Ex) Article Title, Author, Keywords
Ex) Article Title, Author, Keywords
Pharmacoepidemiology and Risk Management 2023; 15(1): 62-71
Published online March 31, 2023 https://doi.org/10.56142/perm.22.0019
Copyright © Korean Society for Pharmacoepidemiology and Risk Management.
Cho Rong Kim1, So Young Lee1, Min Jung Geum1, Jong Hee Ko1, Eun Sun Son1, Yun Mi Yu2
김초롱1, 이소영1, 금민정1, 고종희1, 손은선1, 유윤미2
Correspondence to:Eun Sun Son
Department of Pharmacy, Severance Hospital, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea
Tel: +82-2-2228-6888
Fax: +82-2-2227-7983
E-mail: sespharm@yuhs.ac
Yun Mi Yu
College of Pharmacy, Yonsei University, 85 Songdogwahak-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon 21983, Korea
Tel: +82-32-749-4505
Fax: +82-32-749-4105
E-mail: yunmiyu@yonsei.ac.kr
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Objective: With the increase in cancer incidence and technological development, approvals of oral anticancer drugs are increasing. A number of oral targeted anticancer drugs have been reported to have a high frequency of potential interactions. However, few studies have evaluated pharmacists’ interventions for patients taking oral anticancer drugs. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate pharmacists’ interventions using objective indicators in patients taking oral anticancer drugs. Methods: Pharmacists’ interventions were studied among cancer patients aged ≥ 19 years who were prescribed oral anticancer drugs in inpatient and outpatient settings between July 2020 and June 2022. The interventions were analyzed using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) version 9.1 criteria and their clinical significance was evaluated using the Overhage criteria. Results: A total of 456 interventions were performed in 341 patients. The most frequently intervened drugs were propulsives (15.0%) among the concomitant drugs and protein kinase inhibitors (13.9%) among the anticancer drugs. The most frequent type of intervention was “effect of drug treatment not optimal (46.3%)”, followed by “adverse drug event (possibly) occurring (31.6%)”. The most frequent cause of the interventions was “drug selection (53.5%)”, followed by “dose selection (31.8%)”. The acceptance rate of the intervention was 84.4% and 87.1% were clinically significant. Conclusion: This study showed that pharmacists' interventions are useful for safe and effective drug treatment in cancer patients. Therefore, more active intervention by pharmacists are needed for cancer patients taking oral anticancer drugs.
KeywordsAntineoplastic agents, Pharmacists, Pharmaceutical Care
Supplementary file
