Chemotherapeutic errors in hospitalised cancer patients: attributable damage and extra costs

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In spite of increasing efforts to enhance patient safety, medication errors in hospitalised patients are still relatively common, but with potentially severe consequences. This study aimed to assess antineoplastic medication errors in both affected patients and intercepted cases in terms of frequency, severity for patients, and costs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A 1-year prospective study was conducted in order to identify the medication errors that occurred during chemotherapy treatment of cancer patients at a French university hospital. The severity and potential consequences of intercepted errors were independently assessed by two physicians. A cost analysis was performed using a simulation of potential hospital stays, with estimations based on the costs of diagnosis-related groups.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among the 6, 607 antineoplastic prescriptions, 341 (5.2%) contained at least one error, corresponding to a total of 449 medication errors. However, most errors (n = 436) were intercepted before medication was administered to the patients. Prescription errors represented 91% of errors, followed by pharmaceutical (8%) and administration errors (1%). According to an independent estimation, 13.4% of avoided errors would have resulted in temporary injury and 2.6% in permanent damage, while 2.6% would have compromised the vital prognosis of the patient, with four to eight deaths thus being avoided. Overall, 13 medication errors reached the patient without causing damage, although two patients required enhanced monitoring. If the intercepted errors had not been discovered, they would have resulted in 216 additional days of hospitalisation and cost an estimated annual total of 92, 907€, comprising 69, 248€ (74%) in hospital stays and 23, 658€ (26%) in additional drugs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings point to the very small number of chemotherapy errors that actually reach patients, although problems in the chemotherapy ordering process are frequent, with the potential for being dangerous and costly.</p

Intensification thérapeutique et autogreffe de cellules souches hématopoïétiques purgées dans les hémopathies lymphoïdes de faible grade de malignité à forte masse tumorale (expérience tourangelle)

TOURS-BU Médecine (372612103) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

Lingual metastasis as an initial presentation of renal cell carcinoma: a case report

Abstract Background Renal cell carcinoma is the third most common tumor that metastasizes to the head and neck, after breast and lung carcinomas. Tongue metastasis as an initial presentation of renal cell carcinoma is extremely rare, and very few cases have been reported. The prognosis is poor. We present a rare case of metastatic renal cell carcinoma that initially presented as a tongue lesion. Case presentation We report the case of a 55-year-old white man who presented with a large exophytic lesion on his tongue. A biopsy was taken, and pathologic examination showed a poorly differentiated carcinoma including a sarcomatoid component. Subtotal glossectomy with neck dissection were planned, but a positron emission tomographic-computed tomography scan showed a left kidney mass. Immunohistochemical evaluation of the tongue lesion was performed, and it was compatible with metastasis from primary renal cell carcinoma. The biopsy of the renal lesion showed a high-grade unclassified renal cell carcinoma. Although our patient underwent systemic therapy, he died of hemorrhagic complications 3 months after the initiation of therapy. Conclusion Tongue lesions require a complete assessment to distinguish a metastasis from a primary cancer in order to give the appropriate treatment

A pyriform sinus cancer organ preservation strategy comprising induction chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil, followed by potentiated radiotherapy: a multicenter, retrospective study.

No specific study has evaluated the role of neoadjuvant DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) followed by radiotherapy in pyriform sinus cancer, which are often included in studies focusing on laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer. We assessed the proportion of patients treated sequentially for a pyriform sinus cancer with a preserved larynx. Overall survival, event-free survival (EFS), survival with 'local control', and treatment tolerance were assessed as well. We retrospectively reviewed 88 patients with advanced pyriform sinus squamous cell carcinoma treated with DCF between 2005 and 2010. After induction, radiation could be potentiated with cetuximab or cisplatin. Most patients (82%) had been treated with organ preservation intent. The response rate to DCF was 85%, including 42% with complete response. Primary tumor was operated in 13 patients (eight with total laryngectomy). Radiotherapy had been delivered to 78 (89%) patients (30 with cisplatin, 39 with cetuximab). Potentiation had been achieved as planned in 52 and 79% of patients treated with cisplatin and cetuximab, respectively. Twenty-three local and three neck recurrences were found. Median overall survival was 16.8 months and 38.3% at 3 years. EFS at 3 years was 29.1% with a hazard ratio for partial responders versus nonresponders of 0.18 (P<0.001), and 0.13 (P<0.001) for complete responders versus nonresponders. Thirty-five percent of patients were alive with their larynx preserved at 3 years. This study confirms the efficacy of induction followed by chemoradiation for pyriform sinus cancer and that response to DCF is predictive of EFS

Abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Long term outcome of the Temporary Authorization for Use program in France.

