Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy 3/2015

01-06-2015 | Research Article

Potential drug–drug interactions in hospitalized patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy: a prospective cohort study

Authors: Paula Stoll, Luciane Kopittke

Published in: International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy | Issue 3/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background Adverse drug–drug interactions (DDI) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in susceptible populations. Cancer patients are a population at high risk for DDI especially because they commonly receive several drugs concomitantly. The knowledge about the most common interactions between drugs used in oncology inpatients is essential to reduce drug-related problems and increase the safety and efficacy of the therapy. Objective To assess the frequency of potential DDI throughout the hospital stay of cancer patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy, describe their epidemiology, and identify risk factors for major DDI. Setting An oncology–hematology inpatient unit of a public hospital in southern Brazil. Method Drug prescriptions were prospectively reviewed throughout the hospital stay of patients admitted for systemic chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics and Poisson regression were used for data analysis. Main outcome measure Potential DDI and their characteristics. Results The cohort consisted of 113 patients, who used a mean of 8.9 ± 2.7 drugs/day. All patients had at least one potential DDI (median, 7.0/patient; 25th–75th percentile, 3.5–12.0), and 46 % of the patients had at least one DDI classified as major, i.e. that it may result in death, hospitalization, permanent injury, or therapeutic failure. Only 13.7 % of all interactions involved antineoplastic agents, identified in 62.8 % of patients. Most interactions were of moderate severity, 6.4 % were major, and 8.5 % had a recommendation for therapy modification. Multivariate analysis revealed mean number of drugs prescribed [relative risk (RR) for each additional drug: 1.12; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.07–1.17; P < 0.01] and age ≥60 years (RR 1.48; 95 % CI 1.03–2.14; P < 0.01) as independent risk factors for major DDI. Conclusion Potential DDI were highly frequent in this cohort. Older age and number of drugs prescribed were more likely to lead to major interactions. Prospective surveillance is required to detect adverse DDI, aiming primarily at reducing the risk of toxicity or treatment failure.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
go back to reference 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;55:117–42.CrossRefPubMed 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;55:117–42.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP, Moreira F, Smaletz O, Saad ED. Potential for drug interactions in hospitalized cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2005;56:286–90.CrossRefPubMed Riechelmann RP, Moreira F, Smaletz O, Saad ED. Potential for drug interactions in hospitalized cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2005;56:286–90.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Haddad A, Davis M, Lagman R. The pharmacological importance of cytochrome CYP3A4 in the palliation of symptoms: review and recommendations for avoiding adverse drug interactions. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15:251–7.CrossRefPubMed Haddad A, Davis M, Lagman R. The pharmacological importance of cytochrome CYP3A4 in the palliation of symptoms: review and recommendations for avoiding adverse drug interactions. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15:251–7.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP, Saad ED. A systematic review on drug interactions in oncology. Cancer Invest. 2006;24:704–12.CrossRefPubMed Riechelmann RP, Saad ED. A systematic review on drug interactions in oncology. Cancer Invest. 2006;24:704–12.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP, Zimmermann C, Chin SN, et al. Potential drug interactions in cancer patients receiving supportive care exclusively. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2008;35:535–43.CrossRef Riechelmann RP, Zimmermann C, Chin SN, et al. Potential drug interactions in cancer patients receiving supportive care exclusively. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2008;35:535–43.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP, Tannock IF, Wang L, Saad ED, Taback NA, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions and duplicate prescriptions among cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:592–600.CrossRefPubMed Riechelmann RP, Tannock IF, Wang L, Saad ED, Taback NA, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions and duplicate prescriptions among cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:592–600.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Jansman FG, Reyners AK, van Roon EN, et al. Consensus-based evaluation of clinical significance and management of anticancer drug interactions. Clin Ther. 2011;33:305–14.CrossRefPubMed Jansman FG, Reyners AK, van Roon EN, et al. Consensus-based evaluation of clinical significance and management of anticancer drug interactions. Clin Ther. 2011;33:305–14.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP, Del Giglio A. Drug interactions in oncology: how common are they? Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1907–12.CrossRefPubMed Riechelmann RP, Del Giglio A. Drug interactions in oncology: how common are they? Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1907–12.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Voll ML, Yap KD, Terpstra WE, Crul M. Potential drug–drug interactions between anti-cancer agents and community pharmacy dispensed drugs. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:575–80.CrossRefPubMed Voll ML, Yap KD, Terpstra WE, Crul M. Potential drug–drug interactions between anti-cancer agents and community pharmacy dispensed drugs. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:575–80.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference van Leeuwen RW, Swart EL, Boven E, Boom FA, Schuitenmaker MG, Hugtenburg JG. Potential drug interactions in cancer therapy: a prevalence study using an advanced screening method. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2334–41.CrossRefPubMed van Leeuwen RW, Swart EL, Boven E, Boom FA, Schuitenmaker MG, Hugtenburg JG. Potential drug interactions in cancer therapy: a prevalence study using an advanced screening method. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:2334–41.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Hadjibabaie M, Badri S, Ataei S, Moslehi AM, Karimzadeh I, Ghavamzadeh A. Potential drug–drug interactions at a referral hematology–oncology ward in Iran: a cross-sectional study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2013;71:1619–27.CrossRefPubMed Hadjibabaie M, Badri S, Ataei S, Moslehi AM, Karimzadeh I, Ghavamzadeh A. Potential drug–drug interactions at a referral hematology–oncology ward in Iran: a cross-sectional study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2013;71:1619–27.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Barrons R. Evaluation of personal digital assistant software for drug interactions. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2004;61:380–5.PubMed Barrons R. Evaluation of personal digital assistant software for drug interactions. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2004;61:380–5.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Reis AM, Cassiani SH. Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:822–8.CrossRefPubMed Reis AM, Cassiani SH. Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:822–8.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbuhl S, Beer JH. Evaluation of frequently used drug interaction screening programs. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:367–74.CrossRefPubMed Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbuhl S, Beer JH. Evaluation of frequently used drug interaction screening programs. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:367–74.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Puts MT, Monette J, Girre V, et al. Potential medication problems in older newly diagnosed cancer patients in Canada during cancer treatment: a prospective pilot cohort study. Drugs Aging. 2010;27:559–72.CrossRefPubMed Puts MT, Monette J, Girre V, et al. Potential medication problems in older newly diagnosed cancer patients in Canada during cancer treatment: a prospective pilot cohort study. Drugs Aging. 2010;27:559–72.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Egger SS, Drewe J, Schlienger RG. Potential drug–drug interactions in the medication of medical patients at hospital discharge. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;58:773–8.PubMed Egger SS, Drewe J, Schlienger RG. Potential drug–drug interactions in the medication of medical patients at hospital discharge. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;58:773–8.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Sokol KC, Knudsen JF, Li MM. Polypharmacy in older oncology patients and the need for an interdisciplinary approach to side-effect management. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007;32:169–75.CrossRefPubMed Sokol KC, Knudsen JF, Li MM. Polypharmacy in older oncology patients and the need for an interdisciplinary approach to side-effect management. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007;32:169–75.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Miranda V, Fede A, Nobuo M, et al. Adverse drug reactions and drug interactions as causes of hospital admission in oncology. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2011;42:342–53.CrossRef Miranda V, Fede A, Nobuo M, et al. Adverse drug reactions and drug interactions as causes of hospital admission in oncology. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2011;42:342–53.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Riechelmann RP. Drug combinations with the potential to interact among cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15:1113–4.CrossRefPubMed Riechelmann RP. Drug combinations with the potential to interact among cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2007;15:1113–4.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Peral Aguirregoitia J, Lertxundi Etxebarria U, Martínez Bengoechea MJ, Mora Atorrasagasti O, Franco Lamela E, Gabilondo Zelaia I. Prospective assessment of drug interactions in hospitalized patients using a computer programme. Farm Hosp. 2007;31:93–100.CrossRefPubMed Peral Aguirregoitia J, Lertxundi Etxebarria U, Martínez Bengoechea MJ, Mora Atorrasagasti O, Franco Lamela E, Gabilondo Zelaia I. Prospective assessment of drug interactions in hospitalized patients using a computer programme. Farm Hosp. 2007;31:93–100.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Norton PG, Baker GR. Patient safety in cancer care: a time for action. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:579–80.CrossRefPubMed Norton PG, Baker GR. Patient safety in cancer care: a time for action. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:579–80.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Kaboli PJ, Hoth AB, McClimon BJ, Schnipper JL. Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:955–64.CrossRefPubMed Kaboli PJ, Hoth AB, McClimon BJ, Schnipper JL. Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:955–64.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Bremberg ER, Hising C, Nylén U, Ehrsson H, Eksborg S. An evaluation of pharmacist contribution to an oncology ward in a Swedish hospital. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2006;12:75–81.CrossRefPubMed Bremberg ER, Hising C, Nylén U, Ehrsson H, Eksborg S. An evaluation of pharmacist contribution to an oncology ward in a Swedish hospital. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2006;12:75–81.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Cavero Rodrigo E, Climente Martí M, Navarro Fontestad MC, Jiménez Torres NV. Quality assessment of two pharmaceutical care models for oncohaematological patients. Farm Hosp. 2007;31:231–7.CrossRefPubMed Cavero Rodrigo E, Climente Martí M, Navarro Fontestad MC, Jiménez Torres NV. Quality assessment of two pharmaceutical care models for oncohaematological patients. Farm Hosp. 2007;31:231–7.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Potential drug–drug interactions in hospitalized patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy: a prospective cohort study
Authors
Paula Stoll
Luciane Kopittke
Publication date
01-06-2015
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy / Issue 3/2015
Print ISSN: 2210-7703
Electronic ISSN: 2210-7711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-015-0083-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2015

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy 3/2015 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.