Suppr超能文献

口服抗癌药物与非抗癌药物之间具有临床意义的药物相互作用:两种药物汇编的剖析与比较

Clinically significant drug-drug interactions between oral anticancer agents and nonanticancer agents: profiling and comparison of two drug compendia.

作者信息

Wong Chen-May, Ko Yu, Chan Alexandre

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Ann Pharmacother. 2008 Dec;42(12):1737-48. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L255. Epub 2008 Nov 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

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.

摘要

背景

口服抗癌药物在癌症治疗中的应用正得到广泛认可。然而,接受口服治疗的患者发生药物相互作用(DDIs)的风险很高。

目的

为每种涉及选定口服抗癌药物的具有临床意义的DDI创建药物概况,并评估两种常用的DDI汇编之间的一致性:《药物相互作用事实》(DIF)2008版和Micromedex DRUGDEX。

方法

基于一级和三级文献综述制定DDI概况。比较DIF 2008版和Micromedex DRUGDEX,以评估涉及所选口服抗癌药物的DDI在列表、严重程度和科学证据评级方面的一致性。使用Spearman相关性检验评估两种汇编之间严重程度评级的相关性。

结果

共识别出184种DDI。为其中40种符合临床显著相互作用预定标准的DDI创建了药物概况。比较评估显示,DDI列表存在不一致(仅在DIF中列出的占所识别的15.2%,仅在Micromedex中列出的占46.7%)、严重程度评级(Spearman相关系数0.49)和科学证据评级(不一致率25.8%)。

结论

此处评估的汇编之间在DDI列表和评级系统上的差异反映了需要进行更多研究以规范DDI的定义和分类。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验