Skip to main content

The unmet 'financial toxicity' of cancer

In addition to facing new concerns about their health, individuals who are diagnosed with cancer often worry about the financial burdens of treatment. A new study in the USA indicates that many patients feel that such ‘financial toxicity’ is not adequately addressed by their doctors and other clinicians. The findings are published online in  CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society.

Growing awareness of financial difficulties

There is growing awareness that cancer diagnosis and treatment can create financial difficulties even for patients with health insurance, but it is unclear whether patients today are being helped by their doctors or staff with these challenges. To investigate, Reshma Jagsi, MD, DPhil, of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and her colleagues surveyed patients with early-stage breast cancer and their physicians: 2502 patients, 370 surgeons, 306 medical oncologists, and 169 radiation oncologists.

Half of responding medical oncologists reported that someone in their practice often or always discusses financial burden with patients, as did 15.6 percent of surgeons and 43.2 percent of radiation oncologists.

Unmet needs

Patients indicated that financial toxicity remains common: 21.5 percent of whites and 22.5 percent of Asians had to cut down spending on food, as did 45.2 percent of blacks and 35.8 percent of Latinas

The survey also revealed that many patients desired to talk to providers about the financial impact of cancer: 15.2 percent of whites, 31.1 percent of blacks, 30.3 percent of Latinas, and 25.4 percent of Asians. Unmet patient needs for engagement with doctors about financial concerns were common. Of 945 women who worried about finances, 679 (72.8 percent) indicated that doctors and their staff did not help. Of 523 women who desired to talk to providers about the impact of breast cancer on employment or finances, 283 (55.4 percent) reported no relevant discussion.  Dr Jegsi tells us

We found that even though many doctors reported that they routinely make services available to their patients to help with financial concerns, many patients still reported unmet needs.  

More effort needed to address problem

The investigators noted that although advances in detection and treatment have transformed how breast cancer is perceived and managed, this study reveals an important aspect that cannot be overlooked or addressed as an afterthought. 

“Efforts must now turn to confront the financial devastation that many patients face, particularly as they progress into survivorship,” said Dr. Jagsi.

The first steps for clinical practice and policy are clear: all physicians must assess patients for financial toxicity and learn how to communicate effectively about it. To cure a patient’s disease at the cost of financial ruin falls short of the physician’s duty to serve—and failure to recognize and mitigate a patient’s financial distress is no longer acceptable.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha