Toward Improving the Delivery of Oral Anticancer Drugs in the VA: Work IN PROGRESS

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 09/09/2019 - 16:06

Purpose: An Innovation Network Spark award was received to develop “My Chemo Calendar,” a tool aimed at providing veterans with easy to understand critical information (eg drug name, schedule, side effects), to optimize the benefits of their oral anticancer drugs (OADs). Using a human-centered design approach, we are first obtaining insight from patients and providers on tools (including “my Chemo Calendar”) and strategies that may improve experiences with OADs.

Background: OADs often have complex dosing schedules, toxicity risk, and special handling precautions. Best tools and practices for ensuring safe and effective care for veterans who are prescribed OADs are not yet well established.

Methods: Surveys, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews are being conducted with patients and providers. Topics included: OAD education and knowledge, medication handling and adherence, and symptom management.

Data Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the survey data. Audio files from focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using NVivo.

Results: To date, data has been collected from two patients and eighteen oncology care providers. Both patients were ‘very satisfied’ with the information they received to successfully and safely take their OADs. They preferred to receive information from multiple sources (eg physician, internet, hand-outs). The majority of providers reported that they never/rarely/sometimes spoke about digesting an OAD with/without food, necessary diet modifications (e.g. no grapefruit), missed doses, medication storage temperatures, and refills. Most usually spoke about side effects, timing (eg morning), adverse effects, phone number to report side effects, and reporting concerning symptoms. Most were not/slightly/moderately confident that the patients were receiving all the necessary instructions to use the OAD properly. The oncology pharmacist was identified as the most appropriate oncology team member to provide patient education. Although, it was noted that it would be best for patients to receive information at various touch points from different team members. The concept of “My Chemo Calendar” was well received but how best to integrate it into care was unclear.

Implications: Data collection and analysis is still ongoing. This information will be used create and pilot new strategies and tools to improve experiences with OADs.

Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Catherine Hertz ([email protected])

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Catherine Hertz ([email protected])

Author and Disclosure Information

Correspondence: Catherine Hertz ([email protected])

Purpose: An Innovation Network Spark award was received to develop “My Chemo Calendar,” a tool aimed at providing veterans with easy to understand critical information (eg drug name, schedule, side effects), to optimize the benefits of their oral anticancer drugs (OADs). Using a human-centered design approach, we are first obtaining insight from patients and providers on tools (including “my Chemo Calendar”) and strategies that may improve experiences with OADs.

Background: OADs often have complex dosing schedules, toxicity risk, and special handling precautions. Best tools and practices for ensuring safe and effective care for veterans who are prescribed OADs are not yet well established.

Methods: Surveys, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews are being conducted with patients and providers. Topics included: OAD education and knowledge, medication handling and adherence, and symptom management.

Data Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the survey data. Audio files from focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using NVivo.

Results: To date, data has been collected from two patients and eighteen oncology care providers. Both patients were ‘very satisfied’ with the information they received to successfully and safely take their OADs. They preferred to receive information from multiple sources (eg physician, internet, hand-outs). The majority of providers reported that they never/rarely/sometimes spoke about digesting an OAD with/without food, necessary diet modifications (e.g. no grapefruit), missed doses, medication storage temperatures, and refills. Most usually spoke about side effects, timing (eg morning), adverse effects, phone number to report side effects, and reporting concerning symptoms. Most were not/slightly/moderately confident that the patients were receiving all the necessary instructions to use the OAD properly. The oncology pharmacist was identified as the most appropriate oncology team member to provide patient education. Although, it was noted that it would be best for patients to receive information at various touch points from different team members. The concept of “My Chemo Calendar” was well received but how best to integrate it into care was unclear.

Implications: Data collection and analysis is still ongoing. This information will be used create and pilot new strategies and tools to improve experiences with OADs.

Purpose: An Innovation Network Spark award was received to develop “My Chemo Calendar,” a tool aimed at providing veterans with easy to understand critical information (eg drug name, schedule, side effects), to optimize the benefits of their oral anticancer drugs (OADs). Using a human-centered design approach, we are first obtaining insight from patients and providers on tools (including “my Chemo Calendar”) and strategies that may improve experiences with OADs.

