Telephone follow‐up contributes to improving adherence and treatment duration in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with lenvatinib

Background and Aim This study aimed to investigate whether telephone follow‐up by clinical pharmacists for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with lenvatinib (LEN) contributes to improved adherence and treatment duration for LEN. Methods This retrospective study enrolled 13...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 2023-07, Vol.38 (7), p.1140-1147
Hauptverfasser: Tsumura, Sayo, Shimose, Shigeo, Niizeki, Takashi, Kuboyama, Eri, Iwamoto, Hideki, Tanaka, Masatoshi, Moriyama, Etusko, Shirono, Tomotake, Takaki, Kota, Noda, Yu, Nakano, Masahito, Inoue, Mitsutoshi, Tsustumi, Kazuki, Kuromatsu, Ryoko, Koga, Hironori, Higuchi, Kyoko, Kawaguchi, Takumi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background and Aim This study aimed to investigate whether telephone follow‐up by clinical pharmacists for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with lenvatinib (LEN) contributes to improved adherence and treatment duration for LEN. Methods This retrospective study enrolled 132 patients with HCC who were treated with LEN. The patients were classified into non‐telephone follow‐up (n = 32) or telephone follow‐up groups (n = 100) [the latter group was further classified into family‐pharmacist (FP) telephone follow‐up (n = 18), or hospital family‐pharmacist (HFP) telephone follow‐up (n = 82) groups]. Results The progression‐free survival (PFS) in the telephone follow‐up group was significantly higher than that in the non‐telephone follow‐up group (PFS 6.1 months vs 3.7 months, P = 0.001, respectively). Although treatment duration was significantly longer in the telephone follow‐up group than in the non‐telephone follow‐up group [median treatment duration: 10.4 months vs 4.1 months, P = 0.001, respectively.], no significant differences were noted between the HFP telephone follow‐up group and FP telephone follow‐up groups (10.3 months vs 13.3 months, P = 0.543). Self‐interruption and adverse‐event discontinuation in the HFP‐telephone follow‐up group were significantly lower than those in the FP‐telephone and non‐telephone groups (0% vs 11.1% vs 18.8%; P 
ISSN:0815-9319
1440-1746
DOI:10.1111/jgh.16168