Trial reportAmerican journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists2026
The impact of early oral anticancer medication monitoring through electronic patient assessments.
Trial report in American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 2026. 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
purposeThis study evaluated the effectiveness of electronic early oral anticancer medication monitoring questionnaires in identifying adverse effects (AEs) requiring pharmacist intervention among patients initiated on oral anticancer therapy.
methodsA prospective randomized study was conducted within an integrated health system specialty pharmacy. Patients were excluded if they never started treatment, discontinued oral anticancer therapy within 14 days, were not new to therapy, or had a hematologic condition. Stratified randomization by age (≥60 years versus <60 years) and sex was performed to assign patients to intervention or usual care. Intervention patients received an electronic questionnaire 7 to 14 days after initial counseling. Outcomes included time to first AE-related pharmacist intervention and intervention frequency within 45 days and dose modifications, healthcare utilization, and treatment modifications within 90 days. Per-protocol analysis compared outcomes among questionnaire responders and patients assigned to usual care. Cox proportional hazard (time to intervention) and ordinal logistic regression (intervention number) models adjusted for age, sex, race, diagnosis, Charlson comorbidity index score, and medication type.
resultsOf the 446 patients randomized, 388 were included in the analysis (183 in the intervention cohort and 205 in the usual care cohort). The questionnaire response rate was 47%. In the intent-to-treat analysis, no significant differences were observed in time to intervention (hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; P = 0.360) or intervention frequency (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; P = 0.409). Per-protocol analysis (n = 291) showed responders had significantly faster time to intervention (HR, 2.4; P < 0.001), more interventions (OR, 2.7; P < 0.001) and lower healthcare utilization (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9; P = 0.023).
conclusionElectronic monitoring resulted in earlier and more frequent interventions and less healthcare utilization among questionnaire responders.
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.