Search

To analyze the excipients and impurities contained in the various docetaxel products available on the market and find out whether they may be responsible for any of the different adverse events associated with the use of docetaxel in patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment.This is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational, study carried in 26 hospitals in Madrid, Catalonia, Andalusia, and the Valencia Region. The different docetaxel formulations were characterized in terms of their pH, amount of the active ingredient and impurities. The cumulative incidence of adverse events of any grade was evaluated. Adverse events were stratified by drug type and differences were analyzed by means of a chi-square test.Statistically significant differences were found between the different docetaxel formulations in the cumulative per-cycle incidence of: dosage change, anemia, hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis, neuropathy, palmoplantar and dermal toxicity, ungual toxicity and facial edema. The formulation with the lowest content of impurities showed better results in terms of change of dosage, visits to the emergency room and incidence of anemia and facial edema. However, it was associated with poorer results regarding hospitalization, febrile neutropenia, motor neuropathy and palmoplantar toxicity.The results of the study showed differences in the incidence of adverse events of the different docetaxel products available in Spain. Such differences were statistically significant for some of the variables analyzed. The study was not able to determine which of the products offered the best toxicity profile. Nor was it possible to establish a correlation with respect to the composition of excipients or the content of impurities.Objetivo: Estudiar los excipientes e impurezas de los diferentes medicamentos comercializados de docetaxel y conocer la incidencia de los diversos eventos adversos derivados del uso de docetaxel y su repercusión clínica en pacientes con cáncer de mama en el contexto de adyuvancia o neoadyuvancia.Método: Estudio observacional, longitudinal, prospectivo y multicéntrico en 26 hospitales de Madrid, Cataluña, Andalucía y Comunidad Valenciana. Se caracterizaron las distintas formulaciones de docetaxel en cuanto a pH, cantidad de docetaxel e impurezas. Se evaluó la incidencia acumulada de eventos adversos de cualquier grado estratificados por tipo de medicamento, analizando las diferencias mediante el test de χ2.Resultados: Se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las distintas formulaciones de docetaxel en cuanto a la incidencia acumulada por ciclo de: modificación de dosis, anemia, reacciones de hipersensibilidad y anafilaxia, neuropatía, toxicidad palmo- plantar y dermatológica, toxicidad ungueal y edema facial. La formulación con un menor contenido en impurezas presentó mejores resultados en modificación de dosis, visitas a urgencias, e incidencia de anemia y edema facial, pero peores en hospitalización, neutropenia febril, neuropatía motora y toxicidad palmo-plantar.Conclusiones: Los resultados muestran diferencias en la incidencia de los eventos adversos de los distintos medicamentos con docetaxel comercializados en nuestro país, con diferencias significativas entre ellos en algunas de las variables estudiadas. No se ha podido identificar un medicamento con un mejor perfil de toxicidad. Tampoco se ha podido establecer su relación con respecto a la composición de excipientes e impurezas.

Purpose. A literature evaluation of antidopaminergic therapies in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) who have developed psychosis, nausea, vomiting, and hiccups was conducted. Summary. Complications associated with the use of antiparkinsonian drugs make PD management more difficult given the need for antidopaminergic therapy, which worsens motor functioning in patients with PD. For psychosis, clozapine is the only atypical antipsychotic that has proven effective without worsening motor function in PD patients. However, its use requires the monitoring of agranulocytosis. Newer atypical antipsychotics such as quetiapine have been claimed to be safe in terms of motor functioning, but evidence about their effectiveness is not compelling. The emergency treatment of psychosis in PD would require parenteral administration, only available for olanzapine and ziprasidone. However, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to establish the efficacy and safety in this setting. For nausea and vomiting, very little domperidone crosses the blood–brain barrier. As a result, the risk of developing extrapyramidal adverse effects is minimal. Metoclopramide blocks central dopamine receptors and worsens motor parkinsonian symptoms. Chlorpromazine, the first-line treatment of intractable hiccups, is contraindicated in PD. Baclofen could be considered as a first-line alternative. Conclusion. Although clozapine can be used to treat psychosis in patients with PD, managing nausea, vomiting, hiccups, and emergent psychotic symptoms in these patients remains a challenge due to a lack of evidence for currently available options.