Busulfan target exposure attainment in children undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a single day versus a multiday therapeutic drug monitoring regimen

Busulfan exposure has previously been linked to clinical outcomes, hence the need for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Study objective was to evaluate the effect of day 1 TDM-guided dosing (regimen d1) versus days 1 + 2 TDM-guided dosing (regimen d1 + 2) on attaining adequate busulfan exposure. In this observational study, we included all children receiving busulfan-based allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients achieving busulfan target attainment in both TDM regimens. Secondary outcomes were the variance in busulfan exposure and day-4 clearance (Clday4) estimates between both TDM regimens and dosing day 1 and 2. In regimen d1, 84.3% (n = 91/108) attained a therapeutic busulfan exposure, while in regimen d1 + 2 a proportion of 90.9% was found (n = 30/33, not-significant). Variance of Clday4 estimate based on busulfan day 2 concentrations was significantly smaller than the variance of Clday4 estimates based on day 1 concentrations (p < 0.001). Therefore, day 1-guided TDM (pharmacometric model-based) of busulfan may be sufficient for attaining optimal target exposure, provided that subsequent TDM is carried out if required. However, performing TDM on subsequent days may be beneficial, as measurements on day 2 seemed to reduce the variance in the estimated clearance as compared to day 1 sampling

Detectability of Medication Errors With a STOPP/START-Based Medication Review in Older People Prior to a Potentially Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admission.

INTRODUCTION Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are risk factors for drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs) in the ageing population. DRAs caused by medication errors (MEs) are considered potentially preventable. The STOPP/START criteria were developed to detect potential MEs in older people. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the detectability of MEs with a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review in older people with polypharmacy and multimorbidity prior to a potentially preventable DRA. METHODS Hospitalised older patients (n = 963) with polypharmacy and multimorbidity from the intervention arm of the OPERAM trial received a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review by a pharmacotherapy team. Readmissions within 1 year after the in-hospital medication review were adjudicated for drug-relatedness. A retrospective assessment was performed to determine whether MEs identified at the first DRA were detectable during the in-hospital medication review. RESULTS In total, 84 of 963 OPERAM intervention patients (8.7%) were readmitted with a potentially preventable DRA, of which 72 patients (n = 77 MEs) were eligible for analysis. About half (48%, n = 37/77) of the MEs were not present during the in-hospital medication review and therefore were not detectable at that time. The pharmacotherapy team recommended a change in medication regimen in 50% (n = 20/40) of present MEs, which corresponds to 26% (n = 20/77) of the total identified MEs at readmission. However, these recommendations were not implemented. CONCLUSION MEs identified at readmission were not addressed by a prior single in-hospital medication review because either these MEs occurred after the medication review (~50%), or no recommendation was given during the medication review (~25%), or the recommendation was not implemented (~25%). Future research should focus on optimisation of the timing and frequency of medication review and the implementation of proposed medication recommendations. REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02986425. December 8, 2016. FUNDING European Union HORIZON 2020, Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF)

Detectability of Medication Errors With a STOPP/START-Based Medication Review in Older People Prior to a Potentially Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admission

Introduction Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are risk factors for drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs) in the ageing population. DRAs caused by medication errors (MEs) are considered potentially preventable. The STOPP/START criteria were developed to detect potential MEs in older people.Objective The aim of this study was to assess the detectability of MEs with a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review in older people with polypharmacy and multimorbidity prior to a potentially preventable DRA.Methods Hospitalised older patients (n = 963) with polypharmacy and multimorbidity from the intervention arm of the OPERAM trial received a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review by a pharmacotherapy team. Readmissions within 1 year after the in- hospital medication review were adjudicated for drug-relatedness. A retrospective assessment was performed to determine whether MEs identified at the first DRA were detectable during the in-hospital medication review.Results In total, 84 of 963 OPERAM intervention patients ( 8.7%) were readmitted with a potentially preventable DRA, of which 72 patients (n = 77 MEs) were eligible for analysis. About half (48%, n = 37/77) of the MEs were not present during the in-hospital medication review and therefore were not detectable at that time. The pharmacotherapy team recommended a change in medication regimen in 50% ( n = 20/40) of present MEs, which corresponds to 26% (n = 20/77) of the total identified MEs at readmission. However, these recommendations were not implemented.Conclusion MEs identified at readmission were not addressed by a prior single in-hospital medication review because either these MEs occurred after the medication review (similar to 50%), or no recommendation was given during the medication review (similar to 25%), or the recommendation was not implemented (similar to 25%). Future research should focus on optimisation of the timing and frequency of medication review and the implementation of proposed medication recommendations

