Interprofessional care is exhibited in outpatient oncology practices where practitioners from a myriad of specialties (e.g., oncology, nursing, pharmacy, health informatics and others) work collectively with patients to enhance therapeutic outcomes and minimize adverse effects. Historically, most ambulatory-based anticancer medication therapies have been administrated in infusion clinics or physician offices. Oral anticancer medications (OAMs) have become increasingly prevalent and preferred by patients for use in residential or other non-clinic settings. Self-administration of OAMs represents a significant shift in the management of cancer care and role responsibilities for patients and clinicians. While patients have a greater sense of empowerment and convenience when taking OAMs, adherence is a greater challenge than with intravenous therapies. This paper proposes use of a qualitative systems evaluation, based on theoretical frameworks for interdisciplinary team collaboration and systems science, to examine the social interactionism involved with the use of intravenous anticancer treatments and OAMs (as treatment technologies) by describing patient, organizational, and social systems considerations in communication, care, control, and context (i.e., Kaplan’s 4Cs). This conceptualization can help the healthcare system prepare for substantial workforce changes in cancer management, including increased utilization of oncology pharmacists.

The approval of the humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab in 1998 changed the trajectory of treatment and subsequent outcomes for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer and is now the standard of care in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic settings. However, as with most biologic drugs, trastuzumab comes with a relatively high price tag compared with traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy and contributes to healthcare budgets. Three engineered products related to trastuzumab-2 antibody-drug conjugates, ado-trastuzumab emtansine and fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki, as well as the subcutaneous trastuzumab/hyaluronidase-have since been approved and have expanded the treatment options for this patient population. The approval of 5 trastuzumab biosimilars as of the end of 2019 holds the promise of considerable cost savings, but challenges to integrating their use into patient care must be addressed. Barriers to their use, including physician uncertainty to switch patients from the reference drug to the therapeutic biosimilar and patients' lack of understanding about biosimilars, are common in the United States. It is also important that all stakeholders, including managed care professionals, pharmacists, and practice administrators, understand how to incorporate trastuzumab biosimilars into formulary discussions, clinical care plans and processes, and educational initiatives for healthcare providers and patients.

Purpose: An overview of therapeutic oncology biosimilars, the U.S. biosimilars regulatory pathway, and the clinical development of selected biosimilar products is provided, including discussion of considerations in adopting biosimilars into oncology practice.Summary: Biosimilars are biologic agents that are highly similar to and have no clinically meaningful differences from an approved reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency. There is a large market for cancer biologics, and approval of biosimilars has the potential to increase access to care and reduce costs. An abbreviated regulatory pathway for the development and approval of biosimilars defines a stepwise approach to demonstrating biosimilarity and conducting clinical comparative trials to confirm equivalent pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity to the reference product. Three therapeutic biologics (bevacizumab, trastuzumab, and rituximab) have been used extensively in the treatment of a variety of cancers and are targets for biosimilar product development. Preclinical and clinical experience with 2 recently approved biosimilars to bevacizumab and trastuzumab is reviewed. Challenges faced by pharmacy and therapeutics committees when considering oncology biosimilars for formulary inclusion are discussed.Conclusion: Increased adoption of biosimilars could potentially lower treatment costs and improve access to biologics for patients with cancer. Key considerations in formulary review of biosimilars include the quality and quantity of data from comparative clinical trials, economic factors, manufacturer reliability, and challenges associated with incorporating biosimilars into practice.

The inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) have documented antitumor activity via disruption of various signaling pathways leading to impaired cellular growth, proliferation, and survival. In preclinical studies, mTOR inhibitors use in combination with hormonal therapy has shown promising results in overcoming endocrine resistance in breast cancer cells. The role of everolimus in breast cancer was established in the Breast Cancer Trial of Oral Everolimus-2 (BOLERO-2) trial in combination with exemestane for patients with advanced metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer, who relapsed after initial hormonal manipulation. The study met its primary endpoint of significant improvement in progression free survival (PFS) with a median time to progression of 6.9 months in the combination group versus 2.8 months in exemestane group. Favorable improvements in PFS were reported across all patient subgroups regardless of age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, number of prior therapies, and presence of visceral metastases. Adverse events were mostly mild to moderate in severity and consistent with the known safety profile of everolimus. Major toxicities reported include stomatitis, non-infectious pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia. The purpose of this review is to discuss the role of everolimus as a valuable component in advanced metastatic breast cancer and delineate current strategies to prevent and manage the most common toxicities associated with this combination regimen.

Background. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a national coverage determination (NCD) in July 2007, which imposed restrictions on the reimbursement of ESAs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Since a majority of our patients are Medicare or Medicaid beneficiaries, we changed our clinical practice regarding the use of erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) to coincide with the NCD’s reimbursement restriction.

Expanding therapeutic frontiers in metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer