ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2016
Factors Associated with Adherence Rates for Oral and Intravenous Anticancer Therapy in Commercially Insured Patients with Metastatic Colon Cancer.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- TANGENT study design: a phase III, randomized study of emactuzumab for the treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumors.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Phase II study of S-1 on alternate days plus bevacizumab in patients aged ≥ 75 years with metastatic colorectal cancer (J-SAVER).International journal of clinical oncology · 2019Trial
- An Automated Intervention Did Not Improve Adherence to Oral Oncolytic Agents While Managing Symptoms: Results From a Two-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2018Trial
- Final results of the CARO study: real-world adherence, effectiveness and patient-reported quality of life with carfilzomib-based regimens in German patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Impact of caregiver cancer stigma on treatment adherence in newly diagnosed cancer patients: a prospective study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Epidemiology and Treatment Patterns of Stage III Resectable Melanoma Treated with Adjuvant Therapy: A Real-World Study Using the SNDS Database in France.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Association between comorbid depression, antidepressant adherence, and disease-modifying therapy adherence among Texas Medicaid patients with sickle cell disease.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Enhancing medication adherence with blister-packed oral oncolytics: A case example in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2026Article
- Use of Software as a Medical Device to Improve Therapeutic Adherence in Patients With Hematological Malignancies: Prospective Interventional MargheRITA Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- Intranasal administration of temozolomide conjugated nanoparticles with transcranial magnetic stimulation improves the survival in glioblastoma xenograft models.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Article
- Unveiling the impact of adherence: imatinib plasma levels and survival in postoperative gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Adherence of PARP inhibitor for frontline maintenance therapy in primary epithelial ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2024Article
- Association between low-income subsidies and inequities in orally administered antimyeloma therapy use.The American journal of managed care · 2023Article
- Adjuvant chemotherapy non-adherence, patient-centered communication, and patient-level factors in elderly breast and colon cancer patients.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Adherence to Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Resected Melanoma: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior.Advances in therapy · 2022Article
- Treatment utilization patterns of newly initiated oral anticancer agents in a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2021Article
- Patients' Perceived Continuity of Care and Adherence to Oral Anticancer Therapy: a Prospective Cohort Mediation Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Adherence to oral anticancer chemotherapies and estimation of the economic burden associated with unused medicines.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2020Article
- Retrospective Claims Analysis Indirectly Comparing Medication Adherence and Persistence Between Intravenous Biologics and Oral Small-Molecule Therapies in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.Advances in therapy · 2019Article
- Side Effects, Self-Management Activities, and Adherence to Oral Anticancer Agents.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver the past decade, oncology therapies have trended toward orally administered regimens, and there has been growing attention on evaluation of factors that affect adherence. There has not been a rigorous investigation of factors associated with adherence to intravenous (i.v.) and oral anticancer drugs in the setting of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
objectivesTo (a) assess potential patient-specific factors related to adherence to mCRC chemotherapy regimens and (b) compare adherence with IV versus oral dosage forms.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed using the Optum Oncology Management claims database. Patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with mCRC between July 1, 2004, and December 31, 2010, who were insured by a commercial health plan were included in the study. Adherence to i.v. and oral chemotherapy regimens was assessed using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as the standard for expected cycle/regimen duration. The most commonly prescribed chemotherapy regimens were assessed. Adherence was evaluated using the medication possession ratio (MPR), calculated as the number of days a patient was covered by their chemotherapy regimen, according to NCCN guidelines, divided by the number of days elapsed from the first to the last infusion of that regimen. For most analyses, the MPR was considered a continuous variable that could take on values between 0 and 1. In other analyses, a dichotomous categorical variable designated if the MPR was at least 0.8 versus less than 0.8. The Wilcoxon rank sum, Kruskal-Wallis, and Student's t-test were used to detect differences in continuous measures between patients receiving oral capecitabine therapy versus i.v. chemotherapy. The chi square test (X(2) test) or Fisher's exact test was used to assess differences in the dichotomous MPR variable. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used for regimen-level analyses to account for correlated responses within individuals.
resultsA total of 6,780 patients were included in the analysis, virtually all (98%) with commercial insurance coverage and the remaining (2%) with Medicare Advantage. Patients with mCRC received 17,095 regimens of chemotherapy, including 2,252 regimens of oral capecitabine. Of the 17,095 regimens, 6,780 (40%) were first-line regimens (i.e., the first time mCRC was treated for a given patient). The most common chemotherapy regimen, regardless of line of therapy, was FOLFOX (2,991 regimens, 17.5% of all regimens used). FOLFOX-based therapies with or without bevacizumab were the most common regimens for first- and second-line chemotherapy, while oral capecitabine treatment was the most commonly prescribed regimen for patients in third- or fourth-line therapy. Overall, medication adherence across all regimens was relatively high, with a mean MPR of 0.87 (SD = 0.17). Evaluation of the distribution of i.v. and oral capecitabine regimens revealed that 28% of all regimens were associated with an MPR of less than 0.8. The average MPR was clinically similar, but statistically higher for i.v. chemotherapy regimens (0.881) compared with oral capecitabine regimens (0.799; P < 0.0001). In the multivariable GEE model, lung or liver metastases were associated with a higher MPR, while lower Charlson Comorbidity Index and oral anticancer therapy were associated with lower MPR. Furthermore, as line of therapy increased, the difference in MPR between patients receiving oral capecitabine and i.v. chemotherapy increased.
conclusionsThis analysis determined that adherence with i.v. chemotherapy regimens was clinically similar, but statistically higher, compared to oral capecitabine therapy. The difference in adherence rates between the 2 routes of administration increased as the line of anticancer regimen increased. These results suggest that there should be an increased focus on improving adherence rates in patients receiving oral capecitabine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.