Quantitative comparison of anticancer drug dispersal before and after introducing appropriate preparation procedures during anticancer drug preparation

• Published in: Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences 2022-06, Vol.8 (1), p.19-19, Article 19
• Main Authors: Yanagisawa, Yuki, Isama, Kazuo, Kurosu, Tomohiro, Natsume, Yoshiaki, Seino, Toshikazu, Nishimura, Tetsuji, Yamashita, Atsushi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Anticancer drug exposure; Cancer; Chemotherapy; Comparative analysis; Contamination; Dispersion; Drugs; Education; Environmental monitoring; Fluorouracil; Japanese hospital; Medical personnel; Occupational hazards; Personal protective equipment; Pharmaceutical industry; Pharmacists; Preparation procedures; Prevention; Wipe test
• ISSN: 2055-0294; 2055-0294
• DOI: 10.1186/s40780-022-00250-1

In Japan, engineering controls for preparing injectable anticancer drugs are inadequate and compliance with appropriate preparation procedures is vital. In this study, we evaluated the effects of adherence to appropriate anticancer drug formulation and packaging procedures on reducing anticancer drug dispersal in clinical practice, especially in Japan. We quantitatively evaluated the effectiveness of implementing procedures that were experimentally verified to help reduce the amount of anticancer drug dispersed during preparation based on procedures described in the "Anticancer Drug Preparation Manual." The target facilities were four regional hub hospitals in the Kanto area. Contamination of sheets and gloves with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and gemcitabine (GEM) in a safety cabinet during formulation was evaluated using wipe tests. Subsequently, the proper preparation procedure was shown on a video, training was provided, and the wipe tests were repeated. Forty-one and 39 pharmacists were engaged in drug preparation before and after intervention, respectively. 5-FU had the highest dispersal per prepared vial on the sheet before intervention. The dispersal amount per prepared vial decreased significantly (P = 0.01) after intervention. The amount of GEM dispersed before and after intervention did not differ significantly. However, the percentage of sheets below the detection limit after intervention was 62%, increasing from 46% before intervention. The amount dispersed on gloves was not significantly reduced by proper preparation technique. Although not explicitly noticeable and quantifiable, pharmacists must consider that a significant amount of anticancer drug is dispersed on gloves despite following appropriate preparation procedures. Quantitative amounts of anticancer drugs dispersed in the preparations of 5-FU and GEM were found in our study. The difference in the amount of contamination before and after intervention was significantly reduced only for the contamination of sheets with 5-FU. There was no decrease in the amount of glove contamination. There was also no difference between medical facilities. Despite following appropriate preparation procedures, dispersed amounts cannot be maintained below the detection limit, indicating the need for a combination of education and engineering controls.