Suppr超能文献

商业保险的转移性结肠癌患者口服和静脉注射抗癌治疗依从率的相关因素

Factors Associated with Adherence Rates for Oral and Intravenous Anticancer Therapy in Commercially Insured Patients with Metastatic Colon Cancer.

作者信息

Seal Brian S, Anderson Sibyl, Shermock Kenneth M

机构信息

1 Executive Director, Global Health Outcomes, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Boston, Massachussetts.

2 Director, U.S. Medical Science/Oncology, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Whippany, New Jersey.

出版信息

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016 Mar;22(3):227-35. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2016.22.3.227.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, oncology therapies have trended toward orally administered regimens, and there has been growing attention on evaluation of factors that affect adherence. There has not been a rigorous investigation of factors associated with adherence to intravenous (i.v.) and oral anticancer drugs in the setting of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

OBJECTIVES

To (a) assess potential patient-specific factors related to adherence to mCRC chemotherapy regimens and (b) compare adherence with IV versus oral dosage forms.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed using the Optum Oncology Management claims database. Patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with mCRC between July 1, 2004, and December 31, 2010, who were insured by a commercial health plan were included in the study. Adherence to i.v. and oral chemotherapy regimens was assessed using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as the standard for expected cycle/regimen duration. The most commonly prescribed chemotherapy regimens were assessed. Adherence was evaluated using the medication possession ratio (MPR), calculated as the number of days a patient was covered by their chemotherapy regimen, according to NCCN guidelines, divided by the number of days elapsed from the first to the last infusion of that regimen. For most analyses, the MPR was considered a continuous variable that could take on values between 0 and 1. In other analyses, a dichotomous categorical variable designated if the MPR was at least 0.8 versus less than 0.8. The Wilcoxon rank sum, Kruskal-Wallis, and Student's t-test were used to detect differences in continuous measures between patients receiving oral capecitabine therapy versus i.v. chemotherapy. The chi square test (X(2) test) or Fisher's exact test was used to assess differences in the dichotomous MPR variable. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used for regimen-level analyses to account for correlated responses within individuals.

RESULTS

A total of 6,780 patients were included in the analysis, virtually all (98%) with commercial insurance coverage and the remaining (2%) with Medicare Advantage. Patients with mCRC received 17,095 regimens of chemotherapy, including 2,252 regimens of oral capecitabine. Of the 17,095 regimens, 6,780 (40%) were first-line regimens (i.e., the first time mCRC was treated for a given patient). The most common chemotherapy regimen, regardless of line of therapy, was FOLFOX (2,991 regimens, 17.5% of all regimens used). FOLFOX-based therapies with or without bevacizumab were the most common regimens for first- and second-line chemotherapy, while oral capecitabine treatment was the most commonly prescribed regimen for patients in third- or fourth-line therapy. Overall, medication adherence across all regimens was relatively high, with a mean MPR of 0.87 (SD = 0.17). Evaluation of the distribution of i.v. and oral capecitabine regimens revealed that 28% of all regimens were associated with an MPR of less than 0.8. The average MPR was clinically similar, but statistically higher for i.v. chemotherapy regimens (0.881) compared with oral capecitabine regimens (0.799; P < 0.0001). In the multivariable GEE model, lung or liver metastases were associated with a higher MPR, while lower Charlson Comorbidity Index and oral anticancer therapy were associated with lower MPR. Furthermore, as line of therapy increased, the difference in MPR between patients receiving oral capecitabine and i.v. chemotherapy increased.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis determined that adherence with i.v. chemotherapy regimens was clinically similar, but statistically higher, compared to oral capecitabine therapy. The difference in adherence rates between the 2 routes of administration increased as the line of anticancer regimen increased. These results suggest that there should be an increased focus on improving adherence rates in patients receiving oral capecitabine.

摘要

背景

在过去十年中,肿瘤治疗方法已趋向于口服给药方案,并且对影响依从性的因素的评估越来越受到关注。在转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者中,尚未对与静脉注射(i.v.)和口服抗癌药物依从性相关的因素进行严格调查。

目的

(a)评估与mCRC化疗方案依从性相关的潜在患者特异性因素;(b)比较静脉注射剂型与口服剂型的依从性。

方法

使用Optum肿瘤管理索赔数据库进行回顾性分析。研究纳入了2004年7月1日至2010年12月31日期间被商业健康保险覆盖、年龄在18岁及以上、被诊断为mCRC的患者。以美国国立综合癌症网络(NCCN)指南作为预期周期/方案持续时间的标准,评估静脉注射和口服化疗方案的依从性。评估了最常用的化疗方案。使用药物占有率(MPR)评估依从性,计算方法为根据NCCN指南,患者接受化疗方案覆盖的天数除以该方案首次输注至最后一次输注的天数。在大多数分析中,MPR被视为一个连续变量,取值范围为0至1。在其他分析中,一个二分分类变量用于指定MPR是否至少为0.8或小于0.8。使用Wilcoxon秩和检验、Kruskal-Wallis检验和Student t检验来检测接受口服卡培他滨治疗的患者与接受静脉化疗的患者在连续测量指标上的差异。使用卡方检验(X(2)检验)或Fisher精确检验来评估二分MPR变量的差异。使用广义估计方程(GEE)模型进行方案水平分析,以考虑个体内的相关反应。

结果

共有6780名患者纳入分析,几乎所有患者(98%)有商业保险覆盖,其余患者(2%)有医疗保险优势计划覆盖。mCRC患者接受了17095个化疗方案,其中包括2252个口服卡培他滨方案。在这17095个方案中,6780个(40%)是一线方案(即给定患者首次治疗mCRC)。无论治疗线数如何,最常见的化疗方案是FOLFOX(2991个方案,占所有使用方案的17.5%)。含或不含贝伐单抗的基于FOLFOX的治疗是一线和二线化疗最常见的方案,而口服卡培他滨治疗是三线或四线治疗患者最常用的方案。总体而言,所有方案的药物依从性相对较高,平均MPR为0.87(标准差 = 0.17)。对静脉注射和口服卡培他滨方案的分布评估显示,所有方案中有28%的MPR小于0.8。静脉化疗方案的平均MPR在临床上相似,但与口服卡培他滨方案相比在统计学上更高(0.881)(口服卡培他滨方案为0.799;P < 0.0001)。在多变量GEE模型中,肺或肝转移与较高的MPR相关,而较低的Charlson合并症指数和口服抗癌治疗与较低的MPR相关。此外,随着治疗线数增加,接受口服卡培他滨和静脉化疗的患者之间MPR的差异增大。

结论

该分析确定,与口服卡培他滨治疗相比,静脉化疗方案的依从性在临床上相似,但在统计学上更高。两种给药途径之间的依从率差异随着抗癌方案线数的增加而增大。这些结果表明,应更加关注提高接受口服卡培他滨治疗患者的依从率。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

9
Side Effects, Self-Management Activities, and Adherence to Oral Anticancer Agents.副作用、自我管理活动及口服抗癌药的依从性
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019 Dec 31;13:2243-2252. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S224496. eCollection 2019.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验