[Translated article] Compounding training programme for pharmacy technicians using a digital platform and simulation techniques.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a compounding training plan in a tertiary hospital pharmacy service. The project aimed pharmacy assistant technicians to use a digital training platform and simulation techniques. METHODS: Two training programs were designed, one for sterile and the other for non-sterile drugs. Each programme consists of several phases: a basic online training course (digital e-learning platform), a practical simulation workshop, a supervised practice in real conditions, and a final verification by the pharmacist to qualify the technician. Both programs include continuous and accredited evaluation by the hospital's Continued Education Commission. A satisfaction survey on training (e-lerning platform) was designed and conducted for pharmacy technicians (sterile and non-sterile). RESULTS: The project has been running for 3 years. Six specialist pharmacists from different areas involved in compounding are responsible for training and continuous evaluation. Twenty-one technicians have been trained, and nineteen have obtained qualifications. Two of them were found to be unfit. Currently, we employ13 pharmacy technicians who were initially trained. The participation rate in the satisfaction survey on training (e-learning platform) was 61.5% (n=8) out of a total number of current developers (n=13). Overall, 62.5% of technicians reported being satisfied or very satisfied, while the remaining 37.5% were indifferent. CONCLUSIONS: Compounding training program is currently in its third year. It has been crucial in delegating tasks to pharmacy technicians. The use of digital technology is essential in this training. We consider that, specific training in compounding, is indispensable and should be included in the academic plan for pharmacy technicians.

Implementation of a methodology to assess patient reported outcomes in lung cancer patients: The PeOpLe (Patient-reported Outcomes in Lung cancer ) study protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to describe the PeOpLe study protocol, developed to assess patient-reported health outcomes in  advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in routine clinical practice using the methodology provided by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement tool. METHOD: The study envisaged will be multicenter, longitudinal, ambispective and observational. Two groups will be compared: a control group (followed up according to standard clinical practice) and an experimental group (followed up using the International Consortium for Health  Outcomes Measurement methodology adapted to the Spanish setting for 6  months). The variables collected will be related to demography (age, sex,  degree of family support), clinical factors (smoking, comorbidities, lung  capacity), the neoplasm (histology, staging, mutations), pharmacotherapy  (treatment schedule, modifications, and complications), health status  (functional status, quality of life, satisfaction and overall survival) and resource consumption (emergency visits, hospital admissions and time spent by health providers). The PeOpLe study protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee for Research into Medicinal Products of the Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital and will be conducted in compliance with prevailing ethical principles and standards. CONCLUSIONS: The PeOpLe study will explore how patient-reported outcomes collection can be developed and integrated with the clinical processes used in  the management of patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsmall cell  lung cancer what patient-reported outcomes can be measured with systems  that can conveniently be used both by patients and by healthcare providers.  Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcomes will help determine their  impact in terms of effectiveness (survival), safety (complications of systemic  therapy), and quality of life and patient satisfaction. The multidisciplinary and  multicenter nature of the study will facilitate a comprehensive view of the  subject analyzed and allow external reproducibility.

OBJETIVO: El objetivo es describir el protocolo del estudio PeOpLe, cuyo fin es  evaluar los resultados en salud centrados en el paciente con cáncer de pulmón  no microcítico avanzado o metastásico en la práctica clínica habitual mediante  una metodología adaptada de la herramienta del International Consortium for  Health Outcomes Measurement.Método: Estudio observacional, ambispectivo, longitudinal y multicéntrico. Se  compararán dos grupos: grupo control (seguimiento según práctica clínica  habitual) frente a un grupo intervención (seguimiento mediante la metodología  del International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement adaptada al entorno español) durante un período de 6 meses.  Las variables recogidas incluirán aspectos demográficos (edad, sexo, apoyo familiar), clínicos (hábito tabáquico, comorbilidades, capacidad   pulmonar), del tumor (histología, estadiaje, mutaciones), farmacoterapéutico (esquema de tratamiento, modificaciones y  complicaciones), grado de salud (estado funcional, calidad de vida, satisfacción y supervivencia global) y consumo de recursos (visitas a urgencias, ingresos  hospitalarios y tiempo dedicado por los profesionales sanitarios). El protocolo  del estudio PeOpLe ha sido aprobado por el Comité de Ética de la Investigación con medicamentos y se realizará respetando los principios y las normas éticas  básicas. CONCLUSIONES: El estudio PeOpLe explorará cómo se pueden desarrollar e  integrar los procesos de medición de resultados en salud centrados en los  pacientes, especialmente los patient-reported outcomes, en pacientes con  cáncer de pulmón no microcítico localmente avanzado o metastásico en la  práctica clínica. La evaluación sistemática de estos patient-reported outcomes  permitirá conocer su impacto en términos de efectividad (supervivencia),  seguridad (complicaciones de la terapia sistémica) y calidad de vida y  satisfacción. El carácter multidisciplinar y multicéntrico facilitará una visión  integral y su reproducibilidad externa.

A retrospective study of treosulfan versus busulfan-based conditioning in pediatric patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of treosulfan-based vs busulfan-based conditioning regimens in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients. METHODS: Retrospective study of all consecutive patients (2012-2019) treated with allogenic HSCT and treosulfan- or busulfan-based conditioning regimens at a single center. RESULTS: A total of 101 HSCT were included: 66 HSCT with busulfan and 35 with treosulfan. In malignant diseases (n = 62), busulfan-based conditioning was more commonly employed than treosulfan: 82.3% vs 17.7%. However, the use of treosulfan for malignant diseases increased over time: 6.5% of HSCT in 2012-2015 vs 29% of HSCT in 2015-2019 (p = .02). The cohort of treosulfan had more children under 1-year of age than the busulfan cohort (31 vs 13%; p = .033). The percentage of patients who received serotherapy was 73 and 89% in the nonmalignant and malignant groups, respectively. The engraftment, time to neutrophil, and platelet engraftment were not significantly different between the busulfan and the treosulfan cohorts. Rate of grade II-IV acute GvHD was significantly higher in the busulfan cohort than the treosulfan cohort (39% vs 15%; p = .016). No differences were observed in endothelial damage complications, chronic GvHD, relapse, overall survival, and transplant-related mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Busulfan-based conditioning regimens are used more frequently for children undergoing allogenic HSCT, but treosulfan-based conditioning is gaining acceptance. Treosulfan-based conditioning is associated with lower rates of acute GvHD, and no significant differences on overall survival were observed compared with busulfan.

Implantación de una metodología para evaluarpatient-reported outcomes en pacientes con cáncer de pulmón: Protocolo del estudio PeOpLe(Patient-reported Outcomes in Lung cancer) / Implementation of a methodology to assess patient reported outcomes in lung cancer patients: The PeOpLe (Patient-reported Outcomes in Lung cancer) study protocol

Objetivo: El objetivo es describir el protocolo del estudio PeOpLe, cuyofin es evaluar los resultados en salud centrados en el paciente con cáncerde pulmón no microcítico avanzado o metastásico en la práctica clínicahabitual mediante una metodología adaptada de la herramienta del International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement.Método: Estudio observacional, ambispectivo, longitudinal y multicéntrico. Se compararán dos grupos: grupo control (seguimiento según práctica clínica habitual) frente a un grupo intervención (seguimiento mediantela metodología del International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement adaptada al entorno español) durante un período de 6 meses. Lasvariables recogidas incluirán aspectos demográficos (edad, sexo, apoyofamiliar), clínicos (hábito tabáquico, comorbilidades, capacidad pulmonar), del tumor (histología, estadiaje, mutaciones), farmacoterapéutico(esquema de tratamiento, modificaciones y complicaciones), grado desalud (estado funcional, calidad de vida, satisfacción y supervivencia global) y consumo de recursos (visitas a urgencias, ingresos hospitalariosy tiempo dedicado por los profesionales sanitarios). El protocolo del estudio PeOpLe ha sido aprobado por el Comité de Ética de la Investigacióncon medicamentos y se realizará respetando los principios y las normaséticas básicas. (AU)

Objective: The purpose of this article is to describe the PeOpLe studyprotocol, developed to assess patient-reported health outcomes in advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer in routine clinical practiceusing the methodology provided by the International Consortium forHealth Outcomes Measurement tool.Method: The study envisaged will be multicenter, longitudinal, ambispective and observational. Two groups will be compared: a control group(followed up according to standard clinical practice) and an experimentalgroup (followed up using the International Consortium for Health OutcomesMeasurement methodology adapted to the Spanish setting for 6 months).The variables collected will be related to demography (age, sex, degreeof family support), clinical factors (smoking, comorbidities, lung capacity),the neoplasm (histology, staging, mutations), pharmacotherapy (treatmentschedule, modifications, and complications), health status (functionalstatus, quality of life, satisfaction and overall survival) and resource consumption (emergency visits, hospital admissions and time spent by healthproviders). The PeOpLe study protocol has been approved by the EthicsCommittee for Research into Medicinal Products of the Gregorio MarañónGeneral University Hospital and will be conducted in compliance withprevailing ethical principles and standards. (AU)

Managing the front-line treatment for diffuse large B cell lymphoma and high-grade B cell lymphoma during the COVID-19 outbreak.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically challenged care for cancer patients, especially those with active treatment who represent a vulnerable population for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Aggressive lymphoid neoplasms, such as diffuse large B cell lymphoma and high-grade B cell lymphoma, need to be treated without delay in order to get the best disease outcome. Because of that, our clinical practice was changed to minimise the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection while continuing haematological treatment. In this report, we analyse the management of front-line therapy in 18 patients during the COVID-19 outbreak, as well as the results of the implemented measures in their outcome.

Can the dexamethasone intravitreal implant Ozurdex be safely administered in an out-of-operating room setting?

Purpose: To describe a standardized protocol of the dexamethasone intravitreal (DEX) implant Ozurdex (Allergan, Dublin, Ireland) performed in a controlled environment surgical cabin (CESC). Methods: Retrospective and observational study conducted on patients who underwent a DEX implant between May 2011 and June 2019, in a third level University Hospital. The controlled environment surgical cabin (ArcSterile, Imex, Valencia, Spain) used in this study was the MB 20 (2 m width, 1.60 m depth, and 2 m height) with an uninterrupted power system (ARSSAI1) to keep the cabin working for 20 min. The cabin was used in the open mode. A standardized protocol of intravitreal injections in controlled environment surgical cabin was designed. Results: From May 2011 to February 2015, a total of 454 DEX implants were performed in the operating room, whereas from March 2015 to June 2019, 1054 DEX devices were implanted using the CESC. The mean number of DEX implants/per week was significantly lower in the operating room than in the CESC [2.3 (2.1 to 2.5) versus 3.8 (3.6 to 4.1), mean difference 1.5 (1.2 to 1.8), p < 0.0001]. The incidence of endophthalmitis was similar in the two populations, 0/454 (0.0%; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.81%) and 0/1054 (0.0%; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.35%) in the operating room and in the CESC, respectively. Conclusions: The CESC may be a good alternative to the conventional operating room for the administration of the intravitreal DEX implant.