CHEMOTHERAPY MEETS HERBAL MEDICINE: NAVIGATING THE INTERACTION MAZE IN THORACIC ONCOLOGY
Pdf
European Statement
Clinical Pharmacy Services
Author(s)
Margot DESCHAMPS, Nejib BORGAAOUI, Jimmy ROSE, Jennifer LE GRAND, Louise NICOLAS
Why was it done?
One of the clinical pharmacy activities in the thoracic oncology department is the analysis the interactions between chemotherapy and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). Cancer patients often seek alternative treatments which requires a rigorous evaluation of potential interactions. The goal of this study is to assess the methods used to analyze these interactions.
What was done?
To ensure traceability of the analysis, a tracking table for requests was created. The requests, coming from doctors, nurses, or patients, are recorded with key information such as name, date of birth, and the purpose of the analysis. Five information sources were selected, including the Herbal Medicine section of MedlinePlus, the website of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), a database of plants and dietary supplements published by the French National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health Safety, a database from the European Scientific Cooperative on Phytotherapy, and a publication from the journal Medical Oncology (Vol 36, number 45, 2019).
How was it done?
In nine months, 25 interaction requests were processed, 70% of which were from doctors. The analysis took an average of 30 minutes and were completed within 24 to 48 hours. The interactions mainly concerned oral chemotherapies (n=18), particularly Osimertinib (n=13). The requests involved various CAM (essential oils, medicinal plants, dietary supplements), with an average of four products per request. Desmodium was the most frequently analyzed product (n=5). In total, for 24 CAM, including Desmodium, was not recommended for use after analysis due the drug interaction risk and modification of liver metabolism of chemotherapies.
What has been achieved?
It is difficult to prohibit CAM to patients, and most substances can be taken at recommended doses. However, determining the precise dosage at which an interaction with chemotherapy occurs is complex due to the lack of a single reference. Using various sources allows for cross-referencing expertise and obtaining complementary information. For instance, MedlinePlus offers a generalist approach, while MSKCC focuses on interactions in oncology. Using international sources broadens the analysis and fills geographical or cultural gaps.
What next?
For the future, we would like to develop a tool that compiles the five data sources in order to be exhaustive in our future analysis.
SAFER DRUGS WITH AWARD-WINNING DATABASE
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Why was it done?
Hospitalised patients often need multiple IV drugs simultaneously which are commonly mixed in-line before entering the bloodstream. Physicochemically incompatible drugs cause reduced efficacy, clogged catheters and drug precipitation, which can be harmful or even fatal. The risks add uncertainty to the stressful working environment for clinical practitioners. According to a local 2012 survey 68% (n=44) of Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SUH) intensive care unit (ICU) nurses had co-administered drugs uncertain of their compatibility. Hospital pharmacists were hence asked for guidance to optimise compatibility and patient safety.
What was done?
Nurses, doctors and pharmacists were provided with accessible and evidence-based information on IV drug compatibility in order to improve drug therapy, working environment and patient safety.
How was it done?
Drug compatibility data was collected by hospital pharmacists who assessed its applicability to Swedish conditions. The results were documented in charts and procedure documents. A project for creating a database was initiated in collaboration with the IT organisation in Västra Götaland Region (VGR). A survey was designed to evaluate how the SUH’s ICU nurses experienced the database. Collaboration with nurses, doctors and clinical pharmacists helped to improve the quality of the database.
What has been achieved?
Drug compatibility lectures were given to nurses, doctors and pharmacists on a continuous basis. Procedure documents were implemented in eight clinics. A peer-reviewed workflow was established. The database contains over 2,500 assessed drug combinations. Over 700 nurses, doctors and pharmacists from 11 counties plus Norway and Denmark have requested access to the database. Clinics avoid drug mixing by choosing multi-lumen catheters with greater capacity. The 2016 survey showed that 88% (n=86) of SUH’s ICU nurses had co-administered drugs uncertain of their compatibility. The database affected their decisions in 93% (n=45) of the cases, 85% (n=34) found information easier and 88% (n=34) felt more certain when making decisions. A new pharmacist role – IV Compatibility Manager – was introduced and implemented in VGR. In 2016, this work received the national annual award Guldpillret (‘The Golden Pill’).
What next?
In the next years, the database will become nationally available and integrated into electronic journal systems. Compatibility issues may then be identified when prescribing, further improving patient safety.