ANZTCT practice statement: sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease diagnosis and management.

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease (SOS/VOD) is a life-threatening complication which can develop after haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and some antibody-drug conjugates. Several SOS/VOD diagnostic and management guidelines exist, with the most recent and refined being the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation adult and paediatric guidelines. Timely diagnosis and effective management (including the availability of therapeutic options) significantly contribute to improved patient outcomes. In Australia and New Zealand, there is variability in clinical practice and access to SOS/VOD therapies. This review aims to summarise the current evidence for SOS/VOD diagnosis, prevention and treatment and to provide recommendations for SOS/VOD in the context of contemporary Australasian HSCT clinical practice.

A cost comparison of pembrolizumab: Fixed and weight-based dosing.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, indicated to treat multiple cancers, was initially approved in Australia as weight-based dosing at 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W). Subsequent approvals used 'fixed' dosages of 200 mg Q3W or 400 mg every 6 weeks (Q6W). Pharmacokinetic equivalence was demonstrated between dosing strategies, with no significant differences in efficacy or toxicity. Fixed dosing regimens are routinely used in Australia. AIM: To model and compare the cost of weight-based dosing of pembrolizumab to standard fixed dosing regimens. METHOD: A single centre, retrospective review was conducted. Patients, identified from dispensing software, who commenced on pembrolizumab between January and December 2022 were included. Patient demographic and treatment data was extracted from electronic medical records. Costs of weight-based doses were calculated and compared to the cost of fixed dosing. Variables such as acquisition cost, funding mechanisms and 'vial sharing' were considered. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were included (63% male, median age 68 years). Of the 211 doses of pembrolizumab administered (average 4.1 doses/patient), 161 were Q3W doses, and 50 were Q6W doses. The acquisition cost for a fixed 200 mg and 400 mg dose was $7646, and $15,292, respectively. The average patient weight was 77.6 kg (SD 19 kg), which equated to $5933 for a weight-based Q3W dose, and $11,867 for the Q6W dose; a potential cost avoidance of $1965 and $3930 per dose, respectively. This represented a possible 23.5% avoidance in medication acquisition cost. Over the study period of 1 year, using weight-based dosing for pembrolizumab had the potential to reduce medication expenditure by $467,996. DISCUSSION: Significant cost avoidance could be achieved via weight-based pembrolizumab dosing. Given the substantial total cost of pembrolizumab, the growing number of indications and the expected equivalent treatment outcomes with weight-based pembrolizumab, the potential cost reductions of weight-based pembrolizumab at both institution and government level should be further explored.

Medication reuse programs: a narrative review of the literature.

A proportion of returned medications may potentially meet quality standards to be reused safely. In Australia, there is no regulatory guidance available to facilitate such medication reuse. This narrative review aimed to identify and review international literature describing medication reuse programs to provide insight into their implementation and potential barriers. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) -based guidelines, a literature search was conducted in Medline, Scopus, and Embase using key words such as 'medication' and 'reuse' to identify relevant articles. Two reviewers ascertained eligibility for inclusion. Inclusion criteria included English language and publication after 2010. From the articles selected, identified international medication reuse programs and relevant regulatory aspects were summarized. Details, both regulatory and operational, for the specific medication reuse programs, described in the selected articles was further explored via a grey literature search. Of the 1973 identified articles, 84 were assessed for eligibility and 17 were included in this review. Of these, 14 described scenarios where medication reuse is prohibited, 2 studies described programs allowing the reuse of medication and 1 study did not discuss whether reuse was prohibited or not. From these primary articles, secondary citations were identified, with eight from gray literature. Barriers to medication reuse included exposure to environmental extremes during storage, physical appearance, evidence of tampering, safety, and efficacy concerns for the returned medication. Programs that exist globally have overcome these barriers. Several programs that provide safe and effective reuse of medications were i© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site-for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.dentified and described. The findings described in this review should be used to inform frameworks for legislative, regulatory, and professional practice change for medication reuse. Measures implemented in the UK's pandemic response to safely reuse medications in the nursing home and hospice settings and European medication donation programs should be further investigated. The concept of medication reuse is not novel and should be considered for the Australian setting.

Implementation of Partnered Pharmacist Medication Charting in haematology and oncology inpatients.

AIM: Partnered Pharmacist Medication Charting (PPMC) in patients admitted under general medical units has been shown to reduce medication errors. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the PPMC model on medication errors in patients admitted under cancer units in Victorian hospitals. METHODS: A prospective cohort study comparing cohorts before and after the introduction of PPMC was conducted. This included a 2-month pre-intervention phase and 3-month intervention phase. PPMC was implemented during the intervention phase as new model of care that enabled credentialed pharmacists to chart all admission medications, including pre-admission or new medications and cancer therapies, in collaboration with the admitting medical officer. The proportion of medication charts with at least one error was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Seven health services across Victoria were included in the study. The majority of health services were using paper-based prescribing systems for oncology. Of the 547 patients who received standard medical medication charting, 331 (60.5%) had at least one medication error identified compared to 18 out of 416 patients (4.3%) using the PPMC model (p < 0.001). The median (interquartile range) inpatient length of stay was 5 (2.9-10.6) days in pre-intervention and 4.9 (2.9-11) days in intervention (p = 0.88). In the intervention arm, 42 patients had cancer therapy charted by a pharmacist with no errors. CONCLUSIONS: PPMC was successfully scaled into cancer units as a collaborative medication safety strategy. The model was associated with significantly lower rates of medication errors, including cancer therapies. PPMC should be adopted more widely in cancer units in Australia.

Developing clinical indicators for oncology: the inaugural cancer care indicator set for the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) sponsored an expert-led, consensus-driven, four-stage process, based on a modified Delphi methodology, to determine a set of clinical indicators as quality measures of cancer service provision in Australia. This was done in response to requests from institutional health care providers seeking accreditation, which were additional and complementary to the existing radiation oncology set. The steering group members comprised multidisciplinary key opinion leaders and a consumer representative. Five additional participants constituted the stakeholder group, who deliberated on the final indicator set. METHODS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: An initial meeting of the steering group scoped the high level nature of the desired set. In stage 2, 65 candidate indicators were identified by a literature review and a search of international metrics. These were ranked by survey, based on ease of data accessibility and collectability and clinical relevance. The top 27 candidates were debated by the stakeholder group and culled to a final set of 16 indicators. A user manual was created with indicators mapped to clinical codes. The indicator set was ratified by the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia and is now available for use by health care organisations participating in the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. This inaugural cancer clinical indicator set covers high level assessment of various critical processes in cancer service provision in Australia. Regular reviews and updates will ensure usability. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: This is the inaugural indicator set for cancer care for use across Australia and internationally under the ACHS Clinical Indicator Program. Multidisciplinary involvement through a modified Delphi process selected indicators representing both generic and specific aspects of care across the cancer journey pathway and will provide a functional tool to compare health care delivery across multiple settings. It is anticipated that this will drive continual improvement in cancer care provision.

Defibrotide for the treatment of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome: evaluation of response to therapy and patient outcomes.

PURPOSE: Defibrotide is an agent used to treat sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS/VOD) in patients undergoing haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of defibrotide used within institutional guidelines for the treatment of SOS/VOD in patients undergoing haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). METHODS: Data for 23 patients was retrospectively reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of defibrotide and the utility of response criteria to direct therapy as specified within institution guidelines. Patients met institutional criteria for a diagnosis of SOS/VOD based on predominantly Baltimore criteria and received defibrotide. Stabilisation or improvement in symptoms and biochemical markers was required for continuation of therapy with defibrotide. RESULTS: Overall, 14 patients responded to therapy. Survival at day 100 post HSCT was 70%. Median serum (total) bilirubin concentrations in all evaluable patients had decreased at days 5 and 10 (p < 0.001). There was a proportional reduction in median weight of 4% by day 5 and 6.6% by day 10 (p < 0.001). On cessation of defibrotide, there was a decrease in the proportion of patients exhibiting hepatomegaly (p = 0.02), ascites (p < 0.01) and requiring oxygen supplementation (p < 0.01), with 70% survival at day 100 post HSCT. CONCLUSION: Defibrotide to treat SOS/VOD and continued based on attainment of early response was effective management of this condition. Defibrotide should be considered in any consensus protocol providing guidance on the management of SOS/VOD, with future studies considered to assess appropriate time points for response to therapy during treatment.

Failure to achieve therapeutic levels with high-dose posaconazole tablets potentially due to enhanced clearance.

Aim To describe a case of persistent sub-therapeutic posaconazole levels in setting of salvage chemotherapy for relapsed acute myeloid leukemia. Case details A 57-year-old male was admitted for the management of relapsed acute myeloid leukemia and ongoing pulmonary aspergillosis. While continuing on posaconazole tablet 300 mg daily, he received a course of salvage chemotherapy. The initial steady state posaconazole trough level was therapeutic at 0.84 mg/L (target >0.70 mg/L). However, after five days, the level had dropped to 0.40 mg/L, coinciding with hyperbilirubinemia and hypoalbuminemia. Bilirubin level peaked at 36 µm/L (normal high <20 µm/L), albumin levels were consistently low, averaging at 25 g/L (range 33-46 g/L). The patient had been compliant and there were no underlying gastrointestinal conditions identified which might have potentially affected posaconazole absorption. Outcome An increase in posaconazole dose failed to achieve target levels and treatment was changed to voriconazole. However, levels were surprisingly supra-therapeutic, resulting in side effects and substantial dose reduction was required. Conclusion Failure to achieve target posaconazole levels despite increased dosing may be attributed to factors other than impaired oral absorption. Enhanced metabolism and clearance could be associated with hypoalbuminemia and hyperbilirubinemia. Further case studies, including PK modelling, are required to confirm this effect.

Dapsone and azole interactions: A clinical perspective.

An understanding of the clinical significance of dapsone-drug interactions is essential for optimal use of this agent. This review aims to provide clinicians with an overview of this topic.

Evaluation of NovoRapid infusion as a treatment option in the management of diabetic ketoacidosis.

This study evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of NovoRapid (insulin aspart) compared to Actrapid™ (human neutral insulin) for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). In this retrospective study involving 40 patients, no statistically significant differences were observed between biochemical variables, infusion duration or complications in patients treated with insulin aspart or human neutral insulin. These results support the use of insulin aspart as an effective and safe alternative to human neutral insulin in DKA.

Comparison of biosimilar filgrastim with originator filgrastim for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and engraftment in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Nivestim is a biosimilar approved for the same indications as Neupogen including the mobilization of autologous peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs). The clinical efficacy and safety of Nivestim for this use have not been formally assessed in clinical trials. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In our retrospective single-center study we compared variables of PBSC mobilization and engraftment of 60 patients mobilized with Nivestim to that of 38 patients mobilized with Neupogen. RESULTS: We found no difference between Nivestim and Neupogen in peripheral blood CD34+ at first leukapheresis (47 × 10(6) cells/L vs. 60 × 10(6) cells/L, p = 0.48) nor the total CD34+ collected (5.37 × 10(6)/kg vs. 4.59 × 10(6) /kg, p = 0.22). However, a difference in the median number of leukapheresis procedures (one vs. two, p = 0.0007) was observed. Eighty-one patients (51 Nivestim and 30 Neupogen mobilized) went on to transplantation. Median time to neutrophil engraftment (15 days vs. 13.5 days, p = 0.09) and platelet (PLT) engraftment (20 days vs. 18 days, p = 0.01) was longer in the Nivestim group. The significant delay in PLT engraftment did not, however, translate to increased PLT transfusions (two vs. three, p = 0.2) or impact significantly on hospitalization time for admissions within 30 days posttransplant (20 days vs. 18 days, p = .17). CONCLUSION: Nivestim is as effective as Neupogen for PBSC mobilization; however, its use was associated with a delay in PLT recovery. A prospective study should be conducted to confirm our findings.

Improving the transition of highly complex patients into the community: impact of a pharmacist in an allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) outpatient clinic.

PURPOSE: Patients having undergone allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) require complex medication regimens. To ensure the safe and effective management of this patient group, specialised care in a centre with a dedicated and experienced healthcare team is essential. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a specialty clinical pharmacist working in an ambulatory SCT clinic. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients post SCT and discharged to the ambulatory setting. Patients were reviewed by a clinical pharmacist weekly for six visits. At these visits a medication review was undertaken. Interventions from these reviews were recorded. Interventions were then assigned a risk rating by a multidisciplinary panel. Adherence was also assessed by a Morisky questionnaire and review of dose administration aids. Comparison of data over the six-visit period was undertaken. RESULTS: In total 23 patients were enrolled in the study. All six visits were completed in 17 patients and 161 interventions were recorded at an average of 1.4 interventions per patient visit. The panel rated 40 % of interventions as high risk, 46 % as medium risk and 14 % as low risk. At all visit points high- and medium-risk interventions constituted >80 % of the total. Morisky scores improved by an average of 1.53 (p < 0.0001) between visits 1 and 6. All patients were scored as highly adherent by visit 6. CONCLUSIONS: A specialist clinical pharmacist in the SCT outpatient clinic resulted in regular and effective intervention contributing to improved medication management and adherence.

Incidence of Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome/Veno-Occlusive Disease and Treatment with Defibrotide in Allogeneic Transplantation: A Multicenter Australasian Registry Study.

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease (SOS/VOD) is an established complication in patients undergoing allogeneic hemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Defibrotide is an effective and safe pharmacologic option for treating diagnosed SOS/VOD. By exploring data provided to the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR) by centers in Australia and New Zealand, this study aimed to describe the incidence of SOS/VOD and patterns of defibrotide use from 2016 to 2020. Patients who underwent allogeneic hemopoietic stem cell transplantation between 2016 and 2020 were identified from the ABMTRR. Data were extracted for a total of 3346 patients, 2692 from adult centers and 654 from pediatric centers, with a median follow-up of 21.5 months and 33.3 months, respectively. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the patient population, including the incidence of SOS/VOD and defibrotide use. Comparisons were made between patients without SOS/VOD and those with SOS/VOD, divided into defibrotide and no defibrotide cohorts. Associations with overall survival (OS) and day 100 survival with such variables as sex, age, disease at transplantation, stem cell source, conditioning agents, SOS/VOD diagnosis, and use of defibrotide, were determined. The reported incidence of SOS/VOD was 4.1% in adult centers and 11.5% in pediatric centers. Defibrotide was administered to 74.8% of adult patients and 97.3% of pediatric patients with SOS/VOD. Significant variability in the use, dosage, and duration of defibrotide was seen across the adult centers. The day 100 survival rate and median OS for patients managed with defibrotide was 51.8% and 103 days, respectively, for adult patients and 90.4% and not reached, respectively, for pediatric patients. In adults, older age at transplantation, an HLA-matched nonsibling relative donor, and a diagnosis of SOS/VOD treated with defibrotide were associated with reduced OS. In pediatric patients, the patient and transplantation characteristics associated with reduced OS were a diagnosis of SOS/VOD and a ≥2 HLA-mismatched related donor. A collaborative approach across Australasia to diagnosing and managing SOS/VOD, particularly with respect to consistent defibrotide use, is recommended.

A meta-analysis of palifermin efficacy for the management of oral mucositis in patients with solid tumours and haematological malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Palifermin, a recombinant keratinocyte growth factor promotes thickening of the mucosa, minimising severity of mucositis caused by chemotherapy and radiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To synthesise published literature on palifermin for the management of oral mucositis, in patients receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, aiming to ascertain recommendations for practice. METHODS: Databases searched were Medline, Embase, IPA and CIANHL. A meta-analysis included randomised controlled trials (RCT) for palifermin compared to placebo or no palifermin, with the key data extracted being number of events of severe mucositis (defined by WHO criteria grade 3 or 4). RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 10 RCT. Patients were treated for solid and haematological malignancy. Analysis suggested benefit of palifermin decreasing the incidence of severe mucositis in solid tumours RR0.76 [95%CI 0.63-0.92;p = 0.004], haematological malignancy RR0.63 [95 %CI 0.48-0.82;p = 0.0007] and overall RR0.69 [95 %CI 0.59-0.81;p < 0.0001]. CONCLUSION: Palifermin reduces the incidence of severe mucositis up to 30 % in patients receiving treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

Implementation of a pharmacist-initiated pharmaceutical handover for oncology and haematology patients being transferred to critical care units.

GOALS OF WORK: An information gap with respect to specific therapies was identified when patients were transferred from the oncology and haematology unit (OHU) to the critical care units. The goal was to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of a pharmacist-initiated pharmaceutical handover (PIPH) for patients being transferred from the OHU to the critical care units at a major teaching hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A PIPH process for the specific therapies of mouthcare, chemotherapy regimen, growth factors and antibiotics was developed. The PIPH was delivered in written format or combined written and verbal format. The impact of the PIPH was by assessment of recorded clinical pharmacist interventions. Data were analysed to evaluate any difference in the number of interventions relating to and the time to administration of the specific therapies. MAIN RESULTS: Data were available for 30 patient transfers in the pre-implementation group, with 22 transfers available in the post-implementation period. The number of interventions relating to the specific therapies was significantly reduced in the post-implementation group (144 vs 26; p < 0.0001). A significantly greater proportion of the specific therapies were administered on time in the post-implementation group (57% vs 96%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pharmacists in the specialty area of oncology and haematology can improve the continuum of care when their patients are transferred to other units. By providing an accurate handover about specific therapies, there is an overall improvement in the prescribing and timely administration of these therapies.

Dapsone for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia prophylaxis - applying theory to clinical practice with a focus on drug interactions.

Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) is a potentially life-threatening infection that occurs in immunocompromised individuals. The incidence can be as high as 80% in some groups but can be reduced to less than 1% with appropriate prophylaxis. HIV-infected patients with a low CD4 count are at the highest risk of PJP. Others at substantial risk include haematopoietic stem cell and solid organ transplant recipients, those with cancer (particularly haematologic malignancies), and those receiving glucocorticoids, chemotherapeutic agents, and other immunosuppressive medications. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is an established first-line line agent for prevention and treatment of PJP. However, in some situations, this medication cannot be used and dapsone is considered a suitable cost-effective second line agent. However, information on potential interactions with drugs commonly used in immunosuppressed patients is lacking or contradictory. In this this article we review the metabolic pathway of dapsone with a focus on interactions and clinical significance particularly in patients with haematological malignancies. An understanding of this process should optimise the use of this agent.

Validation of a risk stratification tool for a Hospital Outreach Medication Review (HOMR) program.

BACKGROUND: Early hospital readmissions are a challenging and costly experience for both patients and the healthcare service. Reducing hospital readmission rates is a priority for health services globally and this is evident with the establishment of multiple outpatient services to promote early follow-up and to initiate secondary preventative care measures. One such intervention has been the introduction of a pharmacist-led, Hospital Outreach Medication Review (HOMR) service. However, the demand for the service has meant reaching this target has become an increasingly ambitious goal within allocated resources. OBJECTIVE: To validate a risk-stratification tool to identify low-risk patients in whom a telephone medication review would be a safe and effective alternative to a home-based review. METHOD: A risk tool was derived and applied to a retrospective sample to act as the parent cohort. A prospective cohort was stratified into low and high-risk based on this tool, and received either a telephone or a traditional home medication review respectively. RESULTS: 235 patients were included in final analysis (n = 113 prospective, n = 122 baseline controls). High-risk patients were more likely to be readmitted at 60 and 90 days in the baseline cohort (9/38 vs 7/84, p = 0.04 and 11/38 vs 9/84, p = 0.02 respectively), with a trend towards increased readmissions at 30 days (5/38 vs 3/84, p = 0.11). Logistic regression identified the risk tool as an independent predictor of hospital readmission (IRR 1.18, p = 0.04), whereas age and Charlson comorbidity were not (p = 0.80 and 0.31 respectively). There was no significant difference between the new model (incorporating phone reviews) and the parent cohort (p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: Our risk score was able to identify those at highest risk of hospital readmission at 60 and 90 days. Utilising this risk score, a telephone HOMR for low-risk patients was a safe and efficient alternative to a traditional home review.

DCEP as a bridge to ongoing therapies for advanced relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma.

There is limited data describing dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DCEP) in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We reviewed 65 patients with RRMM receiving DCEP between 2005 and 2017 in two Melbourne Hospitals. Patients had received a mean of three prior treatment lines (range, 1-11). The mean number of cycles of DCEP was two (range, 1-4). Overall response rate (ORR) was 55% whilst 19% achieved MR and SD. Median overall survival (OS) was 9.6 months. Those bridged to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) had significantly improved OS compared to those who were not (median 32.8 vs. 10.7 months, p=.0004). Significant treatment-related mortality (TRM) was observed (9.7%), mostly attributable to grade 3-4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. Mandatory use of G-CSF is, therefore, warranted to prevent septic complications. In heavily pretreated RRMM, DCEP is an effective bridge to definitive therapy but in the absence of the latter, its value is questionable.

Defibrotide for the management of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in patients who undergo haemopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, previously known as veno-occlusive disease (VOD/SOS), is a complication in patients undergoing haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Severe VOD/SOS, including progression to multi-organ failure, has resulted in a mortality of greater than 80%. Defibrotide's varying pharmacological actions, particularly on endothelial cells, make it is a useful agent to consider for prophylaxis and treatment of VOD/SOS. Barriers to its routine use include the high acquisition cost and the fact that neither the oral or parenteral formulations are licensed products in many countries at this time. This review summarises available literature on the use of defibrotide in the management of VOD/SOS. Publications consist predominantly of single centre cohort studies and case series. Available evidence indicates that defibrotide is effective in the management of VOD/SOS. Using defibrotide prophylaxis should also be considered, especially in the paediatric setting, where there are available results from a large, open label, randomized controlled trial. Patient outcome data from the larger studies and compassionate programs can inform consensus recommendations on dosing regimen and criteria for the treatment of VOD/SOS with defibrotide in the adult population. The reviewed literature indicates an effective and safe dose for treatment is 25mg/kg/day, continued for at least 14days or until complete response is achieved. Further studies are required to determine the optimal dose and duration of treatment in both paediatric patients and adults. Recent recommendations and a phase 3 trial using historical controls indicate that defibrotide should be included as a pharmacotherapy option in protocols guiding management of VOD/SOS.