Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36338686›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in oncology2022

Financial toxicity in lung cancer.

Mary Boulanger, Carley Mitchell, Jeffrey Zhong, Melinda Hsu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mary BoulangerDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Carley MitchellDepartment of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Jeffrey ZhongDepartment of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Melinda HsuDepartment of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Case Western Reserve University · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center · USUniversity School · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the United States, lung cancer is the third most common cancer and the overall leading cause of cancer death. Due to advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapy, 5-year survival is increasing. The growing population of patients with lung cancer and cancer survivors highlights the importance of comprehensive cancer care, including recognizing and addressing financial toxicity. Financial toxicity is a term used to contextualize the negative effects of the costs of cancer treatment in terms of patient quality of life. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework places emphasis on high-value care as it evaluates cancer treatments "based on clinical benefit, side effects, and improvements in patient symptoms or quality of life in the context of cost". Prior studies have shown that risk factors for financial toxicity in patients with lung cancer include lower household income or savings, inability to afford basic necessities, higher than anticipated out of pocket expenses, and taking sick leave. Among lung cancer survivors, patients experience increased unemployment and lower wages compared to the general population underscoring the lasting effects of financial toxicity. Financial toxicity is associated with increased psychosocial distress and decreased quality of life, and bankruptcy is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with cancer. Despite the negative implications of financial toxicity on patients, standardized screening practices and evidence-based interventions are lacking. The "COmphrensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST)" tool has been validated for assessing financial toxicity with correlation with health-related quality of life. Further research is needed to understand the utility of incorporating routine screening for financial toxicity into clinical practice and the efficacy of interventions. Understanding the relationship between financial toxicity and quality of life and survival is critical to providing high-value cancer care and survivorship care.

Indexed as

ASCO value frameworkfinancial toxicitylung cancerquality of lifesurvivorship care

Identifiers

PMID36338686
PMCPMC9634168
OpenAlexW4306970607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.