Defining a Standard Set of Patient-Reported Outcomes for Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Purpose: Advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) and its treatment cause several symptoms and impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We aim to reach a consensus on the most relevant patient-reported outcome (PROs), the corresponding measures (PROMs), and measurement frequency during AOC patients' follow-up from patients' and healthcare professionals' (HCP) perspective. Methods: The project comprised five steps: 1) a literature review, 2) a focus group with patients, 3) a nominal group with HCP, 4) two round-Delphi consultations with patients and HCP, and 5) a final meeting with HCP. Delphi questionnaire was elaborated based on literature review, focus group (n=5 patients), and nominal group (n=16 HCP). The relevance of each PRO and the appropriateness (A) and feasibility (F) of the proposed PROM were assessed (Likert scale 1=strongly agree; 9=strongly disagree). The consensus was reached when at least 75% of the panelists rated it as 'relevant', 'appropriate', or 'feasible' (score 7-9). Results: A total of 56 HCP [51.8% Hospital Pharmacy; 41.1% Oncology; 3.6% Nursing; and 3.6% Psycho-oncology; mean time in specialty 12.5 (8.0) years] and 10 AOC patients [mean time diagnosis 5.4 (3.0) years] participated in the 1st round. All PROs achieved consensus regarding their relevance, except dry skin (58.0%). Agreement was reached for PRO-CTCAE to be used to assess fatigue (A:84.9%; F:75.8%), neuropathy (A:92.4%; F:77.3%), diarrhea (A:87.9%; F:88.7%), constipation (A:86.4%; F:75.8%), nausea (A:89.4%; F:75.8%), insomnia (A:81.8%; F:88.7%), abdominal bloating (A:82.2%; F:82.2%) and sexuality (A:78.8%; F:88.6%); EQ-5D to determine patients' HRQoL (A:87.9%; F:80.3%), pain (A:87.9%; F:75.8%) and mood (A:77.7%; F:85.5%); to assess treatment adherence the Morisky-Green (A:90.9%; F:84.9%) and the dispensing register (A:80.3%; F:80.3%) were chosen. It was agreed to note in the medical record whether the patient's treatment preferences had been considered during decision-making (A:78.8%; F:78.8%) and to use a 5-point Likert scale to assess treatment satisfaction (A:86.4%; F:86.4%). Panelists agreed (A:92.4%; F: 77.3%) to collect these PROs (1) at the time of diagnosis/relapse; (2) one month after starting treatment/change therapeutic strategy; (3) every three months during the 1st-year of treatment; and later (4) every six months until treatment completion/change. Conclusions: The consensus reached represents the first step towards including the patient's perspective in AOC follow-up. The standardized collection of PROs in clinical practice may contribute to optimizing the follow-up of these patients and thus improving the quality of care.

Deprescribing of non-antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients.

PURPOSE: In recent decades, the life expectancy of HIV-infected patients has increased considerably, to the extent that the disease can now be considered chronic. In this context of progressive aging, HIV-infected persons have a greater prevalence of comorbid conditions. Consequently, they usually take more non-antiretroviral drugs, and their drug therapy are more complex. This supposes a greater risk of drug interactions, of hospitalization, falls, and death. In the last years, deprescribing has gained attention as a means to rationalize medication use. METHODS: Review of the different therapeutic approach that includes optimization of polypharmacy and control and reduction of potentially inappropriate prescription. RESULTS: There are several protocols for systematizing the deprescribing process. The most widely used tool is the Medication Regimen Complexity Index, an index validated in HIV-infected persons. Anticholinergic medications are the agents that have been most associated with major adverse effects so, various scales have been employed to measure it. Other tools should be employed to detect and prevent the use of potentially inappropriate drugs. Prioritization of candidates should be based, among others, on drugs that should always be avoided and drugs with no justified indication. CONCLUSIONS: The deprescribing process shared by professionals and patients definitively would improve management of treatment in this population. Because polypharmacy in HIV-infected patients show that a considerable percentage of patients could be candidates for deprescribing, we must understand the importance of deprescribing and that HIV-infected persons should be a priority group. This process would be highly feasible and effective in HIV-infected persons.

Antifungal stewardship in a tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: The inappropriate use of antifungals is an important health problem related to increasing adverse effects, unnecessary cost and promotion of resistant and emerging fungal infections. Despite its relevance, many health institutions assign few resources to improve prescribing practices. AIMS: To evaluate the efficiency of an antifungal stewardship programme (ASP) centered on restricted antifungal agents. METHODS: The main activity during the eight-month study was to perform a programmed review of restricted antifungals (lipid formulations of amphotericin B, echinocandins and voriconazole) prescribed in hospitalized patients. In the case of amendable antifungal treatment, a recommendation was included in the electronic medical record. RESULTS: A total of 280 antifungal prescriptions for 262 patients were revised during the study period. The indications were prophylactic in 85 cases (30.4%), pre-emptive in 10 cases (3.5%), empiric in 122 cases (43.6%), and directed in 63 cases (22.5%). A total of 70 prescriptions (25%) in 61 patients were considered to be amendable. In most of these cases, treatment could have been reduced considering the patient's clinical improvement and microbiological results. The most common advice was antifungals change (70%), antifungal withdrawal (21%), removal of one antifungal drug in cases of combined therapy (7%), and switching to oral route (1%). Proposed recommendations were addressed in 28 cases (40%). There was no significant difference in adherence with respect to the type of recommendation (p=0.554). There was a 42% lower use of antifungals during the period of the study compared to that observed during a similar previous period. Mortality among patients who were treated according to the recommendations of the ASP was 17% and in whom treatment was not modified it was 30% (p=0.393). CONCLUSIONS: ASPs centered on hospitalized patients may be an efficient strategy to ameliorate antifungal use in hospitals.