A new approach to assessing occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs in hospital environments

1. World Cancer Research Fund International (WCRF). Worldwide data [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at http://www.wcrf.org/int/cancer-facts-figures/worldwide-dataSearch in Google Scholar

2. Transparency Market Research. Anti-cancer drugs market - global industry analysis, size, share, growth, trends, and forecast 2016 - 2024. In: Global anti-cancer drugs market: competitive landscape and region-wise outlook [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/anticancer-drugs-market.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

3. Report Buyer Ltd. Market research and forecast of antineoplastic drugs in China 2016-2021. In: Smmary [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://www.reportbuyer.com/product/4696059/market-research-andforecast-of-antineoplastic-drugs-in-china-2016-2021.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

4. Zion Market Research. Cancer drugs market by therapy (immunotherapy, targeted therapy, chemotherapy, hormone therapy and others) for breast cancer, blood cancer, gastrointestinal cancer, prostate cancer, skin cancer, lung cancer and other cancer: global industry perspective, comprehensive analysis and forecast, 2015-2021. Florida, United States; 2016. [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://www.zionmarketresearch.com/news/global-cancerdrugs-marketSearch in Google Scholar

5. Allied Market Research. Oncology/cancer drugs market by therapeutic modalities (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, hormonal), cancer types (blood, breast, gastrointestinal, prostate, skin, respiratory/lung cancer) - Global opportunity analysis and industry forecast, 2013-2020. Pune, India; 2015. In: Global Oncology/Cancer Drugs Market [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/oncology-cancer-drugs-marketSearch in Google Scholar

6. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). NIOSH List of antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in healthcare settings, 2016 [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at http://bit.ly/2i4gE2aSearch in Google Scholar

7. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs. Volumes 1-116. Lyon: IARC; 2016.Search in Google Scholar

8. Ratner PA, Spinelli JJ, Beking K, Lorenzi M, Chow Y, Teschke K, Le ND, Gallagher RP, Dimich-Ward H. Cancer incidence and adverse pregnancy outcome in registered nurses potentially exposed to antineoplastic drugs. BMC Nursing 2010;9:15. doi: 10.1186/1472-6955-9-15Search in Google Scholar

9. Hall AL, Demers PA, Astrakianakis G, Ge C, Peters CE. Estimating national-level exposure to antineoplastic agents in the workplace: CAREX Canada findings and future research needs. Ann Work Expos Heal 2017;61:656-8. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxx042Search in Google Scholar

10. Beretta G, Fasola G. Organizzazione dell’oncologia in Italia [The set up of oncology services in Italy, in Italian] [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at http://www.aiom.it/C_Common/Download.asp?file=/$Site$/files/doc/AIOM-Servizi/slide/20170427RM_03_Beretta.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

11. Kopjar N, Želježić D, Kašuba V, Rozgaj R. Antineoplastični lijekovi kao čimbenik rizika u radnom okolišu: mehanizmi djelovanja na razini stanice i pregled metoda za otkrivanje njihovih genotoksičnih učinaka [Antineoplastic drugs as a potential risk factor in occupational settings: mechanisms of action at the cell level, genotoxic effects, and their detection using different biomarkers, in Croatian]. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol 2010;61:121-46. doi: 10.2478/10004-1254-61-2010-2025Search in Google Scholar

12. Kibby T. A review of surface wipe sampling compared to biologic monitoring for occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs. J Occup Environ Hyg 2017;14:159-74. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2016.1237026Search in Google Scholar

13. Bobin-Dubigeon C, Amiand M, Percheron C, Audeval C, Rochard S, Leynia P, Bard JM. A new, validated wipesampling procedure coupled to LC-MS analysis for the simultaneous determination of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in surface contamination. J Anal Toxicol 2013;37:433-9. doi: 10.1093/jat/bkt045Search in Google Scholar

14. da Silva CB, Julio IP, Donadel GE, Martins I. UPLC-MS/ MS method for simultaneous determination of cyclophosphamide, docetaxel, doxorubicin and 5-fluorouracil in surface samples. J Pharmacol Tox Met 2016;82:68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.vascn.2016.08.004Search in Google Scholar

15. Pretty JR, Connor TH, Spasojevic I, Kurtz KS, McLaurin JL, B’Hymer C, Debord G. Sampling and mass spectrometric analytical methods for five antineoplastic drugs in the healthcare environment. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2012;18:23-36. doi: 10.1177/1078155210389215Search in Google Scholar

