BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity negatively affects the well-being of cancer survivors. We examined the incidence, cost drivers, and factors associated with financial toxicity after cancer in an upper-middle-income country with universal health coverage. METHODS: Through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology study, 1,294 newly diagnosed patients with cancer (Ministry of Health [MOH] hospitals [n = 577], a public university hospital [n = 642], private hospitals [n = 75]) were observed in Malaysia. Cost diaries and questionnaires were used to measure incidence of financial toxicity, encompassing financial catastrophe (FC; out-of-pocket costs ≥ 30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (decrease in household income from above the national poverty line to below that line after subtraction of cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments). Predictors of financial toxicity were determined using multivariable analyses. RESULTS: One fifth of patients had private health insurance. Incidence of FC at 1 year was 51% (MOH hospitals, 33%; public university hospital, 65%; private hospitals, 72%). Thirty-three percent of households were impoverished at 1 year. Economic hardship was reported by 47% of families. Risk of FC attributed to conventional medical care alone was 18% (MOH hospitals, 5%; public university hospital, 24%; private hospitals, 67%). Inclusion of expenditures on nonmedical goods and services inflated the risk of financial toxicity in public hospitals. Low-income status, type of hospital, and lack of health insurance were strong predictors of FC. CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer may not be fully protected against financial hardships, even in settings with universal health coverage. Nonmedical costs also contribute as important drivers of financial toxicity in these settings.
Cancer survivors in this middle-income setting have persistently impaired HRQoL and high levels of psychological distress. Development of a holistic cancer survivorship program addressing wider aspects of well-being is urgently needed in our settings.
Reliable information on causes of death is essential for an evidence-based health policy. There is a challenge in ascertaining the cause for deaths occurring without medical attention. This has been a persistent problem for Malaysia, where 50% of deaths are registered as "nonmedically certified" deaths mostly with ill-defined causes. During 2014-2016, a research study was conducted in a nationally representative sample of 15,000 deaths in Malaysia, to verify their registered causes and develop cause-specific mortality estimates. Standard Verbal Autopsy (VA) methods were used to ascertain causes for the nonmedically certified deaths in the sample. VA methods were successful in assigning specific causes for most cases with ill-defined causes of death, resulting in plausible mortality patterns. The Malaysian government issued official instructions for routine implementation of VA methods for nonmedically certified deaths. Nationwide capacity development was implemented to improve data quality. These activities provide several lessons for strengthening the national mortality statistics programs.
Background: Evidence to guide cancer policy-making is scarce in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Furthermore, most economic studies in cancer have been conducted from the provider's or payer's perspective. Aim: The ASEAN Costs in Oncology Study (ACTION) was conducted to provide the essential intelligence for national policymakers and official development assistance donors to construct economically sound national cancer control plans. Methods: In the ACTION study, 9513 newly diagnosed cancer patients from eight LMIC in southeast Asia were prospectively followed-up for adverse economic outcomes up to one year after diagnosis, through serial interviews and use of cost diaries. Results: Country-specific analysis of the ACTION Study data had revealed that just within a year of diagnosis, 1 in 2 Malaysian cancer survivors had reported spending more than 30% of their annual household income for cancer related expenditures (FC: financial catastrophe). Strikingly, Malaysia, albeit being a higher income nation, appeared to have fared worse than Thailand, where only 1 in 3 cancer survivors reported FC. Nonetheless, in contrast to finding of the regional study that medical payments (drugs, hospitalization, consultation), largely explained the incidence of FC following cancer, only half of the reported catastrophic expenditures in Malaysia were attributed to medical expenditures suggesting that nonmedical payments related to cancer (e.g., travel, accommodation, childcare) was an important contributor to adverse financial outcomes. Furthermore, marked institutional variations in levels of catastrophic expenditures were observed in Malaysia, even within the public healthcare system. Proportion of patients experiencing FC in the general government hospitals was only 33% compared with 65% in the public academic hospitals. Although late stage at cancer diagnosis largely explained the increased risk of adverse economic outcomes and death, patients from low-income households remained vulnerable even when diagnosed with earlier stages. Conclusion: The findings of the ACTION Study importantly highlight the need for LMIC to undertake their own studies examining the financial impact of cancer in the population, to take affirmative actions to reduce financial loss and premature deaths associated with cancer. From the Malaysian perspective, there appears to be an urgent need to improve social support for cancer in the country, be it through government-led programs such as disability insurance and short term credit or multisectoral collaboration with civil societies, private industries, and philanthropic organizations. Key policy changes should also include prioritization of programs which would allow early detection of cancer, re-examination of the national health financing system to ensure that public funds are channeled to those who need them the most, and addressing disparities in funding between public hospitals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.