Adherence, compliance and persistence to oral antineoplastic therapy: a review focused on chemotherapeutic and biologic agents

Association between adherence with oral anticancer medications and short-term health care resource utilization: A 2010-2018 claims-based analysis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the effect of adherence to oral anticancer medications on health care resource utilization (HRU) among patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between adherence to oral anticancer medication and subsequent HRU.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart commercial claims database. Patients who initiated an oral anticancer medication between 2010 and 2017 were included. Proportion of days covered was used to calculate medication adherence in the first 6 months after oral anticancer medication initiation. All-cause HRU in the following 6 months was assessed. Multivariable negative binomial regressions were used to determine the association between oral anticancer medication adherence and HRU, after controlling for confounders.

RESULTS

Of 37,938 patients, 51.9% were adherent to oral anticancer medications. Adherence with oral anticancer medication was significantly associated with more frequent physician office and outpatient visits for several cancer types with the strongest association among those with liver cancer (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 1.34; 95% CI = 1.18-1.52 and aIRR = 1.32; 95% CI = 1.13-1.55, respectively). Oral anticancer medication adherence was associated with more emergency department visits only among patients with lung cancer (aIRR = 1.22; 95% CI = 1.01-1.48). Oral anticancer medication adherence was significantly associated with a higher rate of inpatient hospitalizations and longer stays among patients with liver cancer (aIRRs were 1.45 [95% CI = 1.02-2.05] and 2.15 [95% CI = 1.21-3.81], respectively), whereas hospitalizations were fewer and length of stay was shorter among patients with colorectal cancer who were adherent with oral anticancer medication (aIRRs were 0.77 [95% CI = 0.68-0.86] and 0.77 [95% CI = -0.66 to 0.90], respectively). Other measures did not reveal statistically significant differences in HRU among adherent and nonadherent patients for the cancer types included in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

HRU following the initial phase of oral anticancer medication therapy was generally similar among adherent and nonadherent patients. We observed a slightly higher rate of office and outpatient visits among adherent patients, which may reflect ongoing monitoring among patients continuing oral anticancer medication. Further studies are needed to determine how oral anticancer medication adherence may affect HRU over a longer time period.

Exploring adherence in patients with advanced breast cancer: focus on CDK4/6 inhibitors

Treatment adherence is crucial for optimal outcomes in advanced breast cancer, but can be challenging due to various factors, i.e. patients' attitudes and behavior upon diagnosis, and complex therapies with high adverse effect rates. Our aim was to explore the adherence to oral anticancer medications (OAM) in women with advanced breast cancer, focusing on cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDKI), and identify factors associated with the adherence. We conducted a cross-sectional study at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Croatia, involving women with stage IV advanced breast cancer receiving OAM. Data collection included a questionnaire assessing socio-demographic and clinical information, Beck Depression Inventory-II for depressive symptoms, Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) for adherence to OAM, and Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire. Plasma concentrations of CDKI were confirmed by LC-MS/MS in three randomly selected participants. A total of 89 women were included. The most prescribed OAMs were anti-estrogen (71.3 %) and CDKI (60.9 %). MARS-5 scores (mean: 24.1 ± 1.6) correlated with CDKI plasma concentrations. Forgetfulness was the primary reason for non-adherence (25.9 %). Women receiving CDKI (p = 0.018), without depressive symptomatology (p = 0.043), and with more positive beliefs about medicines were more adherent (p < 0.05). This study enhances understanding of medication adherence in advanced breast cancer and identifies influential factors.

[Oral anticancer drug: Feedback from six years of tripartite consultations in a hospital center]

INTRODUCTION

Tripartite consultations with a coordination between hospital and community care givers were implemented within hospital center for patients who start an oral anticancer regimen.

METHODS

Six years after the implementation, we wanted to assess this patient's pathway and describe how adjustments were necessary over the time.

RESULTS

A total of 961 patients received tripartite consultations. The medication review process revealed that nearly half of patients had polypharmacy (≥5 drugs/day). A pharmaceutical intervention was formulated in 45 % of cases and they were all accepted. For 33 % of patients, a drug interaction was identified and required for 21 % of them, discontinuation of one drug of their personal treatment. Coordination with general practitioner and community pharmacists were achieved for all patients. 390 patients benefitted from nursing telephone follow-up which represents approximately 20 calls per day to assess tolerance and compliance with treatments. Over time, organisational adjustments were necessary to adapt to the increase in activity. The scheduling of consultations has been improved thanks to the creation of a shared agenda and consultation reports have been expanded. Finally, an hospital functional unit was created to facilitate the financial valuation of this activity.

DISCUSSION

The feedback collected from the teams showed a real desire to perpetuate this activity even if it would seem that an improvement in human resources is still relevant as well as a better optimisation of the coordination between all the participants.

Predictors of adherence to oral anticancer medications: An analysis of 2010-2018 US nationwide claims

BACKGROUND: Various factors, including patient demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, therapy-related factors, clinical characteristics, and health-system factors, can affect patient adherence to oral anticancer medications (OAMs). OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of patients initiating oral anticancer therapy who were adherent to OAMs and to identify significant predictors of adherence to OAMs, including patient OOP costs and patient demographics. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart commercial claims database for 2010-2018. Patients with a new pharmacy claim for an OAM between July 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were followed for 6 months to ascertain their medication adherence, which was defined as a proportion of days covered value of at least 0.8. Average monthly patient OOP costs for OAM prescriptions were categorized as lower OOP costs (quartiles 1-3) and higher OOP costs (quartile 4). Separate multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to identify predictors of OAM nonadherence for each cancer type. RESULTS: Out of 37,938 patients with cancer, 51.9% were adherent to OAMs, with adherence ranging from 32.8% among those with liver cancer to 70.4% among those with brain tumor. The average monthly OOP costs of OAMs also differed by cancer type, ranging from $749 (SD = $1,014) among patients with blood cancer to $106 (SD = $439) among those with prostate cancer. Higher patient OOP costs were associated with higher odds of OAM nonadherence for many cancer types, including renal cancer (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.91; 95% CI = 2.80-5.47) and breast cancer (AOR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.13-1.41). Additionally, patients with inpatient hospitalizations during the 6 months following OAM initiation had significantly higher odds of OAM nonadherence for all cancer types except for stomach cancer. Among patients with stomach cancer, male sex was associated with lower odds of OAM nonadherence (AOR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.37-0.97). Among patients with renal or stomach cancer, those who had Medicare low-income subsidy had higher odds of OAM nonadherence compared with those with commercial insurance coverage. Among patients with blood cancers, Black and Hispanic patients had higher odds of OAM nonadherence compared with White patients (AOR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.25-1.75 and AOR = 1.38; 95% CI = 1.13-1.68, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Overall adherence to OAMs was suboptimal, and for several cancer types, adherence was worse among patients with higher OOP costs, those who were hospitalized, and those who received Medicare low-income subsidy. Policies addressing cost and access to OAMs and health-system strategies to address barriers to the effective use of OAMs are needed to improve patient access to these vital medications. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by joint funding from the Pharmacy Quality Alliance and the National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC). Drs Vyas and Kogut were partially supported by this joint funding. Mr Descoteaux was supported by this joint funding for performing data analysis. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of PQA or NPC. Dr Campbell completed this work during his employment at Pharmacy Quality Alliance; he is now an employee of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ.

Disparities in telehealth use: How should the supportive care community respond?

Telehealth use has increased in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are disparities in telehealth use based on age, income, race/ethnicity, low health, digital literacy, and limited English proficiency. There are multilevel barriers to telehealth use at the patient, health systems, telehealth portal, and policy levels. To ensure equity in telehealth services and to leverage these services to maximize the reach of health care services, concerted efforts are needed to design telehealth tools and workflows. It should include reimbursement for staff training, patient education, and technical support needed for telehealth use. Furthermore, ongoing monitoring and responsive modifications in the use of telehealth services are needed to promote telehealth equity.

