Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
JAMA Oncol ; 10(1): 87-94, 2024 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37971730

ABSTRACT

Importance: New strategies targeting waste are required to improve financial and ecologic sustainability of expensive therapies, such as oral anticancer drugs, that frequently remain unused by patients. Redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs seems to be a promising strategy when drug quality is guaranteed. Objectives: To determine the waste reduction and net cost savings attained by redispensing oral anticancer drugs that go unused by patients compared with the standard practice of disposal. Design, Settings, and Participants: The ROAD study was a prospective single-group intervention conducted in the outpatient pharmacies of 4 hospitals in the Netherlands from February 1, 2021, to February 1, 2023, with 12-month follow-up of each patient. Patients with cancer and who had a prescription for an oral anticancer drug that could be stored at room temperature were included. Of 2426 eligible patients, 602 did not consent and 601 did not respond. Data analyses were performed from August 25, 2022, to April 19, 2023. Intervention: Participants received oral anticancer drugs for use at home in special packaging (ie, sealed packaging with time-temperature indicator), to be returned to the pharmacy should these remain unused. The pharmacy ensured quality of returned drugs based on authenticity, appearance, remaining shelf life and adequate storage temperature. Drugs fulfilling quality requirements were redispensed to other patients. Main Outcome and Measure: Total waste reduction and mean net annual cost savings per patient compared with the standard practice of disposal. Optimization of cost savings was explored by introducing variations in the quality assurance procedure and patient population. All analyses used the average exchange rate for 2021 €1 = US $1.18. Results: Of 1223 patients with cancer who consented, 1071 participated (median [IQR] age, 70 [62-75] years; 622 [58.1%] were male). In all, 171 patients (16.0%; 95% CI, 13.8%-18.3%) returned 335 unused oral anticancer drug packages. Of the returned drugs, 228 packages were redispensed, which reduced waste by 68.1% (95% CI, 67.7%-68.5%) compared with the standard practice (disposal). Redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs comprised 2.4% (95% CI, 2.2%-2.5%) of total drug costs, providing mean net annual cost savings of US $680 (95% CI, $524-$837) up to $1591 (95% CI, $1226-$2002) per participant. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this multicenter intervention study indicate that redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs is associated with waste reduction and cost savings, which in turn may improve the affordability and sustainability of cancer treatment. Trial Registration: World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Identifier: NL9208.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Neoplasms , Pharmacies , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Cost Savings , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Middle Aged
2.
BMC Rheumatol ; 7(1): 7, 2023 Apr 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37069634

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Drug-related problems can negatively influence treatment outcome and well-being for patients with rheumatic diseases. Thus, it is important to support patients in preventing or resolving drug-related problems as quickly as possible. To effectively develop interventions for this purpose, knowledge on the frequency and character of drug-related problems is needed. Therefore, this study aims to quantify and characterize drug-related problems reported by patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases along their treatment process. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in a Dutch outpatient pharmacy. Adult patients with rheumatic diseases that were prescribed medication by a rheumatologist were questioned about experienced DRPs by telephone 4 times in 8 weeks using a structured interview-guide. Patient-reported DRPs were scored on uniqueness (i.e., if a specific DRP was reported in multiple interviews by one individual, this was counted as one unique DRP) and were categorized using a classification for patient-reported DRPs and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: In total, 52 participants (median age 68 years (interquartile range (IQR) 62-74), 52% male) completed 192 interviews with 45 (87%) participants completing all 4 interviews. The majority of patients (65%) were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. Patients reported a median number of 3 (IQR 2-5) unique DRPs during interview 1. In subsequent interviews, patients reported median numbers of 1 (IQR 0-2), 1 (IQR 0-2) and 0 (IQR 0-1) unique DRPs for interviews 2-4 respectively. Participants reported a median number of 5 (IQR 3-9) unique DRPs over all completed interviews. Unique patient-reported DRPs were most frequently categorized into (suspected) side effects (28%), medication management (e.g., medication administering or adherence) (26%), medication concerns (e.g., concerns regarding long-term side-effects or effectiveness) (19%) and medication effectiveness (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with rheumatic diseases report various unique DRPs with intervals as short as two weeks. These patients might therefore benefit from more continuous support in-between contact moments with their healthcare provider.

3.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 19(4): e618-e629, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36626700

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Waste of oral anticancer drugs (OACDs) causes financial and environmental burdens. This study evaluates the feasibility of an individualized dispensing program to prevent waste of OACDs. METHODS: Adult patients were dispensed individualized quantities of niraparib, abiraterone, enzalutamide, ruxolitinib, osimertinib, or imatinib as standard care, during the first 6 months of treatment. The first 50 patients participated in an feasibility evaluation conform five domains of Bowen's Framework. (1) implementation: reach (eligible patients included) and protocol fidelity (executions following protocol) assessed from pharmacy data, (2) acceptability: rated from 1 to 10 and agreement with theoretical framework acceptability domains via a survey among patients and pharmacy technicians, (3) practicality: program's costs, (4) effect: compared with previous practice (full package supply per month), defined as difference in unused OACD unit doses and net cost-savings, and (5) demand: potential scale-up of the program by including more OACDs. RESULTS: Participants' median age was 67 (interquartile range [IQR], 58-71) years, and 76% was male. (1) Implementation: reach and protocol fidelity were 89% and 90%, respectively. (2) Acceptability was high among patients (median, 9; IQR, 8-9) and pharmacy technicians (median, 7; IQR, 6-8). All acceptability domains were agreed on. (3) Practicality: program costs were €4,289. (4) Effect: unused OACD unit doses were reduced by 34%, causing net cost-savings of €693 per discontinued patient. (5) Demand: the program could be scaled up to seven times by including all OACDs. CONCLUSION: Individualized dispensing for patients prescribed OACDs is feasible for preventing waste in terms of implementation, acceptability, practicality, effect, and demand.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Patients , Adult , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Feasibility Studies , Imatinib Mesylate , Costs and Cost Analysis , Antineoplastic Agents/pharmacology , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...