16. Roland C, Caron N, Bussières JF. Multicenter study of environmental contamination with cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and methotrexate in 66 Canadian hospitals: A 2016 follow-up study. J Occup Environ Hyg 2017;14:661-9. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2017.1316389Search in Google Scholar

17. Thulin H, Sundberg E, Hansson K, Cole J, Hartley-Asp B. Occupational exposure to nor-nitrogen mustard: chemical and biological monitoring. Toxicol Ind Health 1995;11:89-97. doi: 10.1177/074823379501100108Search in Google Scholar

18. Turci R, Minoia C, Sottani C, Coghi R, Severi P, Castriotta C, Del Bianco M, Imbriani M. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs in seven Italian hospitals: the effect of quality assurance and adherence to guidelines. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2011;17:320-32. doi: 10.1177/1078155210381931Search in Google Scholar

19. Viegas S, Pádua M, Veiga AC, Carolino E, Gomes M. Antineoplastic drugs contamination of workplace surfaces in two Portuguese hospitals. Environ Monit Assess 2014;186:7807-18. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-3969-1Search in Google Scholar

20. Yoshida J, Koda S, Nishida S, Yoshida T, Miyajima K, Kumagai S. Association between occupational exposure levels of antineoplastic drugs and work environment in five hospitals in Japan. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2011;17:29-38. doi: 10.1177/1078155210380485Search in Google Scholar

21. Colombo M, Jeronimo M, Astrakianakis G, Apte C, Hon CY. Wipe sampling method and evaluation of environmental variables for assessing surface contamination of 10 antineoplastic drugs by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Ann Work Expos Heal 2017;61:1003-14. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxx070Search in Google Scholar

22. Kiffmeyer TK, Tuerk J, Hahn M, Stuetzer H, Hadtstein C, Heinemann A, Eickmann U. Application and assessment of a regular environmental monitoring of the antineoplastic drug contamination level in pharmacies - the MEWIP project. Ann Occup Hyg 2013;57:444-55. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mes081Search in Google Scholar

23. Nussbaumer S, Geiser L, Sadeghipour F, Hochstrasser D, Bonnabry P, Veuthey JL, Fleury-Souverain S. Wipe sampling procedure coupled to LC-MS/MS analysis for the simultaneous determination of 10 cytotoxic drugs on different surfaces. Anal Bioanal Chem 2012;402:2499-209. doi: 10.1007/s00216-011-5157-2Search in Google Scholar

24. Sessink PJM. Environmental contamination with cytostatic drugs: past, present and future. Safety Consideration in Oncology Pharmacy (Special edition) 2011 [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8652/4d606dbd8e116ca2c26b1ec70d3f81cfe272.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

25. Schierl R, Böhlandt A, Nowak D. Guidance values for surface monitoring of antineoplastic drugs in German pharmacies. Ann Occup Hyg 2009;53:703-11. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mep050Search in Google Scholar

26. Böhlandt A, Schierl R. Benefits of wipe sampling: evaluation of long-term 5-fluorouracil and platinum monitoring data. Pharm Technol Hosp Pharm 2016;1:139-50. doi: 10.1515/pthp-2016-0010Search in Google Scholar

27. Hedmer M, Wohlfart G. Hygienic guidance values for wipe sampling of antineoplastic drugs in Swedish hospitals. J Environ Monitor 2012;14:1968-75. doi: 10.1039/C2EM10704JSearch in Google Scholar

28. Sottani C, Grignani E, Oddone E, Dezza B, Negri S, Villani S, Cottica D. Monitoring surface contamination by antineoplastic drugs in Italian hospitals: performance-based hygienic guidance values (HGVs) project. Ann Work Expos Heal 2017;61:994-1002. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxx065Search in Google Scholar

29. Dugheri S, Bonari A, Pompilio I, Gentili M, Montalti M, Mucci N, Arcangeli G. A new automated gas chromatography/solid phase microextraction procedure for determining α-fluoro-β-alanine in urine. Malaysian J Anal Sci 2017;21:1091-100. doi: 10.17576/mjas-2017-2105-11Search in Google Scholar

30. Ensslin AS, Pethran A, Schierl R, Fruhmann G. Urinary platinum in hospital personnel occupationally exposed to platinum-containing antineoplastic drugs. Int Arch Occ Env Hea 1994;65:339-42. doi: 10.1007/BF00405699Search in Google Scholar

31. Connor TH, Smith JP. New approaches to wipe sampling methods for antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in healthcare settings. Pharm Technol Hosp Pharm 2016;1:107-14. doi: 10.1515/pthp-2016-0009Search in Google Scholar

32. Khandavilli S, Panchagnula R. Studies of the skin permeation of lipophilic drugs: paclitaxel. Pharmazie 2007;62:471-3. doi: 10.1691/ph.2007.6.6044Search in Google Scholar

33. Odraska P, Mazurova E, Dolezalova L, Blaha L. In vitro evaluation of the permeation of cytotoxic drugs through reconstructed human epidermis and oral epithelium. Klin Onkol 2011;24:195-202. PMID: 21714452Search in Google Scholar

34. Fransman W1, Kager H, Meijster T, Heederik D, Kromhout H, Portengen L, Blaauboer BJ. Leukemia from dermal exposure to cyclophosphamide among nurses in The Netherlands: quantitative assessment of the risk. Ann Occup Hyg 2014;58:271-82. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/met077Search in Google Scholar

35. US Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Controlling Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Drugs [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/hazardousdrugs/controlling_occex_hazardousdrugs.html#occ_environmentalSearch in Google Scholar

36. United States Pharmacopeia (USP). USP General Chapter <800> Hazardous Drugs - Handling in Healthcare Settings, 2017 [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at http://www.usp.org/sites/default/files/usp/document/our-work/healthcare-quality-safety/general-chapter-800.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

37. European Biosafety Network. Preventing Occupational Exposure to Cytotoxic and Other Hazardous Drugs - European Policy Recommendations, 2016 [displayed 1 August 2018]. Available at http://www.europeanbiosafetynetwork.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Exposure-to-Cytotoxic-Drugs_Recommendation_DINA4_10-03-16.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

38. Marie P, Christophe C, Manon R, Marc M, Charleric B, Patrice V. Environmental monitoring by surface sampling for cytotoxics: a review. Environ Monit Assess 2017;189:52. doi: 10.1007/s10661-016-5762-9Search in Google Scholar

39. Kawachi Y, Ikegami T, Takubo H, Ikegami Y, Miyamoto M, Tanaka N. Chromatographic characterization of hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography stationary phases: hydrophilicity, charge effects, structural selectivity, and separation efficiency. J Chromatogr A 2011;1218:5903-19. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2011.06.048Search in Google Scholar

40. Kromhout H. Hygiene without numbers. Ann Occup Hyg 2016;60:403-4. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mev096Search in Google Scholar

41. Connor TH, Sessink PJ, Harrison BR, Pretty JR, Peters BG, Alfaro RM, Bilos A, Beckmann G, Bing MR, Anderson LM, Dechristoforo R. Surface contamination of chemotherapy drug vials and evaluation of new vial-cleaning techniques: results of three studies. Am J Health-Syst Ph 2005;62:475-84. PMID: 1574591010.1093/ajhp/62.5.47515745910Search in Google Scholar

42. Favier B, Gilles L, Ardiet C, Latour JF. External contamination of vials containing cytotoxic agents supplied by pharmaceutical manufacturers. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2003;9:15-20. doi: 10.1191/1078155203jp102oaSearch in Google Scholar

43. Fleury-Souverain S, Nussbaumer S, Mattiuzzo M, Bonnabry P. Determination of the external contamination and crosscontamination by cytotoxic drugs on the surfaces of vials available on the Swiss market. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2014;20:100-11. doi: 10.1177/1078155213482683Search in Google Scholar

44. Naito T, Osawa T, Suzuki N, Goto T, Takada A, Nakamichi H, Onuki Y, Imai K, Nakanishi K, Kawakami J. Comparison of contamination levels on the exterior surfaces of vials containing platinum anticancer drugs in Japan. Biol Pharm Bull 2012;35:2043-9. doi: 10.1248/bpb.b12-00628Search in Google Scholar

45. Yuki M, Sekine S, Takase K, Ishida T, Sessink PJ. Exposure of family members to antineoplastic drugs via excreta of treated cancer patients. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2013;19:208-17. doi: 10.1177/1078155212459667Search in Google Scholar

46. Kümmerer K, Haiß A, Schuster A, Hein A, Ebert I. Antineoplastic compounds in the environment-substances of special concern. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2016;23:14791-804. doi: 10.1007/s11356-014-3902-8.Search in Google Scholar