Purpose To estimate the prevalence of financial hardship associated with cancer in the United States and identify characteristics of cancer survivors associated with financial hardship. Methods We identified 1,202 adult cancer survivors diagnosed or treated at ≥ 18 years of age from the 2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences With Cancer questionnaire. Material financial hardship was measured by ever (1) borrowing money or going into debt, (2) filing for bankruptcy, (3) being unable to cover one’s share of medical care costs, or (4) making other financial sacrifices because of cancer, its treatment, and lasting effects of treatment. Psychological financial hardship was measured as ever worrying about paying large medical bills. We examined factors associated with any material or psychological financial hardship using separate multivariable logistic regression models stratified by age group (18 to 64 and ≥ 65 years). Results Material financial hardship was more common in cancer survivors age 18 to 64 years than in those ≥ 65 years of age (28.4% v 13.8%; P < .001), as was psychological financial hardship (31.9% v 14.7%, P < .001). In adjusted analyses, cancer survivors age 18 to 64 years who were younger, female, nonwhite, and treated more recently and who had changed employment because of cancer were significantly more likely to report any material financial hardship. Cancer survivors who were uninsured, had lower family income, and were treated more recently were more likely to report psychological financial hardship. Among cancer survivors ≥ 65 years of age, those who were younger were more likely to report any financial hardship. Conclusion Cancer survivors, especially the working-age population, commonly experience material and psychological financial hardship.

No abstract

BackgroundThere is a critical need for real-time tracking of behavioral indicators of mental disorders. Mobile sensing platforms that objectively and noninvasively collect, store, and analyze behavioral indicators have not yet been clinically validated or scalable.ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to report on models of clinical symptoms for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression derived from a scalable mobile sensing platform.MethodsA total of 73 participants (67% [49/73] male, 48% [35/73] non-Hispanic white, 33% [24/73] veteran status) who reported at least one symptom of PTSD or depression completed a 12-week field trial. Behavioral indicators were collected through the noninvasive mobile sensing platform on participants’ mobile phones. Clinical symptoms were measured through validated clinical interviews with a licensed clinical social worker. A combination hypothesis and data-driven approach was used to derive key features for modeling symptoms, including the sum of outgoing calls, count of unique numbers texted, absolute distance traveled, dynamic variation of the voice, speaking rate, and voice quality. Participants also reported ease of use and data sharing concerns.ResultsBehavioral indicators predicted clinically assessed symptoms of depression and PTSD (cross-validated area under the curve [AUC] for depressed mood=.74, fatigue=.56, interest in activities=.75, and social connectedness=.83). Participants reported comfort sharing individual data with physicians (Mean 3.08, SD 1.22), mental health providers (Mean 3.25, SD 1.39), and medical researchers (Mean 3.03, SD 1.36).ConclusionsBehavioral indicators passively collected through a mobile sensing platform predicted symptoms of depression and PTSD. The use of mobile sensing platforms can provide clinically validated behavioral indicators in real time; however, further validation of these models and this platform in large clinical samples is needed.

Purpose Survivorship care planning should involve discussions between providers and cancer survivors to address survivors' needs and optimize adherence. We examined the frequency and factors associated with oncologists' and primary care physicians' (PCPs) reports of provision of written survivorship care plans (SCPs) and discussion of survivorship care recommendations with survivors. Methods A nationally representative sample of 1,130 oncologists and 1,020 PCPs was surveyed about survivorship care practices with survivors. Logistic regression models predicted multilevel factors associated with providing SCPs or discussing recommendations with survivors. Results Although a majority of oncologists (64%) reported always/almost always discussing survivorship care recommendations with survivors, fewer also discussed who survivors should see for cancer-related and other follow-up care (32%); fewer still also provided a written SCP to the survivor (< 5%). Survivorship care recommendations and provider responsibility were not regularly discussed by PCPs and survivors (12%). Oncologists who reported detailed training about late and long-term effects of cancer were more likely to provide written SCPs (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.44) and discuss survivorship care planning with survivors (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.51 to 2.70). PCPs who received SCPs from oncologists were 9× more likely (95% CI, 5.74 to 14.82) to report survivorship discussions with survivors. Conclusion A minority of both PCPs and oncologists reported consistently discussing and providing SCPs to cancer survivors. Training and knowledge specific to survivorship care and coordinated care between PCPs and oncologists were associated with increased survivorship discussions with survivors. These nationally representative data provide a useful benchmark to assess implementation of new efforts to improve the follow-up care of survivors.