Our results showed mixed evidence regarding the benefits of interventions because of the variety of the study designs and the results found. Nevertheless, the interventions do seem to have been beneficial, as 65% of the studies had positive outcomes. Therefore, more high-quality studies should be conducted.

There is a lack of magnesium monitoring in these patients. Serum magnesium determinations should be done every 4-8 weeks in patients treated with EGFR-targeting antibodies, as it is a useful surrogate marker for both toxicity and efficacy.

The main objective of the study is to determine the pharmacist detection of drug‐drug and drug‐food interactions in patients receiving oral antineoplastic drugs (OADs). Descriptive, prospective study in a tertiary‐care teaching hospital. The study population included patients who received OADs from the Outpatient Pharmacy of the hospital. The study population was attended by a pharmacist who checked potential interactions. The severity of interactions was evaluated using the summary of product characteristics of each drug and three different databases. We included 219 patients with a total of 736 concomitant medications. A total of 34 drug‐drug or food‐drug interactions were recorded. The most common interaction detected was between erlotinib and ranitidine (major interaction). In 19 of the 34 interactions detected in the experimental group, the pharmacist prevented them from reaching the patient. Interactions were resolved by drug suspensions, drug changes, or changes in schedules always according to the attending physician or the patient. In the remaining 15 interactions, the doctor was not contacted because the interactions were considered to be of little relevance or because they only required surveillance. Hospital pharmacist can improve the patient's safety and the efficiency of oral cytostatic treatment by detecting and preventing drug‐drug and drug‐food interactions.

No abstract

Dose adjustments are more frequent in obese patients than in cachectic patients. In cancer oncology patients, dose is adjusted mainly by hematology and hematopoietic cell transplant teams. Capping BSA is the most frequent strategy, followed by calculating actual body weight.

Most of ZA prescriptions in cancer outpatients followed the labeled indications. The percentage of ZA doses administered without intravenous chemotherapy was 60.5 %.

BackgroundChemotherapy extravasation is an accidental complication of antineoplastic administration. Due to its low incidence but serious consequences, further studies are needed to achieve a better management.PurposeTo analyse the context in which extravasation occurs, the degree of compliance with the extravasation protocol and the impact of electronic records on extravasation notification.Material and methodsThis was a retrospective study set in a tertiary-level hospital between 2013 and 2017. Data were obtained from 54 extravasation notifications received either on paper or electronically. Collected variables were: patient demographics, antineoplastic drug extravasated, potential factors for extravasation, description of resulting damage, degree of information given in the form, observance of extravasation protocol and follow-up of patients.ResultsExtravasation incidence was 54 of 1 47 837 doses of chemotherapy administered (0.04%): 48.15% were males and 51.85% females, mean age was 63.9±12.2 years. 48.15% (n=26) of the drugs involved were vesicant and 38.89% (n=21) irritant. The most frequent extravasated drugs were carboplatin (10, 18.5%) and paclitaxel (eight, 14.8%). 36.54% (n=19) of extravasated veins were weak, 36.54% (n=19) were small-diameter and 11.54% (n=6) were trough. In 51 cases (94.4%) the medical device access was a peripheral catheter and in 51.9% (n=28) the point of puncture was in the plexus arm or in the hand. Infusion pumps with occlusion sensor were used in 40.74% (n=22) of extravasations. In the majority of the cases, the patient (31, 57.4%) was the one who detected the incident. Most common symptoms described were qedema (35, 64.8%), pain (31, 57.4%) and redness (18, 33.3%). Protocol adherence was 83.3% (n=45). In 21 extravasations (38.9%) a control photograph was not taken. First follow-up occurred during the first 24 hours after the extravasation in 19 patients (35.19%) but in 58% of them, it was telephonically. Notifications received electronically were completed worse than paper notifications, 25.3% of unanswered questions (n=373) and 10.1% (n=102) respectively.ConclusionAlthough the incidence of extravasation is low, patient education and nursing staff training are essential for an early detection, a correct actuation, an adequate record of the incident and a proper follow-up. If the patient’s venous assessment indicates a potential issue with access, a peripheral catheter should be avoided, especially if the drug is vesicant and it is infused over more than 30 min (such as paclitaxel).No conflict of interest

No abstract