Out‐of‐pocket health care expenditure burden for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is increasing concern regarding the financial burden of care on cancer patients and their families. Medicare beneficiaries often have extensive comorbidities and limited financial resources, and may face substantial cost sharing even with supplemental coverage. In the current study, the authors examined out‐of‐pocket (OOP) spending and burden relative to income for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study pooled data for 1997 through 2007 from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey linked to Medicare claims. Medicare beneficiaries with newly diagnosed cancer were selected using claims‐based diagnoses. Generalized linear models were used to estimate OOP spending. Logistic regression models identified factors associated with a high OOP burden, defined as spending > 20% of one's income during the cancer diagnosis and subsequent year. RESULTS: The cohort included 1868 beneficiaries with and 10,047 without cancer. Compared with the noncancer cohort, cancer patients were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to lack supplemental coverage. The mean OOP spending for cancer patients was $4727. Cancer patients faced an adjusted $976 ( P < .01) incremental OOP spending. Greater than one‐quarter (28%) of beneficiaries with cancer experienced a high OOP burden compared with 16% of beneficiaries without cancer ( P < .001). Supplemental insurance and higher income were found to be protective against a high OOP burden, whereas assets, comorbidity, and receipt of cancer‐directed radiation and antineoplastic therapy were associated with a higher OOP burden. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with cancer face a higher OOP burden than their counterparts without cancer; some of the higher burden was explained by the higher comorbidity burden and lack of supplemental insurance noted among these patients. Financial pressures may discourage some elderly patients from pursuing treatment. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Preventing interruptions can be challenging given that RT is time-consuming (up to 6-7 weeks), toxic, and generates high out-of-pocket patient expense.
“Preventing interruptions can be challenging given that RT is time-consuming (up to 6-7 weeks), toxic, and generates high out-of-pocket patient expense16;”
From X-CART: a multimodal real-world data pipeline for explainable AI-driven patient navigation in radiation oncology (2026) · cites this paper as [16]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Suppli, N. P., Johansen, C., Kessing, L. V., Toender, A., Kroman, N., Ewertz, M., & Dalton, S. O. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2016.68.8358 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Zink, J. A., Rashid, R., Chinthala, L., Kheirinejad, S., White, B. M., Kheirkhah Rahimabad, P., Hashtarkhani, S., Kumsa, F. A., Brett, C. L., Davis, R. L., et al. (2026) · ESMO Real World Data and Digital Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2026.100771 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Davidoff, A. J., Erten, M., Shaffer, T., Shoemaker, J. S., Zuckerman, I. H., Pandya, N., Tai, M., Ke, X., & Stuart, B.
- Venue
- Cancer
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-12-07
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1257-1265
- ISSN
- 0008-543X
- 1097-0142
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review