[Effects of Introducing PBPM for Outpatient Cancer Drug Therapy and Its Impact on Physician Workload].

In May 2022, Hyogo Medical University Hospital introduced protocol-based pharmacotherapy management(PBPM), which is jointly planned by doctors and pharmacists, for certain cancer drug therapies. Colorectal cancer patients who underwent outpatient cancer chemotherapy in the Department of Lower Gastrointestinal Surgery from October to December 2021(before the introduction of PBPM)and from May to August 2022(after the introduction of PBPM)were retrospectively studied. The proportion of clinical examinations performed, number of prescription questions, and time taken by pharmacists to solve the prescription questions before and after the introduction of PBPM were compared. Additionally, the number of modifications made in the medical record by pharmacists on behalf of doctors in response to the prescription questions was assessed. The proportion of clinical examinations performed(clinical examinations actually performed/clinical examinations that should have been performed)improved from 93.2%(260/279)before to 98.8%(405/410)after the introduction of PBPM(p<0.001). The number of prescription questions decreased from an average of 64.7(±11.9)per month before to an average of 29.5(±3.4)per month after the introduction of PBPM. The average number of modifications made in the medical record by pharmacists on behalf of the doctors in response to the prescription questions was 25.8(±5.4)per month after the introduction of PBPM. There was no significant difference before and after the introduction of PBPM in regard to the median(interquartile range)time taken by pharmacists to solve the prescription questions (before PBPM: 1.88 minutes per case[1.70-2.28 minutes]; after PBPM: 1.71 minutes per case[1.61-2.06 minutes][p= 0.75]). The increased proportion of clinical examinations performed after the implementation of PBPM may have improved the safety of cancer drug management, and the decreased number of prescription questions is speculated to have led to a reduction in physician workload.

[Questionnaire Survey on the Timing of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling for Advanced Recurrent Colorectal Cancer and Its Impact on Patients].

BACKGROUNDS: Comprehensive genomic profiling(CGP)has been covered by health insurance since June 2019. However, the clinical impact of CGP on patients with metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC)remains unclear. To date, there are very limited reports regarding patient-oriented outcomes of CGP in mCRC. PATIENTS: A questionnaire was completed by patients with mCRC who had already received their CGP results after April 2021. Eight questions were posed, covering the degree of satisfaction and timing when CGP was conducted. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients with mCRC who had received their CGP test results by August 2021 in our department, 21 patients responded to our questionnaire. In total 66.7% patients with mCRC answered "(very)satisfied"with the CGP testing. 28.6% of the patients already knew about CGP testing before their local doctors informed them. Except for 3 patients who did not answer, 47.6% and 9.5% of patients with mCRC"agreed"and "moderately agreed"with the timing of the CGP test. CONCLUSION: Although most patients with mCRC failed to access promising new treatment via CGP, approximately half of the patients answered that they were satisfied with the CGP testing. Conversely, a few patients already knew about CGP testing before it was proposed by their doctors. Thus, the provision of information at an early stage is necessary.

[Challenge of Skin Treatment Led by Nurses and Pharmacists for Advanced Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Anti-EGFR Antibodies].

Preemptive skin treatment led by nurses and pharmacists was started for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)who received anti-EGFR antibody treatment. Incidence of skin-related toxicities, amount of topical moisturizers used, and administered cycles of anti-EGFR antibody were retrospectively compared between a preemptive skin treatment group and a control group. Thirty-four mCRC patients before the introduction of preemptive skin treatment led by nurses and 23 mCRC patients treated with preemptive skin treatment led by nurses were evaluated. The incidence of 6- and 12- week Grade 2 or higher skin-related toxicity was 23.5% in the control group and 8.7% in the preemptive group(p=0.18), and 67.7% in the control group and 30.4% in the preemptive group(p=0.0076), respectively. Mean amounts of moisturizer used were both lower in the control group than in the preemptive group at both 6 weeks and 7-12 weeks(6 weeks; 275 g vs 550 g, p=0.036, 7-12 weeks; 575 g vs 1,175 g, p=0.013). However, the amount of topical steroid used was similar in both groups. Preemptive moisturizer skin treatment led by nurses and pharmacists may decrease the incidence of skin- related toxicity.