Search

Background: Hospital admission and discharge are at high risk of drug‐related problems (DRPs) in older patients with cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical and economic impact of a comprehensive pharmaceutical care intervention (RECAP) to optimize drug therapy in patients with cancer ≥75 years admitted to oncology or geriatric wards. Method: RECAP intervention was defined as follows: at admission and discharge, hospital pharmacists conducted comprehensive medication reconciliation and review, identified relevant DRPs and provided optimization recommendations to prescribers; at discharge, pharmacists also provided patient education and shared information with primary care providers. The impact of the intervention was assessed by the rate of implementation of recommendations by the prescribers and the evolution of polypharmacy rate; a peer review of the clinical significance of DRPs was performed by an expert panel of geriatric oncologists and pharmacists. A cost saving analysis compared cost avoided through resolution of DRPs to cost of pharmacist's time. Results: From January 2019 and August 2020, 201 patients were included (median age 80 [75–97] years), 68.7% with solid tumors. DRPs requiring optimization were identified in 70.9% of patients at admission (mean 1.7 DRP/patient) and 47.7% at discharge (0.9 DRP/patient). Most pharmacist recommendations (70.8%) were followed by prescribers, allowing the correction of 1.2 DRP/patient at admission and 0.7 DRP/patient at discharge. Half of resolved DRPs were rated as clinically significant. However, polypharmacy rate was not reduced at discharge. Cost comparison showed $7.2 avoided for $1 invested, with an estimated total net benefit of $354,822 (mean $1766 per patient). Conclusions: The RECAP model significantly reduces DRPs in hospitalized older patients with cancer. The model was cost saving, confirming the value of implementing it in routine practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Recent advances in technology have made it possible to develop robots for preparing injectable anticancer drugs. This study aims to compare characteristics between robots available in the European market in 2022 and to help future pharmacy users in their choices. Methods: Three sources of data were used: (1) a review of published articles in the MEDLINE database from November 2017 to end of June 2021 on chemotherapy-compounding robots used in hospital; (2) all manufacturers' documentation, and (3) demonstrations of robot operations in real hospital conditions and discussions with users and manufacturers. Robot characteristics included number of robots installed, general technical characteristics, type of injectable chemotherapy produced and compatible materials, productivity data, preparation control methods, residual manual tasks, chemical and microbiological risk management, cleaning method, software, and implementation time. Results: Seven robots commercialized were studied. Several technical characteristics have to be taken into account in selecting the robot whose match the specific needs of a particular hospital, and which often require rethinking the current production workflow as well as the organization of the pharmacy unit. In addition to increasing productivity, the robots improve the quality of production thanks to better traceability, reproducibility, and precision of sampling. They also improve user protection against chemical risk, musculoskeletal disorders, and needle wounds. Nevertheless, when robotization is being planned, there are still numerous residual manual tasks to keep in mind. Conclusion: Robotization of the production of injectable anticancer drugs is booming within anticancer chemotherapy preparation pharmacy units. Feedback from this experience needs to be further shared with the pharmacy community regarding this significant investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Oral folic acid supplementation is essential for patients treated with pemetrexed, to prevent the risk of severe hematologic toxicity. In case of intestinal absorption disorder, no recommendations exist for intravenous folic acid supplementation. Case report: We describe a 74-year-old patient with multimetastatic non-small-cell lung adenocarcinoma, receiving first-line chemotherapy with carboplatin AUC5, pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. The patient presented neglected celiac disease, resulting in malabsorption syndrome with iron and folic acid deficiency. The question was how to administer folic acid supplementation during the pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. Management and outcomes: Intravenous injection of 200 mg levoleucovorin on day 1 of cycle 1 of pemetrexed-based chemotherapy was administered and well tolerated. During the second cycle, the levoleucovorin perfusion was not renewed by omission. The patient was hospitalized for 7 days because of febrile aplasia. Piperacillin–tazobactam was started, and then switched to amoxicillin–clavulanate plus ciprofloxacin. After this episode of post-chemotherapy febrile aplasia, it was decided to systematically supplement the patient with intravenous levoleucovorin, with blood folate concentration monitoring at each cycle. At 16 months after start of treatment, the patient was in complete remission, indicating that the immune-chemotherapy was effective, with no further febrile neutropenia. Discussion/conclusion: This case report highlights intravenous levoleucovorin supplementation as an alternative to oral folic acid if needed during pemetrexed – antifolate-based chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer patients are being exposed to antineoplastic drugs more frequently and for longer periods, resulting in a higher risk of hypersensitivity reactions. The aim of this study was to assess the pharmaceutical time and direct cost of drug allergy explorations following immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents. Methods: A micro-costing method was used to collect data on consumption of human and material resources for allergy exploration preparations. The monetisation was carried out on the basis of prices and hourly wage costs applied in 2018. The number and type of allergy explorations prepared by the pharmacy as well as nature of antineoplastic drugs tested, and the number of culprit drugs reintroductions were collected. Results: Almost 1.5 h is required to realise allergy tests for one patient including pharmacist time for prescription analysis and pharmacy technician's time for tests preparation. The mean manufacturing cost of these tests is estimated at €62.87 (€57.82–65.49) per culprit drug for one patient. Programming patients according to culprit drugs tested allows rationalising healthcare provider time and increasing efficiency. From January 2010 to December 2018, 277 patients were tested and 490 allergy explorations were performed, corresponding to more than 5000 preparations. Mostly, the culprit drug could be reintroduced (n = 383, 78.2%) allowing patients to receive the best possible treatment. Conclusion: Management of hypersensitivity reactions is constantly progressing, as it contributes to improving patient care in oncology. This activity is time-consuming for the pharmacy team but allows patients with previous hypersensitivity reaction to continue effective treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate the incidence of delayed methotrexate elimination in patients treated with high-dose methotrexate (≥1 g/m2 ) for haematological malignancy and to identify the impact of interacting drugs, especially proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and ranitidine. All patients treated with high-dose methotrexate over a 6 year period in the haematology department of the Lyon Sud University Hospital (Hospices Civils de Lyon, France) were included. Potential risk factors for delayed methotrexate elimination were tested in a generalized linear model by univariate analysis: patient age, gender, methotrexate dose, administration of PPI or ranitidine, and concomitant nephrotoxic drugs. A total of 412 cycles of methotrexate were administered to 179 patients. Proton-pump inhibitors were co-administered with methotrexate in 127 cycles and ranitidine in 192 cycles. Ninety-three cycles included no antacid drugs. A total of 918 plasma methotrexate assays were performed. Methotrexate concentrations were checked at 24 hours in 92% of cycles. Delayed methotrexate elimination was observed in 20.9% of cycles. A total of 63 cycles with delayed methotrexate elimination were only identified on plasma methotrexate measures at 72 hours: ie, plasma methotrexate was in the normal range at 24 and 48 hour post injection. Use of PPI/ranitidine or no antacid drugs did not increase risk of delayed elimination, with respectively delayed methotrexate elimination in 20.5%, 21.9%, and 19.4% of cycles (P = .89). Impaired baseline creatinine clearance showed significant association in univariate analysis. Fifteen patients showed grade 1 acute kidney injury, 1 grade 2, 2 grade 3, and none grade 4. For half of these cases, delayed methotrexate elimination was observed and the 2 grade 3 events appeared in patients treated with PPIs. This retrospective study suggests that there is no association between concomitant use of proton-pump inhibitors (pantoprazole and esomeprazole) or ranitidine and delayed methotrexate elimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]