Assessment of patients' understanding of and adherence to oral anticancer medication (OAM): Results of a cross-sectional institutional pilot study

BACKGROUND

Although oral anticancer medications (OAM) provide opportunity for treatment at home, challenges include prescription filling, monitoring side effects, safe handling, and adherence. We assessed understanding of and adherence to OAM in vulnerable patients.

METHODS

This 2018 pilot study defined vulnerable patients based on Chinese language, older age (≥65 years), and subsidized insurance. All participants had a cancer diagnosis and were taking an OAM filled through the hospital's specialty pharmacy. Participants reported on OAM taking (days per week, times per day, special instructions) and handling (handling, storage, disposal). The specialty pharmacist classified patient-reported responses about OAM taking and handling as adequate or inadequate. OAM regimens were classified by complexity.

RESULTS

Of 61 eligible patients, 55 participated. Mean age was 68 years (standard deviation [SD] = 12) and 53% were female. Patient subgroups were: 27% Chinese, 64% ≥65 years, and 9% subsidized insurance. Forty-nine percent were on frontline therapy and median time on OAM was 1 year (Quartile 1 = 0.4, Quartile 3 = 1.7). Adequacy of OAM taking (30%) and handling (15%) were low; 15% had adequacy in both. Adequacy of OAM taking and handling did not vary by patient subgroup or regimen complexity. Mean patient-reported adherence was high (5.4, SD = 1, possible range 1-6) and did not vary by adequacy of OAM taking or handling.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding of OAM taking and handling in this group of vulnerable patients was low and did not align with patient-reported adherence. Future interventions should ensure that patients understand how to safely take and handle OAM, thereby optimizing their therapeutic potential.

Enhancing patients' understanding of and adherence to oral anticancer medication: Results of a longitudinal pilot intervention

BACKGROUND

Oral anticancer medications (OAM) make administration more convenient for patients, but shifts the responsibility of care from clinical providers to the patients themselves. Following an institutional pilot study showing inadequate understanding and adherence among vulnerable patients taking OAM, a longitudinal intervention was developed using an oncology specialty pharmacist and medication navigators to enhance OAM understanding and adherence.

METHODS

Patients initiating OAM were approached for four formalized teaching and check-in sessions, supplemented with medication information sheets and individualized calendars. At each session, participants were assessed on their OAM understanding and adherence using teach-back and validated measures. A study evaluation elicited feedback from participants on the usefulness of the intervention.

RESULTS

Of 80 eligible patients, 58 (72.5%) received formal OAM teaching from the specialty pharmacist. Of those, 54 (93.1%) enrolled in the study with 39 (72%) completing the intervention for final analysis. At study completion, all participants adequately understood OAM taking, but 41.0% had inadequate understanding of OAM handling. Throughout the study, participants reported issues that were addressed by the intervention team (28.2% to 31.6%) as well as those requiring additional assistance from the treatment team (26.3% to 38.5%), Most participants found the intervention to be very beneficial (initial evaluation, 86.5%; final evaluation, 76.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot intervention addressed gaps identified by our institutional assessment through formalized OAM teaching and follow-up. Improved understanding of taking and handling OAM through this subsequent study illustrated the enhanced effect of a multidisciplinary and multicomponent intervention to better educate and support patients on OAM.

A Review of Factors Influencing the Three Phases of Medication Adherence in People with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Objectives: Factors affecting adherence to medications in people with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not well understood in the context of their influence on the different phases of adherence, that is, initiation, implementation, and discontinuation. This review aimed to identify the factors affecting the three phases of medication adherence in people with ADHD. Methods: Six electronic databases, including Medline, PubMed, IPA, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO, were systematically searched from inception through October 2018 with the limitations of English language and human studies. The search strategy was based on three concepts (adherence, ADHD, and factors) and their relevant terminologies. Results: Considerable variability was observed with regards to the criteria used to define adherence in identified studies (n = 48). Most studies focused on the implementation phase of adherence (n = 27), while only a handful focused on the initiation (n = 6) and discontinuation (n = 5) phase of adherence. The remaining studies (n = 10) examined multiple phases of adherence. Conflicting information received about medication, medication frequency, and fears of medication's effect on growth were the unique factors impacting initiation, implementation, and discontinuation, respectively. Moreover, factors within each phase of adherence also differed with different populations such as parents, children, adolescents, and adults. Fear of addiction, medication effectiveness, psychiatric comorbidity, and medication side effects were the most common factors identified in all three phases of adherence. Conclusions: This review found some unique factors in each phase of adherence while some overlap was also noted. Future interventions to improve adherence should be phase- and group specific rather than consider adherence as a single variable.

A Novel Approach to Better Characterize Medication Adherence in Oral Anticancer Treatments

Purpose: This study aims to describe a 12-month medication adherence with oral anticancer medications (OAMs) in a routine care medication adherence program, and to better characterize non-persistence.

Patients and methods:In this observational, one-centered, longitudinal study, medication adherence was monitored electronically while patients were taking part in a medication adherence program for 12 months or until treatment stop. Patients were >18 years and starting or taking one of the following OAMs: letrozole, exemestane, imatinib, sunitinib, capecitabine, or temozolomide. Non-persistence was defined as any premature treatment interruption due to patient's unilateral decision or to a medical decision because of adverse effects. The Kaplan Meier survival function estimate was used to characterize persistence, and Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) were adopted to fit implementation. Statistical analyses were performed using the R software package.

Results: Forty-three outpatients with various tumor entities were enrolled. Reasons for quitting the medication adherence program and/or OAM medication were characterized as OAM discontinuation due to adverse effects or toxicity (n = 5), planned OAM completion time (n = 10), OAM failure (cancer relapse) (n = 5) and non-compliance to the adherence program (n = 3). In persistent patients, the implementation rates were high (from 98% at baseline to 97% at 12 months). The probability of being persistent at 12 months was estimated at 85%.

Conclusion: A better characterization of both persistence and implementation to OAMs in real life settings is crucial for understanding and optimizing medication adherence to OAMs. The complex identification of non-persistence underlines the need to carefully and prospectively assess OAM interruption or treatment switch reasons. The GEE analysis for describing implementation to OAMs will allow researchers and professionals to take advantage of the richness of longitudinal real-time data, to avoid reducing such data through thresholds and to put them into perspective with OAM blood levels.

Adherence to Oral Anticancer Medications: Evolving Interprofessional Roles and Pharmacist Workforce Considerations

Interprofessional care is exhibited in outpatient oncology practices where practitioners from a myriad of specialties (e.g., oncology, nursing, pharmacy, health informatics and others) work collectively with patients to enhance therapeutic outcomes and minimize adverse effects. Historically, most ambulatory-based anticancer medication therapies have been administrated in infusion clinics or physician offices. Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) have become increasingly prevalent and preferred by patients for use in residential or other non-clinic settings. Self-administration of OAMs represents a significant shift in the management of cancer care and role responsibilities for patients and clinicians. While patients have a greater sense of empowerment and convenience when taking OAMs, adherence is a greater challenge than with intravenous therapies. This paper proposes use of a qualitative systems evaluation, based on theoretical frameworks for interdisciplinary team collaboration and systems science, to examine the social interactionism involved with the use of intravenous anticancer treatments and OAMs (as treatment technologies) by describing patient, organizational, and social systems considerations in communication, care, control, and context (i.e., Kaplan’s 4Cs). This conceptualization can help the healthcare system prepare for substantial workforce changes in cancer management, including increased utilization of oncology pharmacists.

Assessment and measurement of medication adherence: oral agents for cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are challenged to find ways to assess and measure adherence to oral agents for cancer (OACs).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to report on available ways to assess and measure medication adherence by patients with cancer.

METHODS

Tools examined include the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) and the Adherence Estimator, which are able to predict risk of nonadherence. Adherence Starts With Knowledge (ASK®)-12 and the Brief Adherence Rating Scale (BARS) are likely to be effective for predicting nonadherence and measuring adherence rates.

FINDINGS

Additional research needs to focus on the testing of reliable and valid tools that are sensitive and specific to patients with cancer who are prescribed OACs. The authors found that the MMAS and Adherence Estimator tools may be useful at predicting risk of medication nonadherence, and the ASK-12 and BARS may be useful for measuring rates of adherence. Tools could be modified to a specific clinical setting and used in a standardized format so that nurses can assess risk of medication nonadherence and measure adherence rates of OACs.

Putting evidence into practice: evidence-based interventions for oral agents for cancer

BACKGROUND

The limited evidence available suggests that adherence to oral agents for cancer is a significant clinical problem and may have a substantial impact on treatment success or failure. Adherence is a difficult issue among patients who are very sick with a life-threatening disease who often must adhere to complex treatment protocols independently at home.

OBJECTIVES

This article aims to identify effective interventions for the promotion, treatment, and management of adherence to oral agents for cancer and to synthesize the literature for use in clinical practice.

METHODS

As part of the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) Putting Evidence Into Practice (PEP) initiative, a comprehensive examination of the current literature was conducted to identify effective interventions for patients prescribed oral agents for cancer. The ONS PEP weight-of-evidence classification schema levels of evidence were used to categorize interventions to assist nurses in identifying strategies that are effective at improving adherence.

FINDINGS

The majority of evidence found was conducted in conditions other than cancer; therefore, research is needed to identify whether these interventions are effective at promoting adherence in patients with cancer.

Oral antineoplastic agents: how do we care about adherence?

AIMS

Oral therapies, including hormone-based or targeted therapies, have recently taken an increasing place in cancer treatment. In this context, a state of the art of the available studies dealing with the adherence of adult patients to oral anticancer treatment is warranted. The purpose of this review is to address (i) the association between assessment methods and measured adherence, (ii) the putative factors related to adherence and (iii) new ways of improving adherence to oral cancer therapies.

METHODS

We conducted a literature-based narrative review of studies obtained from Pubmed using medical subject heading terms and free-text terms combining concepts related to oral anticancer medication and adherence.

RESULTS

The analysis is based on 48 studies published since 1990, mostly assessing hormone-based therapy in breast cancer and targeted therapies in chronic myeloid leukaemia. Various methods of adherence were reported including self-report, medication measurement or combinations of methods. Adherence rates were found to vary from 14% to 100%. Beside patient related-factors, adherence rate discrepancies were found to be dependent on the method used. Furthermore, there was no consensual definition of adherence even regarding the same methods, some of them tolerating a period of interruption during the treatment period. Finally, several studies addressing persistence found a progressive decrease in adherence with time.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to novel oral therapies is a major issue and further research is warranted to standardize adherence assessment in clinical studies better and to define better the most appropriate approaches to improve long term adherence in oncology practice.

Adjuvant Systemic Therapy in Older Breast Cancer Women: Can We Optimize the Level of Care?

Defining optimal adjuvant treatment for older women with breast cancer is challenged by the lack of level-1 clinical evidence and the heterogeneity of the older population. Nevertheless, recommendations based on reviews of available evidence mainly from retrospective subgroup analyses and extrapolation of study results from younger patients, and expert opinions, may be useful to guide treatment decisions in fit patients. But how can we properly define a "fit" older patient? In clinical practice, age by itself and clinical impression generally drive treatment decision, although the appropriateness of this judgment is under-documented. Such an approach risks overtreatment or, more frequently, undertreatment. A geriatric assessment can be valuable in oncology practice to address this issue. In this review article, we will focus only on systemic treatment and will discuss "standard" adjuvant systemic treatment strategies for fit older breast cancer patients and the role of "personalized" systemic therapy in unfit patients. The concepts conveyed in this review cannot be extrapolated to locoregional therapy.

Persistence and compliance among U.S. patients receiving pazopanib or sunitinib as first-line therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective claims analysis

BACKGROUND

For first-line therapy options for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), clinical trials have demonstrated similar efficacy for pazopanib and sunitinib as well as differing side-effect profiles, which may affect patient persistence in self-administration of these oral medications. However, the treatment patterns of each drug in real-world clinical practice, as opposed to the controlled environment of a trial, have not been directly compared.

OBJECTIVE

To compare persistence and compliance (adherence) with pazopanib versus sunitinib in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective claims analysis using 2 databases: Optum Research Database and Impact National Benchmark Database. Eligible patients included adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with ≥ 2 RCC diagnoses and evidence of first-line therapy with ≥ 1 subsequent pharmacy claim for pazopanib or sunitinib between October 2009 and July 2012. The date of the first pazopanib or sunitinib claim was defined as the index date. Additional requirements included continuous enrollment in the health plan for 2 months prior (baseline period) through 6 months after (follow-up period) the index date and no cancers other than those associated with RCC. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias. Persistence with the index drug was compared using days to discontinuation, estimated level of persistence (ELPT) at 180 days, and proportion of days covered (PDC). PDC was defined by dividing the number of days covered with the index drug by the number of follow-up days. Compliance was estimated using medication possession ratio (MPR). For matched cohort pairs with > 1 fill, MPR was defined by dividing the number of days covered with the index drug by the number of days between the first and last index medication fill.

RESULTS

We identified 84 matched pairs among 97 patients prescribed pazopanib and 349 prescribed sunitinib. Among the matched population, mean comorbidity index score was 5.8 (95% CI = 1.8-6.0) for pazopanib, and 6.1 (95% CI =1.8-6.0) for sunitinib (P = 0.133). Evidence of any radiation therapy during the baseline period was significantly higher among the sunitinib cohort prior to matching (9% vs. 18%, P = 0.043), and evidence of surgery was higher in the pazopanib cohort after matching (12% vs. 7%, P = 0.046). Cohorts were balanced according to demographic and clinical characteristics with mean (SD) age of 63.0 (9.0) years and 77.4% male. During the 6-month period after drug initiation, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) by drug cohort in the duration of index drug therapy or the percentage of patients who discontinued their index drugs. The mean (SD) time to discontinuation was 133.4 (62.8) days and 139.9 (55.6) days among the matched pazopanib and sunitinib cohorts, respectively (P = 0.445). In both cohorts, more than 40% of patients discontinued their index drugs (46.4% pazopanib and 44.1% sunitinib, P = 0.732). In addition, there was no significant difference by drug cohort in the ELPT at any time examined between 30 and 180 days after initiation of therapy. PDC with the index drug during the fixed 6-month follow-up was also examined. Although the mean PDC was significantly higher among the sunitinib cohort (0.77 vs. 0.68 for pazopanib, P = 0.037), there was no difference by cohort in the percentage of patients with high PDC (defined as ≥ 80%): 52.4% versus 56.0% for pazopanib and sunitinib, respectively (P = 0.622). Mean MPR among matched pairs with at least 2 fills for the index drug was significantly higher among the sunitinib cohort, although there was no difference by cohort in the percentage of patients with high MPR (defined as ≥ 80%): 81.4% versus 93.2% for pazopanib and sunitinib, respectively (P > 0.071).

CONCLUSIONS

In the first 6 months of treatment, persistence and compliance to pazopanib and sunitinib were similar. Future studies are needed, including those assessing larger cohorts and longer follow-up periods.

