Efficacy and Safety of Trifluridine/Tipiracil-Containing Combinations in Colorectal Cancer and Other Advanced Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review.

We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with other antineoplastic agents in advanced cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a systematic search on May 29, 2021, for studies reporting one or more efficacy or safety outcome with FTD/TPI-containing combinations. Our search yielded 1378 publications, with 38 records meeting selection criteria: 35 studies of FTD/TPI-containing combinations in mCRC (31 studies second line or later) and 3 studies in other tumor types. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was extensively studied, including 19 studies in chemorefractory mCRC. Median overall survival ranged 8.6-14.4 months and median progression-free survival 3.7-6.8 months with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Based on one randomized and several retrospective studies, FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was associated with improved outcomes compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. FTD/TPI combinations with chemotherapy or other targeted agents were reported in small early-phase studies; preliminary data indicated higher antitumor activity for certain combinations. Overall, no safety concerns existed with FTD/TPI combinations; most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia, ranging 5%-100% across all studies. In studies comparing FTD/TPI combinations with monotherapy, grade ≥ 3 neutropenia appeared more frequently with combinations (29%-67%) vs. monotherapy (5%-41%). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events ranged 0%-11% for FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab and 0%-17% with other combinations. This systematic review supports feasibility and safety of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Data on non-bevacizumab FTD/TPI combinations remain preliminary and need further validation.

Ovarian cancer classification and prognosis assessment model based on prognostic target genes in key microRNA-target gene networks.

BACKGROUND: The present study was designed to screen key microRNA (miRNA)-target gene networks for ovarian cancer (OC) and to classify and construct a risk assessment system for OC based on the target genes. METHODS: OC sample data of The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset and GSE26193, GSE30161, GSE63885 and GSE9891 datasets were retrospectively collected. Pearson correlation analysis and targeted analysis of miRNA and target gene were performed to screen key miRNA-target gene networks. Target genes associated with the prognosis of OC were screened from key miRNA-target gene networks for consensus clustering and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-based regression machine learning analysis of OC samples. RESULTS: Twenty target genes of 2651 key miRNA-target gene pairs had significant prognostic correlation in each OC cohort, and OC was divided into three clusters. There were differences in prognostic outcome, biological pathways, immune cell abundance and susceptibility to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy and anti-tumor drugs among the three molecular clusters. S2 exhibited the least advantage in prognosis and immunotherapy response rate in the three molecular clusters, and the pathways regulating immunity, hypoxia, metabolism and promoting malignant progression of cancer, as well as infiltrating immune and stromal cell population abundance, were the highest in this cluster. An eight-target gene prognostic model was created, and the risk index obtained by using this model not only significantly distinguished the immune characteristics of the sample, but also predicted the response of the sample to ICB treatment, and helped to screen 36 potential anti-OC drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides a classification strategy for OC based on prognostic target genes in key miRNA-target gene networks, and creates a risk assessment system for predicting prognosis and response to ICB therapy in OC patients, providing molecular basis for prognosis and precise treatment of OC.

Anticancer drugs are the first cause of drug-induced liver injury in a reference hospital.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a challenging liver disorder for hepatologists. We aimed to assess the pattern and causes of DILI in a tertiary hospital. We registered prospectively all patients referred with suspicion of DILI from 2018 to 2023. A total of 106 patients fulfilled the diagnostic criteria (30 caused by paracetamol were excluded; total number 76). The pattern of liver injury was hepatocellular in 55 (72%). Drugs causing DILI were antineoplastic (26%), antibiotics (24%), analgesics (12%), and recreational drugs (9%). Regarding clinical outcomes, 39 (51%) required hospitalization and 7 (9%) underwent a liver transplantation or died from acute liver injury. We identified 126 additional patients with DILI due to immune check-point inhibitors who were not referred to a liver disease specialist. Antineoplastic drugs have become the first cause of DILI in hospitals. A multidisciplinary approach and specific educational tools to increase DILI awareness are needed among different specialists.

