Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L255
DC FieldValue
dc.titleClinically significant drug-drug interactions between oral anticancer agents and nonanticancer agents: Profiling and comparison of two drug compendia
dc.contributor.authorWong, C.-M.
dc.contributor.authorKo, Y.
dc.contributor.authorChan, A.
dc.date.accessioned2014-10-29T01:50:02Z
dc.date.available2014-10-29T01:50:02Z
dc.date.issued2008-12
dc.identifier.citationWong, C.-M., Ko, Y., Chan, A. (2008-12). Clinically significant drug-drug interactions between oral anticancer agents and nonanticancer agents: Profiling and comparison of two drug compendia. Annals of Pharmacotherapy 42 (12) : 1737-1748. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L255
dc.identifier.issn10600280
dc.identifier.urihttp://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/105741
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Use of oral anticancer agents is gaining wide acceptance in the treatment of cancer. However, patients receiving oral therapy are at high risk for drug-drug interactions (DDIs). OBJECTIVE: TO create a drug profile for each clinically significant DDI involving selected oral anticancer agents and evaluate the agreement between 2 commonly used DDI compendia: Drug Interaction Facts (DIF) 2008 and Micromedex DRUGDEX. METHODS: DDI profiles were developed based on primary and tertiary literature reviews. DIF 2008 and Micromedex DRUGDEX were compared to assess the consistency of listings, severity, and scientific evidence ratings of DDIs involving the oral anticancer agents that were selected. The Spearman correlation test was used to assess the correlation of the severity ratings between the 2 compendia. RESULTS: A total of 184 DDIs were identified. A DDI profile was created for 40 of these that met the predetermined criteria for clinically significant interactions. The comparative assessment showed inconsistency in DDI listings (15.2% of those identified were listed in DIF only and 46.7% were listed in Micromedex only), severity ratings (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.49), and scientific evidence ratings (disagreement 25.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The discrepancies in DDI listing and rating systems between the compendia evaluated here reflect the need for more studies to standardize the definitions and classifications of DDIs.
dc.description.urihttp://libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L255
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectDrug compendia
dc.subjectDrug information
dc.subjectDrug-drug interactions
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentPHARMACY
dc.description.doi10.1345/aph.1L255
dc.description.sourcetitleAnnals of Pharmacotherapy
dc.description.volume42
dc.description.issue12
dc.description.page1737-1748
dc.description.codenAPHRE
dc.identifier.isiut000261489900001
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.