International audience264 Background: COU-AA-301 trial has proved that abiraterone acetate (AA), a selective inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis, improved overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after a first line of docetaxel. Based on this result, a temporary use authorisation (TUA) was performed between December 2010 and July 2011 to provide patients with mCRPC the opportunity to receive AA before its commercialization. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of AA treatment in this TUA. Methods: Between December 2010 and July 2011, we conducted an ambispective, multicentric cohort study and investigated data from 20 centres participating to the AA TUA for patients presenting mCRPC and already treated by a first line of chemotherapy (CT). Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the Stata software v13 to identify predictive and prognostic factors. Results: Among the 408 patients, 306 were eligible with a follow-up at 3 years. Median OS was 37.1 months from beginning of CT and 14.6 months from AA introduction. 211 patients (69%) received ≥ 3 months of AA and 95 patients (31%) were treated less than 3 months. In the multivariate analyses, duration of AA was significantly correlated with PSA decrease at 3 months. Additionally, shorter time under AA treatment, presence of multiple sites of metastasis and previous hormonal treatment duration were three independent factors associated with poorer OS. At the time of analysis ten patients were still under treatment for more than 3 years. Conclusions: Biochemical response monitored by PSA changes at 3 months is a strong predictive factor for AA treatment duration. Some high responders’ patients could beneficiate from AA for more than 3 years

Abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: long term outcome of the Temporary Authorization for Use programme in France

International audienceAbstractBackgroundCOU-AA-301 trial has proved that abiraterone acetate (AA), a selective inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis, improved overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after a first line of docetaxel. Based on this result, a Temporary Authorization for Use (TAU) was performed between December 2010 and July 2011 to provide patients with mCRPC the opportunity to receive AA before its commercialization. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of AA treatment in this TAU.MethodsBetween December 2010 and July 2011, we conducted an ambispective, multicentric cohort study and investigated data from 20 centres participating to the AA TAU for patients presenting mCRPC and already treated by a first line of chemotherapy (CT). Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the Stata software v13 to identify predictive and prognostic factors.ResultsAmong the 408 patients, 306 were eligible with a follow-up at 3 years. Median OS was 37.1 months from beginning of CT and 14.6 months from AA introduction. 211 patients (69%) received ≥ 3 months of AA and 95 patients (31%) were treated less than 3 months. In the multivariate analyses, duration of AA was significantly correlated with PSA decrease at 3 months. Additionally, shorter time under AA treatment, presence of multiple sites of metastasis and previous hormonal treatment duration were three independent factors associated with poorer OS. At the time of analysis ten patients were still under treatment for more than 3 years.ConclusionsBiochemical response monitored by PSA changes at 3 months is a strong predictive factor for AA treatment duration. Some high responders’ patients could beneficiate from AA for more than 3 years

First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: What Are the Most Appropriate Combination Therapies?

The development of antiangiogenic treatments, followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), has significantly changed the management of metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer. Several phase III trials show the superiority of combination therapy, dual immunotherapy (ICI-ICI) or ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) of the vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF) over sunitinib monotherapy. The question is therefore what is the best combination for a given patient? A strategy based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) classification is currently recommended with pembrolizumab + axitinib, cabozantinib + nivolumab, and lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (for all patients) or nivolumab + ipilimumab (for patients with intermediate or poor risk), which are the first-line treatment standards of care. However, several issues remain unresolved and require further investigation, such as the PD-L1 status, the relevance of possible options based on the patient’s profile, and consideration of second-line and subsequent treatments

Denosumab Toxicity When Combined With Anti-angiogenic Therapies on Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A GETUG Study

International audienceBACKGROUND:About one-third of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have detectable metastases at diagnosis. Among them, bone is the second most frequent metastatic site. Treatment of metastatic RCC mostly relies on anti-angiogenic (AA) therapies and, more recently, immunotherapy. Skeletal-related events (SREs) can be prevented with bone-targeted therapies such as denosumab (Dmab), which has demonstrated superiority when compared with zoledronic acid in solid tumors. However, there is limited available data on Dmab toxicity in combination with AA therapies in patients with kidney cancer. The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the toxicity profile (mainly osteonecrosis of the jaw [ONJ] and hypocalcemia) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with Dmab and AA therapy combination.PATIENTS AND METHODS:We conducted a multicenter retrospective study among centers from the French Groupe d'Etudes des Tumeurs Uro Genitales (GETUG). Patients with bone metastases who received concurrently or sequentially AA therapy and Dmab were included in this study.RESULTS:A total of 41 patients with mRCC were enrolled. Although no patient presented with severe hypocalcemia, ONJ occurred in 7 (17%) of 41 patients. Interestingly, all patients with ONJ received the Dmab and AA combination in the first line of treatment; among these patients, 3 patients had no risk factor other than the Dmab and AA combination.CONCLUSION:The incidence of ONJ was high in this real-life population of patients with mRCC treated with AA therapies combined with Dmab. This toxicity signal should warn physicians about this combination in the mRCC population