METHODS: Country-specific data from a multinational prospective cohort study, Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology Study, comprising 1,249 cancer survivors were included. Household costs of complementary medicine (healthcare practices or products that are not considered as part of conventional medicine) throughout the first year after cancer diagnosis were measured using cost diaries. Study outcomes comprised (1) shares of household expenditures on complementary medicine from total out-of-pocket costs and health costs that were respectively incurred in relation to cancer, (2) incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket costs related to cancer ≥ 30% of annual household income), and (3) economic hardship (inability to pay for essential household items or services).

RESULTS: One third of patients reported out-of-pocket household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis, accounting to 20% of the total out-of-pocket costs and 35% of the health costs. Risk of financial catastrophe was higher in households reporting out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine (adjusted odds ratio: 1.39 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.86]). Corresponding odds ratio within patients from low-income households showed that they were substantially more vulnerable: 2.28 (95% CI, 1.41 to 3.68). Expenditures on complementary medicine were, however, not associated with economic hardship in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis.

METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, data on newly diagnosed patients with cancer were derived from the ASEAN Costs in Oncology (ACTION) cohort study, a prospective longitudinal study in 47 centres located in eight countries in southeast Asia. The ACTION study measured household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis. Participants were given cost diaries at baseline to record illness-related payments that were directly incurred and not reimbursed by insurance over the 12-month period after study recruitment. We assessed incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket cancer-related costs ≥30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (reduction in annual household income to below poverty line following subtraction of out-of-pocket cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments) at 1 year.

FINDINGS: Between March, 2012, and September, 2013, 9513 participants were recruited into the ACTION cohort study, of whom 4754 (50·0%) participants were included in this analysis. Out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine were reported by 1233 households. These payments constituted 8·6% of the annual total out-of-pocket health costs in lower-middle-income countries and 42·9% in upper-middle-income countries. Expenditures on complementary medicine significantly increased risks of financial catastrophe (adjusted odds ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·23-1·88]) and medical impoverishment (1·75 [1·36-2·24]) at 12 months in upper-middle-income countries only. However, the risks were significantly higher for economically disadvantaged households, irrespective of country income group.

INTERPRETATION: Integration of evidence-supported complementary therapies into mainstream cancer care, along with interventions to address use of non-evidence-based complementary medicine, might help alleviate any associated adverse financial impacts.

METHODS: Through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology study, 1490 newly diagnosed cancer patients were followed-up in Malaysia for 1 year. Health-related quality of life was assessed by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQol-5 (EQ-5D) dimension questionnaires at baseline, 3 and 12 months. Psychological distress was assessed by using Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Data were modeled by using general linear and logistic regressions analyses.

RESULTS: One year after diagnosis, the mean EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health score of the cancer survivors remained low at 53.0 over 100 (SD 21.4). Fifty-four percent of survivors reported at least moderate levels of anxiety, while 27% had at least moderate levels of depression. Late stage at diagnosis was the strongest predictor of low HRQoL. Increasing age, being married, high-income status, hospital type, presence of comorbidities, and chemotherapy administration were also associated with worse HRQoL. The significant predictors of psychological distress were cancer stage and hospital type.

METHODS: Through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology study, 1,294 newly diagnosed patients with cancer (Ministry of Health [MOH] hospitals [n = 577], a public university hospital [n = 642], private hospitals [n = 75]) were observed in Malaysia. Cost diaries and questionnaires were used to measure incidence of financial toxicity, encompassing financial catastrophe (FC; out-of-pocket costs ≥ 30% of annual household income), medical impoverishment (decrease in household income from above the national poverty line to below that line after subtraction of cancer-related costs), and economic hardship (inability to make necessary household payments). Predictors of financial toxicity were determined using multivariable analyses.

RESULTS: One fifth of patients had private health insurance. Incidence of FC at 1 year was 51% (MOH hospitals, 33%; public university hospital, 65%; private hospitals, 72%). Thirty-three percent of households were impoverished at 1 year. Economic hardship was reported by 47% of families. Risk of FC attributed to conventional medical care alone was 18% (MOH hospitals, 5%; public university hospital, 24%; private hospitals, 67%). Inclusion of expenditures on nonmedical goods and services inflated the risk of financial toxicity in public hospitals. Low-income status, type of hospital, and lack of health insurance were strong predictors of FC.