Project description:The loss of patents covering many biopharmaceutical/biological agents in the mid 1990s led to the introduction of a new generation of drugs: biosimilars. These new agents, produced by living cells just as the originator drugs, are chemically highly similar to endogenous human proteins; characterized by three-dimensionally complex, high molecular weight compounds. Among the first biosimilars used in haematology-oncology were erythropoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. After five years of use in clinical practice, the efficacy and safety profile of biosimilars approved by the European Medicines Agency is excellent. Over the next year or two, biosimilar monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) will become available; the first will be rituximab and trastuzumab. Not only are MoAbs more complex in terms of molecular weight and number of amino acids than the first biosimilars, but they are also anticancer drugs, not merely supportive treatments like their predecessors. This opens up important questions. How are regulatory agencies to assess their clinical efficacy, immunogenicity and safety? Is the neoadjuvant clinical setting the best to evaluate them? What will regulatory agencies decide in terms of switching an originator molecule for a biosimilar or extrapolating efficacy results from one pathology to another? Once biosimilars of rituximab and trastuzumab are approved, several challenging issues will need to be addressed such as how to maintain appropriate pharmacovigilance, how to extrapolate across indications, and issues concerning automatic substitution. There is currently no consensus in any of these areas. This review addresses all these issues: new challenges that the oncology community will face in the near future.
Project description:This project was done at specialist cancer hospital in Qatar. At a haematology-oncology inpatient department most patients were not getting access to palliative care unless they were at the very end stages of life. Data collected from 2008-2011 showed significant numbers of patients were dying within one month of their transfer to palliative care. There was no standard measure to identify the prospective palliative care patients. A multidisciplinary team developed a Palliative care referral screening tool based on the National Cancer Care Network guideline. Retrospective medical record review done from January to April 2012 showed a mean of 68% of patients who scored more than five were not consulted, 32% of patients who scored more than seven were not transferred to palliative care and seven percent died without any referral. The team used various kinds of quality planning, analysis and improvement tools in the form of process mapping, value analysis, Fish Bone diagrams, stakeholders' analysis and communication, physician survey, "Pareto's principal" (80 / 20 rule, the law of vital few) and other data collection tools. The palliative care referral process was standardised by preparing and implementing an objective scoring tool based on international best practice. It changed the referral culture and helped manage the psychological barriers of patients, families and caregivers. Extensive orientation and education of all key stakeholders was implemented. Monthly auditing of patient records was carried out. The aim has been achieved, exceeded and sustained, and we reduced the percentage of patients who scored more than five without palliative consultation from a mean of 68% to 16% and those who scored more than seven without palliative care transfer from a mean of thirty two percent to three percent, after four months of the project's implementation. Standardising the referral process and creating an objective referral tool is needed to facilitate safe, collaborative, continuous and patient centered care. Timely referral of cancer patients to palliative care minimises patient and caregiver distress, ensures better quality of life, and provides an appropriate measure for end of life care.
Project description:BackgroundLumbar punctures (LPs) are common in children with cancer. Although pain management during the lumbar puncture has been well standardized, dealing with stress and anxiety is not well addressed yet. Our objective was to evaluate the potential improvement of the LP success rate using a positioning pillow, to ensure maximum lumbar flexion, and allow paravertebral muscles to relax, in children who are awake, with either conscious sedation or no sedation.MethodsChildren aged 2-18 years undergoing LP were randomly assigned to a positioning pillow or no intervention. The primary outcome was the rate of success, i.e. achieving the LP (sampling or injection) at the first attempt, without bleeding (RBC < 50/mm3). The secondary outcomes included: the child's pain, assessed by a self-administered visual analogical scales (VAS) for children over 6 years of age; the parents' and caregivers' perception of the child's pain; the satisfaction of the children, the parents, the caregivers and the physician. The child's cooperation and the occurrence of post-LP syndrome were also evaluated.Results124 children (62 in each group) were included. The LP pillow tended to increase the success rate of LPs (67% vs. 57%, p = 0.23), and decreased the post-LP syndromes (15% vs. 24%, p = 0.17) but the differences were not statistically significant. In children over 6-year of age (n = 72), the rate of success was significantly higher in the pillow group (58.5% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.031), with a tendency to feel less pain (median VAS 25 vs. 15 mm, p = 0.39) and being more satisfied (84.4% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.34).ConclusionOverall results do not demonstrate a benefit in using this pillow for lumbar punctures. This study results also suggest a benefit in the sub group of children over 6-year of age; this result needs confirmation.
Project description:Molecular characterization of early hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains rare. Ten out of 78 patients of a hematology/oncology center were found to be HCV RNA positive two to four months after hospitalization. Only two of the ten patients were anti-HCV positive. HCV hypervariable region 1 (HVR1) was amplified in seven patients (including one anti-HCV positive) and analyzed by next generation sequencing (NGS). Genetic variants were reconstructed by Shorah and an empirically established 0.5% variant frequency cut-off was implemented. These sequences were compared by phylogenetic and diversity analyses. Ten unrelated blood donors with newly acquired HCV infection detected at the time of donation (HCV RNA positive and anti-HCV negative) served as controls. One to seven HVR1 variants were found in each patient. Sequences intermixed phylogenetically with no evidence of clustering in individual patients. These sequences were more similar to each other (similarity 95.4% to 100.0%) than to those of controls (similarity 64.8% to 82.6%). An identical predominant variant was present in four patients, whereas other closely related variants dominated in the remaining three patients. In five patients the HCV population was limited to a single variant or one predominant variant and minor variants of less than 10% frequency. In conclusion, NGS analysis of a cluster of HCV infections acquired in the hospital setting revealed the presence of low diversity, very closely related variants in all patients, suggesting an early-stage infection with the same virus. NGS combined with phylogenetic analysis and classical epidemiological analysis could help in tracking of HCV outbreaks.
