This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Summerhayes, M. Articles by Lovell, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Summerhayes, M. Articles by Lovell, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Reduced pharmacy resource utilization associated with raltitrexed treatment of advanced colorectal cancer

Pharmacy Department, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Steven J Wanklyn, BPharm, MSc, MRPharmS

From the Pharmacy Department, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Roselyn A Shakespeare

From the Pharmacy Department, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Jacqueline Lovell

From the Pharmacy Department, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Objective. The pharmacy resources needed for prep aration of the direct, specific thymidylate synthase inhibitor raltitrexed (`Tomudex' ; Zeneca Pharmaceu ticals, Ltd., Macclesfield, UK); the Mayo, Machover, and De Gramont regimens of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and calcium leucovorin (LV); and continuous intravenous 5-FU for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer were compared.

Design. The pharmacy time spent on prepara tion, the disposables used, and associated drug wast age were recorded and costed for a treatment cycle.

Patients. Colorectal cancer patients receiving standard treatment or included in a clinical trial in a large teaching hospital were considered.

Outcome Measures. The pharmacy preparative time, labor, disposable, and drug wastage costs per treatment cycle, prepared extemporaneously and us ing a batch process, were measured.

Results. A cycle of raltitrexed was much quicker to prepare than any other regimen (P < .05). The labor costs were significantly less (£2.87 for ralti trexed compared with £5.24-19.67 for the 5-FU regi mens) particularly with respect to the Machover regimen, which incurred costs seven times those of raltitrexed. The cost of disposables was significantly lower for raltitrexed, with continuously infused 5-FU incurring the greatest cost. As expected for a new treatment assessed within a clinical trial rather than in a routine setting, drug wastage was higher for ralti trexed (P < .05) except when compared with batch- preparation for the Machover regimen.

Conclusions. Raltitrexed was quicker and sim pler to prepare than 5-FU- based regimens for colo rectal cancer. This resulted in lower pharmacy labor and disposable costs, although in this study drug wastage was higher for raltitrexed prepared under clinical trial conditions.

Key Words: Colorectal • cancer • chemotherapy; 5-fluorouracil • pharmacaeconomics • raltitrexed.

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, Vol. 3, No. 1, 24-30 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/107815529700300104


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?