Étude de l’exposition du personnel au contact du 177Lu-DOTATATE, un produit de radiothérapie interne vectorisée

Leblanc, Olivia; Gayrard, Laurent; Boirie, G.; Pons‐Kerjean, Nathalie; Reguiga, Makrem Ben

doi:10.1016/j.phclin.2014.10.079

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7–12 Dermal absorption is an important source of workers’ exposure, which explains the abundance of studies that performed wipe sampling in healthcare and other settings. 13 Hand contamination has been observed with workers directly handling antineoplastic drugs, but it was also observed with cleaning staff 14,15 and other workers not directly handling them. 16 Accordingly, other sources of exposure include handling the antineoplastic drug containers upon their receipt 17-19 and handling patient excreta.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface contamination with nine antineoplastic drugs in 109 canadian centers; 10 years of a monitoring program

Chabut

Tanguay

Gagné

et al. 2021

J Oncol Pharm Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Healthcare workers exposure to antineoplastic drugs can lead to adverse health effects. Guidelines promote the safe handling of antineoplastic drugs, but no safe exposure limit was determined. Regular surface sampling contributes to ensuring workers safety. Methods A cross-sectional monitoring is conducted once a year with voluntary Canadian centers, since 2010. Twelve standardized sampling sites were sampled. Samples were analyzed by high performance mass coupled liquid chromatography. The limits of detection (in ng/cm2) were: 0.001 for cyclophosphamide and gemcitabine; 0.3 for docetaxel and ifosfamide; 0.04 for 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel; 0.003 for irinotecan; 0.002 for methotrexate; 0.01 for vinorelbine. Results The surfaces from 109 centers were sampled between 01/01/2020–18/06/2020. Twenty-six centers delayed their participation because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 1217 samples were analyzed. Surfaces were frequently contaminated with cyclophosphamide (34% positive, 75th percentile 0.00165 ng/cm2) and gemcitabine (16% and <0.001 ng/cm2). The armrest of patient treatment chairs (84% to at least one drug), the front grille inside the biological safety cabinet (BSC) (73%) and the floor in front of the BSC (55%) were frequently contaminated. Centers that prepared ≥5000 antineoplastic drugs annually had higher concentration of cyclophosphamide on their surfaces (p < 0.0001). Contamination measured on the surfaces was reduced from 2010 to 2020. Conclusions This large-scale study showed reproducible long term follow up of the contamination of standardized sites of Canadian centers and a reduction in surface contamination from 2010 to 2020. Periodic surface sampling help centers meet their continuous improvements goals to reduce exposure as much as possible. The COVID-19 pandemic had a limited impact on the program.

show abstract