Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Cancer
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Hematology | Research

Determination of drug-related problems in the hematology service: a prospective interventional study

Authors: Aslınur Albayrak, Demircan Özbalcı

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Patients with hematological malignancies often require multidrug therapy using a variety of antineoplastic agents and supportive care medications. This increases the risk of drug-related problems (DRPs). Determining DRPs in patients hospitalized in hematology services is important for patients to achieve their drug treatment goals and prevent adverse effects. This study aims to identify DRPs by the clinical pharmacist in the multidisciplinary team in patients hospitalized in the hematology service of a university hospital in Turkey.

Methods

This study was conducted prospectively between December 2022 and May 2023 in the hematology service of Suleyman Demirel University Research and Application Hospital in Isparta, Turkey. DRPs were determined using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) 9.1 Turkish version.

Results

This study included 140 patients. Older age, longer hospital stay, presence of acute lymphoblastic leukemia, presence of comorbidities, higher number of medications used, and polypharmacy rate were statistically significantly higher in the DRP group than in the non-DRP group (p < 0.05). According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, the probability of DRP in patients with polypharmacy was statistically significant 7.921 times (95% CI: 3.033–20.689) higher than in patients without polypharmacy (p < 0.001).Every 5-day increase in the length of hospital stay increased the likelihood of DRP at a statistically significant level (OR = 1.476, 95% CI: 1.125–1.938 p = 0.005). In this study, at least one DRP was detected in 69 (49.3%) patients and the total number of DRPs was 152. Possible or actual adverse drug events (96.7%) were the most common DRPs. The most important cause of DRPs was drug choice (94.7%), and the highest frequency within its subcategories was the combination of inappropriate drugs (93.4%).