Prevalence and characteristics associated with default of treatment and follow-up in patients with cancer

Defaulting is an important issue across all medical specialties, but much more so in cancer as delayed or incomplete treatment has been shown to result in worse clinical outcomes such as treatment resistance, disease progression as well as lower survival. Our objective was to identify psychosocial variables and characteristics associated with default among cancer patients. A total of 467 consecutive adult cancer patients attending the oncology clinic at a single academic medical centre completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and reported their preference for psychological support at baseline, 4-6 weeks and 12-18 months follow-up. Default was defined as refusal, delay or discontinuation of treatment or visit, despite the ability to do so. A total of 159 of 467 (34.0%) cancer patients were defaulters. Of these 159 defaulters, 89 (56.0%) desired psychological support, compared to only 13 (4.2%) of 308 non-defaulters. Using a logistic regression, patients who were defaulters had 52 times higher odds (P = 0.001; 95% confidence interval 20.61-134.47) of desiring psychological support than non-defaulters after adjusting for covariates. These findings suggest that defaulters should be offered psychological support which may increase cancer treatment acceptance rates and improve survival.

Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Institute's Symptom Management and Health-Related Quality of Life Steering Committee held a clinical trials planning meeting (September 2011) to identify a core symptom set to be assessed across oncology trials for the purposes of better understanding treatment efficacy and toxicity and to facilitate cross-study comparisons. We report the results of an evidence-synthesis and consensus-building effort that culminated in recommendations for core symptoms to be measured in adult cancer clinical trials that include a patient-reported outcome (PRO).

METHODS

We used a data-driven, consensus-building process. A panel of experts, including patient representatives, conducted a systematic review of the literature (2001-2011) and analyzed six large datasets. Results were reviewed at a multistakeholder meeting, and a final set was derived emphasizing symptom prevalence across diverse cancer populations, impact on health outcomes and quality of life, and attribution to either disease or anticancer treatment.

RESULTS

We recommend that a core set of 12 symptoms--specifically fatigue, insomnia, pain, anorexia (appetite loss), dyspnea, cognitive problems, anxiety (includes worry), nausea, depression (includes sadness), sensory neuropathy, constipation, and diarrhea--be considered for inclusion in clinical trials where a PRO is measured. Inclusion of symptoms and other patient-reported endpoints should be well justified, hypothesis driven, and meaningful to patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This core set will promote consistent assessment of common and clinically relevant disease- and treatment-related symptoms across cancer trials. As such, it provides a foundation to support data harmonization and continued efforts to enhance measurement of patient-centered outcomes in cancer clinical trials and observational studies.

Effect of a structured, active, home-based cancer-treatment program for the management of patients on oral chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

The advent of oral chemotherapy agents has had a strong impact on several aspects of the management of cancer patients, including survival rates, health-care expenditure, and health-related quality of life. However, access to care and adherence to oral chemotherapy are central to optimal outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicenter observational study, we assessed the effect of the "Active Home Care" initiative - a structured, active, home-based cancer-treatment program - on quality of life, health-care utilization, and patient adherence and satisfaction using self-administered questionnaires. Sixty-two patients treated with oral chemotherapy (capecitabine, vinorelbine, imatinib, sunitinib, sorafenib, temozolomide, ibandronate) were enrolled in the program. Weekly home visits were scheduled, each one with a trained nurse who delivered the home-based chemotherapy and reviewed patients' compliance and treatment toxicity. An oncologist evaluated patients and modified the dosage of oral chemotherapy based on toxicity reported during the previous cycle at bi-weekly visits.

RESULTS

A total of 460 home visits were performed between April 2012 and February 2013. The Active Home Care initiative was associated with significant improvements in physical functioning and symptoms, and reductions in the access to cancer facilities. Satisfaction with oral chemotherapy and care received was high. All patients reported having taken their medications according to their prescription, and no patient reported difficulties in managing the oral chemotherapy regimen.

CONCLUSION

The Active Home Care program was associated with improvements in the quality of life of patients and caregivers, better adherence to treatment, and the effective management of therapy and cancer-related symptoms. Home-based cancer treatment may also optimize the utilization of health-care resources.

