Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39388180›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Environmental Outcomes of Reducing Medication Waste by Redispensing Unused Oral Anticancer Drugs.

Elisabeth M Smale, Anne B Ottenbros, Bart J F van den Bemt, Eibert R Heerdink, Jelle Verploegen, Rosalie van Zelm, Toine C G Egberts, Charlotte L Bekker

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Choosing Wisely recommendations in oncology: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Elisabeth M SmaleDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Anne B OttenbrosDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bart J F van den BemtDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Eibert R HeerdinkDivision of Laboratory, Genetics and Pharmacy, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jelle VerploegenDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Rosalie van ZelmDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Toine C G EgbertsDivision of Laboratory, Genetics and Pharmacy, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Charlotte L BekkerDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Medications are associated with substantial environmental outcomes, yet frequently end up being unused by patients. Waste-minimizing interventions, such as redispensing of quality-approved oral anticancer drugs remaining unused by patients at home, could reduce the environmental footprint of cancer treatment. Objectives: To assess the environmental outcomes of redispensing quality-assured oral anticancer drugs and to explore how redispensing could be environmentally optimized. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this quality improvement study, a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was performed in the outpatient pharmacy of 4 Dutch hospitals, based on a prospective multicenter trial comprising 1071 patients with a clinical diagnosis of cancer and an active prescription for an oral anticancer drug stored at room temperature from February 1, 2021, to February 1, 2023, with a follow-up of 12 months per patient. Intervention: Participants received prescribed oral anticancer drugs with additional quality-assurance materials (ie, seal bags and time-temperature indicators), so the pharmacy could redispense quality-assured drugs based on authenticity, appearance, remaining shelf life, and/or adequate storage. Main Outcomes and Measures: The estimated environmental outcomes avoided due to waste reduction (ie, production and transport and incineration of redispensed oral anticancer drugs) corrected for outcomes of process burdens (ie, quality assurance materials), quantified in 3 outcome measures: human health damage (disability-adjusted life-years), ecosystems damage (species × year), and climate change (kg of carbon dioxide equivalent [CO2-eq]) per patient per year. Results: A volunteer sample of 1071 patients (median age, 70 years [IQR, 62-75 years]; 622 men [58.1%]) participated in the intervention. Redispensing oral anticancer drugs was initially associated with an environmental burden, mainly because of the high impact of time-temperature indicators. However, when quality-assurance materials were selectively used for temperature-sensitive oral anticancer drugs (ie, maximum storage temperature of 25 °C), redispensing was environmentally beneficial to human health and ecosystems, providing estimated climate benefits of 1.9 kg (95% CI, 1.4-2.6 kg) of CO2-eq per patient per year. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs was found to be a suitable strategy to reduce waste and improve environmental sustainability of cancer treatment after process optimization. Redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs could contribute to sustainability of cancer treatment through reduced costs and environmental outcomes.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsAdministration, OralAgedDrug StorageFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsProspective StudiesQuality ImprovementAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID39388180
PMCPMC11581632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.