Skip to main content
Log in

Occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents at several departments in a hospital

Environmental contamination and excretion of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in urine of exposed workers

  • Published:
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The occupational exposure to cyclophosphamide (CP), ifosfamide (IF), 5-fluorouracil (5FU), and methotrexate (MTX) of 25 pharmacy technicians and nurses from four departments of a hospital was investigated. Previously developed methods for the detection of exposure to some antineoplastic agents were validated. Exposure to CP, IF, 5FU, and MTX was measured by the analysis of these compounds in the environment (air samples and wipe samples from possible contaminated surfaces and objects). Contamination of the work environment was found not only on the working trays of the hoods and on the floors of the different rooms but also on other objects like tables, the sink unit, cleaned urinals and chamber pots, and drug vials and ampules used for preparation and packing of drugs. The gloves used during preparation of the drugs and during cleaning of the hoods were always contaminated. The uptake of CP or IF was determined by the analysis of both compounds in urine. CP or IF was detected in the urine of eight pharmacy technicians and nurses. The amounts ranged from < 0.01 to 0.5 μg (median: 0.1 μg). CP and IF were found not only in the urine of pharmacy technicians and nurses actively handling these compounds (n = 2) but also in the urine of pharmacy technicians and nurses not directly involved in the preparation and administration of these two drugs (n = 6). CP and IF were excreted during different periods ranging from 1.40 to 24.15 h after the beginning of the working day, suggesting different times of exposure, different exposure routes, and/or interindividual differences in biotransformation and excretion rate for these compounds. The urinary CP and IF determination method seems to be sensitive and suitable for monitoring the exposure to and measuring the uptake of these toxic compounds by pharmacy technicians and nurses during occupational activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Society of Hospital Pharmacists (1990) ASHP technical assistance bulletin on handling cytotoxic and hazardous drugs. Am J Hosp Pharm 47:1033–1049

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baker GL, Kahl LE, Zee BC, Stelzer BL, Agarwal AK, Medsger Jr TA (1987) Malignancy following treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with cyclophosphamide. Long-term casecontrol follow-up study. Am J Med 83:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  3. Evelo CTA, Bos RP, Peters JGP, Henderson PT (1986) Urinary cyclophosphamide assay as a method for biological monitoring of occupational exposure to cyclophosphamide. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 58:151–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Friederich U, Molko F, Hofmann V, Scossa D, Hann D, Würgler FE, Senn HJ (1986) Limitations of the Salmonellal mammalian microsome assay (Ames test) to determine occupational exposure to cytostatic drugs. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 22:567–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Greene MH, Harris EL, Gershenson DM, et al. (1986) Melphalan may be a more potent leukemogen than cyclophosphamide. Ann Intern Med 105:360–367

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haas JF, Kittelmann B, Mehnert WH, Staneczek W, Möhner M, Kaldor JM, Day NE (1987) Risk of leukaemia in ovarian tumour and breast cancer patients following treatment by cyclophosphamide. Br J Cancer 55:213–218

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hirst M, Tse S, Mills DG, Levin L, White DF (1984) Occupational exposure to cyclophosphamide. Lancet 1:186–188

    Google Scholar 

  8. IMS Holland (1989) Personal report. Instituut voor Medische Statistiek, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  9. International Agency for Research on Cancer (1981) IARC monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk to humans, vol 26. Some antineoplastic and immunosuppressive agents. Lyon, France

  10. Kaldor JM, Day NE, Pettersson F, et al. (1990) Leukemia following chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 322:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  11. McDiarmid MA, Egan T, Furio M, Bonacci M, Watts SR (1986) Sampling for airborne fluorouracil in a hospital drug preparation area. Am J Hosp Pharm 43:1942–1945

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pedersen-Bjergaard J, Ersbøll J, Sørensen HM, et al. (1985) Risk of acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and preleukemia in patients treated with cyclophosphamide for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Ann Intern Med 103:195–200

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sessink PJM, Anzion RB, van den Broek PHH, Bos RP (1992) Detection of contamination with antineoplastic agents in a hospital pharmacy department. Pharm Weekbl [Sci] 14:16–22

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sessink PJM, van den Broek PHH, Bos RP (1991) Urinary cyclophosphamide excretion in rats after intratracheal, dermal, oral and intravenous administration of cyclophosphamide. J Appl Toxicol 11:125–128

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sorsa M, Hemminki K, Vainio H (1985) Occupational exposure to anticancer drugs — potential and real hazards. Mutat Res 154:135–149

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stolar MH, Power LA, Viele CS (1983) Recommendations for handling cytotoxic drugs in hospitals. Am J Hosp Pharm 40:1163–1171

    Google Scholar 

  17. deWerk Neal A, Wadden RA, Chiou WL (1983) Exposure of hospital workers to airborne antineoplastic agents. Am J Hosp Pharm 40:597–601

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sessink, P.J.M., Boer, K.A., Scheefhals, A.P.H. et al. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents at several departments in a hospital. Int. Arch Occup Environ Heath 64, 105–112 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381477

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381477

Key words

Navigation