MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2288929049 · doi:10.1182/blood.v122.21.1749.1749

Shelf-Life Extension Of Azacitidine: A Cancer Centre Experience On Waste and Cost Reduction In The Treatment Of Myelodysplastic Syndromes

2013· article· en· W2288929049 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Hany R. Guirguis, Flay Charbonneau, Ivan Tyono, Matthew C. Cheung, Rena Buckstein

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePharmaceutical studies and practices
Établissements canadiensHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVialAzacitidineMedicineDosingMedical prescriptionMyelodysplastic syndromesLenalidomideInternal medicinePharmacologyChemistryMultiple myelomaChromatography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Azacitidine (AZA) is a nucleoside metabolic inhibitor indicated for the treatment of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). In Canada, it is supplied as a lyophilized powder in 100-mg vials priced at 628 Canadian dollars (C$). The product monograph indicates that the reconstituted drug may be held under refrigerated conditions (2-8°C) for up to a maximum of 8 hours. At a recommended dosing of 75 mg/m2 x 7 days and average body surface areas (BSA) ranging between 1.7-1.9 m2, most patients require more than a single vial reconstituted each day resulting in a drug wastage that might range from 58-72 mg/patient/day. Without strategies to mitigate this wastage, up to 40-50% of the daily dosage for patients of average BSA is thus discarded. At our center, AZA acquisition costs are reimbursed by the provincial funding agency according to mg dispensed and administered (dollars/mg) and not for total vials used; the potential cost of drug wastage is substantial. Walker et al. (Can J Hosp Pharm 2012) recently demonstrated that AZA reconstituted in cold (4°C) sterile water, and stored at -20°C for up to 4 days retained more than 90% of its initial concentration. The Odette Cancer Centre has used this reconstitution and storage strategy since November 2011. In addition, ‘batching’ of AZA patients on the same days and at the same times is attempted wherever possible. We audited AZA prescription use and drug wastage over 1 year after adopting this strategy to determine if the anticipated drug wastage was actually minimized. Methods From December 2011 until November 2012 all patients with MDS treated with at least 1 cycle of AZA were identified via the Cancer Centre pharmacy database. Analysis of the prescribed and wasted doses of AZA was performed. We retrospectively retrieved the mean number of doses administered per patient and per cycle. The mean BSA was determined for all patients, and the mean dose per injection as well as the mean number of cycles per patient was calculated. The total amount of actual drug wastage (based on the pharmacy records) was compared to the projected amount of drug wastage without implementing the new strategy. Results Thirty-one patients (mean BSA of 1.86 m2) received 1167 injections of AZA over 170 cycles of treatment (mean of 5.48 cycles per patient). The mean dose prescribed was 141.7 mg per injection (95% confidence interval 139.43-143.98). Over 12 months a total of 165,370 mg was dispensed at a cost of C$1,038,523.60. The projected amount of AZA that would have been dispensed without adopting the new strategy would have been 233,400 mg, representing potential drug wastage of 68,030 mg at a cost of C$427,228.40. With the mitigating strategies implemented, the actual amount of wasted drug was 2,400 mg at a cost of C$15,072. Expiry on shelf accounted for 52% of the drug wastage (1,240 mg). Drug expiry outside the freezer due to human error, patients failing to arrive on the day of treatment, freezer technical issues, or other causes accounted for 48% of the drug wastage. The average waste per patient per cycle of treatment due to drug expiry on shelf was only 7.3 mg at a cost of C$45.70. If a solitary patient (without patient batching) of average BSA 1.86 m2had been treated without our policy of cold (4°C) water reconstitution and freezing, the drug wastage (cost) would have been 425.6 mg (C$2,672.70)/7 day cycle. In contrast, cold (4°C) sterile water reconstitution with overnight freezing of vials and syringes would result in a drug wastage of 25.6 mg/7 day cycle (C$160.70), a 94% cost savings due to wastage. Conclusions Shelf-life extension with cold (4°C) sterile water reconstitution and freezing of vials and syringes is a simple policy that reduces the waste of AZA by 72-98%. This, in addition to other drug waste minimization strategies like patient batching can lead to significant reductions in drug expenditure and substantial cost-saving. Disclosures: Charbonneau: Hospira: Honoraria; BD Medical: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Hoffman LaRoche: Honoraria. Buckstein:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,390
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,161

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,346
Écart entre enseignants0,288 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetPharmaceutical studies and practicesTravaux en français237 207