 3 and higher toxicities were noted in 8 (36.3%) patients.
UNASSIGNED: Less frequent dosing of osimertinib may be a valid treatment option, especially in the second line and beyond setting in patients who cannot afford full dose daily osimertinib. This may provide an additional treatment option with a similar toxicity profile as that of standard dose osimertinib.

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity is common among patients with cancer, as are co-occurring health-related social risks (HRSRs). There is limited evidence to support best practices in screening for HRSRs and financial toxicity in the cancer context. This analysis sought to understand variations of identified needs based on treatment course using data from a large screening program.
METHODS: This 2022 to 2023 screening quality improvement program included four services (breast, gastrointestinal, gynecologic, thoracic) at an urban comprehensive cancer center. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity measured financial toxicity. Patients completed an HRSR checklist documenting food, housing, medication, or transportation insecurity and financial borrowing practices. Differences were evaluated by treatment course (radiation therapy [RT] versus other treatment and RT plus chemotherapy versus other treatment).
RESULTS: Screening surveys were sent to 70,983 unique patients; 38,249 completed a screening survey (54% response rate). Of responders, 4% (n = 1,686) underwent RT in the 120 days before their survey, and 3% (n = 1,033) received RT in combination with chemotherapy. Overall, patients receiving RT had lower unadjusted Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity scores, indicating worse financial toxicity. The proportion of patients receiving RT reporting unmet transportation (15% versus 12%, P < .001) and food (13% versus 11%, P = .02) needs was significantly higher than for patients not receiving RT. More patients receiving RT borrowed money than did patients not receiving RT (17% versus 15%, P = .02). In multivariable models, RT (alone or in combination) was associated with worse financial toxicity and transportation difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: Screening for financial toxicity and HRSR is possible at a large cancer center. Patients receiving RT have higher transportation insecurity and worse financial toxicity compared with those receiving other treatments. Tailored intervention throughout the treatment trajectory is essential.

OBJECTIVE: This article provided a comprehensive scoping review, synthesizing existing literature on the financial distress faced by breast cancer patients. It examined the factors contributing to financial distress, the impact on patients, coping mechanisms employed, and potential alleviation methods. The goal was to organize existing evidence and highlight possible directions for future research.
METHODS: We followed the scoping review framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) to synthesize and report evidence. We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library, for relevant literature. We included English articles that met the following criteria: (a) the research topic was financial distress or financial toxicity, (b) the research subjects were adult breast cancer patients, and (c) the article type was quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods research. We then extracted and integrated relevant information for reporting.
RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 5459 articles were retrieved, and 43 articles were included based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The articles addressed four main themes related to financial distress: factors associated with financial distress, impact on breast cancer patients, coping mechanisms, and potential methods for alleviation. The impact of financial distress on patients was observed in six dimensions: financial expenses, financial resources, social-psychological reactions, support seeking, coping care, and coping lifestyle. While some studies reported potential methods for alleviation, few discussed the feasibility of these solutions.
CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients experience significant financial distress with multidimensional impacts. Comprehensive consideration of possible confounding factors is essential when measuring financial distress. Future research should focus on exploring and validating methods to alleviate or resolve this issue.

OBJECTIVE: Financial toxicity is used to describe the financial hardship experienced by cancer patients. Financial toxicity may cause negative consequences to patients, whereas little is known in Chinese context. This study aimed to explore the level of financial toxicity, coping strategies, and quality of life among Chinese patients with hematologic malignancies.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study among 274 Chinese patients with hematologic malignancies from November 2021 to August 2022 in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. Clinical data were extracted from electronic clinical records. Data on financial toxicity, coping strategies, and quality of life were collected using PRO measures. Chi-square or independent t test and multivariate logistic regression were performed to explore the associated factors of financial toxicity and quality of life, respectively. Effects of financial toxicity on coping strategies were examined using Chi-square.
RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 50.2 (± 14.6) years. Male participants accounted for 57.3%. About half of the participants reported high financial toxicity. An average median of ¥200,000 on total medical expenditures since the diagnosis was reported. The average median monthly out-of-pocket health expenditure relating to cancer treatment was ¥20,000 (range ¥632-¥172,500) after reimbursement. Reduce daily living expenses (64.9%), borrowing money (55.7%), and choosing cheaper regimens (19.6%) were the commonly used strategies to cope with financial burden. Financial toxicity was negatively associated with quality of life (β = 0.071, P = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Financial toxicity was not uncommon in patients with hematological malignancies. Reducing daily living expenses, abandoning treatment sessions, and borrowing money were the strategies commonly adopted by participants to defray cancer costs. Additionally, participants with high level of financial toxicity tended to have worse quality of life. Therefore, actions from healthcare providers, policy-makers, and other stakeholders should be taken to help cancer patients mitigate their financial toxicity.