Published papers

Pharmacy practice experience (PPE) is essential in the six-year course of pharmaceutical education in Japan. We previously found that PPE reinforced students' self-efficacy for curriculums (SECs), leading robust acquisition and reconstruction of pharmaceutical expertise. In this study, we aimed to clarify whether students' SECs affect successful experiences as enactive attainments in PPE. We distributed survey questionnaires to the fifth-year students in Keio University in 2016-2017 before and after PPE. The students made a self-assessment of their psychological state “expect to do well” on a seven-point Likert scale for each curriculum (C1 to C18), and their successful experiences were also collected from free description type questionnaire. We could follow up 139 students. The SEC scores increased from pre-PPE to post I (p<0.001) and II terms (p<0.01). The increase in SEC scores during PPE was associated with the rate of students' successful experiences in the first-term PPE (p=0.04). The path analysis revealed the following as significant predictive factors of SECs for successful experiences: basic sciences (C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, and C6) with stand-ardizing coefficient 0.35, health and environmental sciences (C11 and C12) with 0.39, and pharmaceutical sciences (C7, C8, C9, C10, C13, and C14) with −0.51. Students in the first-term PPE tended to experience successful performance in medical professions by using their pharmaceutical expertise that they had learned. In this study, for the first time, we demonstrated that Japanese students' SECs for pharmaceutical expertise affected successful experiences, leading better outcomes of PPE.

Sedating antihistamines (sAH) are widely used as premedication to prevent infusion-related reactions (IRRs). Subcutaneous daratumumab (DARA-SC) is administered in a shorter time than its intravenous form. Therefore, sedation caused by sAH after DARA-SC administration may also pose a concern. We investigated the efficacy and safety of sAH and non-sedating antihistamines (nsAH) premedication. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study was conducted from six hospitals in Japan. Data from the electronic medical records of consecutive patients with multiple myeloma who received DARA-SC injection between 19 May 2021 and 31 December 2022 was analyzed. The incidence of IRR and drowsiness was investigated as efficacy and safety endpoints, respectively. Differences in incidence between patients treated with nsAH and those treated with sAH were compared. Thirty-one patients in the nsAH group and 130 patients in the sAH group were evaluated. All patients in the nsAH group were treated with levocetirizine, while patients in the sAH group were treated with dexchlorpheniramine or diphenhydramine. The incidence of IRRs was 0% (0/31) in the nsAH group and 1.5% (2/130) in the sAH group. The incidence of drowsiness was 6.5% (2/31) in the nsAH group and 7.7% (10/130) in the sAH group. These differences were not statistically significant. This study showed that levocetirizine is not obviously inferior in efficacy and safety relative to sAH in preventing IRRs and drowsiness. Therefore, levocetirizine can be considered as a substitute for patients for whom the use of sAH is not acceptable.

This study aimed to examine the effects of concomitant use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the survival outcomes in patients with endocrine-sensitive chemotherapy-naïve advanced breast cancer (BC) treated with palbociclib or abemaciclib. This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted at five hospitals in Japan. Data were collected from consecutive patients treated with palbociclib or abemaciclib in combination with endocrine therapy as first-line treatment for endocrine-sensitive chemotherapy-naïve advanced BC between December 2017 and August 2022. Associations between concomitant PPI use and survival outcomes were analyzed. Among 202 patients, 38 (19%) were concomitant PPI users. In the palbociclib population (n = 123), concomitant PPI use was associated with a trend toward decreased progression-free survival (PFS) and a significant reduction in overall survival (OS; crude hazard ratio [HR], 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86–3.00 and crude HR, 3.51; 95% CI, 1.53–7.64, respectively). In multivariable analyses, consistent results were obtained (adjusted HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.66–2.53 and adjusted HR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.28–7.67, respectively). In contrast, concomitant PPI use did not significantly affect either PFS or OS in the abemaciclib group (n = 79). Concomitant PPI use decreased the efficacy of palbociclib regardless of the formulation, with no such impact observed with abemaciclib.

