Utilization of collaborative practice agreements between physicians and pharmacists as a mechanism to increase capacity to care for hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

Survival after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has improved and the number of allogeneic HSCTs performed annually in the United States is expected to reach 10,000 by 2015. The National Marrow Donor Program created the System Capacity Initiative to formulate mechanisms to care for the growing number of HSCT recipients. One proposed method to increase capacity is utilization of pharmacists to manage drug therapy via collaborative practice agreements (CPAs). Pharmacists have managed drug therapy in oncology patients with CPAs for decades; however, there are limited HSCT centers that employ this practice. Engaging in collaborative practice and billing agreements with credentialed pharmacists to manage therapeutic drug monitoring, chronic medical conditions, and supportive care in HSCT recipients may be cost-effective and enable physicians to spend more time on new or more complex patients. The goal of this paper is to provide a framework for implementation of a CPA and address how it may improve HSCT program capacity.

Retrospective comparison of filgrastim plus plerixafor to other regimens for remobilization after primary mobilization failure: clinical and economic outcomes.

We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes in patients receiving remobilization therapy after primary mobilization failure. Our primary endpoint was to compare filgrastim plus plerixafor to other regimens in their ability to collect a target cell dose of at least 2 million CD34+ cells/kg (cumulative). Of 96 consecutive patients who failed their primary mobilization therapy and in whom a second mobilization was attempted, remobilization consisted of filgrastim plus plerixafor (n = 38), filgrastim with or without sargramostim (n = 43), or chemotherapy plus filgrastim (n = 15), 84% of filgrastim/plerixafor patients were able to collect at least 2 million CD34+ cells/kg from both mobilizations, compared to 60% of patients mobilized with chemotherapy/filgrastim and 79% of the filgrastim ± sargramostim patients (P = 0.17). However, when combined with cells collected from the first mobilization, 53% of filgrastim/plerixafor patients reached the target of 2 million CD34+ cells in one apheresis, compared to 20% of those receiving chemotherapy/filgrastim and 28% of those receiving filgrastim ± sargramostim (P = 0.02). Resource utilization, mobilization drug costs, clinical care costs, and total costs were significantly different. We conclude that while filgrastim/plerixafor is the most efficient remobilization strategy, those clinical benefits may not translate into lower cost, especially when multiple days of plerixafor administration are required.

Modern systemic chemotherapy in surgically unresectable neoplasms of appendiceal origin: a single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Appendiceal neoplasms include tumors ranging from benign-appearing cells with widespread mucin deposits to aggressive poorly differentiated signet ring cell adenocarcinomas. Traditionally, these tumors are treated with cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. For some patients, cytoreductive surgery is not an option, and minimal published data exist in the management and outcome of these patients. A retrospective analysis was conducted to determine the benefit of modern systemic chemotherapy in patients with disseminated appendiceal neoplasm who were not considered optimal candidates for cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted using The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center tumor registry between January 2000 and July 2005. Response was determined by radiographic response and/or overall clinical benefit. RESULTS: Of 186 patients diagnosed with appendiceal neoplasm, 54 (29%) patients considered to be suboptimal surgical candidates received > or =2 cycles of systemic chemotherapy. Thirty (55.6%) patients had a disease control rate noted as a complete response, partial response, or stable disease. After a median follow-up of 24 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were determined to be 7.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-11) and 56 months (95% CI, 36-not applicable), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic chemotherapy has a role in appendiceal neoplasm patients who are suboptimal candidates for cytoreductive surgery. The intermediate PFS indicates the challenges that exist for appendiceal neoplasm patients in this setting. Prospective randomized trials including systemic chemotherapy are needed to provide further insight into this malignancy, for which no standard exists.