↓ Skip to main content

Potential drug–drug interactions in hospitalized patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy: a prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Potential drug–drug interactions in hospitalized patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy: a prospective cohort study
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11096-015-0083-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula Stoll, Luciane Kopittke

Abstract

Background Adverse drug-drug interactions (DDI) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in susceptible populations. Cancer patients are a population at high risk for DDI especially because they commonly receive several drugs concomitantly. The knowledge about the most common interactions between drugs used in oncology inpatients is essential to reduce drug-related problems and increase the safety and efficacy of the therapy. Objective To assess the frequency of potential DDI throughout the hospital stay of cancer patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy, describe their epidemiology, and identify risk factors for major DDI. Setting An oncology-hematology inpatient unit of a public hospital in southern Brazil. Method Drug prescriptions were prospectively reviewed throughout the hospital stay of patients admitted for systemic chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics and Poisson regression were used for data analysis. Main outcome measure Potential DDI and their characteristics. Results The cohort consisted of 113 patients, who used a mean of 8.9 ± 2.7 drugs/day. All patients had at least one potential DDI (median, 7.0/patient; 25th-75th percentile, 3.5-12.0), and 46 % of the patients had at least one DDI classified as major, i.e. that it may result in death, hospitalization, permanent injury, or therapeutic failure. Only 13.7 % of all interactions involved antineoplastic agents, identified in 62.8 % of patients. Most interactions were of moderate severity, 6.4 % were major, and 8.5 % had a recommendation for therapy modification. Multivariate analysis revealed mean number of drugs prescribed [relative risk (RR) for each additional drug: 1.12; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.17; P < 0.01] and age ≥60 years (RR 1.48; 95 % CI 1.03-2.14; P < 0.01) as independent risk factors for major DDI. Conclusion Potential DDI were highly frequent in this cohort. Older age and number of drugs prescribed were more likely to lead to major interactions. Prospective surveillance is required to detect adverse DDI, aiming primarily at reducing the risk of toxicity or treatment failure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 54 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Chemistry 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 12 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 January 2016.
All research outputs
#6,365,716
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#331
of 1,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,556
of 255,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#7
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.