Santoleri F, Romagnoli A, Costantini A. Real-life adherence in capecitabine therapy using two analysis methods and persistence after 6 months of treatment.
J Oncol Pharm Pract 2020;
27:1112-1118. [PMID:
32799777 DOI:
10.1177/1078155220949634]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
Medication adherence in the field of Oncology is crucial in therapy management and can influence the probability of achieving and maintaining efficacy over time. We conducted a cross-sectional study to evaluate adherence and persistence to oral therapy with Capecitabine, using two different calculation methods: therapy diary and indirect prescription refilling patterns. The main objective of the study was to compare the two methods of analysis and to propose a reliable adherence datum, yielded by the application of two complementary methodologies. We consequently set out to verify if data collected from therapy diaries can be superimposed to those gathered from prescription refilling patterns. Furthermore, we included data on patient-perceived quality in relation to Capecitabine therapy, as well as adverse reactions and their duration. Of 594 patients who used the study drug as of January 1, 2012, 45 completed their therapy diary. Adherence to treatment was 0.93 ± 0.10 and 0.84 ± 0.15, calculated using therapy diaries and pharmacy refill data, respectively. In terms of persistence, 53% of patients continued with treatment after six months of therapy. On a 1 to 5 scale, perceived quality was 3.31. In conclusion, when it comes to calculating adherence, it is important to preserve the objectivity of the method, which must be unencumbered by any conditioning. Regardless of the method, also considering what has already been discussed in the available literature, adherence in patients under treatment with Capecitabine, unlike persistence, is good.
Collapse