Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41233706›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026

Financial Toxicity among Survivors of Extremity and Pelvic Sarcoma: A Retrospective Study.

Devika A Shenoy, Caroline E Sloan, Giussepe Yanez, Elizabeth Sachs, Emily Peairs, Chad Cook, Ariana Matarangas, Brian Brigman, William C Eward, Julia D Visgauss

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Devika A ShenoyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. das140@duke.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-7543-5414
Caroline E SloanDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Giussepe YanezDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Elizabeth SachsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Emily PeairsDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
Chad CookDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Ariana MatarangasDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Brian BrigmanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
William C EwardDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Julia D VisgaussDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFinancial toxicity in oncology, defined as the economic burden and psychosocial distress of cancer care, has been associated with poor clinical outcomes. Despite high projected treatment costs, data on financial toxicity in patients with sarcoma remain limited. This study aimed to characterize financial toxicity in survivors of sarcoma and to better inform screening practices for patients with rare cancers requiring complex, multidisciplinary treatment plans.

methodsThis retrospective cohort study surveyed patients with a diagnosis of trunk or extremity sarcomas between 2016 and 2024 (i.e., survivors of sarcoma). Patients were administered the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) instrument, which has been validated with cancer patients. Scores ranged from 0 to 44. Financial toxicity was categorized into moderate-to-severe (score <26) and low-to-none (score ≥26) groups. Demographic and clinical variables were obtained from electronic medical records. Univariate logistic regression analyses were used to explore variables associated with financial toxicity.

resultsAmong 205 participants, 77 % reported moderate-to-severe financial toxicity. The odds of financial toxicity were similar across insurance types, race, ethnicity, employment status, income, and geography. Patients were less likely to report financial toxicity if they had soft tissue sarcomas (compared with bone sarcomas; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.98).

conclusionFinancial toxicity is highly prevalent among survivors of sarcoma. The widespread nature of this financial distress across different patient groups suggests that no specific population is disproportionately affected, underscoring the universal risk of financial toxicity. These findings support exploring universal financial toxicity screening for patients with sarcoma to facilitate timely interventions.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsCost of IllnessExtremitiesFinancial StressPelvic NeoplasmsSarcomaAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesFinancial stressFinancial toxicityHealth care costsOrthopaedicsSarcoma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.