ArticleJournal of food and drug analysis2024
Effectiveness of pharmacist-managed oncology ambulatory care for patients with non-small cell lung cancer in Taiwan.
Article in Journal of food and drug analysis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is commonly treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, adverse events from such treatment can lead to treatment discontinuation and additional medical expenditures. Ambulatory care from oncology pharmacists in patient education and symptom management can benefit patients with NSCLC. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of an oncology pharmacy service at a medical center in Taiwan. We retrospectively enrolled 137 patients with NSCLC who initiated treatment with afatinib, gefitinib, or erlotinib between January 2017 and December 2021; 40 of them utilized the oncology pharmacy service (intervention group), and the remaining 97 did not (nonintervention group). To determine the effectiveness of the oncology pharmacy service, we analyzed the following outcomes: adverse event rates, number of hospital visits (unexpected outpatient department visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalization), and medical expenditure. The intervention group had significantly more skin-related adverse events (acneiform rash: 75% vs. 49%; mucositis: 40% vs. 21%; dermatitis: 30% vs. 9%; and paronychia: 85% vs. 28%) but significantly fewer monthly emergency department visits (0.04 vs. 0.17) and unexpected outpatient department visits (0.15 vs. 0.34). The intervention group also had significantly lower expenditure for emergency department visits (NT$166.4 vs. NT$734.8) and nonsignificantly lower expenditure for outpatient department visits. Our findings indicate the value of pharmacist-managed ambulatory oncology care. Although this service did not reduce the incidence rates of adverse events, it reduced the number of unplanned outpatient and emergency department visits and reduced the emergency department expenditure of patients with NSCLC receiving TKIs.
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.