Search

Introduction: The treatment of cancer is associated with high risk for toxicity and high cost. Strategies to enhance the value, quality, and safety of cancer care are often managed independently of one another. Oncology stewardship is a potential framework to unify these efforts and enhance outcomes. This landscape survey establishes baseline information on oncology stewardship in the United States., Methods: The Hematology/Oncology Pharmacy Association (HOPA) distributed a 38-item survey composed of demographic, institutional, clinical decision-making, support staff, metrics, and technology sections to 675 HOPA members between 9 September 2022 and 9 October 2022., Results: Most organizations (78%) have adopted general pharmacy stewardship practices; however, only 31% reported having established a formalized oncology stewardship team. More than 70% of respondents reported implementation of biosimilars, formulary management, and dose rounding as oncology stewardship initiatives in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Frequently cited barriers to oncology stewardship included lack of clinical pharmacist availability (74%), lack of oncology stewardship training (62%), lack of physician/provider buy-in (32%), and lack of cost-saving metrics (33%). Only 6.6% of survey respondents reported their organization had defined "value in oncology." Lack of a formalized stewardship program was most often cited (77%) as the rationale for not defining value., Conclusions: Less than one-third of respondents have established oncology stewardship programs; however, most are providing oncology stewardship practices. This manuscript serves as a call to action for stakeholders to work together to formalize oncology stewardship programs that optimize value, quality, and safety for patients with cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: The objective of this study is to describe the use of targeted therapies for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and overall survival (OS) among patients in clinical practice in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA)., Methods: A retrospective cohort of 286 patients from 24 VHA Medical Centers diagnosed with advanced clear cell RCC between Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 and FY2014 was followed through September 30, 2016. Among patients who received targeted therapy, we described the medications taken, duration of therapy, and overall survival. We also assessed the effect of the first therapy received on overall survival using Cox Proportional Hazards models., Results: There were 66 patients who did not receive therapy for their advanced RCC. Of the 220 treated patients, the mean (sd) number of medications received was 1.9 (1.1). The medications most commonly used first were sunitinib (61.8%), pazopanib (17.3%), and temsirolimus (10.9%). The median duration of first-line therapy was 86 days (interquartile range [IQR] 42, 210). Median total duration of therapy was 159 days (IQR 58, 397). 62.3% of patients had ≥ 1 dose of therapy held or reduced, mainly due to an adverse drug event (ADE). Median survival from the start of treatment to death was 1.08 years (IQR 0.80, 1.31). Finally, receipt of temsirolimus vs sunitinib (HR 1.95 [95%CI 1.09,3.47]) as the first targeted therapy was independently associated with an increased hazard of death., Conclusion: Our analysis of targeted therapies for advanced RCC in VHA suggests duration of treatment is shorter in a real-world setting than in clinical trials, and dose reductions and ADEs are more common., (© 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation may occur with high risk immunosuppression, such as anti-cluster of differentiation (CD)20 antibodies (Abs). Appropriate HBV prophylaxis during anti-CD20 Ab therapy averts hepatitis, chemotherapy disruption, and death. Serologic evidence of prior HBV exposure is present in one in nine veterans in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). In 2014, most (61%-73%) patients in the VHA who were receiving anti-CD20 Ab treatment underwent HBV testing, yet <20% of eligible patients received HBV antiviral prophylaxis. We aimed to prevent HBV reactivation by increasing HBV testing and antiviral treatment rates among anti-CD20 Ab recipients through prospective interventions. A multidisciplinary team of clinicians, pharmacists, and public health professionals developed comprehensive prevention systems, including national seminars/newsletters/websites; pharmacy criteria for HBV screening/treatment prior to anti-CD20 Ab use; changes to national formulary restrictions to expand HBV prophylaxis prescribing authority; Medication Use Evaluation Tracker to identify omissions; national e-mail alert to all VHA oncology providers detailing specific testing and HBV antiviral treatment needs; and a voluntary electronic medical record "order check" used at interested facilities (n = 11) to automatically assess pretreatment HBV testing and antiviral treatment and only generate a reminder to address deficiencies. Analysis of monthly data from June 2016 through September 2017 among anti-CD20 Ab recipients revealed pre-anti-CD20 Ab treatment HBV testing increased to 91%-96% and appropriate HBV antiviral prophylaxis to 76%-85% nationally following implementation of the intervention. Medical centers using the voluntary electronic medical record order check increased HBV testing rates to 93%-98% and HBV antiviral prophylaxis rates to 99%. Conclusion: Multimodal intervention systems to prevent HBV reactivation among VHA patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab therapies increased national rates of HBV testing to >90% and antiviral prophylaxis to >80%.

Background: Given the paucity of information on dose intensity, the objective of this study is to describe the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer, focusing on relative dose intensity (RDI), overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS)., Methods: Retrospective cohort of 367 patients diagnosed with stage III colon cancer in 2003-2008 and treated at 19 VA medical centers. Kaplan-Meier curves summarize 5-year OS and 3-year DFS by chemotherapy regimen and RDI, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model these associations., Results: 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FU/LV) was the most commonly initiated regimen in 2003 (94.4%) and 2004 (62.7%); in 2005-2008, a majority of patients (60%-74%) was started on an oxaliplatin-based regimen. Median RDI was 82.3%. Receipt of >70% RDI was associated with better 5-year OS (p < 0.001) and 3-year DFS (P = 0.009) than was receipt of ≤70% RDI, with 5-year OS rates of 66.3% and 50.5%, respectively and 3-year DFS rates of 66.1% and 52.7%, respectively. In the multivariable analysis of 5-year OS, oxaliplatin + 5-FU/LV (versus 5-FU/LV) (HR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.34-0.91), >70% RDI at the first year (HR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.37-0.89) and married status (HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.45-0.97) were associated with significantly decreased risk of death, while age ≥75 (versus 55-64) (HR = 2.06; 95% CI = 1.25-3.40), Charlson Comorbidity Index (HR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.06-1.30), T4 tumor status (versus T1/T2) (HR = 5.88; 95% CI = 2.69-12.9), N2 node status (HR = 1.68; 95% CI = 1.12-2.50) and bowel obstruction (HR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.36-3.95) were associated with significantly increased risk. Similar associations were observed for DFS., Conclusion: Patients with stage III colon cancer who received >70% RDI had improved 5-year OS. The association between RDI and survival needs to be examined in studies of adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer outside of the VA.

The VA Pharmacy Benefits Management Service has developed a number of tools and procedures to provide treatment guidance, increase consistency, and minimize costs across all VA facilities., Competing Interests: Author disclosures The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.