Potential Obstacles in the Acquisition of Oral Anticancer Medications

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. e29-e36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L. Niccolai ◽  
Danielle L. Roman ◽  
Justin M. Julius ◽  
Rachelle W. Nadour

Purpose: To determine the amount of time elapsed between prescriber order and patient receiving oral anticancer medication. Patients and Methods: Adult patients with a diagnosis of cancer were prospectively identified in three outpatient oncology clinics when oral anticancer agents were prescribed during a 4-month observation period. For each patient, time to obtain medication was analyzed by the following time points: date of prescription, date of submission to insurance, date prior authorization was obtained, date financial assistance was received, date prescription was processed by pharmacy, and date patient received medication. Out-of-pocket cost and time spent by clinic staff to facilitate the medication acquisition process were recorded. Results: Thirty-four patients were prescribed oral anticancer medication during the data collection period. For the 27 patients who were eligible for the primary end point, medication acquisition required a median of 10 days (range, 3 to 28 days). Overall, the rate-limiting step for medication acquisition was processing by the pharmacy, with a median of 6 days (range, 1 to 27 days). Most patients’ prescription insurance plan covered a portion of medication cost, and the majority of patients considered their out-of-pocket expense to be affordable. Clinic staff spent a median of 2 hours per prescription to facilitate medication acquisition. Conclusion: Patients may encounter process barriers in acquiring oral therapy, particularly because of pharmacy processing time, as well as high copays. Time to treatment initiation may have implications for patients’ clinical outcomes. Adequate staff with dedicated time to facilitate this process should be used in the ambulatory oncology practice setting.

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Flannery ◽  
Shannon M. Phillips ◽  
Catherine A. Lyons

Purpose: A large component of ambulatory oncology practice is management of telephone calls placed to and from the practice between outpatient appointments. However, scant information is available in the literature concerning oncology practice telephone calls. The specific aims of this study were to define telephone call volume and distribution in an active ambulatory oncology practice, describe the callers and reasons for the telephone calls, and examine any differences in call volume by practice characteristics. Methods: A descriptive retrospective design was used to analyze medical oncology and hematology telephone calls in a 4-month period. Two investigator-developed tools were validated and used to collect data on telephone call content and patient demographics. Results: The sample included 5,283 telephone calls to or from 1,486 different individuals. Individuals making and/or receiving more than one telephone call in the study period represented 56% of the telephone calls. For every 10 scheduled clinic appointments, seven telephone calls were received or made. The volume of telephone calls was significantly higher on Mondays and in the mornings. The reasons for high-volume telephone calls by diagnosis and frequency were identified, with 30% of telephone calls involving multiple reasons. Conclusion: The data demonstrate the impact of telephone calls on ambulatory oncology practice and highlight the complex and highly variable actions required to manage the telephone calls. The findings confirm and document specific practice patterns and identify subgroups that target repeat telephone calls as an area for improvement.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 159-159
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Hensing ◽  
Bruce Brockstein ◽  
George W. Carro ◽  
Ashton Marie Hullett ◽  
Brad Hughes ◽  
...  

159 Background: Approval of new oral anticancer agents (OAA) continues to rise, accounting for 75% of new oncology drugs approved so far in 2015. OAA prescriptions generated at our institution demonstrate similar growth, as the prescription volume for OAA is approximately 200% greater than it was 8 years ago. Challenges of OAA, including safe prescribing, monitoring toxicities, and assessing adherence, continue to be an obstacle to providing quality care. In recognition of these challenges, our institution employed the electronic medical record (EMR) to develop tools to enhance safe prescribing, monitoring, and follow up for patients receiving OAA. Methods: Comprehensive, regimen-specific, OAA protocols were built in the EMR using the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Quality Oncology Practice Initiative criteria as a guide. Protocols included OAA prescriptions, laboratory tests, monitoring communications, supportive care medications, plan for follow up, and a monitoring order. The monitoring order, dated 7 to 10 days after the start of each cycle, was utilized to identify patients for follow up, and as a documentation tool. During follow up calls, pharmacists provided education, addressed adherence and toxicities, and communicated findings to team members. The initial analysis focused on six of the most commonly prescribed OAA agents at our institution. Results: Cycle 1 follow up calls were placed for 115 new start OAA patients. Over half of the patients (56.5%) required an intervention (ex: symptom management, alerting the medical team, counseling). Eleven patients had barriers to adherence (ex: confusion, incorrect technique, cost, obtaining insurance coverage, and toxicity). Overall, 98% of patients verbalized appropriate adherence. There were 191 subsequent follow up efforts, after the cycle 1 follow up call, which resulted in 39 interventions (20%). Conclusions: OAA requires the same intensive monitoring and follow up as IV chemotherapy, but is more difficult to provide given the nature of administration of these medications. Utilizing the EMR to develop prescribing and monitoring tools can help address these challenges by providing a means for enhanced documentation and follow up.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6550-6550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tufia C. Haddad ◽  
Jane Helgeson ◽  
Katharine Pomerleau ◽  
Marissa Makey ◽  
Phillip Lombardo ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 188-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori A. Buswell ◽  
Patricia Reid Ponte ◽  
Lawrence N. Shulman

Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants often work in teams to deliver cancer care in ambulatory oncology practices. This is likely to become more prevalent as the demand for oncology services rises, and the number of providers increases only slightly.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
George W. Carro ◽  
Thomas A. Hensing ◽  
Bruce Brockstein ◽  
Shannon Maureen Gavin ◽  
Abigail Harper ◽  
...  

77 Background: Utilization of oral anticancer agents (OAA) has drastically increased over the past decade, accounting for more than 70% of new oncology agents approved in 2013. There are many challenges associated with OAA, including monitoring of adverse drug reactions (ADR) and adherence. While few studies estimate adherence of OAA, it is known that a multidisciplinary approach with intensive pharmacist counseling may improve outcomes. Currently, the electronic medical record (EMR) at our institution has many limitations on tracking OAA. In 2007, 1,872 OAA prescriptions were written. The 2014 annualized OAA prescriptions will surpass 5,510, demonstrating a growth of 194%. The purpose of this project is to establish an OAA monitoring program to allow consistent documentation, closer monitoring, and timely management of ADR. Methods: American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Quality Oncology Practice Initiative criteria were utilized to develop a unique monitoring tool, specific for OAA, which was employed via EMR. The monitoring tool assesses the current regimen, ADR, labs, adherence, and drug interactions. The initial analysis focused on testing the tools on two of the most commonly prescribed OAA agents within our institution. New start patients were identified through utilization of an OAA pharmacist verification queue. The pharmacist provided education, intensive follow up, and communicated treatment complications to other healthcare team members. Results: Follow-up calls were placed for 24 capecitabine patients and four erlotinib patients. Over half of the patients required an intervention. For capecitabine, there were seven patients with barriers to adherence. There were two patients who were non-adherent and one patient who was lost to follow-up; therefore, overall adherence rate was 91%. For erlotinib, adherence rate was 100% with no barriers to adherence. Symptom management and education were provided to 16 patients with grade 1 toxicities, and four drug interactions were identified. Conclusions: Oral chemotherapy should be treated with the same intensive monitoring as IV chemotherapy. A multidisciplinary pharmacist driven OAA monitoring program may improve adherence and allow more timely management of ADR.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 293-293
Author(s):  
Johanna M. LaSala ◽  
Anne C. Chiang ◽  
Kimberly M Severino

293 Background: Pain control is a challenging balance in the ambulatory oncology practice. Standard methods of pain reassessment resulted in poor pain control in the majority of patients given prescriptions for narcotics. We developed a proactive reassessment of pain using patient reported outcomes and a coach to assist in medication usage. The aim was to decrease the time to reassessment of pain to fewer than 5 days and achieve acceptable pain control in greater than 50% of patients receiving new narcotic prescriptions in an ambulatory oncology setting. Methods: Patients receiving a new narcotic prescription or a new dose were provided with a pain diary and an appointment with their pain coach at 48 hours. Using a standard pain scale 1-10, patients’ pain scores were recorded by the patient in their pain diary and communicated via nurse/patient phone contact at 48 hour intervals. Dosing intervention by the patient’s oncologist was made for unacceptable pain and reassessed at 48 hours. Uncontrolled pain at 96 hours was followed by in person appointment with the oncologist. Pain scores and days to reassessment were recorded using an Excel data collection tool for patients receiving new or dose adjusted narcotic prescriptions between August and December31, 2017. Results: There were 17 patients encounters where the patient received a new prescription or a dose change from August 1- Dec 31, 2017. Reassessment of pain was achieved in 100% of patients in fewer than 5 days. The average time was 2.6 days (range 2-4). Acceptable pain control (pain scores 0-3) at the time of reassessment was achieved in 53% of patients. Conclusions: Cancer related pain is an ongoing challenge in oncology practices. Barriers include lack of planned follow-up and patient education. The institution of a pain coach, pain diary and scheduled contact decreased the time to reassessment of pain and decreased pain scores during short interval reassessment periods achieving better pain control in 50% of patients during the evaluated period. Quality interventions in ambulatory settings are achievable though multiple patient interactions and record keeping require additional staffing resources to sustain this change.


Author(s):  
Rabia Aqeel ◽  
Nidhi Srivastava ◽  
Poonam Kushwaha

Background: In the recent years, Micelles represent a promising carrier for the treatment and diagnosis of cancer. Architecturally, micelles are self-assembled nanosized colloidal aggregates prepared from amphiphilic surfactant with a hydrophobic core and hydrophilic shell. Such composition making them a potential carrier for delivery of hydrophobic anticancer drugs with in their core. Description: Micelles have received increasing interest as an enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) targeted drug delivery systems for cancer treatment. Micelles can be modified to contribute various attractive properties for instance active targeting, stimuli-responsiveness. They have also proven their ability in drug targeting to tumor tissue, enhanced drug accumulation, drug stabilization, tissue penetration, prolong circulation, in vivo biocompatibility, biodegradability and, reduced side effects. Micelles have displayed vital role in multidrug delivery for cancer therapy. Results and Discussion : The aim of the present review is to provide an overview on the status of micellar nanoformulations for anticancer agents, including their pre-clinical and clinical researches. Emphasis is placed on presenting the newer strategies to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of anticancer drug at target site. The type of co-polymers used and methods for the preparation of micelles are also highlighted in the paper.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19117-e19117
Author(s):  
Jessica Cleveland ◽  
Michael J. Hassett ◽  
Sherry Lee ◽  
Isaac S. Chua ◽  
Laura Stewart Dominici ◽  
...  

e19117 Background: Systematic review of electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) has been shown to improve quality of life and overall survival in clinical trial. We previously demonstrated feasibility of ePRO across Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI). We sought to examine the distribution and frequency of first symptomatic adverse events (SAEs) among ePRO responders in ambulatory oncology practice. Methods: The ePRO tool uses the validated NCI developed Patient Reported Outcomes – Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) instrument to assess attributes of 15 core SAEs (fatigue, insomnia, general pain, decreased appetite, nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, shortness of breath, numbness and tingling, rash, concentration, fever, anxiety, sadness) selected by clinician stakeholders and deployed via any internet-enabled device once every 7 days. Responses are viewable in the EHR, scored 0 to 3 using an algorithm, with scores of 3 highlighted to indicate severe grade SAEs. Results: We examined the distribution and frequency of the first 5183 unique ePRO reports for unselected patients seen in the medical, radiation and surgical oncology outpatient clinics of four pilot multidisciplinary clinics (Breast, Genitourinary, Gastrointestinal and Head and Neck) between September 2018-December 2019. Twenty one percent of eligible patients responded to ePRO (5183 of 26,084). Most respondents were female (59%), Caucasian (89%), and age 50-69 years (56% compared to 16% age <50 years, 28% age ≥70; range 19-98 years). The frequency of grade 3 SAEs was pain (10%), fatigue (6%), insomnia (4%), constipation (3%), numbness and tingling/concentration/anxiety/decreased appetite (2%), diarrhea/shortness of breath/sadness (1%), and rash/fever/nausea/vomiting (none) (Table). Conclusions: We observed a consistent distribution of SAEs across cancer types, age and sex. The most frequently reported SAEs are those clinicians struggle to treat with medications - pain, fatigue, insomnia and anxiety. Research to develop effective strategies to address this constellation of SAEs should be prioritized. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document