High Implementation Adherence to Lenalidomide in Multiple Myeloma
Rattachement africain : il, us, be, ch, mm. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Adherence to oral anticancer therapy correlates with outcome. Lenalidomide (LEN) is an oral mainstay treatment for multiple myeloma (MM), administered in 21-day/7-day (on/off) cycles. Data on LEN adherence is limited. Electronic monitoring (EM) represents the most reliable adherence assessment method. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: ) in lenalidomide-naïve multiple myeloma patients to quantify adherence during on/off cycles and identify patterns of non-adherence in real-world practice. On and off cycles were determined semi-automatically. Implementation adherence was calculated as the proportion of prescribed drug taken, during each on cycle and across all on cycles. Daily adherence predictors were analyzed using logistic regression with generalized estimating equations. KEY RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included. Median age was 68 years, 66% received LEN as a second-line treatment, 75% of patients perfectly adhered to the recommended 21/7-day on/off cycle. Median implementation adherence was 100%. Only 4% of patients had a proportion of doses taken below 90%. All doses were taken by 51% of patients, while 9% missed ≥4 doses. Among the 13 predictors investigated, only age under 80 and participation in a support group were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: this novel assessment of LEN adherence in MM patients demonstrated high implementation adherence and cycle duration compliance.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- High Implementation Adherence to Lenalidomide in Multiple Myeloma
- Date Crossref
- 06/11/2025
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.