A pragmatic review of varenicline prescribing practices.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is the leading preventable cause of illness and premature death worldwide. Most tobacco users desire to quit, but few are successful. Guidelines recommend varenicline as an initial treatment recommendation to support smoking cessation. OBJECTIVES: Determine whether historic warnings preclude the use of varenicline as an initial treatment recommendation in patients with and without certain comorbidities. Appendix 1 shows the questions asked in the survey. METHODS: This study was conducted in 2 parts. Part 1 of this study was a provider survey. Part 2 was a multicenter, retrospective chart review. Survey respondents were primary care providers (PCPs) or internal medicine residents within a large health system. Patients included in the chart review had a PCP appointment between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2020, and a diagnosis of tobacco dependence or tobacco cessation therapy prescription. RESULTS: In total, 352 providers were included in survey distribution and 56 responses were received, resulting in a response rate of 16%. Most providers (77%) indicated that they would be likely to use varenicline as an initial treatment recommendation in a patient with no comorbidities. Providers indicated they would be unlikely to use varenicline in a patient with certain mental health comorbidities (43%, 43%, and 55% for patients with bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or history of suicide attempts, respectively, with 25%, 30%, and 27% having no opinion for each group). In addition, chart review yielded data for 25,128 patients. Notably, patients with schizophrenia were found to have an odds ratio of 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.77) to receive varenicline at any point in therapy, and patients with diabetes had an odds ratio of 2.66 (95% CI 2.22-3.19) to receive no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Historic warnings for neuropsychiatric events with varenicline may still preclude usage in patients with serious psychiatric comorbidities such as schizophrenia. In addition, patients with diabetes were less likely to receive any form of tobacco cessation therapy.

Evaluation of denosumab in adult oncology patients for the prevention of skeletal related events across a large academic health system.

INTRODUCTION: Denosumab (Xgeva®) and zoledronic acid (Zometa®) are widely utilized for prevention of skeletal related events (SREs) in oncology patients. Drug costs, renal function, ease and logistics of administration, and adverse effect profile are factors frequently considered by patients and/or providers when selecting an optimal agent. Given the significantly higher drug cost of denosumab compared to zoledronic acid, an evaluation of our institution's denosumab use and investigation into opportunities to shift denosumab administrations to zoledronic acid and/or to lower cost sites-of-care was warranted. METHODS: A single-center, multi-site, retrospective, observational analysis of the electronic medical record (EMR) was conducted for adult oncology patients who received denosumab 120 mg for prevention of SREs from October 1st, 2018 to September 30th, 2019 at three institutions within our health system. Additional information was collected to characterize the patient population based on cancer diagnosis, renal function, and concomitant calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Our primary objective was to evaluate if the use of denosumab met current formulary restrictions of the health system. RESULTS: In total, 304 adult oncology patients received 1411 doses of denosumab for the prevention of SREs. The majority of reviewed patients had a primary oncology diagnosis of breast (35%) or lung (24%) cancer. Of the patients who received denosumab, 278 (93%) met the health system's current formulary restrictions. The majority of patients who did not meet formulary restrictions were those with multiple myeloma (MM) (20/22; 91%). Of the 304 patients reviewed, 70 had the appropriate parameters in the EMR to calculate creatinine clearance (CrCl) using Cockcroft-Gault Equation. Of those 70 patients, 59 (84%) would have been eligible to receive zoledronic acid instead of denosumab given that their CrCl >30 mL/min with no documented intolerance to bisphosphonates. Concurrent use of calcium and vitamin D is recommended when using denosumab. Based on the most recent prior to admission (PTA) medication list obtained from the 304 patients evaluated, 222 (73%) had both calcium and vitamin D listed as "taking". CONCLUSIONS: Within our health system, denosumab is restricted to those who meet formulary restrictions. Additional education is recommended to help limit the use of denosumab, specifically in MM, to reduce drug costs when zoledronic acid is also an appropriate first-line agent.

Assisted versus referred pharmacy smoking interventions for patients with thoracic malignancies or pulmonary nodules.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is the foremost preventable cause of death, disease, and disability in the United States. Continued tobacco use in malignant disease contributes to treatment failure and disease progression. Pharmacists are pivotal to tobacco cessation counseling, management, and follow up. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, single-center, cohort study of ambulatory cancer patients was designed to assess the impact of assisted versus "Ask, Advise, Refer" (AAR) pharmacy-driven smoking cessation interventions on patient-reported quit rates at 30- and 90-days. Those included were currently smoking or recently quit adults with a thoracic malignancy or nodule. Those in the assisted intervention were offered nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for free according to a personalized quit plan. After July 1, 2020, patients were enrolled in the AAR intervention, whereby participants were referred to obtain NRT through insurance or external resources. Both clinical interventions were provided as standard of care. RESULTS: 129 participants were included (assisted n = 83; AAR n = 46) with baseline characteristics evenly matched. After excluding those unable to be reached at 30-days, 30 (44.8%) in the assisted intervention quit smoking versus 11 (27.5%) in the AAR intervention, p = 0.08. Lung cancer patients were more likely to report quitting at 30-days in the assisted intervention, 16 (64.0%) versus 5 (29.4%) in the AAR intervention, p = 0.03. After excluding those unable to be reached at 90-days, 30 (45.5%) in the assisted intervention quit versus 11 (35.5%) in the AAR intervention, p = 0.35. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-led smoking cessation initiatives that include providing NRT are especially impactful on smoking cessation in lung cancer patients.

Alignment of Medical and Psychosocial Sectors for Promotion of Tobacco Cessation among Residents of Public Housing: A Feasibility Study.

The inequity in cessation resources is at the forefront of the recently enacted US smoking ban in public housing facilities. This pre-post, non-randomized pilot study assessed the feasibility of a smoking cessation program targeting smokers in Baltimore City public housing. The study implemented a four-phased, 10-week, community-based cessation program using a joint academic-housing partnership that provided on-site cessation pharmacotherapy, behavioral counseling, and psychosocial/legal services. The community-led strategy involved: (1) two-week smoking cessation training for lay health workers; (2) screening and recruitment of smokers by housing authority residential leadership; (3) four-week resident-led cessation using evidenced-based strategies along with wraparound support services; (4) formative evaluation of the intervention's acceptability and implementation. Thirty participants were recruited of which greater than one-half attended the majority of weekly cessation events. Thirty percent were able to achieve biomarker-proven cessation, as measured by a reduction in exhaled CO levels-a percentage comparable to the reported state quitline 30-day cessation rate. Despite weekly joint community-academic led-education of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) therapies, only two participants regularly and properly used NRT transdermal patches; <20% of participants used NRT gum correctly at their first follow-up visit. Less than one-half utilized psychosocial and legal services by our community-based organization partners. Post-intervention interviews with participants noted broad approval of the ease in accessibility of the cessation intervention, but more diversification in the timing and personalization of offerings of services would have assisted in greater adoptability and participant retention. Though a reduction in smoking behaviors was not broadly observed, we elucidated modifiable social, educational, and physical features that could enhance the likelihood of smoking cessation among public housing residents.

An evaluation of provider-chosen antibiotic indications as a targeted antimicrobial stewardship intervention.

BACKGROUND: Provider-entered indications for antibiotics have been recommended as a tracking tool for antibiotic stewardship programs. The accuracy and utility of these indications are unknown. METHODS: Drug-specific lists of evidence-based indications were integrated into an electronic health system as an ordering hard-stop. We reviewed antibiotic orders with provider-entered indications to determine whether the chosen indication matched the documentation and whether antibiotic use was appropriate. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five antibiotic orders were reviewed. Clinical documentation supported the entered indication in 80% of vancomycin orders, 78% of cefepime orders, and 74% of fluoroquinolone orders. The clinical appropriateness for vancomycin, cefepime, and fluoroquinolones were 94%, 100%, and 68%, respectively. When providers chose indications from the list as opposed to choosing "other" and entering free text, antibiotic orders were significantly more likely to be appropriate (odds ratio, 5.8; P = .001) but also less likely to match clinical documentation (odds ratio, 0.25; P = .0043). DISCUSSION: Provider-chosen indications are, overall, an accurate reflection of the true reason for antibiotic use at our institution. Providers frequently documented reasons for fluoroquinolone use that were not among the provided indications. CONCLUSION: Selecting an indication from an evidence-based list as opposed to free-text indications increases the odds that antibiotic agents will be used appropriately.