Patient preference for oral chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast and lung cancer
- PMID: 31571304
- DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13164
Patient preference for oral chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast and lung cancer
Abstract
Objectives: Although new therapies against metastatic cancer have been developed in recent decades, chemotherapy is still an important treatment option. Prolonged treatment and side-effects are often discouraging for patients, and in many cases, therapy is only palliative, not curative. This study explores patient preference for oral or intravenous (IV) chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic breast or lung cancer.
Methods: It is a descriptive, open label, multicentre, nation-wide study, in which a 16-item questionnaire consisting of single-choice questions scored on a 5-point Likert scale was administered to patients in a single visit, and another 11-item questionnaire was self-administered by the patient's oncologist.
Results: A total of 131 breast and lung cancer specialists at 64 hospitals enrolled 412 patients (lung cancer = 161; breast cancer = 251). To be eligible, patients must have already received IV therapy and at least 2 cycles of oral chemotherapy. Most (77%) patients expressed preference for oral therapy. Most considered their daily life was less disrupted with tablets (70.4%), had no trouble swallowing them (86.9%), and were not concerned about forgetting to take them (56.8%). Half (56.3%) were worried about problems related to drug infusion with IV therapy, 61.7% were concerned about nurses failing to find a suitable vein, and 63.1% were dissatisfied with hospital waiting times. A uniform response was obtained from both samples of patients.
Conclusion: Convenience, ease of administration, fewer side effects and better quality of life tilt the balance towards oral drug administration.
Keywords: intravenous administration; metastasis; oral administration; patient preference; quality of life; tablets.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
'Tablet burden' in patients with metastatic breast cancer.Eur J Cancer. 2016 Mar;55:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.11.015. Epub 2015 Dec 28. Eur J Cancer. 2016. PMID: 26734784
-
The preferences and experiences of different bisphosphonate treatments in women with breast cancer.Psychooncology. 2011 Jul;20(7):755-61. doi: 10.1002/pon.1781. Epub 2010 May 24. Psychooncology. 2011. PMID: 20878871
-
Health-related quality of life in early breast cancer.Dan Med Bull. 2010 Sep;57(9):B4184. Dan Med Bull. 2010. PMID: 20816024
-
[Oral vinorelbine: pharmacology and treatment outcome in non-small cell bronchial carcinoma and breast carcinoma].Onkologie. 2006 Mar;29 Suppl 1:1-28. doi: 10.1159/000091889. Epub 2006 Mar 3. Onkologie. 2006. PMID: 16534241 Review. German.
-
Vinorelbine. A review of its pharmacological properties and clinical use in cancer chemotherapy.Drugs Aging. 1994 Sep;5(3):200-34. doi: 10.2165/00002512-199405030-00006. Drugs Aging. 1994. PMID: 7803948 Review.
Cited by
-
Effects of nursing based on Orem's self-care model on self-care efficacy, quality of life and adverse emotions in patients with advanced lung cancer.Am J Transl Res. 2021 Apr 15;13(4):2983-2989. eCollection 2021. Am J Transl Res. 2021. PMID: 34017465 Free PMC article.
-
A pharmacist-led interprofessional medication adherence program improved adherence to oral anticancer therapies: The OpTAT randomized controlled trial.PLoS One. 2024 Jun 7;19(6):e0304573. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304573. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 38848380 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Pooled analysis of oral vinorelbine as single agents in patients with advanced NSCLC.Lung Cancer Manag. 2025 Dec;14(1):2477418. doi: 10.1080/17581966.2025.2477418. Epub 2025 Mar 21. Lung Cancer Manag. 2025. PMID: 40116568 Free PMC article.
-
Hereditary angioedema patients would prefer newer-generation oral prophylaxis.J Drug Assess. 2021 Jan 6;10(1):51-56. doi: 10.1080/21556660.2020.1863699. J Drug Assess. 2021. PMID: 33489436 Free PMC article.
-
Adherence to the CDK 4/6 Inhibitor Palbociclib and Omission of Dose Management Supported by Pharmacometric Modelling as Part of the OpTAT Study.Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jan 3;15(1):316. doi: 10.3390/cancers15010316. Cancers (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36612312 Free PMC article.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Aisner, J. (2007). Overview of the changing paradigm in cancer treatment: Oral chemotherapy. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 64, S4-S7. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070035
-
- Bartel, S. B. (2007). Safe practices and financial considerations in using oral chemotherapeutic agents. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 64, S8-S14. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp070036
-
- Benjamin, L., Cotté, F. E., Philippe, C., Mercier, F., Bachelot, T., & Vidal-Trécan, G. (2012). Physicians' preferences for prescribing oral and intravenous anticancer drugs: A Discrete Choice Experiment. European Journal of Cancer, 48, 912-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.09.019
-
- Borner, M., Scheithauer, W., Twelves, C., Maroun, J., & Wilke, H. (2001). Answering patients' needs: Oral alternatives to intravenous therapy. The Oncologist, 6(Suppl 4), 12-16. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.6-suppl_4-12
-
- Depierre, A., Freyer, G., Jassem, J., Orfeuvre, H., Ramlau, R., Lemarie, E., … Trillet-Lenoir, V. (2001). Oral vinorelbine: Feasibility and safety profile. Annals of Oncology, 12, 1677-1681. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013567022670
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical