Assessing Financial Toxicity in Cancer: A Global Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Using an Asset Framework

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity (FT), encompassing objective and subjective impacts of cancer care costs, is linked to poorer quality of life, reduced treatment adherence, and higher mortality. While patient-level risk factors have been examined, a system-level perspective incorporating socioeconomic context is needed to understand global variation in FT. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 06/27/2025 for peer-reviewed, English-language studies describing self-reported FT outcomes among adults with cancer. Reviewers extracted study characteristics, FT prevalence, predictors, and measurement tools. Financial, physical, and social asset measures from the World Bank were merged with FT data by study country and year of data collection. Focusing on studies reporting Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) scores, multilevel random effects meta-analysis was performed. Univariate and multivariate multilevel meta-regression evaluated relationships between country-level assets and COST. RESULTS: = 99.2%) and a predominance of studies from the US (55%) limited its standalone interpretability. Variance decomposition showed that 46% of heterogeneity was attributable to between-country differences. Higher log GDP per capita was associated with higher COST (β = 4.44, 95% CI: 2.90-5.98), explaining 43.1% of between-country variance. Higher out-of-pocket health expenditure, population-level financial hardship, and vulnerable employment were associated with worse FT. GDP associations were robust to sensitivity analyses excluding US-based studies. CONCLUSIONS: FT among cancer patients is linked to structural conditions governing access to education, employment, and financial systems, although expanded research in low-resource settings is needed. These findings highlight the roles of economic development strategies and investment in human capital in helping to safeguard against population-level FT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cancer Medicine
Published
2026-07-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.72082
Primary Topic
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing Financial Toxicity in Cancer: A Global Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Using an Asset Framework

Gayane Yenokyan, Catherine K. Ettman, Seema Kacker, C. Scott Dorris et al.
Cancer Medicine
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
article

Assessing Financial Toxicity in Cancer: A Global Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Using an Asset Framework

Gayane Yenokyan, Catherine K. Ettman, Seema Kacker, C. Scott Dorris, Madison Hearn, Sudip Gupta, Leila J. Mady, Maria Armache, Johannes J. Fagan, W Najjar, John R. de Almeida, Laila A. Gharzai, Tobias Todsen, Rachel Stemme, Hisham Mehanna, Nadia L. Samaha, Carole Fakhry
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity (FT), encompassing objective and subjective impacts of cancer care costs, is linked to poorer quality of life, reduced treatment adherence, and higher mortality. While patient-level risk factors have been examined, a system-level perspective incorporating socioeconomic context is needed to understand global variation in FT. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 06/27/2025 for peer-reviewed, English-language studies describing self-reported FT outcomes among adults with cancer. Reviewers extracted study characteristics, FT prevalence, predictors, and measurement tools. Financial, physical, and social asset measures from the World Bank were merged with FT data by study country and year of data collection. Focusing on studies reporting Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) scores, multilevel random effects meta-analysis was performed. Univariate and multivariate multilevel meta-regression evaluated relationships between country-level assets and COST. RESULTS: = 99.2%) and a predominance of studies from the US (55%) limited its standalone interpretability. Variance decomposition showed that 46% of heterogeneity was attributable to between-country differences. Higher log GDP per capita was associated with higher COST (β = 4.44, 95% CI: 2.90-5.98), explaining 43.1% of between-country variance. Higher out-of-pocket health expenditure, population-level financial hardship, and vulnerable employment were associated with worse FT. GDP associations were robust to sensitivity analyses excluding US-based studies. CONCLUSIONS: FT among cancer patients is linked to structural conditions governing access to education, employment, and financial systems, although expanded research in low-resource settings is needed. These findings highlight the roles of economic development strategies and investment in human capital in helping to safeguard against population-level FT.

Cancer MedicineVol. 15(7)
Northwestern University (US), West Virginia University (US), University of Copenhagen (DK), University Health Network (CA), Johns Hopkins University (US), University of Cape Town (ZA), Duke University (US), Georgetown University (US), University of Toronto (CA), Johns Hopkins Medicine (US), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Rigshospitalet (DK), Institute for Work & Health (CA), Duke University Hospital (US), University of Baltimore (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), University of Birmingham (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.