PHARMACY FORUM HELD ON 3RD DECEMBER 2010 AT THE HOLIDAY INN RUNCORN Attendees
Jo Bateman, Countess of Chester Hospital (JB) Sarah Roden, Western Cheshire PCT (SR) Danny Forrest, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital (DF) Victoria Birchall, NHS CL WL Locality (VB) Diane Hornsby Western Cheshire PCT (DH) Dave Thornton, Aintree Hospital (DT) Michael Lloyd, Whiston Hospital (ML) Michelle Wong, Arrowe Park Hospital (MW) Catherine Lee, Royal Liverpool University Hospital (RLUH) (CL) Apologies Jenny Lunn, Warrington PCT Erica Baker, NHS Halton and St Helens Matters Arising 1. The Way Forward
JB told the group that she was the new Chair. She recapped on the fact that CMCSN are now stepping back from the Pharmacy Forum both financially and organisationally. Future meetings would still be hopefully arranged by the Cardiac Network. JB asked the group if they would be happy for future meetings to be sponsored by Pharmaceutical Companies and there were no objections to this proposal, providing the Company Representatives did not sit in on the meeting. The Holiday Inn at Runcorn was approved of as the venue for future meetings and it was agreed that these should be held on Friday afternoons, with a start time of 2.00pm. JB asked the group what should be covered in future meetings. It was agreed that the following areas should be covered:
discussions to ensure smooth transitions between primary, secondary and tertiary
sharing of clinical guidelines to prevent duplication of work educational presentations from group members ensuring pharmacist input into the CMCSN workstreams
On the last point it was felt that the Pharmacy Forum had lost contact with the Cardiac Workstreams. DT suggested that a formal letter be written to the Director of CMCSN (Margaret Lead) highlighting the importance of pharmacy representation on the Cardiac Workstreams. ACTION: JB to draft letter to send to Director of CMCSN and to circulate for comments.
DH highlighted the fact that some of the PCT pharmacists who were absent from the meeting may also have some thoughts on what should be covered at subsequent Pharmacy Forum meetings ACTION: All Pharmacy Forum members who did not attend meeting to forward suggestions re how to structure future meetings to JB
Note: the views expressed in the meeting and minuted below are representative of general discussions around the subject in question and do not necessarily reflect specific or ratified protocols in place
2. Fondaparinux – sharing guidelines
JB showed the group guidelines drawn up at the Countess of Chester (COCH) for fondaparinux in the treatment of NSTEMI/UA and asked the other secondary care pharmacists how they were using this drug in their hospitals. MW stated that at Arrowe Park (AP) they had switched from enoxaparin to fondaparinux in November and the transition had gone smoothly so far. She stated that there had been some confusion over the fact that it was for prophylactic use only and had made an educational poster to help deal with this. JB said that there had been similar issues at COCH. There was discussion around when to stop fondaparinux prior to angiogram and when to restart it. MW said that at AP it is stopped on the day of the angiogram, although some cardiologists have said to still give a night-time dose, and she wondered if there were any guidelines on this. Nothing was available from the Company she said. DT suggested that a query be placed on the UKCPA message board to see if any guidance was available ACTION: JB to put message on message board.
JB said that at COCH fondaparinux is also stopped on the day of the angiogram and the Cardiologists wait until the next day to restart, as fondaparinux may not be required in any case, depending on the results of the angiogram. CL queried if the drug needed to be stopped 24 hours prior to the procedure and JB confirmed that this was the recommended action. DF stated that Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital (LHCH) had not seen any fondaparinux as it is stopped before the patient arrives there. DT said that at Aintree the Cardiologists were reticent to switch to fondaparinux before seeing guidelines from CMCSN. JB stated that at COCH, enoxaparin is still being used in renal patients, although data shows fondaparinux is safer, and CL stated that at Royal Liverpool University Hospital (RLUH), renal patients were also still receiving enoxaparin. CL stated that she would ask Dr Saltissi where CMCSN is up to with ACS guidance. ACTION: CL to ask Dr Saltissi where CMCSN up to with ACS guidance
JB asked the group when to give fondaparinux if a patient had been receiving prophylactic tinzaparin, then had ACS. DF said that there was no black and white answer. Give fondaparinux 12-24 hours after a treatment dose or any time after a prophylactic dose of tinzaparin. CL queried what to do if a patient had ACS and existing AF. JB said that at COCH, if a patient had UA/NSTEMI and new AF then they would be given enoxaparin 1mg/kg twice daily. MW added that if the patient was on aspirin, not warfarin, then the patient should have fondaparinux. DT said that for acute ACS the full dose of enoxaparin was 1mg/kg and this dose was supported by 2 trials. 3. Dronedarone
This item had been added to the agenda by Erica Baker, who unfortunately was not at the meeting. Informally the group discussed where dronedarone was being used (COCH, LHCH, Aintree). VB stated that it was about to go to Sefton and North Lancs MMC. DF said that dronedarone had been taken to North Mersey MMC prior to the recent NICE TAG being published and prescribing for some patients had been refused as it was believed that dronedarone was 3rd line after amiodarone. DT said that this highlighted the fact that Pharmacist input to various committees was required. ML stated that at Whiston, 4MB locality have proposed that the NICE audit tool be used to determine whether a patient fits the eligibility criteria for dronedarone, before the Consultant prescribes it. MW said that dronedarone is not on the AP Formulary. ML queried the group’s opinion on switching patients who can’t tolerate amiodarone, to dronedarone. DT said that this had happened at Aintree. ML said that potentially the patients might need a washout period between the two drugs, but JB stated that in the ADONIS and EURIDIS trials, patients were switched within 48 hours, whereas in ATHENA, the washout period was 4 weeks. DT said that he hadn’t used a washout period at all and there had been no problems so far. 4. Losartan – a suitable alternative to candesartan?
