Value Assessment of Oncology Pharmacist Interventions.

A review of the published literature confirms the challenge in quantifying the value of oncology pharmacists. This editorial expands on a 2020 study by Meleis and colleagues published in the Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology and seeks to correlate pharmacist interventions to cost-saving and cost-avoidance measures to show the value of ambulatory oncology clinical pharmacists in patient care. A total of 4,686 interventions were reviewed. The 6-month intervention data demonstrate an annualized value of approximately $1.1 million dollars from nine ambulatory oncology clinical pharmacists showcasing the essential role of the clinical pharmacist in ambulatory oncology settings.

Comparison of differing dose levels of methotrexate for patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: It has long been established that high-dose methotrexate is an essential part of therapy for primary central nervous system lymphoma. When regimens utilizing high-dose methotrexate were first studied, a dose of 8 g/m2 was used. More recently, reduced dosing strategies have been studied and adopted in attempts to reduce rates of adverse events. Studies utilizing 3.5 g/m2 of methotrexate have shown promising outcomes and improved rates of adverse events but there have never been any randomized head-to-head studies of differing dose levels of high-dose methotrexate. The purpose of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of different dosing strategies of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL). METHODS: This single center retrospective review was conducted between 07/01/2013 to 6/3/2020. The patient population was separated into two arms based upon dose of methotrexate. The high intensity (HiHD) arm was defined as patients who received doses > 3.5 g/m2, while the low intensity (LiHD) arm received ≤ 3.5 g/m2. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) and secondary endpoints include efficacy via 2-year overall survival (OS), progression to transplant, and utilization of consolidation or salvage therapy. Safety was assessed through monitoring of relevant laboratory studies. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients were included in this analysis. Baseline demographics were similar between groups, with the LiHD group trending toward older age. There were 78 patients eligible for assessment for ORR; there was no significant difference between the two groups (42.0% LiHD vs. 44.4% HiHD; p = 1.0). Rates of OS, progression to transplant and progression to consolidation chemotherapy were not different between groups. There were statistically significantly higher rates of renal and/or hepatic dysfunction with the first dose in the HiHD group compared with the LiHD group (11.5% LiHD vs. 64.3% HiHD; p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this PCNSL patient cohort, there is no difference in terms of efficacy between HiHD LiHD methotrexate, but patients in the HiHD group had higher rates of renal and hepatic dysfunction. Limitations include small sample size and disparity between group sizes.

Evaluation of the Role and Impact of Ambulatory Clinical Pharmacists in an Academic Comprehensive Cancer Center.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, there has been significant growth of ambulatory oncology pharmacy, yet there is a paucity of published studies on the clinical activities and impact of ambulatory oncology clinical pharmacists. At Duke Cancer Center, dedicated pharmacist services are embedded in specialized outpatient oncology areas. Pharmacists document their clinical and administrative activities in the electronic health record. The primary objective of this study is to quantify and assess ambulatory oncology pharmacist interventions in clinics in a large academic comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: For the purposes of this single-center, retrospective, descriptive study, pharmacist interventions were collected, quantified, and described over a 6-month period from July 1 to December 31, 2015. The study evaluated the perceived contribution and impact of a pharmacist on patient care in ambulatory oncology clinics via a survey that was distributed to providers and nurses. RESULTS: In the 6-month time period, there were 5,091 interventions spanning 3,967 patient encounters between nine ambulatory oncology clinic pharmacists. The average time per encounter in the 6-month time frame was 22.4 minutes. There were 92 respondents to the survey (61.7% response rate). Overall, responses showed that the clinical pharmacists add value to patient care and are integral members of the team. CONCLUSIONS: Although previous studies have described pharmacist activities in outpatient oncology clinics, this study showed a larger number and variety of clinical pharmacist activities in outpatient cancer clinics to improve patient care. Future directions include conducting prospective, controlled studies to link pharmacist activities to tangible outcomes.

Cetuximab hypersensitivity infusion reactions: Incidence and risk factors.

INTRODUCTION: Cetuximab is a chimeric mouse-human (30:70) IgG1 monoclonal antibody that competitively inhibits the binding of epidermal growth factor. Cetuximab is generally well tolerated; however, hypersensitivity infusion reactions have been reported. The incidence at the University of Oklahoma was currently unknown, though anecdotally high. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of severe HIRs and secondarily to determine risk factors for cetuximab-induced hypersensitivity infusion reactions. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective chart review was conducted and included all patients that received cetuximab from 2005 to 2010 at the outpatient clinics of the Oklahoma University Health Sciences Center. A total of 153 patients were included in the analysis. The overall incidence proportion of severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions was 12.4%. Male patients had an increased incidence of severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions compared to female patients (20.6% vs. 5%, p = 0.0036). Current smokers had an increased incidence of severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions of 23.6% when compared to never smokers or former smokers, p = 0.0012. Cervical cancer had a significantly decreased risk of severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions when compared to other tumor types (5.3% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.0387). Multivariate analysis identified risk factors associated with severe HIRs to be: male gender, RR = 3.9, p = 0.01 and current smokers, RR = 3.98, p = 0.0048. CONCLUSION: Patients at the University of Oklahoma had an increased incidence of severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions when compared to the national average. Male patients and current smokers were found to be at increased risk for severe hypersensitivity infusion reactions in our study. Further investigation is warranted.

Management of cyclosporine overdose in a hematopoietic stem cell transplant patient with sequential plasma exchange and red blood cell exchange.

Cyclosporine is commonly used as an immunosuppressive agent in both solid organ and bone marrow transplant. While used for graft rejection in organ transplantation, cyclosporine has been used to enable tolerance and for prevention of acute graft-versus-host disease in bone marrow transplant [Ratanatharathorn et al., Blood 1998;92:2303-2314]. Cyclosporine has a narrow therapeutic window, and many patients develop some level of toxicity even within the therapeutic range. Common toxicities include hypertension, nephrotoxicity, electrolyte abnormalities, hyperglycemia, and neurotoxicity [Woo et al., Bone Marrow Transplant 1997;20:1095-1098]. Management of cyclosporine toxicity is not clearly defined and is primarily supportive in nature. In cases of significant elevations of cyclosporine levels, limited data are available but suggest that whole blood exchange may be effective [Kwon et al., J Heart Lung Transplant 2006;25:483-485; Leitner et al., Transplantation 2003;75:1764-1765]. We present a case of successful rapid clearance of cyclosporine utilizing a combined approach of red cell exchange and plasma exchange.