Caitlin C Murphy1, Simon J Craddock Lee2, David E Gerber3, John V Cox4, Hannah M Fullington5, Robin T Higashi5. 1. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, USA. Electronic address: caitlin.murphy@utsouthwestern.edu. 2. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 3. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Parkland Health & Hospital System, Dallas, TX, USA. 5. Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The introduction of oral cancer therapies presents new challenges to delivery of quality cancer care. Little is known about how patients and providers address and overcome these challenges. We conducted a qualitative study exploring the range of patient and provider perspectives on oral cancer therapies. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and providers at a tertiary referral center and county safety-net hospital in Dallas, TX. Interviews probed perspectives on differences between parenteral chemotherapy and oral therapies, adherence, communication, and cost/insurance. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using a deductively-driven coding scheme corresponding to the interview guide. RESULTS: We conducted 22 patient (13 at tertiary referral center, 9 at safety-net hospital) and 10 provider (7 oncologists, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist) interviews. Key themes from interviews included: (1) differences in parenteral chemotherapy vs. oral therapy; (2) adherence and dosing; and (3) experiences related to cost and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all providers described challenges engaging with and educating patients about oral cancer therapies. Despite our initial hypothesis, safety-net patients encountered few barriers accessing oral therapies compared to patients receiving care in the tertiary referral center. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our findings will guide future interventions to monitor and support cancer patients receiving oral therapies.
OBJECTIVE: The introduction of oral cancer therapies presents new challenges to delivery of quality cancer care. Little is known about how patients and providers address and overcome these challenges. We conducted a qualitative study exploring the range of patient and provider perspectives on oral cancer therapies. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and providers at a tertiary referral center and county safety-net hospital in Dallas, TX. Interviews probed perspectives on differences between parenteral chemotherapy and oral therapies, adherence, communication, and cost/insurance. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using a deductively-driven coding scheme corresponding to the interview guide. RESULTS: We conducted 22 patient (13 at tertiary referral center, 9 at safety-net hospital) and 10 provider (7 oncologists, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist) interviews. Key themes from interviews included: (1) differences in parenteral chemotherapy vs. oral therapy; (2) adherence and dosing; and (3) experiences related to cost and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all providers described challenges engaging with and educating patients about oral cancer therapies. Despite our initial hypothesis, safety-net patients encountered few barriers accessing oral therapies compared to patients receiving care in the tertiary referral center. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our findings will guide future interventions to monitor and support cancerpatients receiving oral therapies.
Authors: Kelvin K Pho; Rong Lu; Samantha Gates; Jennifer Cai; Donglu Xie; Yang Xie; Simon J Craddock Lee; David E Gerber Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2019-02
Authors: Albert J Farias; Ryan N Hansen; Steven B Zeliadt; India J Ornelas; Christopher I Li; Beti Thompson Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Alfred I Neugut; Milayna Subar; Elizabeth Ty Wilde; Scott Stratton; Corey H Brouse; Grace Clarke Hillyer; Victor R Grann; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-05-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alyce S Adams; Connie Mah Trinacty; Fang Zhang; Ken Kleinman; Richard W Grant; James B Meigs; Stephen B Soumerai; Dennis Ross-Degnan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-01-30 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Ethan Basch; William A Wood; Deborah Schrag; Camelia S Sima; Mary Shaw; Lauren J Rogak; Mark G Kris; Marwan Shouery; Antonia Bennett; Thomas Atkinson; M Catherine Pietanza Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Simon J Craddock Lee; Katelyn K Jetelina; Emily Marks; Eric Shaw; Kevin Oeffinger; Deborah Cohen; Noel O Santini; John V Cox; Bijal A Balasubramanian Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Caitlin C Murphy; Hannah M Fullington; David E Gerber; Isaac Alex Bowman; Maneka Puligandla; Janice P Dutcher; Robert S DiPaola; Naomi B Haas Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 4.452