Liang Irene, Tay Djin L, Kirchhoff Anne C, Schwanke Garrett, Ellington Lee, Pisu Maria, Mooney Kathi
University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO, USA.
College of Nursing, University of Utah, 10 S 2000 E, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Support Care Cancer. 2024 Nov 14;32(12):790. doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-09007-y.
Financial toxicity, cancer-treatment-related financial harm, is associated with expensive treatments like immunotherapy. The purpose of this study was to explore financial toxicity among advanced cancer patients receiving immunotherapies and their caregivers and, secondarily, to study how recent inflation and the COVID-19 pandemic impacted these experiences.
Advanced cancer patients receiving immunotherapies and their caregivers were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews about supportive care needs from 2022 to 2023. The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity was collected. Guided by Jones et al.'s cancer financial toxicity model, the content analysis was conducted by two trained coders using NVIVO R1.
Sixteen patients and 10 caregivers (including 7 dyads) across 5 states participated in interviews in 2022-2023. Participants averaged 63.43 years (SD = 12.75), and patients received an average of 14.6 months of immunotherapy (SD = 9.415). The majority lived in non-metropolitan areas (67%) and were white (95%). Three theory-driven themes were developed: (1) Sources of Financial Toxicity, (2) Buffers of Financial Toxicity, and (3) Consequences of Financial Toxicity. Inflation was added to financial toxicity for non-metropolitan dwelling participants due to increased prices of gas and accommodation. Social support systems buffered the impact of financial toxicity. Material and psychological impacts of financial toxicity disproportionately affected younger and privately insured participants.
While immunotherapy patients face high medical costs of treatment, the burdens of accessing treatment for people living at a distance from the cancer center can exacerbate financial toxicity. Clinicians and researchers should also consider external financial pressures such as national economic impacts that compound the financial toxicity of treatment.
经济毒性,即与癌症治疗相关的经济损害,与免疫疗法等昂贵治疗相关。本研究的目的是探讨接受免疫疗法的晚期癌症患者及其护理人员的经济毒性,其次,研究近期的通货膨胀和新冠疫情如何影响这些经历。
招募接受免疫疗法的晚期癌症患者及其护理人员,于2022年至2023年参与关于支持性护理需求的半结构式访谈。收集经济毒性综合评分。在琼斯等人的癌症经济毒性模型的指导下,由两名经过培训的编码员使用NVIVO R1进行内容分析。
2022 - 2023年,来自5个州的16名患者和10名护理人员(包括7对患者与护理人员组合)参与了访谈。参与者的平均年龄为63.43岁(标准差=12.75),患者平均接受了14.6个月的免疫治疗(标准差=9.415)。大多数人居住在非大都市地区(67%),且为白人(95%)。形成了三个理论驱动的主题:(1)经济毒性的来源,(2)经济毒性的缓冲因素,(3)经济毒性的后果。由于汽油和住宿价格上涨,非大都市地区居住的参与者的经济毒性中增加了通货膨胀因素。社会支持系统缓冲了经济毒性的影响。经济毒性的物质和心理影响对年轻和有私人保险的参与者影响尤为严重。
虽然免疫疗法患者面临高昂的治疗费用,但居住在远离癌症中心地区的人们获得治疗的负担会加剧经济毒性。临床医生和研究人员还应考虑外部经济压力,如加剧治疗经济毒性的国家经济影响。