Prospective Survey of Financial Toxicity Measured by the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity in Japanese Patients With Cancer
Prospective Survey of Financial Toxicity Measured by the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity in Japanese Patients With Cancer
复制标题
DOI：
10.1200/jgo.19.00003
复制
发表时间：
2019-05-09
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Muro, Kei
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Honda, Kazunori;Gyawali, Bishal;Muro, Kei
目的我们之前报道了一项初步研究，评估使用日语翻译的财务毒性综合评分(COST)工具来衡量日本癌症患者的财务毒性(FT)的可行性。在这项研究中，我们报告了使用相同的工具评估日本癌症患者FT的前瞻性调查结果。方法和方法符合条件的患者接受实体肿瘤化疗至少2个月。结果191例患者中，156例(82%)回答了问卷调查。原发部位分别为结直肠(n=77；49%)、胃(n=39；25%)、食道(n=16；10%)、甲状腺(n=9；6%)、头颈部(n=4；3%)和其他(n=11；7%)。中位成本得分为21(范围从0到41；平均+/-标准差为12.1+/-8.45)，成本得分越低，表明FT越严重。在使用线性回归的多变量分析中，年龄较大(Beta，每年0.15；95%CI，0.02至0.28；P=0.02)和较高的家庭储蓄(Beta，8.24‰；95%CI，4.06至12.42；P<；.001)与成本得分、非正规就业(Beta，-5.37；95%CI，-10.16至-0.57；P=.03)、因癌症退休(Beta，-5.42；95%CI，-8.62至-1.37；P=.009)，以及应对癌症护理成本的策略的使用(Beta，-5.09；95%CI，-7.87至-2.30；P<；.001)与成本得分负相关。结论使用日文版成本工具，我们确定了与日本癌症患者FT相关的各种因素。这些发现将对日本的癌症政策规划产生重要影响。(C)2019年美国临床肿瘤学会
PURPOSE We previously reported on the pilot study assessing the feasibility of using the Japanese translation of the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool to measure financial toxicity (FT) among Japanese patients with cancer. In this study, we report the results of the prospective survey assessing FT in Japanese patients with cancer using the same tool.PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients were receiving chemotherapy for a solid tumor for at least 2 months. In addition to the COST survey, socioeconomic characteristics were collected by using a questionnaire and medical records.RESULTS Of the 191 patients approached, 156 (82%) responded to the questionnaire. Primary tumor sites were colorectal (n = 77; 49%), gastric (n = 39; 25%), esophageal (n = 16; 10%), thyroid (n = 9; 6%), head and neck (n = 4; 3%), and other (n = 11; 7%). Median COST score was 21 (range, 0 to 41; mean +/- standard deviation, 12. 1 +/- 8.45), with lower COST scores indicating more severe FT. On multivariable analyses using linear regression, older age (beta, 0.15 per year; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.28; P = .02) and higher household savings (beta, 8.24 per (sic)15 million; 95% CI, 4.06 to 12.42; P < .001) were positively associated with COST score; nonregular employment (beta, -5.37; 95% CI, -10.16 to -0.57; P = .03), retirement because of cancer (beta, -5.42; 95% CI, -8.62 to -1.37; P = .009), and use of strategies to cope with the cost of cancer care (beta, -5.09; 95% CI, -7.87 to -2.30; P < .001) were negatively associated with COST score.CONCLUSION Using the Japanese version of the COST tool, we identified various factors associated with FT in Japanese patients with cancer. These findings will have important implications for cancer policy planning in Japan. (C) 2019 by American Society of Clinical Oncology