Cyclophosphamide Contamination Observed on the External Surfaces of Drug Vials and the Efficacy of Cleaning on Vial Contamination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate contamination on the external surfaces of cyclophosphamide vials available on the Canadian market during storage in pharmacy departments and the efficacy of decontaminating the external surfaces of vials using various cleaning techniques. METHODS: The study consisted of three phases: the quantification of cyclophosphamide on the external surfaces of 10 vials of Procytox and 10 vials of Cytoxan available on the Canadian market with or without prewashing (Phases I and II) and the quantification of cyclophosphamide on the surfaces of 30 deliberately contaminated empty sterile vials cleaned using three different washing techniques (Phase III). The quantification of cyclophosphamide was conducted using ultra performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: In Phase I, we observed that 9 of 10 vials of Procytox and 4 of 10 vials of Cytoxan had traces of cyclophosphamide. The average concentration of cyclophosphamide measured on the vials was higher for Procytox than it was for Cytoxan. In Phase II, we observed that simply by washing vials with water we could effectively eliminate the presence of contamination on 6 of 10 Procytox vials and on 10 of 10 Cytoxan vials. Phase III demonstrated the efficacy of using a cloth soaked in soapy water to clean the contaminated vials. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates the presence of contamination on the external surfaces of cyclophosphamide vials from two manufacturers on the Canadian market. It suggests that cleaning vials from manufacturers and wholesalers may help to reduce the risk of occupational exposure. There is a need for a pilot study to establish guidelines on decontamination agents and cleaning process to eliminate the presence of contamination on vial surfaces.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".