Search

The article discusses a study aimed at determining the incidence of encephalopathy within lymphoma and sarcoma disease groups and evaluate for potential risk factors that influenced the incidence of encephalopathy when patients received ifosfamide therapy. Topics discussed include indication of a significant difference in ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy (IIE) incidence based on cancer diagnosis and findings that CYP2B6 inhibitors increased the risk for IIE.

Background Oncology care is delivered largely in ambulatory settings by interdisciplinary teams. Treatments are often complex, extended in time, dispersed geographically and vulnerable to teamwork failures. To address this risk, we developed and piloted a team training initiative in the breast cancer programme at a comprehensive cancer centre. Methods Based on clinic observations, interviews with key staff and analyses of incident reports, we developed interventions to address four high-risk areas: (1) miscommunication of chemotherapy order changes on the day of treatment; (2) missing orders on treatment days without concurrent physician appointments; (3) poor follow-up with team members about active patient issues; and (4) conflict between providers and staff. The project team developed protocols and agreements to address team members' roles, responsibilities and behaviours. Results Using a train-the-trainer model, 92%of breast cancer staff completed training. The incidence of missing orders for unlinked visits decreased from 30% to 2% (p<0.001). Patient satisfaction scores regarding coordination of care improved from 93 to 97 (p=0.026). Providers, infusion nurses and support staff reported improvement in efficiency (75%, 86%, 90%), quality (82%, 93%, 93%) and safety (92%, 92%, 90%) of care, and more respectful behaviour (92%, 79%, 83%) and improved relationships among team members (91%, 85%, 92%). Although most clinicians reported a decrease in non-communicated changes, there was insufficient statistical power to detect a difference. Conclusions Team training improved communication, task coordination and perceptions of efficiency, quality, safety and interactions among team members as well as patient perception of care coordination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. Ifosfamide is metabolized by the cytochrome P450 system to its active form, ifosforamide mustard. A potential side effect is neurotoxicity, often manifesting as confusion, hallucination, or seizure. Aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 inhibitor, is recommended for highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens and may interfere with the metabolism of ifosfamide as it inhibits CYP3A4. The objective of the study is to identify if an increase in the incidence of neurotoxicity may be associated with the use of aprepitant with concomitant ifosfamide. Methods. A retrospective study of inpatients with sarcoma who received a two or four-day regimen of MAI (mesna, doxorubicin, and ifosfamide) between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2006 was conducted. Data collection focused on characterizing neurotoxicity of patients receiving ifosfamide with or without aprepitant. Correlation between serum creatinine, albumin, liver function tests, age, gender, and total doses of ifosfamide was examined. Results. A total of 45 patients received ifosfamide of which 23 (51%) were male and 24 (53%) received aprepitant. All baseline characteristics were similar for those who received aprepitant versus those who did not. No significant differences were noted between patients with or without neurotoxicity for age, gender, or liver enzymes. Eight patients (18%) of 45 developed neurotoxicity of which six (75%) of those patients also received aprepitant. A trend of increased occurrence of neurotoxicity was noted with aprepitant administration (6 vs. 2 patients respectively, p=0.176), although a statistical difference was not observed. A relative risk of 2.6 (95% CI, 0.47-26.6) was associated with the addition of aprepitant. Conclusions. An increased risk was identified for ifosfamide-induced neurotoxicity associated with aprepitant use; however, the observed difference was not statistically significant. The necessity of aprepitant given in association with ifosfamide may need to be reconsidered due to this risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]