Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Faculty of Health - School of Medicine, Witten/Herdecke University, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, Building 33, D-51109 Cologne, Germany.
Cancer Treat Rev. 2014 Feb;40(1):102-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2013.07.004. Epub 2013 Aug 1.
The use of oral anticancer agents has increased in the last decades. Adherence is a crucial factor for the success of oral anticancer agent therapy. However, many patients are non-adherent.
The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of adherence interventions in patients taking oral anticancer agents.
A systematic literature search was performed in Medline and Embase. Titles and abstracts and in case of potential relevance, full-texts were assessed for eligibility according to the predefined inclusion criteria. The study quality was evaluated. Both process steps were carried out independently by two reviewers. Relevant data on study design, patients, interventions and results were extracted in standardized tables by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer.
Six controlled studies were included. Only one study was randomized. The study quality was moderate to low. One study showed statistically significant results in favor of the adherence intervention, two studies showed a tendency in favor of the intervention, one study showed an inconsistent result depending on the adherence definition and one study showed almost identical adherence rates in both groups. One study showed a tendency in favor of the control group.
Although most of the interventions are not very effective, it appears that certain adherence enhancing interventions could have a promising effect. One crucial point is the consideration of the baseline adherence when choosing patients to avoid ceiling effects. The evidence is limited due to lack of sufficient studies and partly inconsistent results. Further high quality studies are needed.
在过去几十年中,口服抗癌药物的应用有所增加。依从性是口服抗癌药物治疗成功的关键因素。然而,许多患者不依从。
评估口服抗癌药物治疗患者依从性干预的效果。
在 Medline 和 Embase 中进行了系统的文献检索。根据预设的纳入标准,评估标题和摘要以及潜在相关的全文的适宜性。评估研究质量。两名评审员独立进行了这两个过程步骤。一名评审员将相关数据提取到标准化表格中,并由第二名评审员进行检查,这些数据包括研究设计、患者、干预措施和结果。
纳入了 6 项对照研究。只有一项研究是随机的。研究质量为中等至低等。一项研究显示干预措施具有统计学上显著的效果,两项研究显示干预有倾向,一项研究显示结果因依从性定义而异,一项研究显示两组的依从率几乎相同,一项研究显示对照组有倾向。
尽管大多数干预措施效果不是很显著,但某些增强依从性的干预措施似乎可能有一定效果。选择患者时考虑基线依从性是一个关键问题,以避免天花板效应。由于缺乏足够的研究和部分结果不一致,证据有限。需要进一步进行高质量的研究。