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the participants’ comfort in understanding research papers written in English and discussing such research in English via an Asian online journal club. Methods: A self-administered online survey was delivered to seven journal club meeting attendees from July 2020 to July 2021. A customer satisfaction analysis was performed to assess the association between the participants’ perspectives on program logistics and satisfaction. Results: The recovery rate was 37.0% (44/119). After participating in the journal club, the median scores of critical appraisal skills, knowledge and/or pharmaceutical care skills in clinical practice, and discussion skills in English (assessed using a seven-point Likert scale) improved significantly (compared to pre-participation median scores) from 4 (interquartile range [IQR]: 3–5) to 5 (IQR: 4–6), 5 (IQR: 4–5) to 5 (IQR: 5–6), and 4 (IQR: 2–5) to 5 (IQR: 3–5), respectively (P < 0.0001). The respondents also expressed great appreciation for the benefits and overall qualities of the journal club. Additionally, regarding patient care behavior after participation in the journal club, 34 (77.3%), 17 (38.6%), 16 (36.4%), and 14 (31.8%) respondents reported improvement in “drug information services,” “patient assessments,” “patient counseling,” and “multidisciplinary rounds,” respectively. Customer satisfaction analysis revealed that sharing information, mutual discussion, a shift system of presenters and co-chairs, and session duration should be improved as a matter of highest priority. Conclusion: The findings suggest that our program could be helpful for Asian pharmacists, pharmacy students, and faculty members of the department of pharmacy.

The association of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and baseline peripheral blood count ratios with the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) plus chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. This multicenter, retrospective study analyzed data from 191 patients treated with pembrolizumab or atezolizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy across five hospitals in Japan between December 2018 and March 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed in relation to irAEs within a 6-week landmark analysis and baseline peripheral blood count ratios using Cox proportional hazards models. IrAEs occurred in 70 patients (36.6%) and showed no substantial association with survival (PFS: hazard ratio [HR]=1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.70–1.53; OS: HR=0.82, 95% CI=0.49–1.34). Conversely, baseline peripheral blood count ratios were considerably linked to survival. A higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio correlated with reduced PFS (adjusted HR=1.62, 95% CI=1.10–2.40) and OS (adjusted HR=2.50, 95% CI=1.53–4.09), with similar trends for the lymphocyte-to-monocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios. Collectively, these findings suggest that although irAEs were not predictive of survival, baseline blood count ratios can serve as prognostic biomarkers in patients with NSCLC receiving chemoimmunotherapy.

© 2018, The Author(s). This study aimed to compare the antiemetic efficacy and safety of a four-drug combination with those of a standard three-drug combination in Japanese patients with breast cancer treated with anthracycline. We retrospectively analyzed data from Japanese patients with breast cancer, who had received their first cycle of anthracycline and were treated with aprepitant, palonosetron, and dexamethasone with or without olanzapine. This retrospective observational study was performed at Ehime University Hospital using the electronic medical records. Multivariable and propensity score-adjusted analyses were performed to compare the onset of complete response (CR) failure between the groups. One-hundred and thirty patients were included in this study and the four- and three-drug group had 22 and 108 patients, respectively. Similar to multivariable logistic regression analysis, propensity-adjusted logistic regression analysis revealed that the four-drug group was markedly associated with a decreased odds of CR failure in the overall, acute, and delayed phases (odds ratio [OR]: 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10–0.73; OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.10–0.76; and OR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04–0.57, respectively). Additionally, treatment-related adverse events were well tolerated in both the groups. These findings suggest that the antiemetic efficacy of the four-drug combination is superior to that of the standard three-drug combination.

Background: The efficacy of olanzapine as an antiemetic agent in cancer chemotherapy has been demonstrated. However, few high-quality reports are available on the evaluation of olanzapine’s efficacy and safety at a low dose of 5 mg among patients treated with carboplatin regimens. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the efficacy and safety of 5 mg olanzapine for managing nausea and vomiting in cancer patients receiving carboplatin regimens and identified patient-related risk factors for carboplatin regimen-induced nausea and vomiting treated with 5 mg olanzapine. Methods: Data were pooled for 140 patients from three multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for managing nausea and vomiting induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the patient-related risk factors. Results: Regarding the endpoints of carboplatin regimen-induced nausea and vomiting control, the complete response, complete control, and total control rates during the overall study period were 87.9, 86.4, and 72.9%, respectively. No treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed. The multivariable logistic regression models revealed that only younger age was significantly associated with an increased risk of non-total control. Surprisingly, there was no significant difference in CINV control between the patients treated with or without neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist. Conclusions: The findings suggest that antiemetic regimens containing low-dose (5 mg) olanzapine could be effective and safe for patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

Background: Olanzapine has been reported to be an effective antiemetic in patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1RA) added to olanzapine, a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), and dexamethasone (DEX) has not been proven. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NK1RA, in combination with three-drug antiemetic regimens containing olanzapine, in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by carboplatin-based chemotherapy. Methods: Data were pooled for 140 patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy from three multicenter, prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. The propensity score of the co-administration of NK1RA was estimated for each patient using a logistic regression model that included age, sex, and carboplatin dose. We analyzed a total of 62 patients, who were treated without NK1RA (non-NK1RA group: 31 patients) and with NK1RA (NK1RA group: 31 patients). The patients were selected using propensity score matching. Results: The complete response rate (without emetic episodes or with no administration of rescue medication) in the overall period (0–120 h post carboplatin administration) was 93.5% in the non-NK1RA group and 96.8% in the NK1RA group, with a difference of -3.2% (95% confidence interval, -18.7% to 10.9%; P = 1.000). In terms of safety, there was no significant difference between the groups in daytime sleepiness and concentration impairment, which are the most worrisome adverse events induced by olanzapine. Conclusions: The findings suggest that antiemetic regimens consisting of olanzapine, 5HT3RA, and DEX without NK1RA may be a treatment option for patients receiving carboplatin-based chemotherapy.

The association between capecitabine efficacy and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is controversial. Here, we determined whether co-administration of PPIs affects the real-world effectiveness of capecitabine. This retrospective observational study included consecutive patients with stage II–III colorectal cancer (CRC) who received adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy or CapeOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) between January 2009 and December 2014 at nine participating institutions. The primary endpoint was the difference in relapse-free survival (RFS) between patients who received PPIs and those who did not and was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Overall survival (OS) was the secondary endpoint. Multivariable analysis of RFS and OS was performed using a Cox proportional hazards model, propensity score adjustment, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses. Data from 606 patients were evaluated, 54 of whom had received a PPI. PPI-treated patients tended to have poorer RFS and OS than patients treated without PPIs. The hazard ratio for RFS with capecitabine monotherapy was 2.48 (95% confidence interval: 1.22–5.07). These results were consistent with sensitivity analyses performed using propensity score adjustment and IPTW methods. Co-administration of PPIs may reduce the effectiveness of capecitabine and negatively impact patients with stage II–III CRC.

The standard treatment for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (PSROC) is platinum-based chemotherapy followed by olaparib monotherapy. A retrospective study was conducted to identify factors affecting the survival of patients with PSROC undergoing olaparib monotherapy in real-world clinical settings. The study enrolled 122 patients who received olaparib monotherapy between April 2018 and December 2020 at three national centers in Japan. The study used the Kaplan–Meier method and univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to evaluate the associations between factors and progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with BRCA1/2 mutations had a significantly longer median PFS than those without these mutations. Both the BRCA1/2 mutation-positive and mutation-negative groups exhibited a prolonged PFS when the platinum-free interval (PFI) was ≥ 12 months. Cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) level within reference values was significantly linked to prolonged PFS, while a high platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (≥ 210) was significantly associated with poor PFS in the BRCA1/2 mutation-negative group. The study suggests that a PFI of ≥ 12 months may predict survival after olaparib monotherapy in patients with PSROC, regardless of their BRCA1/2 mutation status. Additionally, a CA-125 level within reference values may be associated with extended survival in patients without BRCA1/2 mutations. A larger prospective study should confirm these findings.