MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386053311 · doi:10.2147/ppa.s417180

Real-World Comparison of First-Line Treatment Adherence Between Single-Agent Ibrutinib and Acalabrutinib in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

2023· article· en· W4386053311 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoxiao Lu, Bruno Émond, Laura Morrison, Frédéric Kinkead, Patrick Lefèbvre, Marie‐Hélène Lafeuille, Wasiulla Khan, Linda Wu, Zaina P. Qureshi, Ryan Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Preference and Adherence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersJanssen Scientific Affairs
KeywordsIbrutinibMedicineChronic lymphocytic leukemiaInternal medicineOfatumumabOdds ratioLogistic regressionOncologyLeukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Increased dosing frequency adversely affects treatment adherence and outcomes in chronic diseases; however, such data related to treatment adherence is lacking in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). This study compared adherence between patients treated with ibrutinib (once-daily) versus acalabrutinib (twice-daily) as first-line (1L) therapy for CLL/SLL. Patients and Methods: Specialty pharmacy electronic medical records were used to identify adults with CLL/SLL initiating 1L ibrutinib or acalabrutinib between 01/01/2018 and 11/30/2020. Adherence was measured by the proportion of days covered (PDC) and medication possession ratio (MPR) and was compared between cohorts using odds ratios (ORs) obtained from logistic regression models adjusted for baseline characteristics. Results: Between 01/01/2018 and 11/30/2020, 1374 and 140 patients initiated ibrutinib and acalabrutinib, respectively. Based on PDC/MPR ≥ 80%, patients treated with once-daily ibrutinib were more likely to be adherent than those treated with twice-daily acalabrutinib (OR ranges: PDC: 1.04– 1.76; MPR: 1.03– 1.58). At 6 months, patients on ibrutinib had a 58– 76% higher likelihood of staying adherent compared to patients on acalabrutinib (PDC: 75.9% for ibrutinib vs 63.6% for acalabrutinib, OR: 1.76, P= 0.008; MPR: 76.8% vs 66.9%, OR: 1.58, P= 0.036) with a similar trend noted for the entire line of treatment (LOT) (PDC: 53.0% vs 41.4%, OR: 1.53, P= 0.021; MPR: 58.7% vs 47.1%, OR: 1.50, P= 0.027). Conclusion: In this real-world analysis, CLL/SLL patients initiating 1L once-daily ibrutinib had > 50% higher treatment adherence than those initiating twice-daily acalabrutinib during their LOT. Given the importance of sustained adherence for disease control in CLL/SLL, dosing frequency may be an important consideration for patients and physicians. Graphical Abstract: Keywords: CLL/SLL, Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor, treatment compliance, proportion of days covered, medication possession ratio

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Preference and AdherenceSame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207