Pharmacist's role in the management of drug-drug interactions caused by nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in COVID-19 oncohematology patients.

OBJECTIVE: New drugs developed for SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r), represent a potential for oncohematology patients, but also pose a challenge in managing the potential clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) that may arise. The aim of this study is to assess the frequency, severity, and pharmacist detection of pDDIs. METHODS: This prospective, observational, study spanned 8 months, involving 42 oncohematology patients prescribed NMV/r in a tertiary-level hospital. A Board Certified oncology pharmacist assessed pDDIs using three databases and made recommendations to prescribing physicians. Linear and logistic regression analyses were employed to explore the relationship between prescribed drugs and pDDIs. RESULTS: Clinically relevant pDDIs were detected in 76.2% of patients, with 18.1% of all medications involved in drug-drug interactions (DDIs). The most common drugs implicated were atorvastatin and imatinib. Micromedex® identified 63.3% of interactions as major severity, while Lexicomp® and University of Liverpool classifications were less restrictive. Pharmacists prevented most DDIs from reaching patients through different interventions, including treatment monitoring (44.2%), discontinuation (36.5%), and dose reduction (17.3%). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the high prevalence of clinically significant pDDIs in oncohematology patients receiving NMV/r for COVID-19. Pharmacists, as integral members of the healthcare team, played a crucial role in detecting, categorizing, and mitigating these interactions. The results underscore the need for comprehensive studies to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led interventions in optimizing drug therapy and enhancing patient safety in this vulnerable population.

Real-world data of atezolizumab in patients with previously treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of atezolizumab for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (mUBC) report controversial efficacy data. Furthermore, real-world evidence about this use is limited. AIM: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of atezolizumab in a real-world population with mUBC, to explore effectiveness with regard to selected poor prognostic criteria such as performance status by Eastern Oncology Cooperative Group (ECOG), hemoglobin levels and liver metastases, and to determine the safety profile of atezolizumab. METHOD: Multicenter, retrospective real-world study including previously treated mUBC patients who received atezolizumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Additionally, progression-free survival (PFS), best response reached and safety data were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed, while OS and PFS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients (84.9% men, median age 69 years) were included. Median PFS was 4.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-6.0], and median OS was 20.0 months (95% CI 11.8-28.5), with an objective response rate of 28.1%. OS was higher for patients with ECOG 0-1 versus 2-3 [24.5 months (95% CI 14.5-34.6) vs. 5.2 (95% CI 4.4-6.0), p = 0.004]; and for patients without liver metastases [25.4 months (95% CI 16.2-34.6) vs. 6.4 months (95% CI 4.0-8.1), p = 0.006]. Regarding hemoglobin levels, no survival differences were detected. Adverse events were registered in 55.1% of patients. CONCLUSION: In a real-world population with previously treated mUBC, atezolizumab seems to provide clinically relevant benefit, which is even higher for patients with ECOG 0-1 and without liver metastases, with an acceptable safety profile.

Real clinical impact of drug-drug interactions of immunosuppressants in transplant patients.

The main objective was to determine the prevalence of real drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of immunosuppressants in transplant patients. We conducted a prospective, observational 1-year study at a tertiary hospital, including all transplanted patients. We evaluated data from monitoring blood concentrations of immunosuppressive drugs and adverse drug events (ADEs) caused by DDIs. The DDIs were classified as C, D, or X according to their Lexi-Interact rating (C = monitor therapy, D = consider therapy modification, X = avoid combination). The clinical importance of real DDIs was expressed in terms of patient outcomes. The causality of DDIs was determined using Drug Interaction Probability Scale. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences v. 25.0. A total of 309 transplant patients were included. Their mean age was 52.0 ± 14.7 years (18-79) and 69.9% were male. The prevalence of real DDIs was 21.7%. Immunosuppressive drugs administered with antifungal azoles and tacrolimus (TAC) with nifedipine have a great clinical impact. Real DDIs caused ADEs in 22 patients. The most common clinical outcome was nephrotoxicity (1.6%; n = 5), followed by hypertension (1.3%; n = 4). Suggestions for avoiding category D and X DDIs included: changing the immunosuppressant dosage, using paracetamol instead of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and interrupting atorvastatin. The number of drugs prescribed and having been prescribed TAC was associated with an increased risk of real DDIs. There are many potential DDIs described in the literature but only a small percentage proved to be real DDIs, based on the patients´ outcomes.

A multicentre observational study of the effectiveness, safety and economic impact of nivolumab on non-small-cell lung cancer in real clinical practice.

Background Immunotherapy has become a standard treatment for lung cancer; however, the high cost makes it necessary to assess health outcomes. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness, safety and economic cost of nivolumab in real-world clinical practice. Setting Fifteen regional and academic hospitals from Spain participated in this study. Methods This study was a retrospective, multicentre and observational study involving patients who experienced progression after first-line therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer and were treated with nivolumab between January 2016 and July 2017. Effectiveness and safety were evaluated by the oncologist, and the data from the electronic clinical records of the patients were collected by the research team. Economic cost was calculated using the cost of acquiring nivolumab for the public health system. Main outcome measures Effectiveness variables were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The safety variable was the incidence of adverse events (AEs), and the cost per life-year gained (LYG) was the economic variable. Results A total of 221 patients were enrolled (83.7% men). The mean age was 64.5 years, and 84.6% of the patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status score of 0-1. Squamous tumours accounted for 59.7% of the total, and 78.7% of the patients presented a time since platinum therapy (TPT) > 6 months. The mean nivolumab dose was 216 mg (SD 211), and the treatment duration was 7.0 months (95% CI 5.8-8.1). The median PFS was 5.3 months (95% CI 3.2-7.3), and OS was 9.7 months (95% CI 7.6-11.8). The median PFS and OS values were statistically significantly superior for patients with an ECOG score of 0-1 and for patients with a TPT > 6 months. The median OS was also statistically significantly superior for patients with non-squamous histology. Regarding safety, 71% of the patients presented AEs of any grade, and in 18.6%, the nivolumab treatment had to be delayed or discontinued. The cost of nivolumab per patient was €19,910.00 (SD 19,369), and the cost per LYG was €110,026.00 (€77,557.00-€231,171.00). Conclusions This study confirms that the efficacy and safety of nivolumab treatment in a real population are comparable to the results obtained in clinical trials. A greater clinical benefit of nivolumab therapy was observed in patients with an ECOG score of 0-1, a TPT > 6 months or non-squamous histology. Despite the benefit observed, the cost per LYG is above the threshold of efficiency established by public health institutes.

Guía de administración de fármacos por sonda nasogástrica

Contiene: 1.Introducción, 2.Interacciones fármaco-nutrición enteral, 3.Recomendaciones generales para la administración de fármacos por sonda nasogástrica, 4.Recomendaciones específicas para cada medicamento incluido en la guía farmacoterapeútica del hospital, Tabla1. Fármacos con valores de ph extremos y Tabla2. Formulaciones orales líquidas que por osmolaridad pueden provocar diarrea.