Marie Barillet1, Virginie Prevost2,3,4, Florence Joly2,3,4, Bénédicte Clarisse4. 1. Centre Hospitalier J Monod, rue Eugène Garnier BP 219, 61104, Flers cedex. 2. Université de Caen Basse-Normandie EA 3936, Esplanade de la Paix, BP 5186, 14032, Caen Cedex 05. 3. INSERM U1086, Cancers et Préventions, Avenue de la Côte de Nacre, F-14000, Caen. 4. Centre Régional de Lutte Contre le Cancer François Baclesse, 3 Avenue du Général Harris, 14000, Caen, France.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Vittorio Gebbia; Giuseppe Bellavia; Francesco Ferraù; Maria Rosaria Valerio Journal: Expert Opin Drug Saf Date: 2011-12-13 Impact factor: 4.250
Authors: Ann H Partridge; Laura Archer; Alice B Kornblith; Julie Gralow; Debjani Grenier; Edith Perez; Antonio C Wolff; Xiaofei Wang; Helen Kastrissios; Donald Berry; Clifford Hudis; Eric Winer; Hyman Muss Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ralph Winterhalder; Pierre Hoesli; Geoffrey Delmore; Stefanie Pederiva; Albéric Bressoud; Frank Hermann; Roger von Moos Journal: Oncology Date: 2011-05-23 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: E Thivat; I Van Praagh; A Belliere; M A Mouret-Reynier; F Kwiatkowski; X Durando; H Mahammedi; A F Dillies; P Chollet; R Chevrier Journal: Oncology Date: 2012-10-31 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Mélanie Dos Santos; M Lange; R Gervais; B Clarisse; A Capel; M Barillet; J M Grellard; N Heutte; I Licaj; F Joly Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-01-28 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Marco Di Nitto; Fabio Sollazzo; Valentina Biagioli; Gianluca Pucciarelli; Francesco Torino; Rosaria Alvaro; Ercole Vellone Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Deborah R Kaye; Lauren E Wilson; Melissa A Greiner; Lisa P Spees; Jessica E Pritchard; Tian Zhang; Craig E Pollack; Daniel George; Charles D Scales; Chris D Baggett; Cary P Gross; Michael S Leapman; Stephanie B Wheeler; Michaela A Dinan Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 3.929