Search

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of pharmacist intervention in reducing and preventing prescribing errors of investigational drugs for cancer patients. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was conducted during two periods: a baseline period from December 2015 to June 2016 and an intervention period from July 2016 to February 2017. The investigational drug service (IDS) pharmacists performed active interventions during the intervention period. Results: Among 12,387 investigational drug orders, 395 (6.1%) prescribing errors were detected in 6477 orders at the baseline period, and 278 errors (4.7%) were detected in 5,910 orders at the intervention period. To identify factors that affect prescribing errors, three models were constructed for the multivariate analysis. Among factors affecting prescribing errors, sponsor initiated trial (SIT) was the strongest factor (AOR: 4.16, 95% CI: 3.31–5.23). Pharmacist intervention reduced prescribing errors by at least 25% in all constructed models after adjusting for confounding variables. Prescribing errors were 1.3 times higher when dealing with intravenous medications than when dealing with oral medications. There were 60% fewer prescribing errors in the blinded study than in the open study. SIT and multi-center/multi-nation studies had 4.2 and 2.4 times more frequent prescribing errors than in investigator-initiated trials (IIT) and single-center/single-nation studies, respectively. Fewer errors occurred in phase 2 and trials covering both phase 1 and phase 2 (phase 1/2) than in phase 3 trials. Conclusions: The IDS pharmacist intervention in cancer clinical trials was associated with significant reductions in prescribing errors and may lead to increased medication safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: We investigated for the first time the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in patients receiving new antineoplastic agents in early-stage clinical trials, including new immuno-regulatory anti-cancer investigational compounds and drug combinations. We found that about three-quarters of the patients under active anticancer treatments experienced mild to moderate adverse effects (AEs) related to COVID-19 vaccines. Patients enrolled in early-phase trials or receiving experimental immunotherapy agents did not experience worse AEs related to the vaccine than patients with cancer not enrolled in these trials, receiving approved drugs. The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials, including those treated with new immune checkpoint inhibitors, does not seem to differ from that of the general population of patients with cancer. Our data support the current vaccine prioritization of all cancer patients with active treatment and calls for data sharing from vaccinated patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials. Pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines did not include cancer patients, with questions remaining about their safety and efficacy in this population. Patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials receive novel treatments with unknown efficacy and safety profiles. Studies on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in these patients are urgently required. This is a retrospective, real-world, cohort study of patients receiving anticancer treatments and COVID-19 vaccines between 1 February and 25 June 2021 at the Division of New Drugs Development for Innovative Therapies of the European Institute of Oncology. One hundred thirteen patients were enrolled, 40 in early-phase clinical trials, and 20 under novel immunotherapy agents. Nearly three-quarters of the patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE) after the first dose (1D) (74.3%) and second dose (2D) (72.6%). Most of the AEs were local (67.3% 1D and 61.9% after 2D), while 31.8% (1D) and 38.1% (2D) of the patients had systemic AEs. No AEs above grade 2 were observed. Therefore, COVID-19 vaccines appear to be safe in patients enrolled in early-phase clinical trials, including patients receiving novel immunotherapy compounds. All cancer patients should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, regardless of ongoing treatments or enrollment in early-phase trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Many new cancer medicines have been developed that can improve patients' outcomes. However, access to these agents comes later in Europe than in the United States (US). The aim of this study is to assess the access in Europe to newly registered cancer drugs and to get more insight in the implications of these variations for patients. Methods. A retrospective database study was conducted. Analyses involved 12 cancer drugs and 28 European countries in the period 2011–2018. Time to patient access, speed of drug uptake, and the potential loss of life years due to a delay in access have been studied. Results. Marketing approval for the cancer drugs came on average 242 days later in Europe than in the US, and actual patient access varied extensively across Europe. The average time to market in Europe was 403 days (range 17–1187 days). The delay in patient access of ipilimumab and abiraterone may have led to a potential loss of more than 30,000 life years. Conclusion. It takes a long time for patients to get access to newly registered cancer drugs and there is great variation in access. The health outcomes can be substantially improved by faster processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]