Self-Reported Adherence to Capecitabine on XELOX Treatment as Adjuvant Therapy for Colorectal Cancer

Prolonged administration of the granisetron transdermal delivery system reduces capecitabine plus oxaliplatin regimen induced nausea and vomiting

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the granisetron transdermal delivery system (GTDS) combined with Dexamethasone for preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving Capecitabine plus Oxaliplatin (CapeOX) therapy.

DESIGN

Open-label, prospective, multi-center phase II trial.

SETTING

Three institutions.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-four patients scheduled to receive CapeOX chemotherapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received GTDS (3.1 mg applied to the upper arm 48 h before chemotherapy, replaced on day 5, and discarded on day 12) and Dexamethasone.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was the complete control rate of CINV. Secondary endpoints included the duration of delayed complete control, complete control rate in the acute phase, safety, and quality of life.

RESULTS

The complete control rate for delayed CINV over the entire period (25-480 h) was 72.7% (95% CI 0.57-0.88). The duration of delayed complete control was 17.2 ± 4.5 days, with 51.5% of patients experiencing no nausea during the delayed phase. The complete control rate in the acute phase was 81.8% (95% CI 0.69-0.95). No serious adverse events related to the antiemetic regimen were reported.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged administration of GTDS is safe and effective for preventing CINV in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies treated with CapeOX.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT05325190); registered on October 10, 2021.

[Evaluation of the Leftover Capecitabine Tablets in Adjuvant CAPOX Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer]

Since it is important that patients take their oral anticancer therapy as prescribed, pharmacists need to assess adherence. In addition, oral anticancer drugs are expensive, and reuse of leftover drugs at outpatient pharmacy clinics is useful in reducing drug costs. The present study aimed to clarify when and why patients have leftover capecitabine tablets, and the cost of leftover capecitabine tablets reused at an outpatient pharmacy clinic, focusing on adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) chemotherapy for gastric cancer. We retrospectively studied patients who received adjuvant CAPOX chemotherapy for gastric cancer between November 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021, at the Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research. The cost of leftover capecitabine reused by pharmacists was calculated based on the National Health Insurance drug price standard for the study period. This study included 64 patients who received adjuvant CAPOX chemotherapy. Thirty-seven patients had 152 leftover capecitabine tablets. The most common reasons for leftover capecitabine tablets were nausea and vomiting (21.7%), missed doses (18.4%), and diarrhea (13.2%). The leftover capecitabine tablets for 25 patients were reused at the outpatient pharmacy clinic at a cost of JPY 604142.8 (JPY 24165.7 per patient). The study results suggest that evaluating capecitabine adherence and the reasons for leftover capecitabine tablets at outpatient pharmacy clinics as well as reusing leftover medication can contribute to reducing drug costs.

The Combined Use of 5 or More Drugs Is a Factor Related to Lower Adherence to S-1 in S-1 and Oxaliplatin Treatment for Advanced Gastric Cancer

S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) is an established treatment for advanced gastric cancer. S-1 adherence is the key to successful SOX treatment. This study focused on S-1 adherence by evaluating real-world adherence to S-1 and investigating factors related to decreased S-1 adherence. This study included cases treated between August 1, 2014 and October 12, 2016 at the Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research. The S-1 adherence rate per cycle was defined as the number of times a patient took S-1/28. In this study, adherence to S-1 was assessed through pill counts and by asking the patient about the reason for non-adherence at a pharmaceutical outpatient clinic. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate factors influencing lower adherence. This analysis included 116 patients evaluated for adherence to S-1 on SOX treatment. The median rate of adherence to S-1 was 92.8% in the first cycle and 90.5% in the seventh cycle. The median relative dose intensity of S-1 was 84.6%. In terms of reasons for nonadherence, patients most commonly cited nausea/vomiting (43.7%), diarrhea (20.8%), missed dose (11.8%), and fever (8.1%). Logistic regression analysis was performed using the most appropriate regression equation, and a significant association was detected with 1 factor, number of combined drugs ≥5 (odds ratio (OR) = 2.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-6.03, p = 0.04). Eliminating unnecessary concomitant medications helps maintain proper adherence to S-1 in SOX treatment.

Adverse reactions and adherence to capecitabine: A prospective study in patients with gastrointestinal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Capecitabine is an oral anticancer drug which can cause some adverse reactions and the great challenge for its use is to ensure the medication adherence. The aim of this study was to analyze adverse reactions and adherence to capecitabine in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed in a tertiary teaching hospital in Brazil. Outpatients undergoing capecitabine treatment for colorectal or gastric cancer were followed for three cycles of treatment. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics data were collected. Adverse reactions were analyzed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.4. Adherence to capecitabine were evaluated using Morisky-Green and MedTake tests. Statistical analysis was conducted using Chi-square, Fisher's exact and McNemer tests.

RESULTS

One hundred and four patients were enrolled in this study, with a mean age was 58.5 ± 10.9 years; 51.0% were men and 51.0% Caucasian. Nausea and diarrhea were the most frequently reported adverse reactions (82.7% and 62.5%, respectively), followed by vomiting (54.8%), fatigue (54.8%), and hand-foot syndrome (53.9%). Nausea and diarrhea were also the most severe adverse reactions. Most patients were adherent to capecitabine in all cycles of treatment using the Morisky-Green test. Adherence increased significantly between cycle 1 and cycle 2 by MedTake test (p < 0.001). Some demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with adverse reactions (e.g., age and nausea, gender and nausea and vomiting) and capecitabine adherence (e.g., marital status and educational level) as well as some adverse reactions were associated with capecitabine adherence (hand-foot syndrome and nausea).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical oncology pharmacists must provide patient information on the correct use of capecitabine, manage adverse reactions, and monitor adherence to treatment. Strategies to prevent non-adherence to capecitabine must be adopted to ensure the success of pharmacotherapy.

Cancer Patients' Perceived Value of a Smartphone App to Enhance the Safety of Home-Based Chemotherapy: Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Oral anticancer therapies can be self-administered by patients outside the hospital setting, which poses challenges of adherence to a drug plan and monitoring of side effects. Modern information technology may be developed and implemented to address these pertinent issues.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore how a smartphone app developed through a stepwise, iterative process can help patients using oral chemotherapy to take their drug, and to report adherence and side effects in a reliable and verifiable manner.

METHODS

Fourteen patients starting capecitabine treatment were included in this study and used the smartphone app in addition to regular follow up of capecitabine treatment. Nine of these patients fulfilled the treatment plan and were interviewed based on a semistructured interview guide and the System Usability Scale (SUS). In addition, two focus groups were completed with 7 oncologists and 7 oncology nurses, respectively. Interview data were analyzed in accordance with the principles of systematic text condensation. Features of the app were also assessed.

RESULTS

The smartphone app provided the patients with a feeling of reassurance regarding correct adherence of their oral chemotherapy treatment. They used the app as a memory tool about their treatment and possible serious side effects, as well as for treatment education. Patients expressed concerns about using the app to report side effects that were not considered to be obviously serious, fearing overreporting. The health personnel expressed an overall positive attitude to integrate this new tool in their everyday work.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients on oral chemotherapy treatment at home felt safe and found the app to be helpful. The app promoted learning about their treatment and made the patients more independent of the cancer clinic, reducing the need for the clinic's limited resources for follow up of patients on oral anticancer medications.

Real-life adherence in capecitabine therapy using two analysis methods and persistence after 6 months of treatment

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.

Patient-doctor relationship and adherence to capecitabine in outpatients of a German comprehensive cancer center

PURPOSE

The prescribing of oral chemotherapy agents has introduced the new challenge of ensuring patients' adherence to therapy. Aspects of a close patient-doctor relationship are reported to be correlated with adherence to oral anticancer drugs, but data on capecitabine are scarce.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-four outpatients with a diagnosis of cancer and prescribed capecitabine were recruited from a German Comprehensive Cancer Center. We used the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9), the Medical Adherence Rating Scale (MARS), the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), and the Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS) to assess patients' perceptions and behavior. Medical data were extracted from the charts.

RESULTS

Non-adherence was reported by 20% of the 64 participants. The perceived quality of the patient-doctor relationship was high in general, but it did not emerge as a predictor of adherence in our survey (odds ratio [OR]=0.915, P=0.162, 95% CI=0.808-1.036). However, beliefs about medicine (OR=1.268, P<0.002; 95% CI=1.090-1.475) as well as satisfaction with information about medicine (OR=1.252, P<0.040, 95% CI=1.010-1.551) were predictors of adherence and the quality of the patient-doctor relationship was correlated with both variables (r=0.373, P=0.002 for SIMS sum score; r=0.263, P=0.036 for BMQ necessity/concern difference). Overall, adherence to capecitabine was high with a conviction that the therapy is necessary. However, concerns were expressed regarding the long-term effect of capecitabine use. Patients have unmet information needs regarding interactions of capecitabine with other medicines and the impairment of their intimate life.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to ensure adherence to capecitabine, our results seem to encourage the default use of modern and perhaps more impersonal means of information brokerage (eg, email, internet). However, the contents of some of patients' informational needs as well as the associations of patients' beliefs and satisfaction about the information received suggest a benefit from a trustful patient-doctor relationship.