Assessing financial toxicity with COST-FACIT: experience from a tertiary care cancer center

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the direct and indirect consequences of cancer diagnosis and treatment and is a key mediator of quality of life (QOL) and survival in cancer patients. To address this, financial navigation (FN) programs have been implemented in many cancer centers. At our large tertiary care cancer center, the FN program uses the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) to screen patients undergoing first cancer treatment. We aimed to better understand FT, risk factors, and association with outcomes in our cancer population. METHODS: We identified 1906 patients with any cancer diagnosis and a completed COST between 6/2021 and 2/2024. Sociodemographic data including the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), disease, and treatment characteristics as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROMIS10, PHQ9 and NCCN DT) were collected. Risk factors for FT and association of FT on overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Median age was 65 years (IQR 56-72); 54% female, 82% white, 57% married, 47% insured privately, and 35% with Medicare. Younger age, race/ethnicity, insurance type, tobacco use, and higher ADI were associated with higher FT. Higher distress (NCCN DT, N = 1001) and lower physical (N = 1474) and mental (N = 1505) health (PROMIS10) were also associated with higher FT. FT was not associated with time to treat (TTT) or OS. However, higher ADI was significantly associated with TTT (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00, p = 0.04) but not OS. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides insights into risk factors for FT in a large cancer population. We did not demonstrate a significant association of FT on survival. Further analysis in specific disease groups is needed to better understand these relationships.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Supportive Care in Cancer
Published
2026-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-026-11344-z
Primary Topic
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessing financial toxicity with COST-FACIT: experience from a tertiary care cancer center

H. Hurwitz, Elizabeth N. Dewey, Betty K. Hamilton, Colleen Strzalka et al.
Supportive Care in Cancer
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
article

Assessing financial toxicity with COST-FACIT: experience from a tertiary care cancer center

H. Hurwitz, Elizabeth N. Dewey, Betty K. Hamilton, Colleen Strzalka, Holly Stegh, Renata Hurn, Aarushi Bhan, Kim Bell, Mahir Khan, Jacqueline Tomer, Sujata Patil
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the direct and indirect consequences of cancer diagnosis and treatment and is a key mediator of quality of life (QOL) and survival in cancer patients. To address this, financial navigation (FN) programs have been implemented in many cancer centers. At our large tertiary care cancer center, the FN program uses the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) to screen patients undergoing first cancer treatment. We aimed to better understand FT, risk factors, and association with outcomes in our cancer population. METHODS: We identified 1906 patients with any cancer diagnosis and a completed COST between 6/2021 and 2/2024. Sociodemographic data including the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), disease, and treatment characteristics as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROMIS10, PHQ9 and NCCN DT) were collected. Risk factors for FT and association of FT on overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Median age was 65 years (IQR 56-72); 54% female, 82% white, 57% married, 47% insured privately, and 35% with Medicare. Younger age, race/ethnicity, insurance type, tobacco use, and higher ADI were associated with higher FT. Higher distress (NCCN DT, N = 1001) and lower physical (N = 1474) and mental (N = 1505) health (PROMIS10) were also associated with higher FT. FT was not associated with time to treat (TTT) or OS. However, higher ADI was significantly associated with TTT (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00, p = 0.04) but not OS. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides insights into risk factors for FT in a large cancer population. We did not demonstrate a significant association of FT on survival. Further analysis in specific disease groups is needed to better understand these relationships.

Supportive Care in CancerVol. 34(11)
Cleveland Clinic (US), Advocate Health Care (US), Case Western Reserve University (US)
Cleveland Clinic
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
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.