Financial toxicity among adult cancer survivors in Singapore: does it exist?

Cancer 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). In 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. Sixty-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. Greater 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.