Pilot study evaluating feasibility and utility of pharmacist-driven oral antineoplastic agent monitoring program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionOncologists are increasingly prescribing oral antineoplastic agents which have benefits and challenges impacting patient outcomes. Practice guidelines recommend monitoring symptoms and adherence without outlining any specific tools or methods for monitoring. Pharmacists are successful in monitoring patients on therapy and improving outcomes. We aimed to assess the feasibility and utility of a pharmacist-delivered and medical record-integrated adherence and symptom monitoring program for patients on oral antineoplastic agents.MethodsThis single-center, prospective, interventional study designed and implemented an adherence and monitoring program. A pharmacist contacted patients twice between clinic visits for three months. During telephone encounters, patients were verbally screened for medication adherence and assessed for new or changing symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System as a signal of possible adverse events. We measured feasibility via patient enrollment, completed proportion of scheduled contacts, and pharmacist time. Utility was assessed through patient adherence, satisfaction surveys, healthcare resource utilization, and pharmacist interventions (i.e., patient education, adherence assistance, and symptom management).ResultsFifty-one patients participated. Ninety-one percent of scheduled patient contacts were completed. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System was administered by pharmacy personnel 102 times. Patient-reported adherence was 100%. Overall satisfaction was 85% and 100%, for patients and physicians, respectively. Fifty-one (98%) pharmacist recommendations were accepted. There were 14 total utilizations of healthcare resources—5.2 per 1000 patient days.ConclusionsThis study suggests a pharmacist monitoring program for patients taking oral antineoplastic agents is feasible and provides utility. Further research is needed to evaluate whether this program improves safety, adherence, and outcomes in patients using oral antineoplastic agents.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".