Chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) and late acute graft-versus-host disease (L-aGVHD) are understudied complications of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in children. The National Institutes of Health Consensus Criteria (NIH-CC) were designed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of cGVHD and to better classify graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) syndromes but have not been validated in patients <18 years of age. The objectives of this prospective multi-institution study were to determine: (1) whether the NIH-CC could be used to diagnose pediatric cGVHD and whether the criteria operationalize well in a multi-institution study; (2) the frequency of cGVHD and L-aGVHD in children using the NIH-CC; and (3) the clinical features and risk factors for cGVHD and L-aGVHD using the NIH-CC. Twenty-seven transplant centers enrolled 302 patients <18 years of age before conditioning and prospectively followed them for 1 year posttransplant for development of cGVHD. Centers justified their cGVHD diagnosis according to the NIH-CC using central review and a study adjudication committee. A total of 28.2% of reported cGVHD cases was reclassified, usually as L-aGVHD, following study committee review. Similar incidence of cGVHD and L-aGVHD was found (21% and 24.7%, respectively). The most common organs involved with diagnostic or distinctive manifestations of cGVHD in children include the mouth, skin, eyes, and lungs. Importantly, the 2014 NIH-CC for bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome perform poorly in children. Past acute GVHD and peripheral blood grafts are major risk factors for cGVHD and L-aGVHD, with recipients ≥12 years of age being at risk for cGVHD. Applying the NIH-CC in pediatrics is feasible and reliable; however, further refinement of the criteria specifically for children is needed.

Objective To determine the effect of a community pharmacist prescribing intervention on glycaemic control in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Design Pragmatic, before–after design. Setting 12 community pharmacies in Alberta, Canada. Participants Type 2 diabetes receiving oral hypoglycaemic medications and with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.5–11%. Intervention Pharmacists systematically identified potential candidates by inviting patients with type 2 diabetes to test their HbA1c using validated point-of-care technology. Pharmacists prescribed 10 units of insulin glargine at bedtime, adjusted by increments of 1 unit daily to achieve a morning fasting glucose of ≤5.5 mmol/L. The patients were followed up at 2, 4, 8, 14, 20 and 26 weeks. Primary outcome Change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26. Secondary outcomes Proportion of patients achieving target HbA1c, changes in oral hypoglycaemic agents, quality of life and patient satisfaction, persistence on insulin glargine, number of insulin dosage adjustments per patient and number of hypoglycaemic episodes. Results We screened 365 patients of whom 111 were eligible. Of those, 100 (90%) were enrolled in the study; all 11 patients who did not consent refused to use insulin. Average age was 64 years (SD 10.4), while average diabetes duration was 10.2 years (SD 7). HbA1c was reduced from 9.1% (SD 1) at baseline to 7.3% (SD 0.9); a change of 1.8% (95% CI 1.4 to 2, p<0.001). Fasting plasma glucose was reduced from 11 (SD 3.3) to 6.9 mmol/L (SD 1.8); a change of 4.1 mmol/L (95% CI of 3.3 to 5, p=0.007). Fifty-one per cent of the patients achieved the target HbA1c of ≤7% at the end of the study. Conclusions This is the first completed study of independent prescribing by pharmacists. Our results showed similar improvements in glycaemic control as previous physician-led studies. RxING provides further evidence for the benefit of pharmacist care in diabetes. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov; Identifier: NCT01335763.

Background: The RxEACH trial was a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of community pharmacy-based case finding and intervention in patients at high risk for cardiovascular (CV) events. Community-dwelling patients with poorly controlled risk factors were identified and their CV risk reduced through patient education, prescribing and follow-up by their pharmacist. Perspectives of patients, family physicians and community pharmacists were obtained regarding pharmacists' identification and management of patients at high risk for CV events, to identify strategies to facilitate implementation of the pharmacist's expanded role in routine patient care. Methods: We used a qualitative methodology (individual semistructured interviews) with conventional qualitative content analysis to describe perceptions about community pharmacists' care of patients at high risk for CV events. Perceptions were categorized into macro (structure), meso (institution) and micro (practice) health system levels, based on a conceptual framework of care for optimizing scopes of practice. Results: We interviewed 48 participants (14 patients, 13 family physicians and 21 community pharmacists). Patients were supportive of the expanded scope of practice of pharmacists. All participant groups emphasized the importance of communication, ability to share patient information, trust and better understanding of the roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and liabilities of the pharmacist within their expanded role. Interpretation: Despite support from patients and changes to delivery of care in primary care settings, ongoing efforts are needed to understand how to best harmonize family physician and community pharmacist roles across the health system. This will require collaboration and input from professional associations, regulatory bodies, pharmacists, family physicians and patients.