Factors associated with adherence to follow-up calls in cancer patients receiving care at a community oncology practice

Smartphone-based application and nurses' interventions for symptoms monitoring in patients treated with oral anticancer agents: A 1-year follow-up in a tertiary cancer center

AIM

The increasing use of oral anticancer agents over the past years has necessitated changes in monitoring toxicities to ensure patients' adherence and tolerance at home. The aim of this study was to describe nurses' interventions and medical changes after alerts triggered by a web-based platform designed to support the management of oral anticancer agents-related toxicities.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients undergoing oral anticancer agents in a cancer center from September 2018 to September 2019 (excluding hormonal therapy). In this cancer center, the standard of care included symptoms' collections for 1 month thanks to a web platform based on patient-reported outcomes. Patients had to fill a weekly questionnaire (Q1 to Q4). The web-based platform triggered orange alerts when patients reported moderate symptoms and red alerts when severe toxicities were declared. The rate of orange and red alerts, the rate of patients with medical changes consecutively to an orange or a red alert, and the different types of nurses' interventions and medical changes were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 524 patients were extracted but the final number of 436 patients were included in this study and 1488 questionnaires were filled in. More than 90% of patients declared that they took their medication as prescribed. Up to 60% of patients recorded all grade symptoms, including 8% of patients who recorded Grades 3-4 symptoms during the month, mostly anorexia, fatigue, and diarrhea. The web platform system triggered 700 orange and 212 red alerts: 305/700 (44%) of orange alerts resulted in nurses' interventions, most frequently phone counseling (78%), and 65/212 (31%) of red alerts resulted in medical changes, most frequent treatment interruptions (48%).

CONCLUSION

Implementing an e-health (electronic-health) system can be helpful for monitoring symptoms in patients under oral anticancer agents, enhancing that this organization should be a standard of care in every cancer centers.

Prevalence and predictors of patients reporting adverse drug reactions to health care providers during oral targeted cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

Pharmacovigilance is a critical component to facilitate clinicians' decision-making to alter or discontinue therapy. However, self-administration of oral targeted therapy (OTT) requires fewer clinical visits than parenteral infusions, potentially leading to an increase in the under-reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

OBJECTIVE(S)

To identify factors associated with patients reporting ADRs to their health care provider (HCP) and to identify the prevalence of unreported ADRs while on OTT.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 years who received care from a community oncology clinic and newly prescribed an OTT between August 1, 2018, and October 31, 2018, were included. Six-monthly follow-up calls were conducted by the pharmacy staff to assess for gradable ADRs-validated by the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events-and ungradable ADRs. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze the prevalence of unreporting ADRs, and a multivariate logistic regression model was utilized to evaluate predictors of reporting ADRs to an HCP. Predictors included sociodemographic factors, severity of ADRs, insurance type, pharmacy setting, type of OTT, and the number of prescribed medications RESULTS: Of the 76 patients analyzed, the mean age was 63.32 ±11.55 years, 84.2% were women, 68.8% were non-Hispanic white, and 76.3% had breast cancer. During the follow-up calls, 306 ADRs were identified and 22.2% were not previously reported to an HCP. Of the unreported gradable ADRs, 63.2% were grade 1, 19.3% were grade 2, and 17.5% were grade 3. We found that for every 1-year increase in age, there was a 5% decrease in the likelihood of reporting ADRs (95% CI, 0.91-0.99), and men were 11.4 times more likely to report ADRs (95% CI, 1.29-100.8).

CONCLUSION

Follow-up calls served as an outlet to collect pharmacovigilance data by identifying over 20% of unreported ADRs to HCPs, in which over one-third were moderate to severe. However, future studies are needed to further understand the statistically significant differences found in under-reporting for women and the older population.