Pd08-07 Determinants of Financial Toxicity in Patients With Urologic Cancer

You have accessJournal of UrologyHealth Services Research: Value of Care: Cost and Outcomes I (PD08)1 May 2024PD08-07 DETERMINANTS OF FINANCIAL TOXICITY IN PATIENTS WITH UROLOGIC CANCER Apoorv Dhir, Avinash Maganty, Kristian D. Stensland, Lindsey A. Herrel, and Rishi Sekar Apoorv DhirApoorv Dhir , Avinash MagantyAvinash Maganty , Kristian D. StenslandKristian D. Stensland , Lindsey A. HerrelLindsey A. Herrel , and Rishi SekarRishi Sekar View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008576.33217.96.07AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Cancer care has dramatically evolved over the past decades with improved diagnostics and novel therapeutics that have significantly improved cancer outcomes. Unfortunately, the current landscape of health insurance and healthcare financing place a profound burden on patients with cancer. In this study, we evaluate determinants of financial toxicity in patients with urologic cancers. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the Health Information National Trends – Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (HINTS-SEER), a nationally representative survey of cancer survivors, identifying a subpopulation with urologic cancers representing approximately 100,000 patients. Our primary outcome of interest was financial toxicity ("Has cancer and its treatment hurt your financial situation?"). Independent variables included age at diagnosis, sex, race/ethnicity, education level, income level, and cancer stage. Survey weighted ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed to identify determinants of financial toxicity. RESULTS: We identified 348 survey respondents with urologic cancers including prostate (n=282), kidney (n=41), and bladder (n=25). On survey weighted analysis, 65.0% reported "Not at all", 20.9% reported "A little", 10.9% reported "Some", and 3.3% reported "A lot". On univariate analysis, higher education level and income level were associated with significantly decreased odds of reporting a higher level of financial toxicity. On multivariable analysis, older age, higher education level, and higher income level were associated with significantly decreased odds of reporting a higher level of financial toxicity, while the other independent variables were not (Table 1). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of HINTS-SEER in a subpopulation of patients with urologic cancer, self-reported financial toxicity was common and influenced by age, education level, and income level. A more detailed understanding of factors that increase or decrease the risk of financial toxicity may help patients, providers, and policymakers design interventions to reduce the financial burden for patients receiving care for urologic cancers. Source of Funding: Rishi Sekar received research support from the National Cancer Institute institutional training grant T32-CA-236621 © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e175 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Apoorv Dhir More articles by this author Avinash Maganty More articles by this author Kristian D. Stensland More articles by this author Lindsey A. Herrel More articles by this author Rishi Sekar More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...