ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Improving outcomes of patients with advanced prostate cancer through a better understanding of clinical factors contributing to financial toxicity: a qualitative study.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients with advanced prostate cancer (aPC) often face significant treatment-related financial hardship. Given the critical role non-physician clinicians play in helping patients access prescribed treatments, we sought to explore their perspectives on factors contributing to treatment-related financial toxicity.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with non-physician clinicians who care for patients with aPC. We used purposive sampling to capture diverse perspectives across practice types (academic, community), and settings (rural, urban, suburban). Participants described their perceptions and experiences regarding delivering aPC treatment, managing prior authorizations, handling insurance-related concerns, and aligning treatment preferences. We conducted content analysis with theme generation, with 30% of transcripts double coded to ensure rigor and trustworthiness in theme identification.
resultsWe interviewed 20 non-physician clinicians, including social workers, financial navigators, pharmacists, and nurses. Four themes emerged from the coded interviews. First, a lack of trust and/or empowerment in patient-clinician relationships left patients lacking support to navigate financial challenges. Second, inefficient resource allocation-including financial, educational, and institutional support-intensified the financial burden on patients. Third, communication gaps between clinicians, patients, and payers hindered treatment coordination and access to assistance. Last, variability across clinical practices, patient demographics and needs, and insurance policies contributed to an unpredictable treatment environment, furthering financial distress and potential inequities in care.
conclusionLack of trust and empowerment, resource gaps, poor communication, and systemic variability all contribute to financial toxicity for patients with aPC. Targeted strategies to improve trust, resource allocation, and communication can better support patients with aPC in managing treatment-related financial burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.