Trends in the delivery of care to oncology patients in the United States: Emphasis on the role pharmacists on the healthcare team.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify trends in oncology care that allow one to forecast workforce supply and demand, the training and skills needed by the oncology pharmacist for the likely future of oncology care. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with experienced oncology pharmacists in leadership roles at 20 organizations balanced by geographic region and type of practice site (academic or community/ambulatory). Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and theme identification. RESULTS: Practice sites differed widely in numbers of patient visits, practitioner/patient ratios, residency program presence, and other structural features. Despite this, the majority reported an expectation of growth in cancer patients, oncology physicians, oncology pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, oncology nurses, and advanced practice practitioners in the next two to five years. Fifty percent of sites currently support Post Graduate Year 2 (PGY2) oncology residencies. At least 50% reported routine pharmacist involvement in 12 clinical functions. More future involvement was predicted for immunotherapy (80%) and oral oncolytic therapy (90%). Interprofessional involvement was reported for a broad variety of practice-related committees and patient education teams. Limited pharmacist involvement in credentialing, quality measurement, and value-based reimbursement systems was found. CONCLUSION: Anticipated increases in demand for oncology pharmacists strongly suggest the need for more PGY2 oncology residency programs and on-the-job oncology training programs. Oncology pharmacists are currently involved in many clinical and administrative functions including multidisciplinary management. While a core set of clinical functions has been identified, oncology pharmacists must prepare for the increased use of oral oncology agents and immunotherapy. Pharmacist involvement in value-based reimbursement and other data-based quality outcome measurements should be increased to optimize involvement in team-based patient care.

Implementation and evaluation of high-dose methotrexate administration guidelines.

BACKGROUND: High-dose methotrexate is used to treat a variety of malignancies. Methotrexate-associated supportive care and the threshold methotrexate level for the discontinuation of supportive care are not consistent among studies. We evaluated the implementation of high-dose methotrexate administration guidelines, which raised the standard threshold methotrexate level for the discontinuation of supportive care from <0.05 to <0.1 µmol. METHODS: A single-center, observational analysis of patients receiving high-dose methotrexate from 1 January 2015 to 31 May 2017 was conducted. The primary endpoint was time from the start of the methotrexate infusion until the discontinuation of the sodium bicarbonate infusion, before and after guideline implementation. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients met the inclusion criteria, which comprised of a total of 136 individual methotrexate doses and were included in the retrospective analysis. Twenty-four patients were included in the prospective analysis, which comprised a total of 46 individual methotrexate doses. The primary endpoint, time until discontinuation of the sodium bicarbonate infusion, was a median of 97.7 h in the retrospective group versus 73.2 h in the prospective group (p = 0.098). Secondary endpoints also favored patients in the prospective group, including hours of hospitalization, number of methotrexate levels checked, weight gained during admission, and adherence to the guideline. CONCLUSION: Among patients who received high-dose methotrexate, implementation of a guideline using a methotrexate threshold of <0.1 µmol was able to significantly decrease the time to discontinuation of supportive care and subsequently may lead to early hospital discharge given that we did not show a statistical significance.

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy of a Busulfan Test Dose in Adult Patients Undergoing Myeloablative Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Owing to interpatient variability in busulfan exposure, therapeutic monitoring of busulfan is often used in myeloablative allogeneic transplantation to ensure that patients are near the optimal steady-state goal of 900 ng/mL. One challenge in therapeutic monitoring of busulfan is the brief course of busulfan treatment, requiring prompt analysis and dose adjustments as needed. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of a busulfan test dose before the start of the conditioning regimen would allow for all conditioning regimen doses to be given at the calculated optimized dose. An observational study was completed to evaluate the effects of a busulfan test dose of 0.9 mg/kg administered before the start of a myeloablative intravenous busulfan-based conditioning regimen. Sixty adult patients who received a busulfan conditioning regimen were reviewed, including 30 patients prior to the implementation of the busulfan test dose (pretest dose group) and 30 patients who received the busulfan test dose (posttest dose group). The primary objective was a pharmacokinetic evaluation of the percentage of patients who achieved the desired steady-state goal using the test dose strategy. The safety and efficacy of the busulfan test dose were evaluated as well. The average busulfan steady-state level after the first dose of the conditioning regimen was significantly lower in the pre-test dose group compared with the post-test dose group (660 ng/mL versus 879.9 ng/mL; P < 0.001). Compared with the post-test dose group, significantly fewer patients in the pre-test dose group were within 10% of the busulfan steady-state goal (10% versus 73.3%; P < 0.001) or within 5% of the goal (0% versus 53%; P < 0.001). Requirements for parenteral nutrition and/or patient-controlled analgesia owing to mucositis and rates of veno-occlusive disease were not significantly different between the pre-test dose group and the post-test dose group. The rates of disease relapse, mortality, and acute graft-versus-host disease were similar in the two groups. A pretransplantation busulfan test dose of 0.9 mg/kg improved the patients' ability to reach therapeutic busulfan target levels after the first conditioning dose and resulted in fewer adjustments during conditioning. The use of a busulfan test dose did not significantly increase patients' risk of mucositis or other safety outcomes.

Pharmacologic options for CNS infections caused by resistant Gram-positive organisms.

Infectious disease continues to evolve, presenting new and challenging clinical situations for practitioners. Specific to device-related and neurosurgical-related CNS infections, Gram-positive organisms are of growing concern. Current Infection Disease Society of America guidelines for the treatment of CNS infections offer little direction after conventional therapy, consisting of vancomycin, has failed or the patient has demonstrated intolerance. A review of literature evaluating alternative therapies, specifically linezolid, quinupristin/dalfopristin, daptomycin and tigecycline, will be presented. Interpretations of these data are offered followed by a brief presentation of future therapies, including ortavancin, telavancin, dalbavancin, ceftobiprole and iclaprim, all of which possess potent Gram-positive activity.

Oxaliplatin hypersensitivity: case report and successful repeat desensitization.

INTRODUCTION: Oxaliplatin is a third generation organoplatinum complex used as an antineoplastic agent in combination with fluorouracil and leucovorin for colorectal carcinoma. Hypersensitivity reactions are commonly observed to oxaliplatin, with an incidence of 12% to 16%. Desensitization protocols for oxaliplatin with premedication using steroids or antihistamines have been previously reported. We present a patient who underwent successful repeat desensitization without premedication. CASE SUMMARY: A 43-year-old Asian male with metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma was started on chemotherapy with oxaliplatin and leucovorin followed by fluorouracil. Three hours after the first infusion of oxaliplatin, he developed generalized urticaria, which resolved with Benadryl. Similar symptoms developed after the second cycle. A desensitization protocol, without premedication, was developed for the third oxaliplatin cycle starting at 1:10,000 of the therapeutic dose followed by doubling doses thereafter until a cumulative goal dose of 175 mg was administered. Fluorouracil and leucovorin were then infused at the usual rates. Skin prick testing, before the procedure, using 5 mg/mL oxaliplatin was negative. Intracutaneous testing using dilutions of 1:1000, 1:100, and 1:10 were also negative. The patient was observed for 2 hours after the procedure without evidence of a hypersensitivity reaction. Two weeks later, the same protocol was successfully implemented for completion of his fourth cycle of chemotherapy and continued biweekly for a total of 11 cycles. Follow-up revealed tumor remission. CONCLUSION: A desensitization protocol without premedication may be considered in those patients with a history of oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions with avoidance of the cumulative exposure to pretreatment medications.