Antineoplastic drugs used in the treatment of cancers present with variable renal tolerance profiles. Among drugs with a potential for renal toxicity, platinum salts, and especially cisplatin is a well-known agent that may induce acute and chronic renal failure. The mechanisms of its renal toxicity and the means of its prevention are presented in this article which represent the Clinical Recommendation from the Special Interest Group on Cancer Care of the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP).

Although there has been a significant increase in the availability and use of oral chemotherapeutic agents, the guidelines around their safe handling are still evolving. Although oral chemotherapy is associated with ease of administration, it has the same exposure risks to health care practitioners, patients, and their caregivers as intravenous formulations, and because it is administered in the home, to the families of patients. However, the general misconception appears to be that exposure risk is low and therefore oral chemotherapeutic agents present little risk and are safer to handle. In a series of three roundtable meetings, a team of international pharmacists from North America and Europe reviewed existing guidelines and identified gaps in recommendations that we believe are important for safe handling. The present article is a compilation of these gaps, especially applicable to manufacturers and distributors, storage and handling, and patient education regarding safe handling. These recommendations, on the basis of our experience and of best practices, provide an international perspective and can be adapted by institutions and practices for development of standardized procedures specific to their needs for the safe handling of oral chemotherapeutic agents.

No abstract

The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is disrupting our health environment. As expected, studies highlighted the great susceptibility of cancer patients to COVID-19 and more severe complications, leading oncologists to deeply rethink patient cancer care.This review is dedicated to the optimization of care pathways and therapeutics in cancer patients during the pandemic and aims to discuss successive issues.First we focused on the international guidelines proposing adjustments and alternative options to cancer care in order to limit hospital admission and cytopenic treatment in cancer patients, most of whom are immunocompromised.In addition cancer patients are prone to polypharmacy, enhancing the risk of drug-related problems as adverse events and drug-drug interactions. Due to increased risk in case of COVID-19, we reported a comprehensive review of all the drug-related problems between COVID-19 and antineoplastics.Moreover, in the absence of approved drug against COVID-19, infected patients may be included in clinical trials evaluating new drugs with a lack of knowledge, particularly in cancer patients. Focusing on the several

The practice of crushing drugs is very common in geriatric units. In 2009 a first study, performed in all geriatric units of a university hospital, showed that numerous errors were made during prescription, preparation and administration. The aim of this second prospective study was to assess the impact of regional and national recommendations in the same geriatric units. A survey of 719 patients (85.3 ± 6.7 years) was performed in 2013. For each patient who received crushed drugs, we recorded the reason the drugs were crushed, pharmacological classes, galenic presentations and the technique used for preparation and administration. Results were compared to the previous study. The number of patients receiving drugs after crushing was significantly lower than in the previous study (22.9% vs. 32.3%, P < 0.001). The number of crushed drugs was lower too (594 per 165 patients vs. 966 per 224 patients (P < 0.01). The main indication for crushing drugs remained swallowing disorders. The dosage form prevented crushing in 24.9% of drugs (vs. 42.0% in 2009, P < 0.001), but the drugs generally remained crushed all together. A mortar was used less often (38.6% vs. 92.6%, P < 0.001), with preference for individual-specific cups (56.1%). Mortars were more often cleaned between each patient (56.0% vs. 11.6%). The vehicle was more often neutral (water 88.5% vs. 5.7%, P < 0.001). This second study shows that regional and national recommendations have led to an overall improvement of practices for crushing drugs. Technical improvements are still possible, in association with appropriate pharmacological studies.