Background: OADs often have complex dosing schedules, toxicity risk, and special handling precautions. Best tools and practices for ensuring safe and effective care for veterans who are prescribed OADs are not yet well established.

Methods: Surveys, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews are being conducted with patients and providers. Topics included: OAD education and knowledge, medication handling and adherence, and symptom management.

Data Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the survey data. Audio files from focus groups and semi-structured interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using NVivo.

Results: To date, data has been collected from two patients and eighteen oncology care providers. Both patients were ‘very satisfied’ with the information they received to successfully and safely take their OADs. They preferred to receive information from multiple sources (eg physician, internet, hand-outs). The majority of providers reported that they never/rarely/sometimes spoke about digesting an OAD with/without food, necessary diet modifications (e.g. no grapefruit), missed doses, medication storage temperatures, and refills. Most usually spoke about side effects, timing (eg morning), adverse effects, phone number to report side effects, and reporting concerning symptoms. Most were not/slightly/moderately confident that the patients were receiving all the necessary instructions to use the OAD properly. The oncology pharmacist was identified as the most appropriate oncology team member to provide patient education. Although, it was noted that it would be best for patients to receive information at various touch points from different team members. The concept of “My Chemo Calendar” was well received but how best to integrate it into care was unclear.

Implications: Data collection and analysis is still ongoing. This information will be used create and pilot new strategies and tools to improve experiences with OADs.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Citation Override
Abstract Presented at the 2019 Association of VA Hematology/Oncology Annual Meeting
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Mon, 09/09/2019 - 16:00
Un-Gate On Date
Mon, 09/09/2019 - 16:00
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Mon, 09/09/2019 - 16:00
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Treatment Patterns Among Men With Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer Within the United States Veterans Affairs Health System

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/13/2016 - 10:27
Abstract 26: 2016 AVAHO Meeting

Background: Therapeutic options for men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded significantly over the past 5 years with several new agents demonstrating improved survival, including 2 oral agents. Abiraterone acetate (AA), a CYP-17 androgen synthesis inhibitor, obtained initial FDA approval in 2011 for post-docetaxel (DXT) use and gained expanded approval in 2012 for pre-DXT use. Enzalutamide (ENZ), an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor, also gained FDA approval in 2012 (post-DXT) and indication was expanded in 2014 (pre-DXT).

Purpose: The objective is to provide insight into the uptake of novel therapeutics and its impact on treatment for patients with mCRPC.

Methods: For this observational study, Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system data (including hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy) were used to identify male veterans who received treatment for mCRPC between fiscal years 2008 and 2014. Sequencing patterns and treatment duration were assessed. Descriptive statistics were employed.

Results: During the study period, 8,774 patients initiated advanced lines of therapy associated with mCRPC. AA, DXT, and ketoconazole (KCZ) were the most commonly used firstlines of advanced therapies (24.6%, 24.8%, 47.0%, respectively). Between 2008 and 2013, the proportion of mCRPC patients treated with first-line DXT or KCZ dropped from 98% to 38% (P < .0001) while the proportion who received first-line AA increased to 58% (P < .0001). Furthermore, among the 4,169 patients treated with AA between 2011 and 2014, the proportion treated pre-DXT increased from 32% to 80% (P < .0001). AA was also the most common second-line treatment received. Between 2012 and 2013, ENZ use was low but increased dramatically. Among patients who initiated DXT, KCZ, or AA as first-line treatment in 2011/2012, median time on initial treatment was 5.9, 9.1, 11.5 months, respectively.

Conclusions: The FDA approval of AA and ENZ had a significant impact on treatment patterns for men with mCRPC within VA and was associated with decreased use of KCZ and delayed use of chemotherapy. Further information regarding patient and disease characteristics is needed. The rapid uptake of these novel agents has significant implications for disease-related outcomes.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Abstract 26: 2016 AVAHO Meeting
Abstract 26: 2016 AVAHO Meeting

Background: Therapeutic options for men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded significantly over the past 5 years with several new agents demonstrating improved survival, including 2 oral agents. Abiraterone acetate (AA), a CYP-17 androgen synthesis inhibitor, obtained initial FDA approval in 2011 for post-docetaxel (DXT) use and gained expanded approval in 2012 for pre-DXT use. Enzalutamide (ENZ), an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor, also gained FDA approval in 2012 (post-DXT) and indication was expanded in 2014 (pre-DXT).

Purpose: The objective is to provide insight into the uptake of novel therapeutics and its impact on treatment for patients with mCRPC.

Methods: For this observational study, Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system data (including hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy) were used to identify male veterans who received treatment for mCRPC between fiscal years 2008 and 2014. Sequencing patterns and treatment duration were assessed. Descriptive statistics were employed.

Results: During the study period, 8,774 patients initiated advanced lines of therapy associated with mCRPC. AA, DXT, and ketoconazole (KCZ) were the most commonly used firstlines of advanced therapies (24.6%, 24.8%, 47.0%, respectively). Between 2008 and 2013, the proportion of mCRPC patients treated with first-line DXT or KCZ dropped from 98% to 38% (P < .0001) while the proportion who received first-line AA increased to 58% (P < .0001). Furthermore, among the 4,169 patients treated with AA between 2011 and 2014, the proportion treated pre-DXT increased from 32% to 80% (P < .0001). AA was also the most common second-line treatment received. Between 2012 and 2013, ENZ use was low but increased dramatically. Among patients who initiated DXT, KCZ, or AA as first-line treatment in 2011/2012, median time on initial treatment was 5.9, 9.1, 11.5 months, respectively.

Conclusions: The FDA approval of AA and ENZ had a significant impact on treatment patterns for men with mCRPC within VA and was associated with decreased use of KCZ and delayed use of chemotherapy. Further information regarding patient and disease characteristics is needed. The rapid uptake of these novel agents has significant implications for disease-related outcomes.

Background: Therapeutic options for men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded significantly over the past 5 years with several new agents demonstrating improved survival, including 2 oral agents. Abiraterone acetate (AA), a CYP-17 androgen synthesis inhibitor, obtained initial FDA approval in 2011 for post-docetaxel (DXT) use and gained expanded approval in 2012 for pre-DXT use. Enzalutamide (ENZ), an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor, also gained FDA approval in 2012 (post-DXT) and indication was expanded in 2014 (pre-DXT).

Purpose: The objective is to provide insight into the uptake of novel therapeutics and its impact on treatment for patients with mCRPC.

Methods: For this observational study, Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system data (including hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy) were used to identify male veterans who received treatment for mCRPC between fiscal years 2008 and 2014. Sequencing patterns and treatment duration were assessed. Descriptive statistics were employed.

Results: During the study period, 8,774 patients initiated advanced lines of therapy associated with mCRPC. AA, DXT, and ketoconazole (KCZ) were the most commonly used firstlines of advanced therapies (24.6%, 24.8%, 47.0%, respectively). Between 2008 and 2013, the proportion of mCRPC patients treated with first-line DXT or KCZ dropped from 98% to 38% (P < .0001) while the proportion who received first-line AA increased to 58% (P < .0001). Furthermore, among the 4,169 patients treated with AA between 2011 and 2014, the proportion treated pre-DXT increased from 32% to 80% (P < .0001). AA was also the most common second-line treatment received. Between 2012 and 2013, ENZ use was low but increased dramatically. Among patients who initiated DXT, KCZ, or AA as first-line treatment in 2011/2012, median time on initial treatment was 5.9, 9.1, 11.5 months, respectively.

Conclusions: The FDA approval of AA and ENZ had a significant impact on treatment patterns for men with mCRPC within VA and was associated with decreased use of KCZ and delayed use of chemotherapy. Further information regarding patient and disease characteristics is needed. The rapid uptake of these novel agents has significant implications for disease-related outcomes.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Citation Override
Fed Pract. 2016 September;33 (supp 8):27S-28S
Disallow All Ads