Project description:The approval of epoetin biosimilars in the European Union requires extensive scientific evaluation and stringent regulatory procedures, including post-marketing studies. The ORHEO (place of biOsimilaRs in the therapeutic management of anaemia secondary to chemotherapy in HaEmatology and Oncology) study was an observational, longitudinal, multicentre study performed in France to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biosimilar epoetins for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) in the clinical setting.Patients >18 years with CIA (haemoglobin [Hb] <11 g/dL) in association with solid tumours, lymphoma or myeloma and eligible for treatment with an epoetin biosimilar were included in this study. Patient characteristics were recorded at baseline along with anaemia-related information, such as observed and target Hb (as chosen by the treating clinician), brand and dose of epoetin biosimilar prescribed, and details of any other treatments. Patients were then followed-up at 3 and 6 months. The primary endpoint was Hb response (defined as Hb reaching ?10 g/dL, an increase of Hb ?1 g/dL since inclusion visit or reaching physician-defined target Hb, with no blood transfusions in the 3 weeks prior to measurement). Other endpoints included adverse events, achievement of target Hb and associated treatments.Overall, 2333 patients >18 years (mean age 66.5 years) with CIA (haemoglobin [Hb] <11 g/dL) in association with solid tumours, lymphoma or myeloma and eligible for biosimilar epoetin treatment were included. 99.9% of patients received epoetin zeta (median dose 30,000 IU/week). Mean baseline Hb was 9.61 g/dL, with 35.6% of patients having moderate anaemia (Hb 8-9.5 g/dL). Hb response was achieved in 81.6% and 86.5% of patients at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Overall mean change in Hb level was 1.52 ± 1.61 and 1.72 ± 1.61 g/dL at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Transfusion and thromboembolic event rates were 9.4% and 2.4% at 3 months, and 5.8% and 1.5% at 6 months, respectively.Epoetin zeta was effective and well tolerated in the management of CIA in patients with solid tumours, lymphoma and myeloma.NCT02140736 (date of registration: 14 May 2014).
Project description:Two SARS-CoV-2 nosocomial outbreaks occurred on the haematology ward of our hospital. Patients on the ward were at high risk for severe infection because of their immunocompromised status. Whole Genome Sequencing proved transmission of a particular SARS-CoV-2 variant in each outbreak. The first outbreak (20 patients/31 healthcare workers (HCW)) occurred in November 2020 and was caused by a variant belonging to lineage B.1.221. At that time, there were still uncertainties on mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, and vaccines nor therapy were available. Despite HCW wearing II-R masks in all patient contacts and FFP-2 masks during aerosol generating procedures (AGP), the outbreak continued. Therefore, extra measures were introduced. Firstly, regular PCR-screening of asymptomatic patients and HCW; positive patients were isolated and positive HCW were excluded from work as a rule and they were only allowed to resume their work if a follow-up PCR CT-value was ≥30 and were asymptomatic or having only mild symptoms. Secondly, the use of FFP-2 masks was expanded to some long-lasting, close-contact, non-AGPs. After implementing these measures, the incidence of new cases declined gradually. Thirty-seven percent of patients died due to COVID-19. The second outbreak (10 patients/2 HCW) was caused by the highly transmissible omicron BA.1 variant and occurred in February 2022, where transmission occurred on shared rooms despite the extra infection control measures. It was controlled much faster, and the clinical impact was low as the majority of patients was vaccinated; no patients died and symptoms were relatively mild in both patients and HCW.
Project description:Intestinal and Nasopharyngeal Microbiota Analysis of Children with Meningococcemia in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: INMACS-PICU Study
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify staff-reported factors and perceptions that influenced implementation and sustainability of an early mobilization program (PICU Up!) in the PICU.DesignA qualitative study using semistructured phone interviews to characterize interprofessional staff perspectives of the PICU Up! program. Following data saturation, thematic analysis was performed on interview transcripts.SettingTertiary-care PICU in the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.SubjectsInterprofessional PICU staff.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsFifty-two staff members involved in PICU mobilization across multiple disciplines were interviewed. Three constructs emerged that reflected the different stages of PICU Up! program execution: 1) factors influencing the implementation process, 2) staff perceptions of PICU Up!, and 3) improvements in program integration. Themes were developed within these constructs, addressing facilitators for PICU Up! implementation, cultural changes for unitwide integration, positive impressions toward early mobility, barriers to program sustainability, and refinements for more robust staff and family engagement.ConclusionsThree years after implementation, PICU Up! remains well-received by staff, positively influencing role satisfaction and PICU team dynamics. Furthermore, patients and family members are perceived to be enthusiastic about mobility efforts, driving staff support. Through an ongoing focus on stakeholder buy-in, interprofessional engagement, and bundled care to promote mobility, the program has become part of the culture in the Johns Hopkins Hospital PICU. However, several barriers remain that prevent consistent execution of early mobility, including challenges with resource management, sedation decisions, and patient heterogeneity. Characterizing these staff perceptions can facilitate the development of solutions that use institutional strengths to grow and sustain PICU mobility initiatives.