Treatment time, ease of use and cost associated with use of Equashield™, PhaSeal® , or no closed system transfer device for administration of cancer chemotherapy to a dog model

A Systematic Approach to Evaluating Closed System Drug-Transfer Devices during Drug Product Development

The use of Closed System Drug-Transfer Devices (CSTDs) has increased significantly in recent years due to NIOSH and USP recommendations to use them during preparation of hazardous drugs. Mechanistic and material differences between CSTDs and traditional in-use components warrant an assessment of their impact on product quality and dosing accuracy. Using a combination of prevalent CSTDs with biologic molecules, we performed an extensive assessment of the effect of using CSTDs for dose preparation and observed no negative impact on product quality attributes. Additionally, we found that the CSTD hold-up volume is 2 to 4-fold higher than conventional in-use components and exhibited a strong dependence on the CSTD brand used. We also found that the CSTD brand and dosing volume have a major influence on dosing accuracy with suboptimal protein recovery at very low dosing volumes. We identified entrapment of product in the CSTD spike as the root cause for this sub-optimal recovery and found that flushing the CSTD spike with a brand-new syringe and not the dosing syringe aided in complete protein recovery. Taken together we present a systematic approach to evaluate the risks and impact of CSTD to drug product quality, dose preparation, and dosing accuracy.

Effectiveness of Closed System Drug Transfer Devices in Reducing Leakage during Antineoplastic Drugs Compounding

This study, conducted in a centralized cytotoxic drug preparation unit, analyzes the effectiveness of two closed system drug transfer devices (CSTDs) in reducing leakage during antineoplastic drug compounding. Wipe/pad samplings inside and outside the preparation area were taken during surveillance programs from 2016 to 2021. All samples were analyzed for gemcitabine (GEM) contamination. In 2016, the presence of GEM in some samples and the contamination of the operators’ gloves in the absence of apparent drug spilling suggested unsealed preparation systems. In subsequent monitoring, GEM was also evaluated in the vial access device and in the access port system to the intravenous therapy bag of Texium^TM/SmartSite^TM and Equashield^® II devices after the reconstitution and preparation steps of the drug. The next checks highlighted GEM dispersion after compounding using Texium^TM/SmartSite^TM, with positive samples ranging from 9 to 23%. In contrast, gemcitabine was not present at detectable levels in the Equashield^® II system in all of the evaluated samples. The Equashield^® II closed system seems effectively able to eliminate spills and leakage during gemcitabine compounding. Since drugs with different viscosities can have different effects on CSTDs, Equashield^® II needs to be considered with other antineoplastic drugs during a structured surveillance program.

Review of economic data on closed system transfer drug for preparation and administration of hazardous drugs

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to review economic data on the use of closed system drug transfer devices (CSTDs) for preparing and administering hazardous drugs, and to evaluate the quality of data reporting as defined by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS).

METHODS

All references from a recent Cochrane review about CSTDs were evaluated for inclusion. A literature review was also conducted. Articles containing economic data about the use of CSTDs were retained for analysis. Two researchers independently graded the articles according to the 24-item CHEERS checklist.

RESULTS

Of the 138 articles identified initially, 12 were retained for analysis. Nine of these studies did not report acquisition costs or did not detail acquisition costs. Six studies reported economic benefits associated with the used of CSTDs, all related to extending the beyond-use date. The mean number of CHEERS criteria fulfilled by the included articles was 9.2 (SD 2.4).

CONCLUSIONS

CSTDs are costly to acquire. However, few studies have examined the economic impact of these devices, and the existing studies are incomplete. As a result, hospitals planning to implement these devices will be unable to make a sound economic evaluation. Robust economic evaluation of CSTDs is needed.

ACVIM small animal consensus statement on safe use of cytotoxic chemotherapeutics in veterinary practice

The purpose of this report is to offer a consensus opinion of ACVIM oncology diplomates and technicians on the safe use of cytotoxic chemotherapeutics in veterinary practice. The focus is on minimizing harm to the personnel exposed to the drugs: veterinary practitioners, veterinary technicians, veterinary staff, and pet owners. The safety of the patient receiving these drugs is also of paramount importance, but is not addressed in this statement. Much of the information presented is based on national recommendations by Occupational Safety and Health Administration, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, United States Pharmacopeia, and other published regulations. These directives reflect an abundance of caution to minimize exposure to medical personnel, but large-scale studies about the consequences of long-term occupational exposure are not available in veterinary medicine. Challenges in the delivery of optimal treatment safely and economically to veterinary patients in general practice without access to a veterinary oncologist or other specialist, because of costs or proximity, remain.