Has the time come for metronomics in low-income and middle-income countries?

In 2008, 72% of cancer deaths occurred in low-income and middle-income countries, where, although there is a lower incidence of cancer than in high-income countries, survival rates are also low. Many patients are sent home to die, and an even larger number of patients do not have access to treatment facilities. New constraint-adapted therapeutic strategies are therefore urgently needed. Metronomic chemotherapy--the chronic administration of chemotherapy at low, minimally toxic doses on a frequent schedule of administration, with no prolonged drug-free breaks--has recently emerged as a potential strategy to control advanced or refractory cancer and represents an alternative for patients with cancer living in developing countries. This low-cost, well-tolerated, and easy to access strategy is an attractive therapeutic option in resource-limited countries. Moreover, combined with drug repositioning, additional anticancer effects can be achieved, ultimately resulting in improved cancer control while maintaining minimum cost of treatment. In this Personal View, we will briefly review the rationale behind the combination of metronomic chemotherapy and drug repositioning-an approach we term metronomics. We assess the clinical experience obtained with this kind of anticancer treatment and describe potential new developments in countries with limited resources. We also highlight the need for adapted clinical study endpoints and innovative models of collaboration between for-profit and non-profit organisations, to address the growing problem of cancer in resource-limited countries.

Patient adherence and persistence with Imatinib, Nilotinib, Dasatinib in clinical practice

Introduction

The aim of this study is to evaluate adherence and persistence of patients treated with Imatinib, Nilotinib or Dasatinib, also giving economic evaluations on therapy costs for Received Daily Dose (RDD).

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective study, we took into account 3 years from 1st Jan. 2009 to 31st March.2012. Treatment adherence was quantified utilizing ratio between RDD and PDD (Prescribed Daily Dose). Persistence is reckoned taking into account the actual therapy days, comparing posology with supplied dose, drawing the graph using Kaplan-Meir method.

Results

Adherence results in values between 0.8 and 1.0 for Nilotinib (Adh  = 0.93), Imatinib (Adh  = 0.83) and Dasatinib (0.85). Imatinib has better persistence, 90% of patients in treatment exceed one year of treatment versus 83.3% for Nilotinib and 80% for Dasatinib. The cost per single day of treatment (cost per RDD) was € 39.41 for Imatinib, € 113.60 for Nilotinib and € 94.84 for Dasatinib.

Conclusion

Patients with CML have a loose of adherence both in first line with Imatinib and in second line of therapy with Dasatinib and Nilotinib. Loss of adherence remains a big problem and could be minimized by a patient-oriented project invlolving physicians, nurses, pharmacists and caregiver.

Determinants and associated factors influencing medication adherence and persistence to oral anticancer drugs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The use of oral anticancer drugs has increased in modern oncology treatment. The move from intravenous treatments towards oral anticancer drugs has increased the patients' own responsibility to take oral anticancer drugs as being prescribed. High rates of non-adherence to oral anticancer drugs have been reported. A systematic literature review was conducted to gain insight into determinants and associated factors of non-adherence and non-persistence in patients taking oral anticancer therapy.

REVIEW METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science and Cinahl were systematically searched for studies focusing on determinants and associated factors of medication non-adherence and non-persistence to oral anticancer drugs. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers. No studies were excluded based on the quality assessment.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies were included and systematically reviewed. The quality of the studies was moderate. Associated factors influencing medication non-adherence and non-persistence to oral anticancer drugs are multifactorial and interrelated. Older and younger age, and the influence of therapy related side effects were found to be predominant factors.

CONCLUSION

Non-adherence and non-persistence to oral anticancer drug therapy are complex phenomena. More qualitative research is needed to facilitate the development of patient tailored complex interventions by exploring patients' needs and underlying processes influencing medication non-adherence and non-persistence to oral anticancer drugs.