Conclusions

This study shows the importance of including a clinical pharmacist in a multidisciplinary team in identifying and preventing DRPs in the hematology service.
Literature
1.
Allart-Vorelli P, Porro B, Baguet F, Michel A, Cousson-Gélie F. Haematological cancer and quality of life: a systematic literature review. Blood cancer J. 2015;5(4):e305–e.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Westerweel PE, Te Boekhorst PA, Levin M-D, Cornelissen JJ. New approaches and treatment combinations for the management of chronic myeloid leukemia. Front Oncol. 2019;9:665.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Alanazi F, Kwa FA, Burchall G, Jackson DE. New generation drugs for treatment of multiple myeloma. Drug Discov Today. 2020;25(2):367–79.PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
Kim MG, Jeong CR, Kim HJ, Kim JH, Song Y-K, Kim KI, et al. Network analysis of drug-related problems in hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancies. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26:2737–42.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Viktil KK, Blix HS, Moger TA, Reikvam A. Polypharmacy as commonly defined is an indicator of limited value in the assessment of drug-related problems. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63(2):187–95.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Kaufmann CP, Stämpfli D, Hersberger KE, Lampert ML. Determination of risk factors for drug-related problems: a multidisciplinary triangulation process. BMJ Open. 2015;5(3):e006376.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Delpeuch A, Leveque D, Gourieux B, Herbrecht R. Impact of clinical pharmacy services in a hematology/oncology inpatient setting. Anticancer Res. 2015;35(1):457–60.PubMed
10.
Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47(3):533–43.PubMed
11.
El Morabet N, Uitvlugt EB, van den Bemt BJ, van den Bemt PM, Janssen MJ, Karapinar-Çarkit F. Prevalence and preventability of drug‐related hospital readmissions: a systematic review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;66(3):602–8.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Ernst FR, Grizzle AJ. Drug-related morbidity and mortality: updating the cost-of-illness model. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2001;41(2):192–9.
13.
Reinau D, Furrer C, Stämpfli D, Bornand D, Meier CR. Evaluation of drug-related problems and subsequent clinical pharmacists’ interventions at a Swiss university hospital. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2019;44(6):924–31.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Umar RM, Apikoglu-Rabus S, Yumuk PF. Significance of a clinical pharmacist-led comprehensive medication management program for hospitalized oncology patients. Int J Clin Pharm. 2020;42:652–61.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Kara E, Okuyan B, Demirkan K, Sancar M. Question awaiting answer during the development and implementation stage of clinical pharmacy services in Turkey: who is clinical pharmacist? J Lit Pharm Sci. 2021;10(1):109–18.CrossRef
16.
17.
Albayrak A, Başgut B, Bıkmaz GA, Karahalil B. Clinical pharmacist assessment of drug-related problems among intensive care unit patients in a Turkish university hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):1–7.CrossRef
18.
Hailu BY, Berhe DF, Gudina EK, Gidey K, Getachew M. Drug related problems in admitted geriatric patients: the impact of clinical pharmacist interventions. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20(1):1–8.CrossRef
19.
Ali MAS, Khedr EMH, Ahmed FAH, Mohamed NNE. Clinical pharmacist interventions in managing drug-related problems in hospitalized patients with neurological diseases. Int J Clin Pharm. 2018;40:1257–64.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Malfará M, Pernassi M, Aragon D, Carlotti A. Impact of the clinical pharmacist interventions on prevention of pharmacotherapy related problems in the paediatric intensive care unit. Int J Clin Pharm. 2018;40:513–9.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Chen P-Z, Wu C-C, Huang C-F. Clinical and economic impact of clinical pharmacist intervention in a hematology unit. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020;26(4):866–72.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Farias TF, Aguiar KS, Rotta I, Belletti KMS, Carlotto J. Implementing a clinical pharmacy service in hematology. Einstein (São Paulo). 2016;14:384–90.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Visacri MB, Tavares MG, Barbosa CR, Duarte NC, Moriel P. Clinical pharmacy in onco-hematology and bone marrow transplant: a valuable contribution to improving patient safety. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2021;27(5):1172–80.PubMedCrossRef
24.
De Grégori J, Pistre P, Boutet M, Porcher L, Devaux M, Pernot C, et al. Clinical and economic impact of pharmacist interventions in an ambulatory hematology–oncology department. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020;26(5):1172–9.PubMedCrossRef
25.
26.
27.
28.
Sandford J, Gilbert D, Mae Llering R, Sande M. Guide to antimicrobial therapy. Viena, Virginia: Antimicrobial therapy. Inc; 1997.
29.
30.
Kovačević M, Vezmar Kovačević S, Miljković B, Radovanović S, Stevanović P. The prevalence and preventability of potentially relevant drug-drug interactions in patients admitted for cardiovascular diseases: a cross‐sectional study. Int J Clin Pract. 2017;71(10):e13005.CrossRef
31.
Ren W, Liu Y, Zhang J, Fang Z, Fang H, Gong Y, et al. Prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions in outpatients of a general hospital in China: a retrospective investigation. Int J Clin Pharm. 2020;42:1190–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Luzze B, Atwiine B, Lugobe HM, Yadesa TM. Frequency, severity, and factors associated with clinically significant drug-drug interactions among patients with cancer attending Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital Cancer Unit, Uganda. BMC Cancer. 2022;22(1):1–11.CrossRef
33.
Gnjidic D, Hilmer SN, Blyth FM, Naganathan V, Waite L, Seibel MJ, et al. Polypharmacy cutoff and outcomes: five or more medicines were used to identify community-dwelling older men at risk of different adverse outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(9):989–95.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Turner JP, Jamsen KM, Shakib S, Singhal N, Prowse R, Bell JS. Polypharmacy cut-points in older people with cancer: how many medications are too many? Support Care Cancer. 2016;24:1831–40.PubMedCrossRef
35.
36.
37.
38.
Kheshti R, Aalipour M, Namazi S. A comparison of five common drug–drug interaction software programs regarding accuracy and comprehensiveness. J Res Pharm Pract. 2016;5(4):257.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Hovstadius B, Petersson G. Factors leading to excessive polypharmacy. Clin Geriatr Med. 2012;28(2):159–72.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Renton KW. Inhibition of hepatic microsomal drug metabolism by the calcium channel blockers diltiazem and verapamil. Biochem Pharmacol. 1985;34(14):2549–53.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Lai C, Bhansali RS, Kuo EJ, Mannis G, Lin RJ. Older adults with newly diagnosed AML: hot topics for the practicing clinician. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023;43:e390018.PubMedCrossRef
42.
43.
44.
Takahashi N, Miura M, Niioka T, Sawada K. Influence of H2-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors on dasatinib pharmacokinetics in Japanese leukemia patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2012;69:999–1004.PubMedCrossRef
45.
San Miguel J, Bladé J, Boccadoro M, Cavenagh J, Glasmacher A, Jagannath S, et al. A practical update on the use of bortezomib in the management of multiple myeloma. Oncologist. 2006;11(1):51–61.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Ho M, Moscvin M, Low SK, Evans B, Close S, Schlossman R, et al. Risk factors for the development of orthostatic hypotension during autologous stem cell transplant in patients with multiple myeloma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2022;63(10):2403–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
48.
Key NS, Khorana AA, Kuderer NM, Bohlke K, Lee AY, Arcelus JI, et al. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(5):496–520.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Falanga A, Ay C, Di Nisio M, Gerotziafas G, Jara-Palomares L, Langer F, et al. Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(5):452–67.PubMedCrossRef
50.
51.
Blower P, De Wit R, Goodin S, Aapro M. Drug–drug interactions in oncology: why are they important and can they be minimized? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2005;55(2):117–42.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Verbeeck RK, Musuamba FT. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with renal dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;65:757–73.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Verbeeck RK. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64:1147–61.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Martins RR, Silva LT, Lopes FM. Impact of medication therapy management on pharmacotherapy safety in an intensive care unit. Int J Clin Pharm. 2019;41(1):179–88.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Lee C, Markarian A, Ladha F, Nakashima L, de Lemos M, Schaff K, et al. Real-world incidence of venetoclax toxicities in British Columbia. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2022;28(5):1163–9.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Koehler AB, Leung N, Call TG, Rabe KG, Achenbach SJ, Ding W, et al. Incidence and risk of tumor lysis syndrome in patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treated with venetoclax in routine clinical practice. Leuk Lymphoma. 2020;61(10):2383–8.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Li G-z, Hu Y-h, Li D-y, Zhang Y, Guo H-l, Li Y-m, et al. Vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy: a mini-review. Neurotoxicology. 2020;81:161–71.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Ayhan YE, Karakurt S, Sancar M. The effect of the clinical pharmacist in minimizing drug-related problems and related costs in the intensive care unit in Turkey: a non‐randomized controlled study. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2022;47(11):1867–74.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Determination of drug-related problems in the hematology service: a prospective interventional study
Authors
Aslınur Albayrak
Demircan Özbalcı
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Hematology
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-12291-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Cancer 1/2024 Go to the issue

Research

Discovery of a small molecule that inhibits Bcl-3-mediated cyclin D1 expression in melanoma cells

Research

Social factors and age play a significant role in cervical cancer and advanced-stage disease among Danish women

Research

Association of the Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index (ALI) and Gustave Roussy Immune (GRIm) score with immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with gastrointestinal and lung cancer

Study Protocol

A multi-institutional randomized phase III study comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer; Japan Clinical Oncology Group study JCOG2202 (LAPAN study)

Research

Immune checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer with malignant pleural effusion: a retrospective multicenter study

Research

Differences in influencing mechanism of clinicians’ adoption behavior for liver cancer screening technology between the leading and subordinate hospitals within medical consortiums
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits