ArticleSingapore medical journal2026
Financial toxicity among adult cancer survivors in Singapore: does it exist?
Article in Singapore medical journal, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCancer survivors may experience financial toxicity (FT) arising from diagnosis, treatment and potential employment loss. The prevalence of FT in the context of Singapore healthcare model is unknown. We investigate whether higher out-of-pocket (OOP) expenditure correlates positively with FT, and whether higher FT correlates with a worse quality of life (QoL).
methodsIn this pilot study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted on survivors of nasopharyngeal or breast cancer at the National University Hospital Singapore. Patients' FT and QoL were measured using the COmprehensive Score on financial Toxicity (COST) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) questionnaires. Two multivariate regression models estimated (a) the association between FT and a range of variables, and (b) the association between FT and QoL.
resultsSixty-three percent of our cohort of 76 patients experienced mild-moderate FT. Overall, the mean COST and FACT-G scores were 18.0 (out of 44) and 68.3 (out of 108), respectively. There was a positive correlation between COST and FACT-G scores (r = 0.45). We did not find any significant association between OOP expenditure and FT. Predictors for FT included government-subsidised housing, lower education levels, hire of a formal caregiver and the need for household members to take on extra employment.
conclusionGreater FT correlated with a decline in QoL. Patients of lower socioeconomic status were at higher risk of FT. OOP expenditure was not directed related to FT, likely in view of the effective means-tested subsidies. Additional resources should be considered for this at-risk population. Based on this pilot study, our methodology to quantify FT and OOP expenditure can be scaled up to other cancer primaries.
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.