Back

Rates of Adherence to Colorectal Cancer Medications and Predictors of Non-Adherence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Raj, R.; Abegaz, T. M.; Nechi, R. N.; Donneyong, M. M.

2026-01-08 health informatics
10.64898/2026.01.07.26343638 medRxiv
Show abstract

PURPOSETo synthesize adherence rates to colorectal cancer medications and identify predictors of nonadherence. METHODSFollowing PRISMA, we searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science through August 13, 2024. Observational studies reporting adherence or predictors were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data and assessed risk of bias using JBIs Checklist for Cohort Studies. Adherence was grouped by measurement approach: claims-based PDC/MPR, chart/clinical record review, or patient-reported. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed within clinically and methodologically homogeneous subgroups. RESULTSThirteen studies (n = 13) met inclusion, with adherence ranging from 33% to 100%. In claims-based analyses using PDC/MPR thresholds, pooled adherence was about 40% [95% CI, 0.36-0.44] with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 84.6%). Pooled adherence was about 83% in both chart/record [95% CI, 0.44-0.97] (I2 = 71.4%) or patient-reported measures [95% CI, 0.68-0.92] (I2 = 93.8%), also with substantial heterogeneity. Nonadherence was more likely with advanced stage, ECOG [≥]1, multiple prior regimens, female sex, and treatment-related adverse events. The overall risk of bias was low, although some included studies lacked complete follow-up or strategies to address it. CONCLUSIONWe synthesized adherence to CRC medications and identified consistent predictors of nonadherence. Adherence was lowest with claims-based PDC/MPR and higher with chart or patient-reported measures. These findings support targeted interventions for patients at higher risk of non-adherence, including those in the advanced stage of the disease, those with multiple regimens, and those experiencing adverse events. Future work should use standardized adherence definitions and metric-specific reporting to enable valid pooling.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.3%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 14%
13.2%
3
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.7%
4
Preventive Medicine Reports
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.4%
6
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.2%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.2%
9
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.2%
10
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.0%
11
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
12
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
13
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
14
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
16
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.3%
18
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
19
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
20
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
21
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
22
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
23
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
24
American Journal of Gastroenterology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
25
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 55%
0.8%
26
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
27
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
28
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
29
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
30
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%