Impact of Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Intervention Acceptance on Hospital Length of Stay.

Background: Inappropriate antibiotic use is a major public health concern. Excessive exposure to antibiotics results in the proliferation of multidrug-resistant bacteria, increase in potentially avoidable adverse drug reactions, healthcare utilization, and cost. Currently, systematic reviews and controlled trials assessing the effects of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) on hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality, and cost-savings are conflicting. Some studies reported a significant cost-savings driven by shorter hospital LOS while the others found no effect and, in some cases, prolonged LOS. Shortening the time to appropriate therapy and reducing unnecessary days of therapy have been shown to reduce hospital LOS. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of prescriber acceptance to ASP interventions on hospital LOS. Methods: Between January 2018 and December 2019, 764 charts were retrospectively reviewed for patients who received antimicrobial treatment and in whom an ASP intervention was performed. Patients were allocated into 2 groups: those whose ASP interventions were accepted and those whose were rejected. Provider responses were then documented within 24 hours of being communicated. The primary outcome was hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission rates and inpatient antimicrobial duration of therapy (DOT). Results: There were 384 patients with an accepted ASP intervention and 380 with a denied intervention. Baseline characteristics were similar between both groups, except for a difference in the types of intervention performed (P < 0.001). The median hospital LOS for patients in the accepted intervention group was 6.5 days compared to 7 days in the rejected intervention group (P = 0.009). Antimicrobial DOT was also shorter in the accepted intervention group (5 vs 7 days; P < 0.001). There was no difference in 30-day readmission rates (P = 0.98). Conclusion: Prescriber acceptance to ASP interventions decreases hospital LOS and antimicrobial DOT without affecting 30-day readmission rates.

COVID-19: A Review of Potential Treatments (Corticosteroids, Remdesivir, Tocilizumab, Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab, and Casirivimab/Imdevimab) and Pharmacological Considerations.

Objectives: In light of the ongoing global pandemic, this paper reviews data on a number of potential and approved agents for COVID-19 disease management, including corticosteroids, remdesivir, tocilizumab, and monoclonal antibody combinations. Dose considerations, potential drug-drug interactions, and access issues are discussed. Key findings: Remdesivir is the first antiviral agent approved for the treatment of COVID-19, based on results from large clinical trials showing reduction in recovery time, faster clinical improvement, and decrease in time to discharge with remdesivir. Dexamethasone and tocilizumab have demonstrated mortality benefits in large, randomized controlled trials. Consequently, the use of corticosteroids has become the standard of care for hospitalized patients with severe or critical COVID-19, while tocilizumab is recommended for use in combination with a corticosteroid in certain hospitalized patients. Recently, monoclonal antibody combinations bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab received emergency use authorizations for use in non-hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression. Summary: As data from large clinical trials emerge, the paradigm of COVID-19 treatments has shifted significantly. The use of corticosteroids, remdesivir, and tocilizumab depend on disease severity. Emerging data on monoclonal antibody combinations are promising, but further data are required. Pharmacists can play a role in ensuring appropriate access, correct administration, and safe use of COVID-19 treatments and are encouraged to stay abreast of new developments.

Use and safety of appearance and performance enhancing supplements in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men receiving daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Appearance- and performance-enhancing supplements (APES) may be associated with liver and renal toxicity, but use is often under-reported. This study describes the use and safety of APES among gay, bisexual, and other men-who-have-sex with men (gbMSM) attending an urban HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) clinic. A cross-sectional study was conducted between February 2018 to September 2018 to assess APES usage in gbMSM taking daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine for PrEP. Renal and liver function were assessed from electronic medical records. Among 50 participants (98% male, median 32 years, 52% White, on PrEP for a median 4.4 years), 72% reported lifetime APES use, with 52% currently using APES (median 1.5 products/person) and 28% never used APES. The most common products included whey protein, creatine supplements and anabolic steroids. The primary reason for APES use was to increase muscle mass. Three (12%) current APES users had elevated serum creatinine (stage 1) versus zero (0%) in the non-APES group. Two (8%) current APES users experienced grade 3-4 ALT/AST elevations versus zero (0%) in the non-APES group. APES usage among gbMSM taking PrEP was high and may be associated with liver/renal lab abnormalities. Increased awareness of APES use and potential toxicity is encouraged to enhance safety.

