Measuring financial toxicity as a clinically relevant patient-reported outcome: The validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST)

Jonas A de Souza, Bonnie J Yap, Kristen Wroblewski, Victoria Blinder, Fabiana S Araújo, Fay J Hlubocky, Lauren H Nicholas, Jeremy M O'Connor, Bruce Brockstein, Mark J Ratain, Christopher K Daugherty, David Cella, Jonas A de Souza, Bonnie J Yap, Kristen Wroblewski, Victoria Blinder, Fabiana S Araújo, Fay J Hlubocky, Lauren H Nicholas, Jeremy M O'Connor, Bruce Brockstein, Mark J Ratain, Christopher K Daugherty, David Cella

Abstract

Background: Cancer 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.

Methods: Patients 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.

Results: A 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).

Conclusions: The 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.

Keywords: cost of cancer; financial burden; financial toxicity; patient-reported outcome (PRO).

© 2016 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST)‐Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT). Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10 were reverse scored. The lower the score, the worse the financial toxicity.

References

    1. Bestvina CM, Zulling LL, Rushing C, et al. Patient‐oncologist cost communication, financial distress, and medication adherence. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10:162–167.
    1. Northouse L, Williams Al, Given B, McCorkle R. Psychosocial care for family caregivers of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1227–1234.
    1. Pollack, A . For profit, industry seeks cancer drugs. The New York Times. September 1st, 2009. . Accessed September 20, 2016.
    1. de Souza JA, Yap BJ, Hlubocky FJ, et al. The development of a financial toxicity patient‐reported outcome in cancer: the COST measure. Cancer. 2014;120:3245–3253.
    1. Zafar SY, McNeil RB, Thomas CM, Lathan CS, Ayanian JZ, Provenzale D. Population‐based assessment of cancer survivors' financial burden and quality of life: a prospective cohort study. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11:145–150.
    1. Lathan CS, Cronin A, Tucker‐Seeley R, Zafar SY, Ayanian JZ, Schrag D. Association of financial strain with symptom burden and quality of life for patients with lung or colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:1732–1740.
    1. Neugut AI, Subar M, Wilde ET, et al. Association between prescription co‐payment amount and compliance with adjuvant hormonal therapy in women with early‐stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2534–2542.
    1. Ramsey SD, Bansal A, Fedorenko CR, et al. Financial insolvency as a risk factor for early mortality among patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:980–986.
    1. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . What the actuarial values in the Affordable Care Act mean. . Accessed September 20, 2016.
    1. Ungar L, O'Donnel J. Dilemma over deductibles: costs crippling middle class. . Accessed September 20, 2016.
    1. High‐deductible health plans, gamble for some, on the rise [transcript]. All Things Considered. National Public Radio. July 28, 2013. . Accessed September 20, 2016.
    1. Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, et al. The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out‐of‐pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience. Oncologist. 2013;18:381–390.
    1. Huntington SF, Weiss BM, Vogl DT, et al. Financial toxicity in insured patients with multiple myeloma: a cross‐sectional pilot study. Lancet Haematol. 2015;2:e408–e416.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research ; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient‐reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:79.
    1. Cella DF, Jacobsen PB, Orav EJ, Holland JC, Silberfarb PM, Rafla S. A brief POMS measure of distress for cancer patients. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:939–942.
    1. Alexander GC, Casalino LP, Meltzer DO. Patient‐physician communication about out‐of‐pocket costs. JAMA. 2003;290:953–958.
    1. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:570–579.
    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ‐C30: a quality‐of‐life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–376.
    1. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, et al. Content validity–establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 1–eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011;14:967–977.
    1. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, et al. Content validity–establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2‐assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011;14:978–988.
    1. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:539–549.
    1. Crowne DP, Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J Consult Psychol. 1960;24:349–354.
    1. Park BW, Lee S, Lee AR, Lee KH, Hwang SY. Quality of life differences between younger and older breast cancer patients. J Breast Cancer. 2011;14:112–118.
    1. Faller H, Brahler E, Harter M, et al. Performance status and depressive symptoms as predictors of quality of life in cancer patients. A structural equation modeling analysis. Psychooncology. 2015;24:1456–1462.
    1. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.
    1. StataCorp LP. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2013.
    1. Chastek B, Harley C, Kallich J, Newcomer L, Paoli CJ, Teitelbaum AH. Health care costs for patients with cancer at the end of life. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8:75s–80s.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner