Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib in human K2-EDTA plasma.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify the small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib, which are used in patients with oncogenic-driven non-small cell lung cancer. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPURITY® C18 analytical column with a gradient elution using ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0,1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. The assay was validated over a linear range of 50-2,500 ng/ml for brigatinib, 25-1,000 ng/ml for lorlatinib, 100-10,000 ng/ml for pralsetinib and 50-5,000 ng/ml for selpercatinib. All four SMIs were stable for at least 7 days under cool conditions (2-8°C), and at least 24 h at room temperature (15-25°C) in K2-EDTA plasma. Under freezing conditions (-20°C), all SMIs were stable for at least 30 days, except for the lowest quality control (QCLOW ) of pralsetinib. The QCLOW of pralsetinib was stable for at least 7 days at -20°C. This method provides an efficient and simple way to quantify four SMIs with a single assay in clinical practice.

Prescribing Errors With Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins.

BACKGROUND: Low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are used in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Bleeding is the primary major complication of LMWH therapy, which is associated with dose. The administration of appropriate dosages of LMWHs depends on the patient's risk of VTE, risk of bleeding, bodyweight, and renal function. Therefore, LMWH prescribing is prone to errors. However, no earlier study has explored the frequency of prescribing errors with LMWH. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to determine the frequency and determinants of in-hospital LMWH-prescribing errors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted to examine the frequency and determinants of LMWH prescribing errors between April and August 2014. We randomly selected 500 patients 18 years and older with at least one LMWH prescription during inpatient hospitalization. A prescribing error was a deviation from the internal hospital guidelines. Logistic regression estimated determinants of prescribing error. RESULTS: A prescribing error was present with 34% of all LMWH users. The most frequently recorded error was a dose that was not adjusted to body weight and/or renal function (85%). Prophylactic LMWH prescribing in medical wards was associated with a higher risk of prescribing error as compared with surgical wards. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of prescribing errors was 34% in a tertiary care hospital. Being a patient with prophylactic LMWH use on a medical ward is a determinant for LMWH prescribing error. Interventions that will lead to better electronic recording of body weight and more awareness among medical doctors may reduce the total number of prescribing errors.

Experiences with Lean Six Sigma as improvement strategy to reduce parenteral medication administration errors and associated potential risk of harm.

In this controlled before-after study the effect of improvements, derived from Lean Six Sigma strategy, on parenteral medication administration errors and the potential risk of harm was determined. During baseline measurement, on control versus intervention ward, at least one administration error occurred in 14 (74%) and 6 (46%) administrations with potential risk of harm in 6 (32%) and 1 (8%) administrations. Most administration errors with high potential risk of harm occurred in bolus injections: 8 (57%) versus 2 (67%) bolus injections were injected too fast with a potential risk of harm in 6 (43%) and 1 (33%) bolus injections on control and intervention ward. Implemented improvement strategies, based on major causes of too fast administration of bolus injections, were: Substitution of bolus injections by infusions, education, availability of administration information and drug round tabards. Post intervention, on the control ward in 76 (76%) administrations at least one error was made (RR 1.03; CI95:0.77-1.38), with a potential risk of harm in 14 (14%) administrations (RR 0.45; CI95:0.20-1.02). In 40 (68%) administrations on the intervention ward at least one error occurred (RR 1.47; CI95:0.80-2.71) but no administrations were associated with a potential risk of harm. A shift in wrong duration administration errors from bolus injections to infusions, with a reduction of potential risk of harm, seems to have occurred on the intervention ward. Although data are insufficient to prove an effect, Lean Six Sigma was experienced as a suitable strategy to select tailored improvements. Further studies are required to prove the effect of the strategy on parenteral medication administration errors.