JB asked the group if anybody was thinking of switching from candesartan to losartan, as losartan was now available generically and at much lower cost. CL stated that in the HEAAL study 150mg losartan had better clinical outcomes in HF than 50mg losartan. However, losartan is not licensed
at this dose. DT and ML said that losartan had been licensed for HF on the basis of the ELITE II and LIFE studies which used 50mg losartan. The fact that losartan is not licensed for use in combination with an A2RA and has been associated with increased mortality when used in combination with a beta-blocker was also noted. 5. Updated NICE Chronic HF guidelines
CL took the group through the main changes to the recently updated NICE chronic HF guidelines. DT and ML pointed out that the evidence base for using hydralazine and a nitrate is in Afro- Caribbean patients. The fact that ivabradine is being used in some HF patient who also have angina was also touched on. 6. Prasugrel Audit
DF presented an audit looking at whether the use of prasugrel at LHCH fitted within NICE guidance. In addition, the group heard that a letter had come from NW QUIPP (??) asking if the use of prasugrel could be reconsidered. NICE states that it is an ‘option’ and the cost analysis within the NICE guidance was based on the cost of Plavix, rather than generic clopidogrel. There was some thought that PCTs were cherry picking how to use the wording in NICE. Current NICE guidance for prasugrel is not due to be reviewed until January 2012. It is likely that at that point the cost-effectiveness argument will go, but until then the guidance should be followed. JB asked if LHCH had a test for clopidogrel resistance. DF said that LHCH did have a reliable machine to do this, although not being used in all patients at the moment, and that he thought bedside platelet testing was on the near horizon Any other business
DF stated that LHCH had seen ACS patients from COCH and AP coming through on atorvastatin 40mg. MW stated that the evidence was not good for atorvastatin 80mg. DT also stated that a Cardiologist at Aintree didn’t like using atorvastatin 80mg either. JB said that at COCH, Lipid Management Guidelines had just been signed off and that in these ACS patients should be receiving atorvastatin 80mg. DF stated that all ACS patients were switched back to atorvastatin 80mg at LHCH.
MW asked what the rest of the group was doing re this potential interaction and the continuing and conflicting data being published. The group all agreed that for now the advice from the MHRA should be followed, i.e. avoid clopidogrel in combination with omeprazole or esomeprazole.
DT highlighted the fact that the CMCSN website was still not up and running and as such no guidelines could be accessed. He asked if this could be flagged up to CMCSN WE NEED SOMEBODY TO TAKE THIS ACTION ON – ANY TAKERS?
Date to be confirmed. JB said that she would ask Company Representatives for dabigatran and rivaroxaban to sponsor the meeting and to give an overview of each drug. CL said that she would ask Richard Reed, who has set up Liverpool Anti-coagulant Clinic, to come along and talk to the group. Vernakalant was proposed for discussion at the end of the next meeting so that anybody not primarily interested in this can leave.
Date and Time of Next Meeting to be confirmed
TOFRANIL® cloridrato de imipramina APRESENTAÇÕES Drágeas. Embalagens com 20 drágeas de 10 ou 25 mg. VIA ORAL USO ADULTO E PEDIÁTRICO ACIMA DE 5 ANOS COMPOSIÇÃO Cada drágea contém 10 ou 25 mg de cloridrato de imipramina. Excipientes: lactose monoidratada, talco, amido, dióxido de silício, ácido esteárico, glicerol, estearato de magnésio, sacarose, dióxido de tit
All rights are reserved. The document may, however, be freely reviewed, quoted, repro-duced or translated, in part or in full, provided the source is acknowledged. The docu-ment may not be sold or used in conjunction with commercial purposes. The viewsexpressed in boxes of this report are solely the responsibility of named authors of thosetexts. The analysis and policy recommendations of the Repo