Board-Certified Oncology Pharmacists: Their Potential Contribution to Reducing a Shortfall in Oncology Patient Visits.

PURPOSE: With an aging US population, the number of patients who need cancer treatment will increase significantly by 2020. On the basis of a predicted shortage of oncology physicians, nonphysician health care practitioners will need to fill the shortfall in oncology patient visits, and nurse practitioners and physician assistants have already been identified for this purpose. This study proposes that appropriately trained oncology pharmacists can also contribute. The purpose of this study is to estimate the supply of Board of Pharmacy Specialties-certified oncology pharmacists (BCOPs) and their potential contribution to the care of patients with cancer through 2020. METHODS: Data regarding accredited oncology pharmacy residencies, new BCOPs, and total BCOPs were used to estimate oncology residencies, new BCOPs, and total BCOPs through 2020. A Delphi panel process was used to estimate patient visits, identify patient care services that BCOPs could provide, and study limitations. RESULTS: By 2020, there will be an estimated 3,639 BCOPs, and approximately 62% of BCOPs will have completed accredited oncology pharmacy residencies. Delphi panelists came to consensus (at least 80% agreement) on eight patient care services that BCOPs could provide. Although the estimates given by our model indicate that BCOPs could provide 5 to 7 million 30-minute patient visits annually, sensitivity analysis, based on factors that could reduce potential visit availability resulted in 2.5 to 3.5 million visits by 2020 with the addition of BCOPs to the health care team. CONCLUSION: BCOPs can contribute to a projected shortfall in needed patient visits for cancer treatment. BCOPs, along with nurse practitioners and physician assistants could substantially reduce, but likely not eliminate, the shortfall of providers needed for oncology patient visits.

Clinical application of asparaginase activity levels following treatment with pegaspargase.

Asparaginase, an enzyme used to treat acute lymphoblastic leukemia and related forms of nonHodgkin lymphoma, depletes asparagine, which leads to lymphoblast cell death. Unlike most chemotherapeutic agents, asparaginase is a foreign protein that can result in clinical allergy and/or silent hypersensitivity with production of neutralizing antibodies that inactivate asparaginase. In North America, asparaginase activity levels can now be obtained via a commercially available assay, for therapeutic drug monitoring and investigation of potential allergic reactions. Herein, we provide recommendations and a corresponding algorithm for the clinical application of this assay after treatment with pegaspargase to evaluate suspected hypersensitivity reactions and/or silent inactivation.

Managing hypersensitivity to asparaginase in pediatrics, adolescents, and young adults.

Hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapeutic drugs have been documented for numerous cancer therapies. Clinical hypersensitivity to Escherichia coli asparaginase has been reported to range from 0% to 75%. Throughout the United States, nurses assume frontline responsibility for the assessment of asparaginase-related hypersensitivity reactions. It is essential that nurses educate themselves on the signs and symptoms of asparaginase-related hypersensitivity reactions as well as current supportive care approaches. The purpose of this review is to summarize acute lymphoblastic leukemia and the role of asparaginase and the pathology of allergic reactions. We will also update nurses on the differences in asparaginase preparations including dosing, half-life, rates of hypersensitivity, and routes of administration. A summary of current management and supportive care strategies will be provided as will a discussion of the relationship between allergy, antibodies, and asparaginase activity.

Report of the ASHP Task Force on Caring for Patients Served by Specialty Suppliers.

Task Force recommendations are discussed in more detail in eAppendix A (available at www.ajhp.org). What follows is a brief summary of those recommendations. In very abbreviated terms, the Task Force suggested that ASHP: 1. Consider creating and maintaining a Web resource center on ASHP's website to provide information about restricted drug distributions systems (RDDSs), risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMSs), risk assessment and minimization plans (RiskMAPs), and specialty suppliers and products. 2. Provide comprehensive education to members, other health professionals, regulators, third-party payers, patients, and other stakeholders about RDDSs, REMSs, RiskMAPs, and specialty suppliers and products. 3. Develop policies to advocate that a. Pharmacists serve as the institutional leaders in compliance and utilization challenges of safely managing externally supplied medications and related drug administration devices, b. Agencies, organizations, and associations that influence the distribution, sale, and dispensing of medications under these alternative distribution models address issues these models create in continuity of care, reimbursement, and patient safety, c. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Joint Commission develop standards and interpretations that accommodate hospital use of these products and devices when currently available technology (e.g., cold-chain storage, e-pedigree) is used to ensure patient safety, d. Group purchasing organizations negotiate contractual arrangements for specialty pharmaceuticals for both acquisition costs and distribution arrangements, and e. Information technology (IT) be used to resolve issues created by alternative distribution models and that ASHP work with IT vendors to ensure that programs are designed to meet the needs of these evolving models. 4. Quantify through research, perhaps in cooperation with entities such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Institute of Medicine, and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, the impact of alternative distribution models on financial, safety, clinical, and humanistic patient outcomes. 5. Develop multidisciplinary tools and best practices that assist health care practitioners address the challenges created by alternative distribution models, from patient intake and referral to hospital discharge.

Temozolomide stability in extemporaneously compounded oral suspensions.

Temozolomide, commercially available in capsules, is an oral alkylating agent used to treat brain tumors. The purpose of this study was to determine the pharmaceutical acceptability and chemical stability of temozolomide in two extemporaneously compounded suspension formulations prepared from the capsules. The temozolomide oral suspensions were prepared from 100-mg commercial capsules yielding a nominal temozolomide concentration of 10 mg/mL. The suspension vehicles selected for testing were an equal parts mixture of Ora-Plus and Ora-Sweet and an equal parts mixture of Ora-Plus and Ora-Sweet SF. The suspensions were packaged in amber plastic screw-cap prescription bottles, which were stored at 23 deg C for 21 days or 4 deg C for 60 days. Stability-indicating high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis revealed that the temozolomide concentration in both suspension vehicle combinations exhibited little or no loss for 60 days at 4 deg C. At 23 deg C, temozolomide losses were somewhat greater. In the Ora-Sweet formulation, the loss was 6% at 7 days; in the Ora-Sweet SF formulation, losses were about 8% at 14 days and 10% to 11% at 21 days. Temozolomide extemporaneously prepared as oral suspensions from capsules in equal parts mixtures of Ora-Plus suspension vehicle with Ora-Sweet and with ora-Sweet SF syrups with added povidine k-30 and acidified with citric acid were pharmaceutically acceptable and chemically stable for at least 60 days at 4 deg C. Refrigerated storage is recommended. The suspensions should not be stored at room temperature longer than 1 week if Ora-Sweet is used or longer than 2 weeks if Ora-Sweet SF is used.