Greer Joseph A, Amoyal Nicole, Nisotel Lauren, Fishbein Joel N, MacDonald James, Stagl Jamie, Lennes Inga, Temel Jennifer S, Safren Steven A, Pirl William F
Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Oncologist. 2016 Mar;21(3):354-76. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0405. Epub 2016 Feb 26.
BACKGROUND: Oral antineoplastic therapies not only improve survival but also reduce the burden of care for patients. Yet patients and clinicians face new challenges in managing adherence to these oral therapies. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess rates and correlates of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies and interventions aimed at improving adherence. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search of the Ovid MEDLINE database from January 1, 2003 to June 30, 2015, using relevant terminology for oral antineoplastic agents. We included observational, database, and intervention studies. At least two researchers evaluated each paper to ensure accuracy of results and determine risk of bias. RESULTS: We identified 927 records from the search and screened 214 abstracts. After conducting a full-text review of 167 papers, we included in the final sample 51 papers on rates/correlates of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapy and 12 papers on intervention studies to improve adherence. Rates of adherence varied widely, from 46% to 100%, depending on patient sample, medication type, follow-up period, assessment measure, and calculation of adherence. Of the intervention studies, only 1 of the randomized trials and 2 of the cohort studies showed benefit regarding adherence, with the majority suffering high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Although no reliable estimate of adherence to oral antineoplastic therapies can be gleaned from the literature, a substantial proportion of patients struggle to adhere to these medications as prescribed. The few intervention studies for adherence have notable methodological concerns, thereby limiting the evidence to guide practice in promoting medication adherence among patients with cancer.
背景:口服抗肿瘤疗法不仅能提高生存率,还能减轻患者的护理负担。然而,患者和临床医生在管理这些口服疗法的依从性方面面临新的挑战。我们进行了一项系统的文献综述,以评估口服抗肿瘤疗法的依从率及其相关因素,以及旨在提高依从性的干预措施。 方法:按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目指南,我们使用口服抗肿瘤药物的相关术语,对2003年1月1日至2015年6月30日的Ovid MEDLINE数据库进行了全面的文献检索。我们纳入了观察性研究、数据库研究和干预性研究。至少两名研究人员对每篇论文进行评估,以确保结果的准确性并确定偏倚风险。 结果:我们从检索中识别出927条记录,并筛选了214篇摘要。在对167篇论文进行全文审查后,我们最终纳入了51篇关于口服抗肿瘤疗法依从率/相关因素的论文和12篇关于提高依从性的干预性研究论文。依从率差异很大,从46%到100%不等,这取决于患者样本、药物类型、随访期、评估方法以及依从性的计算方式。在干预性研究中,只有1项随机试验和2项队列研究显示在依从性方面有获益,大多数研究存在高偏倚风险。 结论:尽管从文献中无法获得口服抗肿瘤疗法依从性的可靠估计,但相当一部分患者难以按规定坚持服用这些药物。少数关于依从性的干预性研究存在显著的方法学问题,从而限制了指导癌症患者提高药物依从性实践的证据。
Oncologist. 2016-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-6-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-10-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-9-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-6-11
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-1-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-1-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-4-13
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025-3-21
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025-3-6
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2025-3
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015-6
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015-5-12
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014-10-27
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2014-10
J Adv Pract Oncol. 2014-5
BMC Cancer. 2014-6-3