Canadian monitoring program of the surface contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs in 124 centers.

INTRODUCTION: Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to long-term adverse effects on workers' health. A reproducible Canadian surface monitoring program was established in 2010. The objective was to describe contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs measured on 12 surfaces among hospitals participating in this annual monitoring program. METHODS: Each hospital sampled six standardized sites in oncology pharmacies and six in outpatient clinics. Ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry was used for cyclophosphamide, docetaxel, doxorubicin, etoposide, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine, irinotecan, methotrexate, paclitaxel, and vinorelbine. Platinum-based drugs were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry; this excludes inorganic platinum from the environment. Hospitals filled out an online questionnaire about their practices; a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used for some practices. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four Canadian hospitals participated. Cyclophosphamide (405/1445, 28%), gemcitabine (347/1445, 24%), and platinum (71/756, 9%) were the most frequent. The 90th percentile of surface concentration was 0.01 ng/cm² for cyclophosphamide and 0.003 ng/cm² for gemcitabine. Centers that prepared 5000 or more antineoplastic per year had higher concentrations of cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine on their surfaces (p = 0.0001). Almost half maintained a hazardous drugs committee (46/119, 39%), but this did not influence the cyclophosphamide contamination (p = 0.051). Hazardous drugs training was more frequent for oncology pharmacy and nursing staff than for hygiene and sanitation staff. CONCLUSIONS: This monitoring program allowed centers to benchmark their contamination with pragmatic contamination thresholds derived from the Canadian 90th percentiles. Regular participation and local hazardous drug committee involvement provide an opportunity to review practices, identify risk areas, and refresh training.

Assessment of chemical contamination by cancer drugs during use of the RIVATM compounding robot: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Many hospitals are now investing in robotic compounding system for the preparation of cytotoxic agents. The objective of the present study was to describe contamination by cytotoxics inside and outside the RIVATM robot (ARxIUM, Winnipeg, Canada). MATERIAL & METHODS: We applied a risk analysis to determine which locations inside and outside the compounding robot should be monitored. Samples were collected by swabbing with a wet swab (using 0.1 mL of sterile water) before the robots was cleaned. Ten cytotoxics compounded with the robot were screened for using LC-MS/MS. We determined the percentage contamination rates inside (CRin) and outside (CRout) the robot and the amounts of each contaminant (in ng/cm²). If a sample was found to be positive, a corrective action was implemented. RESULTS: Our risk analysis highlighted 10 locations inside the robot and 7 outside. Ten sampling campaigns (10 samples per campaign) were performed. The mean CRin (40%) was significantly higher than the mean CRout (2%; p < 10-4). Gemcitabine and cyclophosphamide were the main contaminants. After the implementation of corrective measures (such as daily cleaning with SDS/isopropyl alcohol), the CRin fell from 60% to 10%. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The frequency of contamination was lower for robotic compounding than for manual compounding in an isolator. However, robotic compounding tended to generated larger mean amounts of contaminant; this was related to incidents such as splashing when syringes were disposed of after the compounding. The implementation of corrective actions effectively reduced the CRs. Further longer-term studies are required to confirm these results.

Pilot study: External surface contamination of gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil on drug packaging.

