Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28457192›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners2018

Assessment of adherence and relative dose intensity with oral chemotherapy in oncology clinical trials at an academic medical center.

Jeff A Engle, Anne M Traynor, Toby C Campbell, Kari B Wisinski, Noelle LoConte, Glenn Liu, George Wilding, Jill M Kolesar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Impact of the ONCORAL multidisciplinary city-hospital follow-up on older patients with cancer treated with oral anticancer drugs.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jeff A Engle1 School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Anne M Traynor2 Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Toby C Campbell2 Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Kari B Wisinski2 Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Noelle LoConte2 Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Glenn Liu2 Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
George Wilding4 MD Anderson Cancer Center, The University of Texas MD, Houston, TX, USA.
Jill M Kolesar5 College of Pharmacy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Nihal Ahmad · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center Support Grant ECIA SupplementP30CA177558 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI Jennifer F Rogers · 2013 to 2026
$38.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS P30 CA177558
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims Oral chemotherapy is increasingly utilized leaving the patient responsible for self-administering an often complex regimen where adverse effects are common. Non-adherence and reduced relative dose intensity are both associated with poorer outcomes in the community setting but are rarely reported in clinical trials. The purpose of this study is to quantify adherence and relative dose intensity in oncology clinical trials and to determine patient and study related factors that influence adherence and relative dose intensity. Methods Patients were identified from non-industry-funded clinical trials conducted between 1 January 2009 and 31 March 2013 at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center. Data were extracted from primary research records. Descriptive statistics and linear regression modeling was performed using SAS 9.4. Results A total of 17 clinical trials and 266 subjects were included. Mean adherence was greater than 97% for the first eight cycles. Mean relative dose intensity was less than 90% for the first cycle and declined over time. Male gender, a performance status of 1 or 2, metastatic disease, and traveling more than 90 miles to reach the cancer center were associated with higher relative dose intensity. Conclusions Patients with cancer enrolled in clinical trials are highly adherent but unlikely to achieve protocol specified relative dose intensity. Given that determining the phase II dose is the primary endpoint of phase I trials, incorporating relative dose intensity into this determination should be considered.

Indexed as

Medication AdherenceAcademic Medical CentersAdministration, OralAgedAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsadherenceOral chemotherapyrelative dose intensity

Identifiers

PMID28457192
PMCPMC5932265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.