Pharmacist-led collaborative medication management programs for oral antineoplastic therapies: A systematic literature review

A Hybrid Type III Effectiveness-Implementation Trial to Optimize Medication Safety With Oral Antitumor Therapy in Real-World: The AMBORA Competence and Consultation Center

PURPOSE

Implementation science endeavors to facilitate the translation of evidence-based research into clinical routine. The clinical pharmacological/pharmaceutical care program evaluated in the randomized AMBORA trial on medication safety with oral antitumor therapeutics (OAT) optimizes care delivery and provides significant benefits for patients, treatment teams, and health care systems. Thus, we aimed to investigate the implementation of this care program within the AMBORA Competence and Consultation Center (AMBORA Center).

METHODS

The AMBORA Center within a University Comprehensive Cancer Center offered several services (eg, patient consultations) and was evaluated according to the RE-AIM framework. This multicenter hybrid type III trial focused on implementation outcomes (eg, patient recruitment, referring units, evaluation of services) while concurrently investigating effectiveness (eg, side effects, medication errors). Quantitative and qualitative assessments were combined.

RESULTS

The AMBORA Center conducted over 800 consultations with 420 patients in seven institutions. The primary end point of counseling 70% of patients treated with OAT was not reached. Patients were referred by 15 treatment units compared with 11 units in the AMBORA trial. On the basis of heterogeneous referral rates and characteristics across the institutions, barriers and facilitators of the implementation process were derived. Several survey results (eg, stakeholder interviews, online/paper-based questionnaires) reflected a high appreciation of services by patients and health care professionals. The severity of 60.1% (178 of 296) of detected side effects improved, and 86.3% (297 of 344) of medication errors were resolved.

CONCLUSION

Despite not reaching the primary implementation outcome, the AMBORA Center included more treatment units and demonstrated patient benefit of the AMBORA care program by meeting all effectiveness outcomes. We outlined quantitative and qualitative implementation characteristics to enhance outreach and foster further dissemination of centers to optimize medication safety with OAT.

A pharmacist-led interprofessional medication adherence program improved adherence to oral anticancer therapies: The OpTAT randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oral anticancer therapies such as protein kinase inhibitors (PKIs) are increasingly prescribed in cancer care. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-led interprofessional medication adherence program (IMAP) on patient implementation (dosing history), persistence (time until premature cessation of the treatment) and adherence to 27 PKIs prescribed for various solid cancers, as well as the impact on patients' beliefs about medicines (BAM) and quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Patients (n = 118) were randomized 1:1 into two arms. In the intervention arm, pharmacists supported patient adherence through monthly electronic and motivational feedback, including educational, behavioral and affective components, for 12 months. The control arm received standard care plus EM without intervention. All PKIs were delivered in electronic monitors (EMs). Medication implementation and adherence were compared between groups using generalized estimating equation models, in which relevant covariables were included; persistence was compared with Kaplan‒Meier curves. Information on all treatment interruptions was compiled for the analysis. Questionnaires to evaluate BAM and QoL were completed among patients who refused and those who accepted to participate at inclusion, 6 and 12 months post-inclusion or at study exit.

RESULTS

Day-by-day PKI implementation was consistently higher and statistically significant in the intervention arm (n = 58) than in the control arm (n = 60), with 98.1% and 95.0% (Δ3.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference 2.5%; 3.7%) implementation at 6 months, respectively. The probabilities of persistence and adherence were not different between groups, and no difference was found between groups for BAM and QoL scores. No difference in BAM or QoL was found among patients who refused versus those who participated. The intervention benefited mostly men (at 6 months, Δ4.7%, 95% CI 3.4%; 6.0%), those younger than 60 years (Δ4.0%, 95% CI 3.1%; 4.9%), those who had initiated PKI more than 60 days ago before inclusion (Δ4.5%, 95% CI 3.6%; 5.4%), patients without metastasis (Δ4.5%, 95% CI 3.4%; 5.7%), those who were diagnosed with metastasis more than 2 years ago (Δ5.3%, 95% CI 4.3%; 6.4%) and those who had never used any adherence tool before inclusion (Δ3.8%, 95% CI 3.1%; 4.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The IMAP, led by pharmacists in the context of an interprofessional collaborative practice, supported adherence, specifically implementation, to PKIs among patients with solid cancers. To manage adverse drug events, PKI transient interruptions are often mandated as part of a strategy for treatment and adherence optimization according to guidelines. Implementation of longer-term medication adherence interventions in the daily clinic may contribute to the improvement of progression-free survival.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04484064.

Pilot study evaluating feasibility and utility of pharmacist-driven oral antineoplastic agent monitoring program

INTRODUCTION

Oncologists are increasingly prescribing oral antineoplastic agents which have benefits and challenges impacting patient outcomes. Practice guidelines recommend monitoring symptoms and adherence without outlining any specific tools or methods for monitoring. Pharmacists are successful in monitoring patients on therapy and improving outcomes. We aimed to assess the feasibility and utility of a pharmacist-delivered and medical record-integrated adherence and symptom monitoring program for patients on oral antineoplastic agents.

METHODS

This single-center, prospective, interventional study designed and implemented an adherence and monitoring program. A pharmacist contacted patients twice between clinic visits for three months. During telephone encounters, patients were verbally screened for medication adherence and assessed for new or changing symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System as a signal of possible adverse events. We measured feasibility via patient enrollment, completed proportion of scheduled contacts, and pharmacist time. Utility was assessed through patient adherence, satisfaction surveys, healthcare resource utilization, and pharmacist interventions (i.e., patient education, adherence assistance, and symptom management).

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients participated. Ninety-one percent of scheduled patient contacts were completed. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System was administered by pharmacy personnel 102 times. Patient-reported adherence was 100%. Overall satisfaction was 85% and 100%, for patients and physicians, respectively. Fifty-one (98%) pharmacist recommendations were accepted. There were 14 total utilizations of healthcare resources-5.2 per 1000 patient days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests a pharmacist monitoring program for patients taking oral antineoplastic agents is feasible and provides utility. Further research is needed to evaluate whether this program improves safety, adherence, and outcomes in patients using oral antineoplastic agents.

Cost-effectiveness of the ONCORAL multidisciplinary programme for the management of outpatients taking oral anticancer agents at risk of drug-related event: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled study

INTRODUCTION

The development of oral anticancer agents (OAA) has profoundly changed cancer care, leading patients to manage their chemotherapy treatment on an outpatient basis. The prevention of iatrogenic effects of OAA remains a major concern, especially since their side effects are not less serious than those of intravenous chemotherapy. The ONCORAL programme was set up to secure the management of OAA in cancer patients followed at the Lyon University Hospital. This multidisciplinary programme involves hospital pharmacists, nurses, oncologists, and haematologists, as well as community health professionals. Given the economic stakes that this programme entails for the health system, a medico-economic study was designed.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective controlled study, with individual open-label randomisation. A total of 216 outpatients treated with OAA and at risk of developing a drug-related iatrogenic event, will be randomised (2:1) to undergo follow-up in the ONCORAL programme or usual care. The primary outcome will be the estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (difference in total costs per quality adjusted life years gained) at 12 months between the two groups. The secondary outcomes will be evaluation of OAA management consequences (relative-dose intensity, adherence, adverse drug events, drug-drug interactions, and proven medication errors), evaluation of overall survival and cancer-related quality of life, and patient-reported outcomes in relation to the treatment. A budget impact analysis will be implemented. Patient and health professional satisfaction regarding the ONCORAL programme will be measured.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval to conduct this study was obtained from an Ethics Committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Ile-de-France VI) in October 2019, and from the French data protection agency (Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés), according to the French Law. Trial results will be disseminated at clinical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03660670.

Assessment of chemotherapy-related educational needs of colorectal cancer patients

AIM

Aim of our study was to evaluate cancer patients' knowledge about their chemotherapy regimens in order to assess educational needs of patients.

METHODS

Study was conducted on 58 colorectal carcinoma patients who were treated in an outpatient chemotherapy unit. These patients had received a 2-page information pamphlet about their chemotherapy treatments before the commencement of treatment. During the first interview with patients, pharmacist collected demographic data and evaluated patients' knowledge about their medications using a standardized questionnaire.

FINDINGS

Mean age of the patients was 59.6 ± 1.3 years; 65.5% were male. Majority (77.6%) of patients were graduates of primary school. Sixty-four percent of these had at least one comorbid disease. Median number of chemotherapy courses already received by patients was 4 (1-9). Fifty-nine percent reported that they did not receive any patient education and 43.1% reported that they did not receive any informative document. Twenty-nine percent of patients did not know what actions to take in case of nausea-vomiting; while 53.4% did not know how to react if their body temperature exceeded 38 °C and 25.9% had no idea about dietary necessities. About one-third of patients did not pay attention to oral care.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that patients did not understand (or remember) the basic points about their chemotherapy sufficiently, but remembered the adverse effects they experienced occasionally. Pharmacists will have the chance to increase the level of knowledge of the patients receiving chemotherapy by providing patient education and follow-up.

Validation of a scale to assess adherence to oral chemotherapy based on the experiences of patients and healthcare professionals (EXPAD-ANEO)

Background: Lack of adherence to Oral antineoplastic agents (OAAs) treatment has important clinical, social and economic consequences.

Objective: To develop and validate a novel instrument for assessing adherence to OAAs, based on the reported experiences of people with cancer in relation to their treatment and the opinions of the healthcare professionals who care for them.

Methods: We performed a multicenter validation study of a scale designed to assess adherence to OAAs. First, a steering committee developed the items for an initial scale, based on the results of a qualitative study that evaluated patients’ and professionals’ experiences with this treatment. We then assessed the validity and reliability of the initial scale in a sample of 268 outpatients with cancer who received their OAAs from four Spanish hospitals.

Results: The mean age of the sample of 268 outpatients was 64.1 (standard deviation [SD] 12.4) years, and 47% of participants were women. With the results of this analysis, we developed the EXPAD-ANEO scale, which has 2 factors, one for beliefs and expectations and another for behavior. Both factors explain 52% of the explained common variance. Good reliability was obtained, with a McDonald’s omega of 0.7 for the first factor and 0.6 for the second factor. The fit indices were optimal (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.02, Comparative Fit Index = 0.99, Tucker Lexis Index = 0.99 and Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual = 0.03), which verifies the appropriateness of the items to the model. We measured EXPAD-ANEO criterion validity against pill count, obtaining a specificity of 80%. We measured convergent validity with the Morisky-Green test and found a significant association (p < 0.001). We measured divergent validity with questions on health literacy from the 16-item European Health Literacy Survey and found no correlation (p = 0.153).

Conclusion: EXPAD-ANEO is the first validated instrument for evaluating patients’ experiences with and adherence to OAAs, providing valuable information that can help health professionals to establish individual strategies or collective programs for improving therapeutic results and reducing healthcare costs.