Financial toxicity may differ by age at diagnosis between adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. We surveyed 52 AYA cancer patients about unmet needs and financial toxicity using the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST). We compared outcomes by age at diagnosis (15-25-year olds [n = 25, 48%] vs. 26-39-year olds [n = 27, 52%]). AYAs diagnosed ages 26-39 reported that cancer negatively affected their finances more than 15-25-year olds (77.8% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.0005). Lower mean COST scores among those diagnosed ages 26-39 indicated greater financial toxicity compared to those 15-25 years (18.22 vs. 24.84, p = 0.02). Financial burden appears to be greater for older AYAs with cancer.

The study objective was to identify sociodemographic and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) factors that are associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. Eligible participants were 18 years or older and were diagnosed with cancer as an AYA (ages 15-39 years) and received services through an AYA cancer program. A total of 342 participants completed a cross-sectional survey. Our primary outcome—COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy—was surveyed as a 5-point Likert scale and operationalized as a binary outcome (agree vs hesitant). A large proportion of participants reported COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (37.1%). In the multivariable regression, female survivors (odds ratio = 1.81, 95% confidence interval = 1.10 to 2.98) and survivors with a high school education or less (odds ratio = 3.15, 95% confidence interval = 1.41 to 7.04) reported higher odds of vaccine hesitancy compared with their male or college graduate or higher counterparts. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy persists among AYA survivors despite their recommended priority vaccination status and higher chances of severe COVID-19 outcomes.

No abstract

Our findings demonstrate the importance of formalizing provider transitions and roles after cancer therapy to improve patient comfort with new providers. By understanding the complexities of the transition from active cancer treatment to follow-up care for AYA survivors, these findings can inform programs undertaking post-care educational activities to ensure a seamless transition into survivorship care. Survivorship care plans can facilitate these transitions and improve patient confidence in follow-up care.

No abstract

Background As survivorship care plan (SCP) use among childhood cancer survivors and their families has not been extensively researched, we report on their experiences with receiving an SCP after the completion of therapy. Methods Eligible patients had acute lymphoblastic leukemia, completed therapy, and had no evidence of disease at enrollment. Patients aged 7 or older ( N = 13) and at least one parent ( N = 23 for 20 total patients) were surveyed and completed assessments at enrollment (Time 1, T1), SCP delivery (Time 2, T2), and follow-up (Time 3, T3) (retention 90.9%). Surveys assessed the delivery process and SCP format. McNemar tests were used to assess change from T2-T3. Results Satisfaction with the SCP was generally high among parents. At T1 the majority of parents (69.6%) thought the SCP should be delivered after treatment but by T3 most preferred the plan to be delivered before the end of treatment (60.9%). While 95.7% of parents intended to share their child’s SCP with another provider, family, or school at T2, only 60.9% had done so by T3 ( P < 0.01). At both T2 and T3, 100% of parents agreed that the SCP would help make decisions about their child’s future health care. Most patients at T3 (83.3%) felt they had learned something new from their SCP. Conclusions Pediatric oncology patients and families feel SCPs are useful and will help them make decisions about health care in the future. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12887-019-1464-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background For adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients aged 18 to 39 years, health insurance literacy is crucial for an effective use of the health care system. AYAs often face high out-of-pocket costs or have unmet health care needs due to costs. Improving health insurance literacy could help AYAs obtain appropriate and affordable health care. This protocol illustrates a randomized controlled trial testing a virtual health insurance education intervention among AYA patients. Methods This is a two-arm multisite randomized controlled trial. A total of 80 AYAs diagnosed with cancer in the Mountain West region will be allocated to either usual navigation care or tailored health insurance education intervention with a patient navigator that includes usual care. All participants will complete a baseline and follow-up survey 5 months apart. The primary outcomes are feasibility (number enrolled and number of sessions completed) and acceptability (5-point scale on survey measuring satisfaction of the intervention). The secondary outcomes are preliminary efficacy measured by the Health Insurance Literacy Measure and the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity. Discussion This trial makes a timely contribution to test the feasibility and acceptability of a virtual AYA-centered health insurance education program. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04448678. Registered on June 26, 2020

The HPV vaccine is an important vaccine for childhood cancer survivors because of their risks of second cancers, yet few survivors receive it. We examined HPV vaccine knowledge among caregivers of childhood cancer survivors, whether their child had received the vaccine, and their intentions to vaccinate. Eligible participants were caregivers (mostly parents) whose child finished cancer treatment at Primary Children's Hospital in Salt Lake City, Utah 3 to 36 months prior to the start of the study (N = 145). Additional analyses were done among caregivers whose child was age-eligible for the HPV vaccine (ages 11 and up; N = 61). We ran descriptive statistics and fit multivariable generalized linear models to identify factors associated with intention to vaccinate and HPV vaccination uptake. Among caregivers whose child had not yet gotten the HPV vaccine, approximately 30% stated they were not likely to get the vaccine for their child and the most commonly cited reason was not enough information (25.2%). Provider discussion about vaccines and side effects (relative risk (RR) = 1.85, 95% CI 1.16-2.94), along with recommendations regarding vaccines after cancer treatment (RR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.06-1.72), led to greater caregiver intention to get the HPV vaccine for their child with cancer. Approximately 40% of ageeligible survivors had gotten at least one dose of the HPV vaccine. Our findings demonstrate a need for oncology-focused interventions to educate families of childhood cancer survivors about the importance of the HPV vaccine after cancer therapy.