Background Chemotherapy is associated with a significant risk of toxicity, which often peaks between ambulatory visits to the cancer centre. Remote symptom management support is a tool to optimize self-management and healthcare utilization, including emergency department visits and hospitalizations (ED+H) during chemotherapy. We performed a single-arm pilot study to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and potential impact of a telephone symptom management intervention on healthcare utilization during chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer (EBC). Methods Women starting adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for EBC at two cancer centres in Ontario, Canada, received standardized, nurse-led calls to assess common toxicities at two time points following each chemotherapy administration. Feasibility outcomes included patient enrollment, retention, RN adherence to delivering calls per the study schedule, and resource use associated with calls; acceptability was evaluated based on patient and provider feedback. Impact on acute care utilization was evaluated post hoc by linking individual patient records to provincial data holdings to examine ED+H patterns among participating patients compared to contemporaneous controls. Results Between September 2013 and December 2014, 77 women were enrolled (mean age 55 years). Most commonly used regimens were AC-paclitaxel (58%) and FEC-docetaxel (16%); 78% of patients received primary granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis. 83.8% of calls were delivered per schedule; mean call duration was 9 min. The intervention was well received by both patients and clinicians. Comparison of ED+H rates among study participants versus controls showed that there were fewer ED visits in intervention patients [incidence rate ratio (IRR) (95% CI) = 0.54 (0.36, 0.81)] but no difference in the rate of hospitalizations [IRR (95% CI) = 1.02 (0.59, 1.77)]. Main implementation challenges included identifying eligible patients, fitting the calls into existing clinical responsibilities, and effective communication to the patient’s clinical team. Conclusions Telephone-based pro-active toxicity management during chemotherapy is feasible, perceived as valuable by clinicians and patients, and may be associated with lower rates of acute care use. However, attention must be paid to workflow issues for scalability. Larger scale evaluation of this approach is in progress. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0404-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

13 Background: According to USP 797 and the National Association of Pharmacy Regulatory Authorities standards, the Beyond Use Date (BUD) based on sterility for single-dose vials is 6 hours, after which the contents must be discarded. In Ontario, centres have traditionally based BUD on stability data, not sterility data. This change presents concern about potential drug waste so an analysis was done to estimate the financial impact to the 76 systemic treatment facilities in Ontario. Methods: Using an administrative database that records the daily total dose of drugs administered by facility, annual drug waste cost was calculated using daily dose administered, cost per milligram, and available vial size(s) for 26 publicly funded drugs. Two different methods were used to determine the amount of drug waste. Method 1 used the largest vial size matched to the closest amount of drug required. Method 2 used the optimal vial size mix, when there are multiple vial sizes, to minimize wastage across all configurations of vial size. Some assumptions made include: 1) each facility had access to all available vial sizes, and 2) single-dose vial contents were true to the stated quantity as per the manufacturer. Results: The 10 facilities with the highest waste estimates are summarized in the table. The total waste estimates for all facilities are $25,927,861 (method 1) and $12,945,353 (method 2). Waste estimates were also calculated by drug, with rituximab, bevacizumab and pemetrexed having the highest waste costs. These drugs are only available in vials with a large range in size (100 and 500 mg), but could waste more than drugs with more size options or less variance between sizes. Conclusions: Assigning a BUD based on 6 hour sterility standards will have significant financial implications to facilities in Ontario. Development of mitigation strategies should be explored to provide guidance to Ontario and other jurisdictions on how to curtail the budget impact.[Table: see text]

105 Background: Chemotherapy (chemo) is associated with a significant risk of toxicity, which often peaks between ambulatory visits. Consequently, effective remote symptom management support is essential to optimize self-management and resource use, including emergency department visits and hospitalizations (ED+H) during chemo. The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility, acceptability and effects of a telephone management intervention on symptomatic toxicity and resource use during chemo for early stage breast cancer (EBC). Methods: A prospective study of telephone-based toxicity management among women receiving neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemo for EBC was undertaken at one urban and one rural site in Ontario, Canada. The intervention consisted of two standardized calls by nurses assessing common toxicities after each chemo (call 1 within 3 days and call 2 within 8-10 days). Primary outcome measures were feasibility and acceptability based on patient (pt) and clinician feedback. Efficacy was evaluated by self-reported ED+H. Results: Between 09/2013 and 12/2014, 77 women with EBC were enrolled (mean age 55 years). Most commonly used regimens were AC-paclitaxel (58%) and FEC-docetaxel (16%). 78% of pts received primary GCSF prophylaxis. Adherence with calls was 82%; mean call duration was 9 minutes. The intervention was well received by both pts and clinicians. 97% of pts indicated they liked receiving the calls and 94% would recommend this protocol be offered to all pts receiving chemo. Clinicians and pts felt the calls reduced pt anxiety by providing just-in-time education and counselling. Twenty five (33%) pts reported at least one ED+H during chemo, lower than the historical rate of 44% for this population in Ontario. Challenges included introducing an intervention that involved both routine clinical personnel and research staff and incorporating the calls into existing work responsibilities. Conclusions: Telephone-based toxicity management during ESB chemo is feasible, perceived as valuable by clinicians and pts, and may be associated with lower rates of acute care use. Larger scale evaluations of this approach focusing on effectiveness are warranted.