Phenobarbital, Midazolam Pharmacokinetics, Effectiveness, and Drug-Drug Interaction in Asphyxiated Neonates Undergoing Therapeutic Hypothermia

Background: Phenobarbital and midazolam are commonly used drugs in (near-)term neonates treated with therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, for sedation, and/or as anti-epileptic drug. Phenobarbital is an inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, while midazolam is a CYP3A substrate. Therefore, co-treatment with phenobarbital might impact midazolam clearance. Objectives: To assess pharmacokinetics and clinical anti-epileptic effectiveness of phenobarbital and midazolam in asphyxiated neonates and to develop dosing guidelines. Methods: Data were collected in the prospective multicentre PharmaCool study. In the present study, neonates treated with therapeutic hypothermia and receiving midazolam and/or phenobarbital were included. Plasma concentrations of phenobarbital and midazolam including its metabolites were determined in blood samples drawn on days 2-5 after birth. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed using non-linear mixed effects modelling; clinical effectiveness was defined as no use of additional anti-epileptic drugs. Results: Data were available from 113 (phenobarbital) and 118 (midazolam) neonates; 68 were treated with both medications. Only clearance of 1-hydroxy midazolam was influenced by hypothermia. Phenobarbital co-administration increased midazolam clearance by a factor 2.3 (95% CI 1.9-2.9, p < 0.05). Anticonvulsant effectiveness was 65.5% for phenobarbital and 37.1% for add-on midazolam. Conclusions: Therapeutic hypothermia does not influence clearance of phenobarbital or midazolam in (near-)term neonates with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy. A phenobarbital dose of 30 mg/kg is advised to reach therapeutic concentrations. Phenobarbital co-administration significantly increased midazolam clearance. Should phenobarbital be substituted by non-CYP3A inducers as first-line anticonvulsant, a 50% lower midazolam maintenance dose might be appropriate to avoid excessive exposure during the first days after birth

Supplementary Material for: Phenobarbital, Midazolam Pharmacokinetics, Effectiveness, and Drug-Drug Interaction in Asphyxiated Neonates Undergoing Therapeutic Hypothermia

Background: Phenobarbital and midazolam are commonly used drugs in (near-)term neonates treated with therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, for sedation, and/or as anti-epileptic drug. Phenobarbital is an inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, while midazolam is a CYP3A substrate. Therefore, co-treatment with phenobarbital might impact midazolam clearance. Objectives: To assess pharmacokinetics and clinical anti-epileptic effectiveness of phenobarbital and midazolam in asphyxiated neonates and to develop dosing guidelines. Methods: Data were collected in the prospective multicentre PharmaCool study. In the present study, neonates treated with therapeutic hypothermia and receiving midazolam and/or phenobarbital were included. Plasma concentrations of phenobarbital and midazolam including its metabolites were determined in blood samples drawn on days 2–5 after birth. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed using non-linear mixed effects modelling; clinical effectiveness was defined as no use of additional anti-epileptic drugs. Results: Data were available from 113 (phenobarbital) and 118 (midazolam) neonates; 68 were treated with both medications. Only clearance of 1-hydroxy midazolam was influenced by hypothermia. Phenobarbital co-administration increased midazolam clearance by a factor 2.3 (95% CI 1.9–2.9, p &lt; 0.05). Anticonvulsant effectiveness was 65.5% for phenobarbital and 37.1% for add-on midazolam. Conclusions: Therapeutic hypothermia does not influence clearance of phenobarbital or midazolam in (near-)term neonates with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy. A phenobarbital dose of 30 mg/kg is advised to reach therapeutic concentrations. Phenobarbital co-administration significantly increased midazolam clearance. Should phenobarbital be substituted by non-CYP3A inducers as first-line anticonvulsant, a 50% lower midazolam maintenance dose might be appropriate to avoid excessive exposure during the first days after birth