Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Challenges to the design and testing supportive interventions for cancer patients treated with oral oncolytic agents

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conducting research into supportive care for patients as they initiate treatment with oral oncolytic agents poses numerous new challenges. Some of these medications have very complex dosing schedules and produce symptoms that patients need to manage at home with less reliance on oncology clinicians. We describe lessons learned from a multi-site trial designed to improve adherence to these medications and self-management of symptoms among patients newly prescribed oral oncolytic agents. Identifying these challenges can assist researchers to improve the integrity of their future supportive care trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Middendorff G, Elsey R, Lounsbery B, Chadwell R (2017) Impact of a specialty pharmacy case management service on adherence in patients receiving oral antineoplastic agents. J Oncol Pharm Pract 24:371–378. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155217708022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Siddiqi AE, Sikorskii A, Given CW, Given B (2008) Early participant attrition from clinical trials: role of trial design and logistics. Clin Trials 5(4):328–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774508094406

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Atkinson TM, Rodríguez VM, Gordon M, Avildsen I, Emanu J, Jewell S, Anselmi K, Ginex P (2016) The association between patient-reported and objective oral anticancer medication adherence measures: a systematic review. Oncol Nurs Forum 43(5):576–582. https://doi.org/10.1188/16.ONF.576-582

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bergsbaken JJ, Eickhoff JC, Buss BA, Mably MS, Kolesar JM (2016) Assessment of adherence with oral anticancer agents in oncology clinical trials: a systematic review. J Oncol Pharm Pract 22(1):105–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155214567163

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gebbia V, Bellavia M, Banna GL, Russo P, Ferraù F, Tralongo P, Borsellino N (2013) Treatment monitoring program for implementation of adherence to second-line erlotinibe for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer 14(4):390–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2012.11.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Timmers L, Boons CC, Kropff F et al (2014) Adherence and patients’ experiences with the use of oral anticancer agents. Acta Oncol 53(2):259–267. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2013.844353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldstein DA, Gordon N, Davidescu M et al (2017) A phamacoeconomic analysis of personalized dosing vs fixed dosing of pembrolizumab in firstline PD-L1-positive non-small cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 109(11):djx063. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Huang WC, Chen CY, Lin SJ, Chang CS (2016) Medication adherence to oral anticancer drugs: systematic review. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 16(4):423–432. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737140.2016.1159515

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bassan F, Peter F, Houbre B, Brennstuhl MJ, Costantini M, Speyer E, Tarquinio C (2014) Adherence to oral antineoplastic agents by cancer patients: definition and literature review. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 23(1):22–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Okumura LM (2018) How to report adherence to treatment as clinically relevant data-making a case of CML and TKI. Support Care Cancer 26(2):323–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3809-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fishbein JN, Nisotel LE, MacDonald JJ et al (2017) Mobile application to promote adherence to oral chemotherapy and symptom management: a protocol for design and development. JMIR Res Protoc 6(4):e62. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.6198

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Pereira-Salgado A, Westwood JA, Russell L, Ugalde A, Ortlepp B, Seymour JF, Butow P, Cavedon L, Ong K, Aranda S, Breen S, Kirsa S, Dunlevie A, Schofield P (2017) Mobile health intervention to increase oral cancer therapy adherence in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (the REMIND system): clinical feasibility and acceptability assessment. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 5(12):e184. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8349

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Greer JA, Amoyal N, Nisotel L, Fishbein JN, MacDonald J, Stagl J, Lennes I, Temel JS, Safren SA, Pirl WF (2016) A systematic review of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies. Oncologist 21(3):54–76. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0405

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zerillo JA, Goldenberg BA, Kotecha RR, Tewari AK, Jacobson JO, Krzyzanowska MK (2018) Interventions to improve oral chemotherapy safety and quality: a systematic review. JAMA Oncol 1 4(1):105–117. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McCall C, Maynes B, Zou CC, Zhang NJ (2010) RMAIS: RFID-based medication adherence intelligence system 2010:3768–3771. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2010.5627529

  16. Spahni S, Lovis C, Ackermann M, Mach N, Bonnabry P, Geissbuhler A (2006) Guarantying the quality of chemotherapy: from the order to the administration. Stud Health Technol Inform 124:241–246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Safdari R, Maserat E, Maserat E (2012) RFID technology in health environment opportunities and challenges for modern cancer care. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 13(12):6533–6537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bach PB, Saltz LB (2017) Raising the dose and raising the cost the case of pembrolizumab in lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 109(11):djx125. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cherny NI, Sullivan R, Dafni U, Kerst JM, Sobrero A, Zielinski C, de Vries EGE, Piccart MJ (2015) A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann Oncol 26:1547–1573. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schnipper LE, Davidson NE, Wollins DS, Blayney DW, Dicker AP, Ganz PA, Hoverman JR, Langdon R, Lyman GH, Meropol NJ, Mulvey T, Newcomer L, Peppercorn J, Polite B, Raghavan D, Rossi G, Saltz L, Schrag D, Smith TJ, Yu PP, Hudis CA, Vose JM, Schilsky RL (2016) Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework: revisions and reflections in response to comments received. J Clin Oncol 34(24):2925–2934. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.68.2518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by NIH/National Cancer Institute, Grant number 1R01CA162401-01A1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Nursing, Michigan State University, C346 Bott Building, 1355 Bogue Street, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Charles W. Given, Barbara A. Given, Alla Sikorskii & Eric Vachon

  2. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    John C. Krauss

Authors
  1. Charles W. Given
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara A. Given
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alla Sikorskii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John C. Krauss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eric Vachon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles W. Given.

Ethics declarations

This trial was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the investigators’ university and each cancer center. Patients (N = 272) were recruited from six NCI designated comprehensive cancer centers. Informed consent was discussed with each prospective patient. All trial participants signed an informed consent form.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Given, C.W., Given, B.A., Sikorskii, A. et al. Challenges to the design and testing supportive interventions for cancer patients treated with oral oncolytic agents. Support Care Cancer 26, 3975–3977 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4414-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4414-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation