Original Research

Impact of VA Hematology/Oncology Clinical Pharmacy Practitioners in the Review of Community Prescriptions for Specialty Medications

Author and Disclosure Information

Background: Within the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), eligible veterans can receive covered health care through the community care network. Many prescriptions for specialty medications made by community care prescribers are filled by outpatient VA pharmacies. Trained hematology/oncology clinical pharmacy practitioners (CPPs) review specialty medication prescriptions from community-based prescribers. This study’s primary objective was to evaluate clinical interventions initiated by hematology/oncology CPPs at the Veterans Affairs North Texas Health Care System (VANTHCS) during their review of hematology/oncology specialty prescriptions from community care prescribers.

Methods: A retrospective chart review of VANTHCS patients enrolled in the community care program with a specialty hematology/oncology prescription received and reviewed by a VA clinical hematology/oncology CPP was conducted for records from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2023. The primary outcome was the number and types of clinical interventions. Secondary outcomes include the number of interventions accepted and/or denied by the prescriber and the financial implications of these interventions.

Results: Two hundred twenty-one specialty hematology/oncology prescriptions met the study inclusion criteria. VANTHCS hematology/oncology CPPs completed clinical interventions for 82 prescriptions (37%). Among those prescriptions, CPPs documented 97 clinical interventions. The most commonly documented interventions included managing/preventing a drug interaction (26%) and dose adjustment requests (25%).

Conclusions: Hematology/oncology CPPs at VANTHCS are essential in reviewing anticancer medication prescriptions from community-based practitioners ; CPPs completed clinical interventions for more than one-third of the prescriptions and prescribers approved most of these interventions.


 

References

The value of a hematology/oncology clinical pharmacy practitioner (CPP) has been validated in several studies documenting their positive impact on patient outcomes, supportive care management, laboratory monitoring, medication error identification, and drug expenditure.1-6 With> 200 oncology-related US Food and Drug Administration approval notifications published from 2020 to 2023, it is no surprise that national trends in oncology drug clinic expenditures increased from $39.9 billion in 2020 to $44.1 billion in 2021.7,8 With the rapidly changing treatment landscape, new drug approvals, and risk of polypharmacy, oral anticancer agents carry a high risk for medication errors.4 Additional challenges include complex dosing regimens and instructions, adherence issues, drug interactions, adjustments for organ dysfunction, and extensive adverse effect (AE) profiles.

Because of the niche and complexity of oral anticancer agents, trained CPPs havehematology/oncology education and expertise that pharmacists without specialized training lack. A survey of 243 nonspecialized community pharmacists that assessed their knowledge of oral anticancer therapies revealed that only about half of the knowledge questions were answered correctly, illustrating an education gap among these pharmacists.9 The Hematology/Oncology Pharmacist Association's suggests that best practices for managing oral oncology therapy should include comprehensive medication review by an oncology-trained pharmacist for each prescription.10

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) community care network, which was established by the MISSION Act, allows covered access for eligible veterans in the local community outside of the VA network. Unfortunately, this dual-system use of health care could increase the risk of poorly coordinated care and has been associated with the risk of inappropriate prescribing.11,12 It is unclear how many private practices enrolled in the community care program have access to oncology-trained pharmacists. Specialized pharmaceutical reviews of oral anticancer medication prescriptions from these practices are vital for veteran care. This study evaluates the clinical and financial interventions of hematology/oncology CPPs review of specialty hematology/oncology prescriptions from community care health care practitioners (HCPs) at the Veterans Affairs North Texas Health Care System (VANTHCS) in Dallas.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) records of patients at VANTHCS from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2023. Patients included were aged ≥ 18 years, enrolled in the VA community care program, received a specialty hematology/oncology medication that was dispensed through VA pharmacies or VA-contracted pharmacies, and had an hematology/oncology CPP medication review documented in CPRS. The primary aim of this study was to assess the number and types of clinical interventions performed. A clinical intervention was defined as a documented communication attempt with a community care HCP or direct communication with a patient to address a specific medication-related issue noted during CPP review.

Review of specialty hematology/oncology medications by a hematology/oncology CPP included evaluation of therapy indication, such as whether the prescription meets clinical guidelines, VA criteria for use, or other clinical literature as judged appropriate by the CPP. In some cases, the CPP requested that the community care HCP prescribe a more cost-effective or formulary-preferred agent. Each prescription was reviewed for dosage and formulation appropriateness, drug interactions with available medication lists, baseline laboratory test completion, and recommended supportive care medicines. At times, patient counseling is completed as part of the clinical review. When necessary, CPPs could discuss patient cases with a VA-employed oncologist for further oversight regarding appropriateness and safety. Secondary outcomes included the number of interventions accepted or denied by the prescriber provider and cost savings.

Data collected included the type of malignancy, hematology/oncology specialty medication requested, number and type of interventions sent to the community care prescriber, number of interventions accepted or denied by the community care prescriber, and whether the CPP conducted patient counseling or dispensed or denied the product. Cost savings were calculated for medications that were denied or changed to a formulary preferred or cost-effective agent using pricing data from the National Acquisition Center Contract Catalog or Federal Supply Schedule Service as of April 2024.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Urine Tests Could Be ‘Enormous Step’ in Diagnosing Cancer
Federal Practitioner
Most women can conceive after breast cancer treatment
Federal Practitioner
Obesity and Cancer: Untangling a Complex Web
Federal Practitioner
Bridging the Gap Between Inpatient and Outpatient Care
Federal Practitioner
The Challenges of Delivering Allergen Immunotherapy in the Military Health System
Federal Practitioner
Overuse of Hematocrit Testing After Elective General Surgery at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Federal Practitioner
One Patient Changed This Oncologist’s View of Hope. Here’s How.
Federal Practitioner
Fit for Promotion: Navy Changes the Policy
Federal Practitioner
Suspected Orbital Compartment Syndrome Leading to Visual Loss After Pterional Craniotomy
Federal Practitioner
Study Estimates Global Prevalence of Seborrheic Dermatitis
Federal Practitioner