The intersection of drug interactions and adverse reactions in contemporary antiretroviral therapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have transformed HIV infection into a chronic and manageable condition. The introduction of potent and more tolerable antiretrovirals (ARVs) with favorable pharmacokinetic profiles has changed the prevalence and nature of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Here, we review the relevance of DDIs in the era of contemporary ART. RECENT FINDINGS: Management of DDIs remains an important challenge with modern ART, primarily due to increased polypharmacy in older persons living with HIV. Significant DDIs exist between boosted ARVs or older nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and comedications for chronic comorbidities (e.g., anticoagulants, antiplatelets, statins) or complex conditions (e.g., anticancer agents, immunosuppressants). Newer ARVs such as unboosted integrase inhibitors, doravirine, and fostemsavir have reduced DDI potential, but there are clinically relevant DDIs that warrant consideration. Potential consequences of DDIs include increased toxicity and/or reduced efficacy of ARVs and/or comedications. Management approaches include switching to an ARV with less DDI potential, changing comedications, or altering medication dosage or dosing frequency. Deprescribing strategies can reduce DDIs and polypharmacy, improve adherence, minimize unnecessary adverse effects, and prevent medication-related errors. SUMMARY: Management of DDIs requires close interdisciplinary collaboration from multiple healthcare disciplines (medicine, nursing, pharmacy) across a spectrum of care (community, outpatient, inpatient).

Impact of Oral Chemotherapy Management Program on Capecitabine Toxicity Management.

PURPOSE: Increasing use of oral chemotherapy has created unique challenges related to patient safety and compliance. To address this issue, the Henry Ford Cancer Institute at Henry Ford Health System developed and implemented a system-wide, multidisciplinary program named the Oral Chemotherapy Management Program (OCMP). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of OCMP on patient outcomes in those receiving capecitabine. METHODS: This was a retrospective, quasi-experimental study that compared outcomes in patients receiving capecitabine before and after OCMP implementation. The co-primary outcomes were incidence(s) of grade 1-4 and grade 3-4 adverse effects (AEs) associated with capecitabine. Secondary outcomes were emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations because of toxicity, and adherence rate. RESULTS: OCMP patients had significantly lower overall incidence of AE of any grade (58.9% v 70.3%; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.94; P = .03). OCMP implementation significantly lowered incidence of any grade and grade 3-4 nausea, vomiting, and/or diarrhea, and grade 3-4 hand-foot syndrome. It resulted in the decreased number of ED visits (8.9% v 18.9%; P = .005) and hospitalizations (6.3% v 17.1%; P = .002), as well as improved medication adherence rates (0.94 v 0.97; P = .03). CONCLUSION: Most patients who developed capecitabine-related AE required intervention by OCMP. Implementation of OCMP reduced the incidence of high-grade AE, decreased the number of ED visits and hospitalizations because of AE, and improved the medication adherence rate.

Getting to the Heart of the Matter: A Review of Drug Interactions Between HIV Antiretrovirals and Cardiology Medications.

The past 20 years have seen remarkable advances in the treatment of HIV such that most people diagnosed with HIV today can live long, healthy lives by taking antiretrovirals which are usually life-long. Advancements in antiretroviral therapy include the availability of well tolerated, single tablet regimens that are associated with a lower risk of drug-drug interactions. Despite this, many people living with HIV infection might be taking antiretroviral agents that are associated with significant drug-drug interactions. Because HIV infection itself is associated with cardiovascular complications and this population is living longer, concomitant use of antiretrovirals and medications to treat cardiovascular-related diseases is often required. For this reason, it is imperative that clinicians are aware of the potential for clinically significant drug-drug interactions between antiretroviral agents and cardiac medications as well as the useful HIV drug interaction resources that might provide guidance. Available data on significant interactions are summarized and suggested guidance regarding management is discussed.