INTRODUCTION: Antineoplastic drugs (ADs) are commonly used pharmaceuticals for anticancer treatments. It has previously been shown that the external surface of drug vials frequently is contaminated with ADs. More than a decade ago methods to prevent occupational exposure were introduced by using plastic coverage of the glass vials or packing vials in a secondary plastic container. The aim of the pilot study was to determine contamination levels of ADs on different parts of AD packaging of two different commercially available drug vials on the Swedish market and to investigate the occurrence of cross contamination of ADs. METHODS: Packagings of gemcitabine (GEM) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were tested by wipe sampling. Five ADs; GEM, 5-FU, cyclophosphamide (CP), ifosfamide and etoposide were quantified using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. RESULTS: AD contaminations were detected in 69% and 60% of the GEM and 5-FU packaging samples. Highest levels, up to approximately 5 µg/sample, were observed on the glass vials. The protective shrink-wrap of 5-FU vials and the plastic container of GEM were contaminated with low levels of 5-FU and GEM, respectively, and furthermore the 5-FU vials with shrink-wrap were cross-contaminated with GEM. Cross-contamination of CP and GEM was detected on 5-FU vials with plastic shrink-wrap removed. CONCLUSIONS: External contamination of ADs are still present at primary drug packagings on the Swedish market. Protection of AD vials by plastic shrink-wrap or a secondary plastic container does not remove the external contamination levels completely. The presence of cross contamination of ADs on drug packagings was also observed.

Assessment of the surface contamination of the primary packaging of oral antineoplastic drugs and secondary packaging of chemotherapy preparations at a Swiss hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the high toxicity of antineoplastic drugs, handling their packaging could lead to the chemical contamination of hospital environments and exposure risks to healthcare professionals and patients. This study aimed to assess the contamination of two main surfaces: the outer primary packaging of oral antineoplastic drug formulations (n = 36) available on the Swiss market and the surface of secondary packaging of injectable antineoplastic drug preparations (n = 60) produced by the pharmacy of a Swiss hospital and carriers used for transport (n = 5). METHODS: Samples were collected using a validated wipe sampling method. The simultaneous analysis of 24 antineoplastic drugs: 5-fluorouracil, busulfan, carboplatin, cyclophosphamide, cytarabine, dacarbazine, daunorubicin, docetaxel, doxorubicin, epirubicin, etoposide, gemcitabine, idarubicin, ifosfamide, irinotecan, methotrexate, oxaliplatin, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, raltitrexed, topotecan, treosulfan, vinblastine, vincristine) and 1 antiviral compound (ganciclovir) was performed by UHPLC-MS/MS. RESULTS: A total of 58% and 90% positive results were obtained for the primary packaging of oral chemotherapies and for the secondary packaging of injectable preparations, respectively. The highest quantities found on the primary packaging for oral chemotherapies and on the surface of closed leak-proof bags were 111 ng of methotrexate and 19 ng of gemcitabine, respectively. Gemcitabine (69%) and cyclophosphamide (38%) were the two most common contaminants found on the packaging of injectable preparations and carriers, regardless of the chemotherapy preparations. CONCLUSION: Trace levels (ng) of antineoplastic drugs can be found on most surfaces of all evaluated pharmaceutical products. Thus, suitable personal protective equipment is mandatory for healthcare professional handling antineoplastic drugs.

An Automated Micro Solid-Phase Extraction (µSPE) Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Method for Cyclophosphamide and Iphosphamide: Biological Monitoring in Antineoplastic Drug (AD) Occupational Exposure.

Despite the considerable steps taken in the last decade in the context of antineoplastic drug (AD) handling procedures, their mutagenic effect still poses a threat to healthcare personnel actively involved in compounding and administration units. Biological monitoring procedures usually require large volumes of sample and extraction solvents, or do not provide adequate sensitivity. It is here proposed a fast and automated method to evaluate the urinary levels of cyclophosphamide and iphosphamide, composed of a miniaturized solid phase extraction (µSPE) followed by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) analysis. The extraction procedure, developed through design of experiments (DoE) on the ePrep One Workstation, required a total time of 9.5 min per sample, with recoveries of 77-79% and a solvent consumption lower than 1.5 mL per 1 mL of urine sample. Thanks to the UHPLC-MS/MS method, the limits of quantification (LOQ) obtained were lower than 10 pg/mL. The analytical procedure was successfully applied to 23 urine samples from compounding wards of four Italian hospitals, which resulted in contaminations between 27 and 182 pg/mL.

Exploring the possible mitoprotective and neuroprotective potency of thymoquinone, betanin, and vitamin D against cytarabine-induced mitochondrial impairment and neurotoxicity in rats' brain.

It has been suggested that cytarabine (Ara-C) induces toxicity via mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress. Therefore, we hypothesized that mitochondrial protective agents and antioxidants can reduce cytarabine-induced neurotoxicity. For this purpose, 48 male Wistar rats were assigned into eight equal groups include control group, Ara-C (70 mg/kg, i.p.) group, Ara-C plus betanin (25 mg/kg, i.p.) group, Ara-C plus vitamin D (500 U/kg, i.p.) group, Ara-C plus thymoquinone (0.5 mg/kg, i.p.) group, betanin group, vitamin group, and thymoquinone group. The activity of acetylcholinesterase (AChE), and butyrylcholinesterase (BChE), the concentrations of antioxidants (reduced glutathione and oxidized glutathione), oxidative stress (malondialdehyde) biomarkers, mitochondrial toxicity parameters as well as histopathological alteration in brain tissues were measured. Our results demonstrated that Ara-C exposure significantly declines the brain enzymes activity (AChE and BChE), levels of antioxidant biomarkers (GSH), and mitochondrial functions, but markedly elevate the levels of oxidative stress biomarkers (MDA) and mitochondrial toxicity. Almost all of the previously mentioned parameters (especially mitochondrial toxicity) were retrieved by betanin, vitamin D, and thymoquinone compared to Ara-C group. These findings conclusively indicate that betanin, vitamin D, and thymoquinone administration provide adequate protection against Ara-C-induced neurotoxicity through modulations of oxidative, antioxidant activities, and mitochondrial protective (mitoprotective) effects.

Evaluation of long-term data on surface contamination by antineoplastic drugs in pharmacies.

PURPOSE: The handling of antineoplastic drugs represents an occupational health risk for employees in pharmacies. To minimize exposure and to evaluate cleaning efficacy, wipe sampling was used to analyze antineoplastic drugs on surfaces. In 2009, guidance values were suggested to facilitate the interpretation of results, leading to a decrease in surface contamination. The goal of this follow-up was to evaluate the time trend of surface contamination, to identify critical antineoplastic drugs and sampling locations and to reassess guidance values. METHODS: Platinum, 5-fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, gemcitabine, methotrexate, docetaxel and paclitaxel were analyzed in more than 17,000 wipe samples from 2000 to 2021. Statistical analysis was performed to describe and interpret the data. RESULTS: Surface contaminations were generally relatively low. The median concentration for most antineoplastic drugs was below the limit of detection except for platinum (0.3 pg/cm2). Only platinum and 5-fluorouracil showed decreasing levels over time. Most exceedances of guidance values were observed for platinum (26.9%), cyclophosphamide (18.5%) and gemcitabine (16.6%). The most affected wipe sampling locations were isolators (24.4%), storage areas (17.6%) and laminar flow hoods (16.6%). However, areas with no direct contact to antineoplastic drugs were also frequently contaminated (8.9%). CONCLUSION: Overall, the surface contaminations with antineoplastic drugs continue to decrease or were generally at a low level. Therefore, we adjusted guidance values according to the available data. The identification of critical sampling locations may help pharmacies to further improve cleaning procedure and reduce the risk of occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs.

Comparing different robots available in the European market for the preparation of injectable chemotherapy and recommendations to users.

INTRODUCTION: Recent advances in technology have made it possible to develop robots for preparing injectable anticancer drugs. This study aims to compare characteristics between robots available in the European market in 2022 and to help future pharmacy users in their choices. METHODS: Three sources of data were used: (1) a review of published articles in the MEDLINE database from November 2017 to end of June 2021 on chemotherapy-compounding robots used in hospital; (2) all manufacturers' documentation, and (3) demonstrations of robot operations in real hospital conditions and discussions with users and manufacturers. Robot characteristics included number of robots installed, general technical characteristics, type of injectable chemotherapy produced and compatible materials, productivity data, preparation control methods, residual manual tasks, chemical and microbiological risk management, cleaning method, software, and implementation time. RESULTS: Seven robots commercialized were studied. Several technical characteristics have to be taken into account in selecting the robot whose match the specific needs of a particular hospital, and which often require rethinking the current production workflow as well as the organization of the pharmacy unit. In addition to increasing productivity, the robots improve the quality of production thanks to better traceability, reproducibility, and precision of sampling. They also improve user protection against chemical risk, musculoskeletal disorders, and needle wounds. Nevertheless, when robotization is being planned, there are still numerous residual manual tasks to keep in mind. CONCLUSION: Robotization of the production of injectable anticancer drugs is booming within anticancer chemotherapy preparation pharmacy units. Feedback from this experience needs to be further shared with the pharmacy community regarding this significant investment.

Impact of low- and high-risk operators handling irinotecan on the blood contamination of health care workers in oncology day care units.

INTRODUCTION: Health care workers handling antineoplastic drugs (ADs) are at risk of mutagenicity and adverse reproductive effects. Despite protective equipment and AD handling guidelines, AD levels are still detected in caregivers in oncology units. This study attempted to assess blood contamination by irinotecan and its metabolites in all health care workers in oncology day hospital units according to activities specific to each employment category. METHODS: The study was performed at two different hospitals: a university hospital and a comprehensive cancer centre. Forty-four participants were categorized according to their daily activity as a high-risk operator (29 nurses/ward aides and 5 cleaning staff) and a low-risk operator (7 doctors and 3 secretaries). The collected blood samples were subjected to UHPLC-MS/MS. The plasma and red blood cell (RBC) levels of irinotecan and its metabolites (SN-38; APC) were determined using a validated analytical method detection test. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-four assay results were collected (132 plasma results and 132 RBC results). The comparison between low- and high-risk operator-contaminated workers was not significant (18.33% positive results in low-risk operators vs. 25.98% positive results in high-risk operators; P = 0.22). This homogeneity showed overall contamination within the unit. Positive results were obtained in 21.43% of physicians, 11.11% of secretaries, 25.86% of nurses/ward aides and 26.67% of cleaning staff. These results could be explained by the lack or failure of personal and collective protective equipment. A lack of protection and inadequate decontamination procedures can result in surface contamination. CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated blood contamination with irinotecan and its metabolites in health care workers from day hospital care units. Among the 24.24% of contaminations observed in care units, the difference between low- and high-risk operator contamination was not significant (P = 0.22). The impact on blood contamination found is the same between low- and high-risk caregivers. This implies that the protective precautions associated with the handling of anticancer drugs must therefore be followed by all staff, including those believed to be at low risk of exposure.

Canadian monitoring program of the surface contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs in 122 centers.

INTRODUCTION: Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to long-term adverse effects on workers' health. Environmental monitoring is conducted once a year, as part of a Canadian monitoring program. The objective was to describe contamination with 11 antineoplastic drugs measured on surfaces. METHODS: Six standardized sites in oncology pharmacy and six in outpatient clinic were sampled in each hospital. Samples were analyzed by ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (non-platinum drugs) and by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (platinum-based drugs). The limits of detection (in ng/cm2) were: 0.0006 for cyclophosphamide; 0.001 for docetaxel; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil; 0.0004 for gemcitabine; 0.0007 for irinotecan; 0.0009 for methotrexate; 0.004 for paclitaxel, 0.009 for vinorelbine, 0.02 for doxorubicine, 0.0037 for etoposide and 0.004 for the platinum. Sub-analyses were done with a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. RESULTS: 122 Canadian hospitals participated. Cyclophosphamide (451/1412, 32% of positive samples, 90th percentile of concentration 0.0160 ng/cm2) and gemcitabine (320/1412, 23%, 0.0036 ng/cm2) were most frequently measured on surfaces. The surfaces most frequently contaminated with at least one drug were the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (97/121, 80%) and the armrest of patient treatment chair (92/118, 78%).The distribution of cyclophosphamide concentration was higher for centers that prepared ≥ 5000 antineoplastic drug preparations/year (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This monitoring program allowed centers to benchmark their contamination with pragmatic contamination thresholds derived from the Canadian 90th percentiles. Problematic areas need corrective measures such as decontamination. The program helps to increase the workers' awareness.

Knowledge and practices about safe handling regarding the risk of exposure to antineoplastic drugs for caregivers in compounding units and in operating rooms performing HIPEC/PIPAC.

INTRODUCTION: Ever since the late 1970s, occupational exposure associated with the handling of antineoplastic drugs (ADs) in the healthcare environment has been highlighted and demonstrated. Contamination was detected in both operating rooms (OR) and compounding units (CU), where healthcare workers handle and are exposed to ADs in different ways. In the OR, the risk of exposure is higher and the staff receives less training in handling ADs than in the CU. This study aimed to assess and compare knowledge and practices about the safe handling of ADs by caregivers working in these two locations, namely the CU and OR. METHODS: Two questionnaires (one each for the OR and CU) were created by two investigator pharmacists and were completed during a personal interview of 20 min. The questions were related to the following topics: training, knowledge about occupational exposure and questions related to protective practices. A scoring system was implemented to assess the knowledge and practices of each participant. RESULTS: In total, 38 caregivers working in the OR and 39 in the CU were included in our study. Significantly more CU staff had specific initial training (p < 0.001) and ongoing training (p < 0.001) in handling ADs. Concerning the knowledge score, OR caregivers had a significantly lower median score for contamination routes (p < 0.001), contamination surfaces (p < 0.001), existing procedures (p < 0.001) and total knowledge (p < 0.001) than CU caregivers. Concerning protective handling practices of ADs, the two locations had nonsignificantly different median scores (p = 0.892). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there is still room for improvement in terms of knowledge and protection practices when handling ADs. An appropriate and tailored training program should be developed and provided to all caregivers who handle or come in contact with ADs.Clinical trial registrationStudy CONTACT, ref. 19-504.

Residual contamination in antineoplastic drug packaging.

INTRODUCTION: The handling of antineoplastic drugs should follow strict supervision and safety rules to minimize the occupational exposure risks to professionals involved. The external surface contamination of drug vials is recognized as a health risk. So, our goal was to determine if there is residual contamination on the vials and containers surface of the antineoplastic drugs doxorubicin (DOX) and cyclophosphamide (CP). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Samples were collected using a uniform sampling procedure on the inner surfaces of the packages/boxes and the outer surfaces of the vials. The analyzes were executed by high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). RESULTS: A total of 209 samples were analyzed, 66 of CP and 143 of DOX. CP levels were detected in nine samples (13.63%), three were below the lower limit of quantification (LLQ) and the other six had contamination levels ranging from 1.24 to 28.04 ng/filter. DOX levels were detected in 36 samples (25.17%), two were below the LLQ and the others had levels between 1.32 and 664.84 ng/filter. The majority of samples with residual contamination were in vials (80.0%), however, boxes also showed contamination. CONCLUSIONS: The results revealed the presence of residual contamination in the vials and packages of CP and DOX drugs. Although the residues found in each sample are small, special care should be taken in the handling and disposal of the antineoplastic drugs. The use of personal protective equipment is fundamental while handling the vials and packaging of cytotoxic drugs.

Perception, knowledge, practices and training regarding the risk of exposure to antineoplastic drugs in three French compounding units.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare workers are exposed to hazardous drugs such as antineoplastic drugs, which have potential carcinogenic, mutagenic and teratogenic effects. Protective measures must be taken after appropriate staff training to handle antineoplastic drugs in a safe way. The objective was to assess perception, knowledge, practices and training regarding the risk of exposure of healthcare workers in three French compounding units. METHODS: This descriptive study was based on a questionnaire made of 33 questions divided into five sections related to the handling of antineoplastic drugs: perception of the risks, knowledge of the risks, protection practices, specific training and general questions. RESULTS: Among the 39 participants, over half considered their overall risk of exposure to antineoplastic drugs not being very low. Inhalation was known to 69.2% of them as possible route of contamination. The breakroom was identified by 28.9% of them as a place of contamination. The procedure in case of accidental exposure to antineoplastic drugs was known by 69.2%, but only half could explain it. Only 38.5% said they changed their gloves every 30 min as recommended. Barely half said that they had been trained specifically for the handling of antineoplastic drugs during an initial training. Over half wished to be informed, trained and aware of the proper handling of antineoplastic drugs. CONCLUSION: Although some of these results are encouraging, specifically when compared to the other settings where antineoplastic drugs are handled, there is still room for improvement. Efforts to build an adapted and impactful training program must pursue. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study CONTACT, ref. 19-504.

Structural Basis of the Binding Mode of the Antineoplastic Compound Motixafortide (BL-8040) in the CXCR4 Chemokine Receptor.

Modulation of the CXCL12-CXCR4 signaling axis is of the utmost importance due to its central involvement in several pathological disorders, including inflammatory diseases and cancer. Among the different currently available drugs that inhibit CXCR4 activation, motixafortide-a best-in-class antagonist of this GPCR receptor-has exhibited promising results in preclinical studies of pancreatic, breast, and lung cancers. However, detailed information on the interaction mechanism of motixafortide is still lacking. Here, we characterize the motixafortide/CXCR4 and CXCL12/CXCR4 protein complexes by using computational techniques including unbiased all-atom molecular dynamics simulations. Our microsecond-long simulations of the protein systems indicate that the agonist triggers changes associated with active-like GPCR conformations, while the antagonist favors inactive conformations of CXCR4. Detailed ligand-protein analysis indicates the importance of motixafortide's six cationic residues, all of which established charge-charge interactions with acidic CXCR4 residues. Furthermore, two synthetic bulky chemical moieties of motixafortide work in tandem to restrict the conformations of important residues associated with CXCR4 activation. Our results not only elucidate the molecular mechanism by which motixafortide interacts with the CXCR4 receptor and stabilizes its inactive states, but also provide essential information to rationally design CXCR4 inhibitors that preserve the outstanding pharmacological features of motixafortide.

Improvement of the In Vitro Cytotoxic Effect on HT-29 Colon Cancer Cells by Combining 5-Fluorouacil and Fluphenazine with Green, Red or Brown Propolis.

Cancer is regard as one of the key factors of mortality and morbidity in the world. Treatment is mainly based on chemotherapeutic drugs that, when used in targeted therapies, have serious side effects. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is a drug commonly used against colorectal cancer (CRC), despite its side effects. Combination of this compound with natural products is a promising source in cancer treatment research. In recent years, propolis has become the subject of intense pharmacological and chemical studies linked to its diverse biological properties. With a complex composition rich in phenolic compounds, propolis is described as showing positive or synergistic interactions with several chemotherapeutic drugs. The present work evaluated the in vitro cytotoxic activity of the most representative propolis types, such as green, red and brown propolis, in combination with chemotherapeutic or CNS drugs on HT-29 colon cancer cell lines. The phenolic composition of the propolis samples was evaluated by LC-DAD-ESI/MSn analysis. According to the type of propolis, the composition varied; green propolis was rich in terpenic phenolic acids and red propolis in polyprenylated benzophenones and isoflavonoids, while brown propolis was composed mainly of flavonoids and phenylpropanoids. Generally, for all propolis types, the results demonstrated that combing propolis with 5-FU and fluphenazine successfully enhances the in vitro cytotoxic activity. For green propolis, the combination demonstrated an enhancement of the in vitro cytotoxic effect compared to green propolis alone, at all concentrations, while for brown propolis, the combination in the concentration of 100 µg/mL gave a lower number of viable cells, even when compared with 5-FU or fluphenazine alone. The same was observed for the red propolis combination, but with a higher reduction in cell viability. The combination index, calculated based on the Chou-Talalay method, suggested that the combination of 5-FU and propolis extracts had a synergic growth inhibitory effect in HT-29 cells, while with fluphenazine, only green and red propolis, at a concentration of 100 µg/mL, presented synergism.

Profile of judicialization in access to antineoplastic drugs and their costs: a cross-sectional, descriptive study based on a set of all lawsuits filed between 2016 and 2018 in a state in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

BACKGROUND: The judicialization of the acquisition of medication for healthcare is not restricted to Brazil but can also be found in other Latin American countries, despite the existence of a universal health system in the case of Brazil, the Unified Health System (known as the SUS). Right-to-medicines litigation has existed ever since the emergence of a high demand for treatment of Acquired Immuno-deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) but the current focus is on cancer. Pharmaceutical Assistance (PA) is the area within the SUS that is responsible for ensuring access to medication and the aim of this article is thus to draw up a profile of litigation related to PA in one economically significant state in the Northeast Region of Brazil, in terms of the following characteristics of lawsuits: the plaintiff filing the lawsuit; medical and health information; the cost of acquiring the requested medications; and the proportion accounted for by spending on antineoplastic drugs. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted of lawsuits filed between 2016 and 2018 at the Litigation Center of the State of Pernambuco Department of Health. RESULTS: A total of 2,947 lawsuits containing at least one requested medication were analyzed. The majority of the plaintiffs were male (51.7%); 49.8% of the requests originated in the Unified Health System (SUS), and plaintiffs were primarily patients in the Metropolitan region of the State capital, Recife. The most frequent cancers involved were those classified by the ICD as C61, C71 and C50. The median general expense on medications for the actions was U$1,734.94. Considering antineoplastic drugs alone, the cost exceeded U$7,500 per lawsuit over the three years, given that the median unit price for antineoplastic drugs is approximately US$65 compared to US$4 for non-antineoplastic drugs. CONCLUSION: The present study is of relevance to the field of public health and examines how a profile of such healthcare litigation can be used as a tool for managing and improving decision-making in times of economic austerity.

Surface contamination with nine antineoplastic drugs in 109 canadian centers; 10 years of a monitoring program.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare workers exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to adverse health effects. Guidelines promote the safe handling of antineoplastic drugs, but no safe exposure limit was determined. Regular surface sampling contributes to ensuring workers safety. METHODS: A cross-sectional monitoring is conducted once a year with voluntary Canadian centers, since 2010. Twelve standardized sampling sites were sampled. Samples were analyzed by high performance mass coupled liquid chromatography. The limits of detection (in ng/cm2) were: 0.001 for cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine; 0.3 for docetaxel and ifosfamide; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel; 0.003 for irinotecan; 0.002 for methotrexate; 0.01 for vinorelbine. RESULTS: The surfaces from 109 centers were sampled between 01/01/2020-18/06/2020. Twenty-six centers delayed their participation because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 1217 samples were analyzed. Surfaces were frequently contaminated with cyclophosphamide (34% positive, 75th percentile 0.00165 ng/cm2) and gemcitabine (16% and <0.001 ng/cm2). The armrest of patient treatment chairs (84% to at least one drug), the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (BSC) (73%) and the floor in front of the BSC (55%) were frequently contaminated. Centers that prepared ≥5000 antineoplastic drugs annually had higher concentration of cyclophosphamide on their surfaces (p < 0.0001). Contamination measured on the surfaces was reduced from 2010 to 2020. CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale study showed reproducible long term follow up of the contamination of standardized sites of Canadian centers and a reduction in surface contamination from 2010 to 2020. Periodic surface sampling help centers meet their continuous improvements goals to reduce exposure as much as possible. The COVID-19 pandemic had a limited impact on the program.