Financial Toxicity After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Its Relation with Oncologic, Functional Outcomes.

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate frequency of financial toxicity among patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of 1,479 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients between 2006-2021 reporting no financial toxicity in preoperative assessments were included retrospectively. Financial toxicity was measured with financial impact of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-quality of life questionnaire-C30. Financial impact scores were collected preoperatively, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

RESULTS

The frequency of financial toxicity was 8.3% (122/1379; 95% CI 7.0-9.8) at any point in time throughout 2 years of follow-up. Patients reporting financial toxicity (63 [58-68]) were significantly younger than patients who had no financial toxicity (65 [61-69]; .001). There was no statistically significant difference between financial toxicity+ and financial toxicity- groups in terms of salvage radiotherapy ( .8) and positive surgical margin ( .2) rates. In functional assessments, clinically significant International Prostate Symptom Score and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form score increase of financial toxicity+ patients (34% and 62%) were more frequent than financial toxicity- patients (23% and 47%; .004 and .002, respectively). In multivariable analysis, age at robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form, and quality of life scores were associated with financial toxicity ( < .001, OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.92-0.98]; .015, OR 2.4 [95% CI 1.2-4.7]; .032, OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.2-2.5]; .01, OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.01-0.57], respectively). Patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy before retirement (≤65 years) had a 1.6-fold increased financial toxicity risk ( .003, 95% CI 1.1-2.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Financial toxicity after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is low in mid-term follow-up. Patients who report urological symptoms after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy should also be evaluated for financial toxicity. Required measures against financial toxicity should be taken especially in the follow-up of younger cancer survivors.