Search

Introduction: Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to long-term adverse effects on workers' health. A reproducible Canadian surface monitoring program was established in 2010. The objective was to describe contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs measured on 12 surfaces among hospitals participating in this annual monitoring program. Methods: Each hospital sampled six standardized sites in oncology pharmacies and six in outpatient clinics. Ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry was used for cyclophosphamide, docetaxel, doxorubicin, etoposide, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine, irinotecan, methotrexate, paclitaxel, and vinorelbine. Platinum-based drugs were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry; this excludes inorganic platinum from the environment. Hospitals filled out an online questionnaire about their practices; a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used for some practices. Results: One hundred and twenty-four Canadian hospitals participated. Cyclophosphamide (405/1445, 28%), gemcitabine (347/1445, 24%), and platinum (71/756, 9%) were the most frequent. The 90th percentile of surface concentration was 0.01 ng/cm² for cyclophosphamide and 0.003 ng/cm² for gemcitabine. Centers that prepared 5000 or more antineoplastic per year had higher concentrations of cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine on their surfaces (p = 0.0001). Almost half maintained a hazardous drugs committee (46/119, 39%), but this did not influence the cyclophosphamide contamination (p = 0.051). Hazardous drugs training was more frequent for oncology pharmacy and nursing staff than for hygiene and sanitation staff. Conclusions: This monitoring program allowed centers to benchmark their contamination with pragmatic contamination thresholds derived from the Canadian 90th percentiles. Regular participation and local hazardous drug committee involvement provide an opportunity to review practices, identify risk areas, and refresh training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to long-term adverse effects on workers' health. Environmental monitoring is conducted once a year, as part of a Canadian monitoring program. The objective was to describe contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs measured on surfaces. Methods: Six standardized sites in oncology pharmacy and six in outpatient clinic were sampled in each hospital. Samples were analyzed by ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (non-platinum drugs) and by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (platinum-based drugs). The limits of detection (in ng/cm2) were: 0.0006 for cyclophosphamide; 0.001 for docetaxel; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil; 0.0004 for gemcitabine; 0.0007 for irinotecan; 0.0009 for methotrexate; 0.004 for paclitaxel, 0.009 for vinorelbine, 0.02 for doxorubicine, 0.0037 for etoposide and 0.004 for the platinum. Sub-analyses were done with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Results: 122 Canadian hospitals participated. Cyclophosphamide (451/1412, 32% of positive samples, 90th percentile of concentration 0.0160 ng/cm2) and gemcitabine (320/1412, 23%, 0.0036 ng/cm2) were most frequently measured on surfaces. The surfaces most frequently contaminated with at least one drug were the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (97/121, 80%) and the armrest of patient treatment chair (92/118, 78%).The distribution of cyclophosphamide concentration was higher for centers that prepared ≥ 5000 antineoplastic drug preparations/year (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: This monitoring program allowed centers to benchmark their contamination with pragmatic contamination thresholds derived from the Canadian 90th percentiles. Problematic areas need corrective measures such as decontamination. The program helps to increase the workers' awareness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Healthcare workers exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to adverse health effects. Guidelines promote the safe handling of antineoplastic drugs, but no safe exposure limit was determined. Regular surface sampling contributes to ensuring workers safety. Methods: A cross-sectional monitoring is conducted once a year with voluntary Canadian centers, since 2010. Twelve standardized sampling sites were sampled. Samples were analyzed by high performance mass coupled liquid chromatography. The limits of detection (in ng/cm2) were: 0.001 for cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine; 0.3 for docetaxel and ifosfamide; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel; 0.003 for irinotecan; 0.002 for methotrexate; 0.01 for vinorelbine. Results: The surfaces from 109 centers were sampled between 01/01/2020–18/06/2020. Twenty-six centers delayed their participation because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 1217 samples were analyzed. Surfaces were frequently contaminated with cyclophosphamide (34% positive, 75th percentile 0.00165 ng/cm2) and gemcitabine (16% and <0.001 ng/cm2). The armrest of patient treatment chairs (84% to at least one drug), the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (BSC) (73%) and the floor in front of the BSC (55%) were frequently contaminated. Centers that prepared ≥5000 antineoplastic drugs annually had higher concentration of cyclophosphamide on their surfaces (p < 0.0001). Contamination measured on the surfaces was reduced from 2010 to 2020. Conclusions: This large-scale study showed reproducible long term follow up of the contamination of standardized sites of Canadian centers and a reduction in surface contamination from 2010 to 2020. Periodic surface sampling help centers meet their continuous improvements goals to reduce exposure as much as possible. The COVID-19 pandemic had a limited impact on the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The objective of this pilot study was to determine the frequency of urination and the concentration of four hazardous drugs (cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil) in workers' 24-h urine samples in relation to exposure to traces with hazardous drugs. Methods: The study was conducted in three healthcare centers in the region of Montréal, Quebec, Canada. We recruited healthcare workers (nurses and pharmacy technicians) assigned to the hematology-oncology department. Each participant was asked to collect all urine voided during a 24-h period, to fill out an activity journal documenting tasks performed and to document the use of personal protective equipment. Samples were analyzed for cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and alpha-fluoro-beta-alanine (FBAL, the main urinary metabolite of 5-fluorouracil). Drugs were quantified by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (positive electrospray MRM mode). Results: Eighteen healthcare workers (10 nurses and 8 technicians) were recruited and provided consent to participate. Urine samples were obtained between 1 September and 30 September 2019. The number of urinations over the 24-h collection period ranged from 3 to 11 per participant. A total of 128 urine samples were analyzed for the 18 workers. All urine samples were negative for the four antineoplastics tested. Conclusion: No traces of cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, or FBAL were found in the 24-h urine samples of 18 healthcare workers practicing in three healthcare facilities in Quebec. Although it was feasible to collect 24-h urine samples in this research project, it appears unrealistic to do so recurrently as part of a large-scale surveillance program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The primary objective was to describe environmental contamination with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Group 1 hazardous drugs in oncology pharmacies and outpatient clinics in Canada in 2019, as part of an annual surveillance project. Methods: In each participating center, 12 standardized sites (6 in the oncology pharmacy and 6 in outpatient clinic) were sampled. Each sample was prepared to allow quantification of six antineoplastic drugs (cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan) by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Samples were also tested for three additional antineoplastic drugs (docetaxel, paclitaxel, and vinorelbine) without quantification. The impact of certain characteristics of the sampling sites was evaluated with a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for independent samples. Results: Ninety-three Canadian centers participated in 2019, with a total of 1045 surfaces sampled. Cyclophosphamide was the drug most often found in the surface samples (32.4% of samples with positive result), followed by gemcitabine (20.3%). The front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (81.5% of samples positive for at least one antineoplastic drug) and the armrest of a treatment chair (75.8%) were the most frequently contaminated surfaces. Centers with more oncology inpatient and outpatient beds, those that prepared more antineoplastic drugs each year, and those that used more cyclophosphamide each year had higher concentrations of cyclophosphamide contamination on the surfaces tested (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Traces of dangerous drugs were found in oncology pharmacies and oncology outpatient clinics in 93 Canadian hospitals in 2019. However, the quantities measured were very small. Every healthcare worker should consider these work areas to be contaminated and should wear appropriate protective equipment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The main objective was to determine the efficacy of various types of cleaning equipment and products after deliberate contamination with cyclophosphamide. The secondary objective was to test various cleaning scenarios using these equipment and products. Methods: The study had two phases: testing of cleaning equipment (wipe : woven microfibers – Hygen®, two layers of non-woven microfibres and an inner layer of highly absorbent viscose fibres – MicronSolo®, two layers of non-woven microfibres and an inner layer of highly absorbent viscose fibres – MicroMix®, simili-tissu (low filament production) – Tork® and, mop : woven microfibers – Hygen®, microfibre and viscose – MicroOne®) and products (disinfectant : quaternary ammonium – DR100®, chlorine 0.1% – Zochlor® – Brutab® – PCS® NPH, sodium hypochlorite 2%, cleaner : detergent – Nu- Action 3®, cleaner and disinfectant: sodium hypochlorite 0.6% + detergent – Aliflex® and water) in phase 1 and testing of various cleaning procedures in phase 2. Specific areas of a room with a laminar flow hood (class II/type B2) were contaminated with 10 mcg of cyclophosphamide. Different types of surfaces were cleaned with various scenarios and the remaining cyclophosphamide was measured by the Institut national de santé publique du Québec. All tests were performed in triplicate. Results: A total of 189 samples were obtained: 42 negative controls and positive controls, 54 during phase 1 and 93 during phase 2. All products were more than 96.5% effective. The 0.1% chlorines were the most effective products. Cleaning procedures with two or three products had average cleaning efficacies of 99.94–99.99%. Efficacy increased with the number of successive cleanings. When two products were used, the average cleaning efficacy varied between 99.78% and 99.98%, depending on the surface. Conclusion: All cleaning products tested reduced cyclophosphamide contamination by more than 96.58%. Cleaning efficacy increased with successive cleaning. No scenario was effective in removing 100% of traces. Additional studies with larger samples should be conducted to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Oncology workers are occupationally exposed to antineoplastic drugs. This exposure can induce adverse health effects. In order to reduce their exposure, contamination on surfaces should be kept as low as possible. Objectives To monitor environmental contamination with cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and methotrexate in oncology pharmacy and patient care areas in Canadian hospitals. To describe the impact of some factors that may limit contamination. Methods This is a descriptive study. Twelve standardized sites were sampled in each participating center (six in the pharmacy and six in patient care areas). Samples were analyzed for the presence of cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and methotrexate by ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry technology. Descriptive statistical analyses were done and results were compared with a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for independent samples. Results In 2015, 48 hospitals participated in this study (48/202, 24%). Overall, 34% (181/525) of the samples were positive for cyclophosphamide, 8% (41/525) for ifosfamide, and 6% (31/525) for methotrexate. The 75th percentile value of cyclophosphamide surface concentration was 6.9 pg/cm2. For ifosfamide and methotrexate, they were lower than the limit of detection. Centers who prepared more antineoplastic drugs per year and centers who used more cyclophosphamide per year showed significantly higher surface contamination (p < 0.0001). Over the years, we observed a reduction in surface contamination. Conclusion In comparison with other multicenter studies that were conducted in Canada, the concentration of antineoplastic drugs measured on surfaces is decreasing. Regular environmental monitoring is a good practice in order to maintain contamination as low as reasonably achievable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose There are health risks to workers occupationally exposed to antineoplastic drugs. We hypothesized that implementing a biological monitoring program would be feasible. The goal was to present the results of our pilot cross-sectional study of biological monitoring of four antineoplastic drugs. Methods We recruited workers from the hematology–oncology department and control workers in a mother–child university health center. This study was preceded by an information period during which we aimed at enhancing the workers’ awareness and knowledge of the risks of occupational exposure. Participants filled out a journal containing activities performed and personal protective equipment worn. One urine sample was collected at the end of their shift. Samples were analyzed by UPLC/MS-MS for the presence of cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and alpha-fluoro-beta-alanine (5-fluorouracile’s main urinary metabolite). Results The participation rate was 85.7% (102/119). No urine sample had detectable concentrations of any of the four drugs evaluated (0/101; 0/74 nurses, 0/11 pharmacists, 0/9 pharmacy technicians, and 0/7 doctors). In the 5 days before sampling, 67/92 (72.8%) hematology–oncology participants performed at least one activity with antineoplastic drugs. Nurses wore all of the recommended protection for technical activities (86.2%), but rarely for non-technical activities (14.9%). Pharmacists and pharmacy technicians wore all of the recommended protection for all activities (100.0%). Conclusions This pilot study had a good participation rate. The absence of positive samples was a good indication that the measures in place ensured workers’ safety, even though we found areas where the worker protection can be enhanced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The main objective was to evaluate the impact of two methods aiming at reducing hazardous drug environmental contamination: the centralization of the priming of IV tubing in the pharmacy and the use of a closed-system transfer device. The secondary objective was to evaluate the satisfaction of pharmacy technicians using a survey. Methods: Sites in the hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy and care unit were analyzed for the presence of cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide and methotrexate before and after the centralization of the priming of IV tubing in the pharmacy and before and after using a closed-system transfer device. The limits of detection for cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide and methotrexate were, respectively, of 0.0015 ng/cm2, 0.0012 ng/cm2 and 0.0060 ng/cm2. The pharmacy technician satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire. Results: A total of 225 samples was quantified. After the centralization of priming in the pharmacy, no significant difference was found in the proportion of positive samples for cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide and methotrexate. Traces of cyclophosphamide found on the floor in patient care areas was significantly reduced (median[min-max] 0.08[0.06−0.09]ng/cm2 vs. 0.03[0.02−0.05], p < 0.0001). After using a closed-system transfer device, a significant difference was found for the proportion of cyclophosphamide positive samples (15/45(33%) vs. 0/45(0%), p < 0.0001), but no significant difference was found for ifosfamide (12/45(27%) vs. 5/45(11%), p = 0.059) and methotrexate (1/45(2%) vs. 2/45(4%), p = 0.557). Pharmacy technicians raised issues following the centralization of priming (e.g. workload) and the use of closed-system transfer devices (e.g. spills, particles, workload and handling difficulties). Conclusion: The centralization of the priming of IV tubing in the pharmacy reduced floor contamination in patient care areas without increasing surface contamination in the pharmacy. Closed-system transfer devices reduced contamination in pharmacy, but handling issues were raised by pharmacy technicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To describe environmental contamination with hazardous drugs in a hospital pharmacy setting before and after reorganizing a hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy. Methods. This is a descriptive study of surface contamination with cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and methotrexate in two hematology-oncology satellite pharmacies. In order to measure surface contamination with hazardous drugs, samples from four distinct measurement sites within the pharmacy were taken in each of the two phases (pre- and postphases) using a sampling procedure and an analytical method modified from Larson et al. Results. A total of 133 samples from four measurement sites were taken and analyzed over the course of the study (specifically 60 prephase samples and 73 postphase samples). The study showed a significant increase in the number of positive samples (from 66.7% to 90.4%, p<0.001) from the pre- to the postphase. The increase, however, is only significant in terms of the location where completed preparations were placed after they had come out from under the hood (from 0/15 to 21/28, p<0.001) and the work surface (from 8/15 to 15/15, p = 0.006) and only in terms of ifosfamide. Furthermore, for the other sites studied, the number of positive samples remained unchanged between the pre- and postphase. A statistically significant difference between the pre- and postphase was observed in terms of ifosfamide for three of the four measurement sites studied and methotrexate for one of the four sites. Average concentrations were higher in the post phase in three of the four cases. Conclusion. This study describes environmental contamination with hazardous drugs in a hospital pharmacy setting before and after reorganizing a hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy. The study showed that a refitting of the hemato-oncology pharmacy is not a sufficient strategy to reduce the environmental contamination by ifosfamide because a significant increase in the number of positive samples from the pre- to the postphase have been observed. Many factors can contribute to influence the contamination of hazardous drugs such as the workflow and the training of the personal. Continuous environmental surveillance of hazardous drugs is required to document traces and help reduce risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients represent a population at high risk for drugrelated problems. Our objective is to describe pharmacist interventions in a hematopoietic stem cell transplant pediatric unit. Methods and Patients. The Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Unit of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine performs around 50 hematopoietic stem cell transplants per year. During a pharmaceutical care specialized residency program, a French pharmacist participated in certain clinical activities. Drug-related problems and clinical interventions were compiled over 31 nonconsecutive days using a tool developed by the Société Française de Pharmacie Clinique. Data concerning patients, drugs, intervention, documentation, approval (if needed), and estimated impact were compiled. Results. During the 31-day period, 525 interventions were collected (16.9±3.7 per day), targeting 29 patients. The main drug-related problems were adverse drug reactions (N=125, 23.8%), untreated indication (N=92, 17.5%) and failure to receive drug (N=89, 17.0%). The pharmacist's interventions concerned mainly dose adjustment (N=174, 33.1%) and drug monitoring (N=132, 25.1%). Among the 324 (61.7%) interventions requiring a physician's approval, 302 (93.2%) were accepted without any change. Conclusion. A pharmacist is able to perform clinically relevant interventions in a hematopoietic stem cell transplant unit, given the complexity of the pharmacotherapy. Our description of drugrelated problems and interventions may help other pharmacists already working or developing pharmaceutical care in a hematopoietic stem cell transplant unit to compare their practice and it is one of the few reported in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Workers can reduce their risk of exposure to hazardous drugs by following safe handling guidelines. Healthcare centers need to dedicate time and resources in order to implement new safety recommendations. The objective was to present the results of a national survey about the safe handling of hazardous drugs in healthcare centers.Quebec healthcare centers performed an auto-evaluation to the newly updated safe handling guidelines in 2021. Centers rated each criterion as compliant or non-compliant. The guidelines tailored recommendations according to three categories of hazards: G1, consisting mostly of carcinogenic drugs; G2, other hazardous drugs; and G3, those with reproductive toxicity. The questionnaire prompted participants to document their planned corrective measures for non-compliant criteria.Most centers participated (28/29, 97%). The overall compliance was 58% (8761/15,216 criteria). The conformity per theme was hygiene and sanitation (1290/1,878, 69%), laundry (221/367, 60%), pharmacy (2658/4,474, 59%), nursing (3436/6,017, 57%), spills and accidental exposure (353/649, 54%), and general measures (803/1,831, 44%). It was higher for recommendations regarding G1s (4226/6,115, 69%) than for G2s (1626/3557, 46%) and G3s (372/916, 41%).This project successfully used an innovative approach that combined a national auto-evaluation survey, an actionable report, and the involvement of a community of practice. Centers were able to benchmark their implementation of safe handling guidelines, and community of practices may help in sharing the best practices. The design of the questionnaire helped in targeting corrective measures. More work is needed for safe handling practices that relate to G2 and G3 drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]