Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy 6/2011

01.12.2011 | Research Article

Prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions in bone marrow transplant patients

verfasst von: Rosimeire Barbosa Fonseca Guastaldi, Adriano Max Moreira Reis, Albert Figueras, Silvia Regina Secoli

Erschienen in: International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy | Ausgabe 6/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective To assess the prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions (DDIs) in bone marrow transplantation (BMT) patients at the time of pre-infusion (day −1), to describe the potential DDIs and assess their frequency and severity. Setting The study was developed in a tertiary care hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Method Cross-sectional study based on examining the medical prescriptions from the pre-infusion day (day −1) of 70 BMT patients. Potential DDIs were analyzed using Drug-Reax® and categorized according to levels of severity, evidence, and onset (rapid and delayed). Only interactions of major or moderate severity were included in the potential DDI analysis. Main outcome measure: Prevalence of potential DDIs in patients during the preinfusion phase of BMT. Results Data were analysed for 70 BMT patients. The median age was 36.5 years; 52.9% (37) of the patients were male, and 65.7% (46) were undergoing autologous BMT. The patients received a median of 8 drugs each. Up to 128 potential DDIs were detected, 60.0% (42) of patients had at least 1 potential DDI and 21.4% (15) were exposed to at least 1 major potential DDI. The most commonly involved drugs were cyclosporine (9, 28.1%), phenytoin (8, 25%) and fluconazole (5, 15.6%). Most potential DDIs had moderate severity (110, 85.9%), a pharmacokinetic mechanism (67, 52.3%), and were classified as delayed onset (106, 82.8%). For major interactions, fluconazole + sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim, diazepam + fentanyl, fluconazole + levofloxacin and fentanyl + fluconazole were the most frequent. Conclusions The prevalence of potential DDIs during the conditioning period of BMT was high as a consequence of the therapeutic complexity of the procedure. Most potential DDIs identified in the study may result in clinically relevant consequences as they could lead to nephrotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and other undesirable adverse effects. Careful monitoring of clinical and laboratory parameters is essential to ensure a successful BMT and to avoid adverse drug events related to DDI.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Fuhr U. Improvement in the handling of drug–drug interactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64:167–71.PubMedCrossRef Fuhr U. Improvement in the handling of drug–drug interactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64:167–71.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Scripture CD, Figg WD. Drug interactions in cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6(7):546–58.PubMedCrossRef Scripture CD, Figg WD. Drug interactions in cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6(7):546–58.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Van Leeuwen RW, Swart EL, Boven E, Boom FA, Schuitenmaker MG, Hugtenburg JG. Potential drug interactions in cancer therapy: a prevalence study using an advanced screening method. Ann Oncol. 2011. (ahead of print). doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq761. Van Leeuwen RW, Swart EL, Boven E, Boom FA, Schuitenmaker MG, Hugtenburg JG. Potential drug interactions in cancer therapy: a prevalence study using an advanced screening method. Ann Oncol. 2011. (ahead of print). doi:10.​1093/​annonc/​mdq761.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Riechelmann RP, Tannock IF, Wang L, Saad ED, Taback NA, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions and duplicate prescriptions among cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(8):592–600.PubMedCrossRef Riechelmann RP, Tannock IF, Wang L, Saad ED, Taback NA, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions and duplicate prescriptions among cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(8):592–600.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Mihara A, Mori T, Aisa Y, Yamazaki R, Iketani O, Tanigawara Y, Ikeda Y, Okamoto S. Greater impact of oral fluconazole on drug interaction with intravenous calcineurin inhibitors as compared with intravenous fluconazole. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64:89–91.PubMedCrossRef Mihara A, Mori T, Aisa Y, Yamazaki R, Iketani O, Tanigawara Y, Ikeda Y, Okamoto S. Greater impact of oral fluconazole on drug interaction with intravenous calcineurin inhibitors as compared with intravenous fluconazole. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;64:89–91.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Secoli SR, Figueras A, Lebrão ML, Lima FD, Santos JL. Risk of potential drug–drug interactions among Brazilian elderly: a population-based, cross-sectional study. Drugs Aging. 2010;27:759–70.PubMedCrossRef Secoli SR, Figueras A, Lebrão ML, Lima FD, Santos JL. Risk of potential drug–drug interactions among Brazilian elderly: a population-based, cross-sectional study. Drugs Aging. 2010;27:759–70.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagamura F, Takahashi T, Takeuchi M, Iseki T, Ooi J, Tomonari A, Uchimaru K, Takahashi S, Tojo A, Tani K, Asano S. Effect of cyclophosphamide on serum cyclosporine levels at the conditioning of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003;32:1051–8.PubMedCrossRef Nagamura F, Takahashi T, Takeuchi M, Iseki T, Ooi J, Tomonari A, Uchimaru K, Takahashi S, Tojo A, Tani K, Asano S. Effect of cyclophosphamide on serum cyclosporine levels at the conditioning of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003;32:1051–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Egger SS, Meier S, Leu C, Christen S, Gratwohl A, Krähenbühl S, Haschke M. Drug interactions and adverse events associated with antimycotic drugs used for invasive aspergillosis in hematopoietic SCT. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010;45:1197–203.PubMedCrossRef Egger SS, Meier S, Leu C, Christen S, Gratwohl A, Krähenbühl S, Haschke M. Drug interactions and adverse events associated with antimycotic drugs used for invasive aspergillosis in hematopoietic SCT. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010;45:1197–203.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbühl S, Beer JH. Evaluation of frequently used drug interaction screening programs. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(4):367–374. doi:10.1007/s11096-008-9191-x. Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbühl S, Beer JH. Evaluation of frequently used drug interaction screening programs. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(4):367–374. doi:10.​1007/​s11096-008-9191-x.
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Reis AMM, Cassiani SHB. Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(6):822–828. doi:10.1007/s11096-010-9445-2. Reis AMM, Cassiani SHB. Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(6):822–828. doi:10.​1007/​s11096-010-9445-2.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Riechelmann RP, Zimmermann C, Chin SN, Wang L, O’Carroll A, Zarinehbaf S, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions in cancer patients receiving supportive care exclusively. J Pain Symp Manag. 2008;35:535–43.CrossRef Riechelmann RP, Zimmermann C, Chin SN, Wang L, O’Carroll A, Zarinehbaf S, Krzyzanowska MK. Potential drug interactions in cancer patients receiving supportive care exclusively. J Pain Symp Manag. 2008;35:535–43.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Leather HL. Drug interactions in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipient: what every transplanter needs to know. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;33:137–52.PubMedCrossRef Leather HL. Drug interactions in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipient: what every transplanter needs to know. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;33:137–52.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Freeman DL, Laupacis A, Keown PA, Stiller CR, Carruthers SG. Evaluation of cyclosporine—phenytoin interaction with observations on cyclosporine metabolites. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1984;18(6):887–93.PubMed Freeman DL, Laupacis A, Keown PA, Stiller CR, Carruthers SG. Evaluation of cyclosporine—phenytoin interaction with observations on cyclosporine metabolites. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1984;18(6):887–93.PubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Keown PA, Laupacis A, Carruthers G, Stawecki M, Koegler J, McKenzie FN, Wall W, Stiller CR. Interaction between phenytoin and cyclosporine following organ transplantation. Transplantation. 1984;38(3):304–6.PubMed Keown PA, Laupacis A, Carruthers G, Stawecki M, Koegler J, McKenzie FN, Wall W, Stiller CR. Interaction between phenytoin and cyclosporine following organ transplantation. Transplantation. 1984;38(3):304–6.PubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Ng TM, Bell AM, Hong C, Hara JM, Touchette DR, Danskey KN, Lindsay TT, Puumala SE. Pharmacists monitoring of QTc interval—prolonging medications in critically ill medical patients: a pilot study. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42:475–82.PubMedCrossRef Ng TM, Bell AM, Hong C, Hara JM, Touchette DR, Danskey KN, Lindsay TT, Puumala SE. Pharmacists monitoring of QTc interval—prolonging medications in critically ill medical patients: a pilot study. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42:475–82.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Crouch MA, Limon L, Cassano AT. Clinical relevance and management of drug related QT interval prolongation. Pharmacotherapy. 2003;23:881–908.PubMedCrossRef Crouch MA, Limon L, Cassano AT. Clinical relevance and management of drug related QT interval prolongation. Pharmacotherapy. 2003;23:881–908.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Gandhi PJ, Menezes PA, Vu HT, Rivera AL, Ramaswamy K. Fluconazol and levofloxacin—induced torsades de pointes in an intensive care unit patient. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60:2479–83.PubMed Gandhi PJ, Menezes PA, Vu HT, Rivera AL, Ramaswamy K. Fluconazol and levofloxacin—induced torsades de pointes in an intensive care unit patient. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60:2479–83.PubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Saad AH, DePestel DD, Carver PL. Factors influencing the magnitude and clinical significance of drug interactions between azole antifungals and select immunosuppressants. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26:1730–44.PubMedCrossRef Saad AH, DePestel DD, Carver PL. Factors influencing the magnitude and clinical significance of drug interactions between azole antifungals and select immunosuppressants. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26:1730–44.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Yu DT, Peterson JF, Seger DL, Gerth WC, Bates DW. Frequency of potential azole drug–drug interactions and consequences of potential fluconazole drug interactions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005;14:755–67.PubMedCrossRef Yu DT, Peterson JF, Seger DL, Gerth WC, Bates DW. Frequency of potential azole drug–drug interactions and consequences of potential fluconazole drug interactions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005;14:755–67.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Lopez-Gil JA. Fluconazole-cyclosporine interaction: a dose-dependent effect? Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27:427–30.PubMed Lopez-Gil JA. Fluconazole-cyclosporine interaction: a dose-dependent effect? Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27:427–30.PubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Egger SS, Drewe J, Shlienger RG. Potential drug–drug interactions in the mediation of medical patient at hospital discharge. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;58:773–8.PubMed Egger SS, Drewe J, Shlienger RG. Potential drug–drug interactions in the mediation of medical patient at hospital discharge. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;58:773–8.PubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Delafuente JC. Understanding and preventing drug–drug interactions in elderly patients. Critic Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003;48:133–43.CrossRef Delafuente JC. Understanding and preventing drug–drug interactions in elderly patients. Critic Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003;48:133–43.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Zwart-van Rijkom J, Uijtendaal E, Ten Berg M, Van Solinge W, Egberts A. Frequency and nature of drug–drug interactions in a Dutch university hospital. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;68(2):187–93.CrossRef Zwart-van Rijkom J, Uijtendaal E, Ten Berg M, Van Solinge W, Egberts A. Frequency and nature of drug–drug interactions in a Dutch university hospital. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;68(2):187–93.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Leone R, Magro L, Moretti U, Cutroneo P, Moschini M, Motola D, Tuccori M, Conforti A. Identifying adverse drug reactions associated with drug–drug interactions: data mining of a spontaneous reporting database in Italy. Drug Saf. 2010;33(8):667–75.PubMedCrossRef Leone R, Magro L, Moretti U, Cutroneo P, Moschini M, Motola D, Tuccori M, Conforti A. Identifying adverse drug reactions associated with drug–drug interactions: data mining of a spontaneous reporting database in Italy. Drug Saf. 2010;33(8):667–75.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Cruciol-Souza JM, Thomson JC. A pharmacoepidemiologic study of drug interactions in a Brazilian teaching hospital. Clinics. 2006;61(6):515–20.PubMedCrossRef Cruciol-Souza JM, Thomson JC. A pharmacoepidemiologic study of drug interactions in a Brazilian teaching hospital. Clinics. 2006;61(6):515–20.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbühl S, Beer JH. Recognition and management of potential drug–drug interactions in patient on internal medicine wards. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:1075–83.PubMedCrossRef Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbühl S, Beer JH. Recognition and management of potential drug–drug interactions in patient on internal medicine wards. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:1075–83.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions in bone marrow transplant patients
verfasst von
Rosimeire Barbosa Fonseca Guastaldi
Adriano Max Moreira Reis
Albert Figueras
Silvia Regina Secoli
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2011
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy / Ausgabe 6/2011
Print ISSN: 2210-7703
Elektronische ISSN: 2210-7711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9574-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2011

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy 6/2011 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.