Retrospective cohort study reveals optimal adherence to WHO Essential Medicines List in cancer treatments, highlighting regional prescribing trends.
<ns3:p>Background Effective cancer management include comprehensive evaluation of treatment patterns to ensure optimal resource utilization. This is a single center study review anticancer drug utilization, with an emphasis on adherence to the World Health Organization Essential Medicines List (WHO EML) and regional prescribing trends amid increasing cancer incidence. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 512 adult patients with histologically confirmed malignant neoplasms that were managed with anti-cancer therapy at King Khaled Hospital, Najran, from 2014 to 2022. Data extraction included demographic characteristics, treatment regimens, and supportive medications, analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 21). Prescription quality was assessed against WHO EML criteria and Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) standards. Results The study revealed slight male predominance (56.4%), with a mean age 55.2 ± 17.0 years. Gastrointestinal (29.7%) and breast cancers (25.8%) accounted for the majority of cases, and 46.7% of patients presented with metastatic disease. First-line regimens predominantly included doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (20.1%) and FOLFOX (13.5%). Notably, 86.7% of prescribed agents were listed on the WHO EML, surpassing the 85.3% benchmark, and 90.1% were generics. Supportive care commonly involved metoclopramide-based antiemetics (76.1%). Medication shortages occurred in 8.4% of cases, predominantly involving BCG. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate an optimal utilization of WHO Essential Medicines List, reflecting evidence-based, cost-effective prescribing practices that exceed international benchmarks. Despite the observed supply chain vulnerabilities, the study reinforces the relevance and applicability of the WHO model at the regional level.</ns3:p>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Badheeb et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: