Adherence to Oral Anticancer Medications After Implementation of an Ambulatory Adherence Program at a Large Urban Academic Hospital.

PURPOSE: Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) offer convenient administration, reducing the burden of cancer treatment, but create challenges for patients and practitioners. Using data from the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative analysis, a baseline adherence rate of 30% was identified at a large public, academic hospital. To improve OAM adherence, a quality improvement initiative was conducted. METHODS: The aim was to increase OAM patient adherence by 30 percentage points. Through cause-and-effect analysis, adherence barriers were identified, leading to the development of 2 strategies: low-cost adherence tools and a pharmacist-led adherence program. Prescription refill data were collected before and after the intervention, using prescription-fill data and specialty pharmacy records. Adherence was defined as the patient having the drug available at least 80% to less than 120% of the days evaluated for 4 treatment cycles. Other indicators collected included the number of interventions, OAM-related toxicity, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations. RESULTS: OAM adherence increased from 37% to 85% (n = 20 of 54 v 44 of 52 patients; P < .0001) in 1 year. During the study, 655 interventions were documented by the pharmacist (adherence related, n = 331; treatment related, n = 324). The number of oncology-related emergency room referrals leading to hospitalization increased from 52% (n = 13 of 25) to 62% (n = 23 of 37) during the study period. CONCLUSION: A pharmacist-led adherence program, combined with low-cost adherence tools, exceeded the goal for the adherence initiative, suggesting that a multidisciplinary collaborative approach to OAM adherence can have a significant impact on outcomes.

Rucaparib and Niraparib in Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Rucaparib and niraparib are two of the newest U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved PARP inhibitors, joining olaparib with indications in ovarian cancer. Both drugs have led to meaningful responses when used as monotherapy in previously treated ovarian cancers, with niraparib demonstrating activity in both BRCA-mutated and BRCA wild-type tumors. Both rucaparib and niraparib have remarkably increased progression-free survival as maintenance therapy for patients with relapsed, platinum-sensitive epithelial ovarian cancer who responded to their most recent platinum-based regimen. In this setting, these drugs appear to be similar in efficacy but have distinct pharmacokinetic and adverse effect profiles. This article will guide the advanced practitioner through the efficacy, safety, and pharmacologic profiles of rucaparib and niraparib, while benchmarking them against olaparib for the treatment of ovarian cancer.

Assessment of Provider Adherence to Recommended Monitoring Parameters for Oral Anticancer Medications.

INTRODUCTION: Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) offer convenient administration but create new challenges with unique toxicity profiles, specific monitoring parameters and non-continuous dosing schedules. We evaluated provider compliance with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug labeling-specified monitoring parameters for commonly dispensed OAMs at a public academic health system. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients receiving OAMs was conducted at Grady Health System between July 2015 and June 2016. Patients included in the evaluation were dispensed one of the ten most common OAMs used in our cancer center. Laboratory data and provider documentation were collected and compared to FDA drug labeling-specified monitoring parameters, and the primary outcome was the percentage of fully-compliant cycles. Secondary outcomes included patient adherence assessed by provider documentation and fill history. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the data. RESULTS: The initial report comprised 422 patients, of which 77 patients with a total of 349 treatment cycles were included for final analysis. One hundred twenty-six (36.1%) of the treatment cycles were fully compliant with the FDA drug labeling-specified monitoring parameters. Sixty-four of the 199 (32.2%) applicable clinic notes documented patient adherence, and 15 (39.5%) of 38 patients were adherent based on fill history. CONCLUSION: This study revealed low compliance with FDA-recommended monitoring parameters for commonly dispensed OAMs at our institution. In addition, this study confirmed national concerns about adherence to oral regimens. It also suggests that provider compliance with monitoring parameters is an area that needs to be addressed in order to improve the ambulatory OAM process.