No abstract

Purpose Financial toxicity arises in cancer patients from subjective financial distress due to objective financial burden from the disease or treatment. Financial toxicity associates with worse outcomes. It has not been described in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy in Germany and its publicly funded health system. In this context, we therefore investigated the prevalence of financial toxicity, associated risk factors, and patient preferences on communication of financial burden. Methods We conducted a preregistered (10.17605/OSF.IO/KH6VX) cross-sectional study surveying patients at the end of their course of radiotherapy in two institutions. Objective financial burden was assessed by direct costs and loss of income. Financial toxicity was measured by subjective financial distress per EORTC QLQ-C30. We used Spearman’s correlation and Fisher’s exact test for univariate analysis, an ordinal regression for multivariate analysis. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the 100 patients participating in the study, 68% reported direct costs, 25% loss of income, and 31% subjective financial distress. Per univariate analysis, higher subjective financial distress was significantly associated with active employment, lower quality of life, lower household income, higher direct costs, and higher loss of income. The latter three factors remained statistically significant in the multivariate analysis. A relative majority of the patients welcomed communication regarding financial burden with their radiation oncologist. Conclusion Financial toxicity is prevalent in cancer patients treated with radiotherapy in Germany. The reported risk factors may help to identify patients at risk. Future studies should validate these results and investigate interventions for financial toxicity to potentially improve outcomes.

No abstract

Incurable head and neck cancer has a poor prognosis and impairs a patient’s health-related quality of life. Palliative radiotherapy may improve or stabilize health-related quality of life and symptoms, best measured by patient-reported outcomes. There is no systematic analysis if palliative radiotherapy for head and neck cancer improves or stabilizes health-related quality of life or symptoms as validly measured by patient-reported outcomes. Therefore, the primary objective of this systematic review (PROSPERO-ID: CRD42020166434) was to assess the effect of palliative radiotherapy for head and neck cancer on patient-reported outcomes. The secondary objective was to assess the rate and quality of use of patient-reported outcomes in relevant studies claiming a “palliative effect” of radiotherapy. The databases MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, “ClinicalTrials.gov” were searched. Concerning the primary objective, four studies were eligible to assess the effectiveness of palliative radiotherapy as measured by patient-reported outcomes. A narrative synthesis suggests a favorable impact of palliative radiotherapy on health-related quality of life and symptom burden. The risk of bias, however, is considerable and the overall quality of evidence low. Concerning the secondary objective, over 90% of studies claiming a “palliative effect” of palliative radiotherapy did either not use patient-reported outcomes or did so by limited quality. In conclusion, implementation of patient-reported outcomes in studies assessing palliative radiotherapy for head and neck cancer should be fostered. Palliative radiotherapy remains an option for head and neck cancer patients, although more studies focusing on patient-reported outcomes are needed.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42020166434

Purpose Psychosocial distress is common among cancer patients in general, but those undergoing radiotherapy may face specific challenges. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence and risk factors for distress in a large national cohort. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective cross-sectional study which surveyed cancer patients at the end of a course of radiotherapy using a patient-reported questionnaire. Distress was measured with the distress thermometer (DT), using a cut-off of ≥ 5 points for clinically significant distress. Univariate analyses and multivariate multiple regression were used to assess associations of distress with patient characteristics. A two-sided p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Out of 2341 potentially eligible patients, 1075 participated in the study, of which 1042 completed the DT. The median age was 65 years and 49% (511/1042) of patients were female. The mean DT score was 5.2 (SD = 2.6). Clinically significant distress was reported by 63% (766/1042) of patients. Of the patient characteristics that were significantly associated with distress in the univariate analysis, a lower level of education, a higher degree of income loss, lower global quality of life, and a longer duration of radiotherapy in days remained significantly associated with higher distress in the multivariate analysis. Yet effect sizes of these associations were small. Conclusion Nearly two in three cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy reported clinically significant distress in a large multicenter cohort. While screening and interventions to reduce distress should be maintained and promoted, the identified risk factors may help to raise awareness in clinical practice. Trial Registry identifier DRKS: German Clinical Trial Registry identifier: DRKS00028784.